4.0 Article

Tolerance of sour passion fruit cultivars to salt stress in a semi-arid region

期刊

出版社

UNIV FEDERAL CAMPINA GRANDE
DOI: 10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v27n10p785-794

关键词

Passiflora edulis Sims; water scarcity; semi-arid region

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Given the scarcity of low-salinity water resources in the Brazilian semi-arid region, using water with a high concentration of salts is necessary. This study aimed to evaluate the tolerance of passion fruit cultivars to irrigation water electrical conductivity. The results showed that a water electrical conductivity of 0.3 dS m-1 negatively affected several physiological and agronomical traits of passion fruit plants. The cultivars BRS GA1, BRS SC1, and SCS437 were classified as sensitive to water electrical conductivity, with threshold values of 0.3, 1.0, and 0.3 dS m-1, respectively.
Given the quantitative scarcity of low-salinity water resources in the Brazilian semi-arid region, it is necessary to use water with a high concentration of salts. Thus, identifying salt-stress tolerant cultivars of crops is an alternative for expanding irrigated agriculture. The objective of this study was to evaluate the tolerance of passion fruit cultivars as a function of irrigation water electrical conductivity. The experimental design was randomized blocks, in a 5 x 3 factorial scheme, whose treatments consisted of the combination of five values of electrical conductivity of irrigation water - ECw (0.3, 1.1, 1.9, 2.7, and 3.5 dS m-1) and three sour passion fruit cultivars (BRS GA1, BRS SC1, and SCS437, with three replicates. Electrical conductivity of water from 0.3 dS m-1 reduces the relative water content, gas exchange, and the number of fruits and increased electrolyte leakage in the leaf blade of passion fruit plants, at 153 days after transplantation. The passion fruit cultivars BRS GA1, BRS SC1, and SCS437 were classified as sensitive, with threshold electrical conductivity of water of 0.3, 1.0, and 0.3 dS m-1, respectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据