AGRONOMIC PERFORMANCE OF RADISH GENOTYPES UNDER DIFFERENT IRRIGATION DEPTHS

Cunha, Fernando F. da; Souza, Ivan P. de; Campos, Washington de O.; Andrade, Valter C. de; Magalhães, Thiago A.

doi:10.1590/1809-4430-Eng.Agric.v39n2p182-190/2019

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Scientific Paper, Soil and Water Engineering • Eng. agríc. (Online) 39 (2) • Mar-Apr 2019 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4430-Eng.Agric.v39n2p182-190/2019 copy

AGRONOMIC PERFORMANCE OF RADISH GENOTYPES UNDER DIFFERENT IRRIGATION DEPTHS

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

In radish production, the choice of proper genotypes and irrigation regime is of great importance to achieve success. In light of this, the current study aimed to evaluate the agronomic performance of a few radish genotypes under different irrigation strategies. The plants were grown in the city of Unaí - MG, in Brazil, under field conditions, and during two cycles, one of 40 days (from February 28 to April 8, 2015) and other of 51 days (from May 9 to June 28, 2015). The experimental design was a randomized block design in a split-plot arrangement with four replications. The treatments consisted of four irrigation strategies (50, 75, 100, and 125% of crop evapotranspiration - ETc) applied by a dripping irrigation system, while subplots consisted of three radish cultivars (Comet, Saxa, and Crimson Giant). We evaluated the following parameters: root system depth, leaf chlorophyll content, shoot fresh matter, diameter and length of tuberous root, number, and mass of commercial and non-commercial tuberous roots, and water use efficiency. All the radish genotypes showed no differences for agronomic characteristics. Under Brazilian Cerrado conditions, the most suitable irrigation strategy for radish crops is 100% of ETc.

KEYWORDS
horticulture; irrigation management; Raphanus sativus

Cycle	pH	P	K	Ca²⁺	Mg²⁺	Al³⁺	H+Al	CEC	V	OM
Cycle	----H₂O----	------mg dm^-3------		------------cmol_c dm^-3------------					----%----
1	5.4	57.5	95.4	5.2	1.8	0.1	2.5	9.7	74.7	1.1
2	5.2	35.0	64.2	5.3	1.9	0.1	1.9	9.3	79.1	1.7

Cycle	Event	Irrigation depths
Cycle	Event	50% ETc	75% ETc	100% ETc	125% ETc
1	Effective precipitation (mm)	46.5	44.3	42.3	42.3
	Net water depth (mm)	33.6	50.3	67.1	83.9
	Total water depth (mm)	80.0	94.6	109.4	126.2
2	Effective precipitation (mm)	5.2	4.8	4.5	4.5
	Net water depth (mm)	52.3	78.5	104.6	130.8
	Total water depth (mm)	57.5	83.3	109.1	135.3

Factor	Cycle	F-test			CV (%)	ID	Comet (Isla)	Saxa (Isla)	Crimson (Top Seed)
Factor	Cycle	ID	RG	ID*RG	CV (%)	ID	Comet (Isla)	Saxa (Isla)	Crimson (Top Seed)
RD (cm)	1	2.247^ns ns non-significant.	1.849^ns ns non-significant.	1.400^ns ns non-significant.	15.45			$\hat{y}$ = 15.42
RD (cm)	2	26.98^* ***** p < 0.001;	12.57^* ***** p < 0.001;	1.101^ns ns non-significant.	18.47		10.65 a	9.41 b	11.38 a
LCC (SPAD)	2	15.03^* ***** p < 0.001;	0.606^ns ns non-significant.	0.142^ns ns non-significant.	11.53			$\hat{y}$ = 35.44
SFM (g pl-1)	1	81.01^* ***** p < 0.001;	16.62^* ***** p < 0.001;	3.806^ p < 0.01;	30.67	50% ETc 75% ETc 100% ETc 125% ETc	23.99 a 36.30 a 51.15 a 38.51 a	20.63 a 37.84 a 55.17 a 37.24 a	23.64 a 28.49 b 42.96 b 30.97 b
SFM (g pl-1)	2	17.49^* ***** p < 0.001;	3.939^* * p < 0.05;	0.670^ns ns non-significant.	35.93		44.18 b	47.97 ab	49.90 a
RDi (cm)	1	11.31^ p < 0.01;	0.821^ns ns non-significant.	0.608^ns ns non-significant.	12.72			$\hat{y}$ = 3.62
RDi (cm)	2	0.321^ns ns non-significant.	2.923^ns ns non-significant.	0.550^ns ns non-significant.	13.38			$\hat{y}$ = 5.20
RL (cm)	1	2.722^ns ns non-significant.	2.895^ns ns non-significant.	1.561^ns ns non-significant.	15.21			$\hat{y}$ = 4.57
RL (cm)	2	0.136^ns ns non-significant.	7.064^ p < 0.01;	1.801^ns ns non-significant.	8.40		4.46 b	4.50 b	4.88 a
NCR (ud m^-2)	1	10.94^ p < 0.01;	2.589^ns ns non-significant.	0.001^ p < 0.01;	39.73	50% ETc 75% ETc 100% ETc 125% ETc	25.94 a 29.69 a 13.15 a 14.68 b	30.31 a 13.13 b 11.25 a 16.25 ab	25.63 a 20.00 b 15.62 a 22.81 a
NCR (ud m^-2)	2	2.149^ns ns non-significant.	0.842^ns ns non-significant.	0.956^ns ns non-significant.	34.77			$\hat{y}$ = 9.79
MNCR (kg m-2)	1	2.417^ns ns non-significant.	10.81^* ***** p < 0.001;	2.354^ns ns non-significant.	43.67		0.251 b	0.208 b	0.338 a
MNCR (kg m-2)	2	0.447^ns ns non-significant.	0.560^ns ns non-significant.	0.378^ns ns non-significant.	49.18			$\hat{y}$ = 0.468
CR (ud m^-2)	1	73.10^* ***** p < 0.001;	5.670^ p < 0.01;	2.557^* * p < 0.05;	47.16	50% ETc 75% ETc 100% ETc 125% ETc	7.50 a 7.18 b 23.13 a 19.69 ab	7.50 a 13.81 a 22.80 a 20.32 a	6.19 a 10.62 ab 20.31 a 15.31 b
CR (ud m^-2)	2	1.650^ns ns non-significant.	9.705^* ***** p < 0.001;	0.564^ns ns non-significant.	11.96		23.81 a	20.26 b	22.17 ab
MCR (kg m-2)	1	50.94^* ***** p < 0.001;	1.946^ns ns non-significant.	3.375^* * p < 0.05;	30.60	50% ETc 75% ETc 100% ETc 125% ETc	0.571 a 0.552 a 1.145 a 1.068 a	0.567 a 0.702 a 1.130 a 0.907 ab	0.548 a 0.708 a 1.024 a 0.798 b
MCR (kg m-2)	2	18.75^* ***** p < 0.001;	5.529^* * p < 0.05;	3.850^ p < 0.01;	23.44	50% ETc 75% ETc 100% ETc 125% ETc	1.195 a 1.390 a 1.059 b 0.762 a	1.066 a 1.361 a 1.601 a 0.962 a	1.272 a 1.498 a 1.379 a 0.923 a
WUE (kg m^-3)	1	5.528^* * p < 0.05;	1.349^ns ns non-significant.	0.478^ns ns non-significant.	16.81	$\hat{y}$ = 10.48
WUE (kg m^-3)	2	65.68^* ***** p < 0.001;	2.345^ns ns non-significant.	1.773^ns ns non-significant.	39.75	$\hat{y}$ = 19.57

Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola SBEA - Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola, Departamento de Engenharia e Ciências Exatas FCAV/UNESP, Prof. Paulo Donato Castellane, km 5, 14884.900 | Jaboticabal - SP, Tel./Fax: +55 16 3209 7619 - Jaboticabal - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revistasbea@sbea.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * Corresponding author. Universidade Federal de Viçosa/ Viçosa - MG, Brasil. E-mail: fernando.cunha@ufv.br