Resumo:
En
|
Texto:
En
|
PDF:
En
ABSTRACT Peach rootstock and scion cultivars are selected in breeding programs considering resistance to pests and diseases, salt tolerance, drought tolerance, and vigor. However, rootstock tolerance to aluminum (Al), which is markedly present in tropical and subtropical soils of the world, is not considered. Thus, it is essential to define potential markers that can contribute to the selection of Al-resistant or Al-tolerant peach rootstocks. The objective of this study was to identify Al-tolerant peach tree rootstock cultivars and clonal selections using physiological and oxidative stress variables. A completely randomized experimental design was used in a 13 (rootstock cultivars and clonal selections) × 2 (with and without Al) factorial arrangement, with three replications. Nursery peach trees of own-rooted ‘BRS Mandinho’ (without rootstock) and nursery trees of ‘BRS Mandinho’ grafted on different rootstock cultivars and clonal selections were grown in a hydroponic system, consisting of two treatments, with and without 100 mg L-1 of Al. Dry biomass, photosynthetic variables, pigment concentration, hydrogen peroxide content, membrane lipid peroxidation, and activity of the antioxidant enzymes were evaluated. The total dry matter production of the own-rooted ‘BRS Mandinho’ trees and the SS-CHI-09-39 and SS-CHI-09-40 selections is affected by the Al presence, representing a decline of 35.4, 37.2, and 24.4 %, respectively, compared to the treatment with Al. The highest total dry matter production in Al presence was observed for the ‘Sharpe’ rootstock. ‘Capdeboscq’, DB-SEN-09-23, FB-ESM-09-43, JB-ESM-09-13, JAH-MAC-09-77, SAS-SAU-09-71, and VEH-GRA-09-55 rootstock selections are tolerant to Al. The use of physiological and biochemical variables shows potential for the selection of clonal rootstocks tolerant or resistant to Al. diseases vigor However Al, , (Al) world considered Thus Alresistant Altolerant 1 arrangement replications ownrooted own rooted BRS Mandinho system treatments 10 L1 L L- biomass concentration content peroxidation evaluated SSCHI0939 SSCHI SS CHI 09 39 SS-CHI-09-3 SSCHI0940 40 SS-CHI-09-4 354 35 4 35.4 372 37 37.2 244 24 24. % respectively ‘Sharpe Sharpe ‘Capdeboscq, Capdeboscq ‘Capdeboscq ‘Capdeboscq’ DBSEN0923, DBSEN0923 DBSEN DB SEN 23, 23 DB-SEN-09-23 FBESM0943, FBESM0943 FBESM FB ESM 43, 43 FB-ESM-09-43 JBESM0913, JBESM0913 JBESM JB 13, JB-ESM-09-13 JAHMAC0977, JAHMAC0977 JAHMAC JAH MAC 77, 77 JAH-MAC-09-77 SASSAU0971, SASSAU0971 SASSAU SAS SAU 71, 71 SAS-SAU-09-71 VEHGRA0955 VEHGRA VEH GRA 55 VEH-GRA-09-5 (Al SSCHI093 0 3 SS-CHI-09- SSCHI094 35. 37. DBSEN092 DB-SEN-09-2 FBESM094 FB-ESM-09-4 JBESM091 JB-ESM-09-1 JAHMAC097 7 JAH-MAC-09-7 SASSAU097 SAS-SAU-09-7 VEHGRA095 5 VEH-GRA-09- SSCHI09 SS-CHI-09 DBSEN09 DB-SEN-09- FBESM09 FB-ESM-09- JBESM09 JB-ESM-09- JAHMAC09 JAH-MAC-09- SASSAU09 SAS-SAU-09- VEHGRA09 VEH-GRA-09 SSCHI0 SS-CHI-0 DBSEN0 DB-SEN-09 FBESM0 FB-ESM-09 JBESM0 JB-ESM-09 JAHMAC0 JAH-MAC-09 SASSAU0 SAS-SAU-09 VEHGRA0 VEH-GRA-0 SS-CHI- DB-SEN-0 FB-ESM-0 JB-ESM-0 JAH-MAC-0 SAS-SAU-0 VEH-GRA- SS-CHI DB-SEN- FB-ESM- JB-ESM- JAH-MAC- SAS-SAU- VEH-GRA DB-SEN FB-ESM JB-ESM JAH-MAC SAS-SAU