Electrical conductivity test in the evaluation of the physiological potential of treated and stored soybean seeds

Abstract

Soybean seed treatment contributes to the maintenance of seed quality, but the effect of commercial formulations and chemical products on the effectiveness of the electrical conductivity test based on electrolyte leaching has been frequently questioned. This study aimed to verify the interference of the chemical seed treatment of two soybean cultivars on the effectiveness of the electrical conductivity test in evaluating the vigor of freshly treated and stored seeds. The experimental design was completely randomized, consisting of seven seed treatments and two evaluation periods (0 and 60 days after storage), with four replications. The used seed treatments consisted of 1) fipronil + pyraclostrobin + thiophanate-methyl, 2) imidacloprid + thiodicarb + carbendazim + thiram, 3) abamectin + thiamethoxan + fludioxonil + mefenoxam + thiabendazole, 4) carbendazim + thiram, 5) fludioxonil + mefenoxam + thiabendazole, 6) carboxin + thiram, and 7) control (no treatment). The cultivars were BRS 360 RR and BRS 284, which were analyzed separately. Germination, accelerated aging, emergence, and electrical conductivity tests were carried out. No differences were detected between the control and chemical treatments performed on seeds of the two freshly treated soybean cultivars regarding germination, accelerated aging, and emergence tests. The germination test stood out after storage with the cultivar BRS 360 RR, showing the maintenance of germination potential for seeds treated with carbendazim + thiram and the control treatment. Therefore, the chemical treatment of soybean seeds interferes with the result of the electrical conductivity test. The electrical conductivity test is effective in segregating seed lots in terms of vigor level. The electrical conductivity test correlates with the other vigor tests used to identify the reduction in the physiological seed quality with storage.