Epicotyl length in seedlings of soybean cultivars subjected to reduced inter-row spacing

Abstract

The objective was to evaluate the epicotyl length of seedlings of soybean cultivars in the field, submitted to plant densification by reducing the inter-row spacing. Two field experiments were conducted in Rio Paranaíba in the state of Minas Gerais and the effect of reduced spacing (20 cm, 30 cm, 40 cm and 50 cm between rows) was evaluated. The assessment of the epicotyl length was done by using a millimeter ruler when the plants reached the V2 development stage. The experiments were conducted in a randomized block design with four repetitions. In experiment 1, the BRSMG752S cultivar was submitted to four inter-row spacings and no differences were found among them. In experiment 2, the simple factorial scheme 4 x 3 was considered, with 4 spacings and 3 cultivars, to analyze the effect of the interaction between cultivars (96R10, 97R50 and 98Y21) and spacing (20, 30, 40 and 50 cm between rows). The results of experiment 2 indicated that there was no significant effect for spacing and that the cultivars presented statistically different averages. Thus, it can be concluded that the epicotyl length of soybean seedlings, grown in the field in Rio Paranaíba in the state of Minas Gerais and evaluated at the V2 stage of development, was not influenced by the distance between the sowing lines and that the cultivar 96R10 showed the highest and 98Y21 the lowest mean epicotyl length of soybean seedlings, grown in the field in Rio Paranaíba in the state of Minas Gerais and evaluated at the V2 stage of development.

Adaptability and phenotypic stability of soybean genotypes regarding epicotyl length using artificial neural network and non-parametric test

“…Nogueira et al (2008) suggested the need to expand the list of descriptors used in this differentiation. In this sense, among several characters, the epicotyl length has stood out in terms of identifying differences between cultivars (Nogueira et al, 2008;Matsuo, Sediyama, Cruz, Oliveira, & Cadore, 2012a;Matsuo, Sediyama, Cruz, & Oliveira, 2012b;Chaves et al, 2017;Camargos, Campos, Alves, Ferreira, & Matsuo 2019;Hanyu, Costa, Cecon, & Matsuo, 2020;Gontijo et al, 2021). However, no manuscripts reporting phenotypic stability and its behavior as a function of different environments were identified in the literature.…”

Physiological alterations and enzymatic evaluation of soybean cultivars under water deficit

“…Soybean plants are affected by various abiotic stresses such as high salinity, low temperatures, mineral element toxicity, drought and others (Ferreira et al, 2020;Escalera et al, 2021;Gontijo et al, 2021;Pimentel et al, 2021). Drought or continuous water deficiency is one of the most important factors affecting growth, development, survival and productivity of the crop (Manavalan, Guttikonda, Tran, & Nguyen, 2009;Fried, Narayanan, & Fallen, 2019).…”