4.5 Article

Seed germination of five Helianthemum species:: Effect of temperature and presowing treatments

Journal

JOURNAL OF ARID ENVIRONMENTS
Volume 65, Issue 4, Pages 688-693

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2005.10.008

Keywords

Helianthemum; seed dormancy; seed germination; seed scarification; temperature

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The germination behaviour of five Helianthemum species (H. almeriense, H. appeninum, H. cincreum, H. hirtum, H. squamatum) has been studied under controlled conditions. Constant 15, 20 or 25 degrees C and alternating 25/15 degrees C temperature regimes and 16/8h light/dark photoperiod conditions were used. Presowing treatments applied were manual scarification, boiling water, hot water, dry heat and sulphuric acid. Germination values recorded were final germination percentage and germination rate expressed as days to reach 50% of the final germination percentage (T-50). Incubation temperature had no significant effect on final germination percentage for untreated seeds of the five Helianthemum species. However, variation due to temperature was significant for scarified seeds, with the lowest germination percentage attained at 25 degrees C. In all Helianthemum species studied, the highest germination percentages were obtained by manual scarification of seeds. Germination rate of scarified seeds decreased as germination temperature increased. The different presowing treatments investigated allowed some germination in some species, but none were any better than manual scarification. The high germination among most species studied, following mechanical rupture of the seed coat, shows that the mechanism of dormancy lies in the seed coat. The physical dormancy caused by impermeable seed-coat appears to be the main reason of poor germination of untreated seeds of Helianthemum species studied. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available