Substrates and fertilizations in the initial growth of the desert rose

Alves, Guilherme Augusto Cito; Hoshino, Rodrigo Thibes; Bertoncelli, Douglas Junior; Suzuki, Ana Beatryz Prenzier; Colombo, Ronan Carlos; Faria, Ricardo Tadeu de

doi:10.14295/oh.v24i1.998

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Scientific Article • Ornam. Hortic. 24 (1) • Jan-Apr 2018 • https://doi.org/10.14295/oh.v24i1.998 copy

Substrates and fertilizations in the initial growth of the desert rose

Substratos e fertilizações no crescimento inicial de rosa do deserto

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

The desert rose (Adenium obesum) has been highlighted in the internal market, however there are not many studies related to its demands regarding its nutrition and substrates. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different fertilizations and its interactions with different substrates in the initial growth of the desert rose. The seedlings of desert rose with 60 days have been potted transplanted with a capacity of 0.415 L, filled with two kinds of substrates: sand + coconut fiber and sand + composted pine powder. Four different fertilization managements have been done: without fertilization, application of the Hoagland & Arnon nutrient solution; application of NH₃NO₄ at 590 g L^-1 of nitrogen (N); and the application of the Hoagland & Arnon nutrient solution modified through the addition of NH₃NO₄, increasing the concentration of N to 800 g L^-1. The solutions have been applied biweekly adding 50 mL per pot. The experiment has been entirely randomized in a 2x4 factorial design, with 10 repetitions. After 150 days from the beginning of the fertilizations the phytometrical parameters evaluated were: height of the shoot; diameter of the basal caudex; number of shoots; dry mass of the roots, caudex and leaves; and determination of the levels and accumulation of macronutrients in the shoot, and the pH and electrical conductivity of the substrates. The evaluated data have been submitted to an analysis of variance and the Tukey test compared through the test at 5% of error probability. For all the evaluated parameters, when the composted pine mixture was used, the seedlings showed a higher development compared to coconut fiber mixture. The seedlings had a better performance with the modified Hoagland solution for height, number of shoots, caudex diameter and leaf dry mass in both substrates. The use of the sand + pine powder (1:1 v v^-1) and the fertilization with Hoagland & Arnon solution combined with the NH₃NO₄ solution provided a better initial growth on the desert rose.

Keywords:
Adenium obseum; nutrition; ornamental

^* * Sand + coconut fiber (S+CF), sand + composted pine powder (S+P). Substrate	DD (g L^-1)	WRC (mL L^-1)	pH H₂O	EC (mS cm^-1)
S+C	838.00	497.33	5.78	2.43
S+P	1042.00	460.67	7.23	1.25

		Height (cm)	Shoots (n°)	Diameter (cm)	CDM³ 3 Caudex dry mass (CDM); leaf dry mass (LDM); roots dry mass (RDM).	LDM	RDM
		Height (cm)	Shoots (n°)	Diameter (cm)	(g)
	C² 2 Fertilizations: absent/control (C); Hoagland and Arnon solution (HA); solution of NO3NH4(N); modified Hoagland and Arnon solution (HA+N).	4.58 c⁴ 4 The same capital letter between groups and lower-case letters within each group did not differ by the Tukey test at 5% of error probability.	0.30 b	1.41 d	0.50 c	0.05 c	0.15 c
	HA	5.66 c	0.40 b	2.11 c	0.98 c	0.65 a	0.54 b
S+C¹ 1 Substrates: sand + coconut fiber (S+C); sand + pine powder (S+P).	N	10.32 b	0.60 b	2.76 b	2.08 b	0.30 b	1.70 a
	HA+N	16.20 a	2.00 a	4.21 a	2.75 a	0.50 a	1.77 a
	Average	9.19 B	0.83 B	2.62 B	1.58 B	0.39 B	1.04 B
	C	8.05 d	0.70 b	2.59 b	1.59 b	0.34 c	0.55 c
	HA	10.87 c	0.80 b	2.70 b	1.41 b	0.33 c	1.23 b
S+P	N	14.22 b	2.10 a	4.09 a	4.04 a	0.84 b	1.49 ab
	HA+N	21.20 a	2.40 a	4.00 a	3.96 a	1.63 a	1.63 a
	Average	13.59 A	1.50 A	3.35 A	2.75 A	0.79 A	1.23 A
	CV(%)	9.29	15.25	9.48	22.61	21.51	29.51

	N	P	K	Ca	Mg	RDM	SDM	TDM	Height	DC
N	1.00	0.01	0.00	-0.54	-0.46	0.52	0.45	0.52	0.67	0.59
P	ns	1.00	0.29	0.25	0.01	-0.29	-0.29	-0.32	-0.08	-0.17
K	ns	ns	1.00	-0.31	-0.22	0.20	0.49	0.44	0.40	0.40
Ca	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	ns	ns	1.00	0.63	-0.66	-0.70	-0.75	-0.69	-0.76
Mg	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	ns	ns	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	1.00	-0.55	-0.38	-0.47	-0.41	-0.54
RDM	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	ns	ns	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	1.00	0.59	0.78	0.61	0.67
SDM	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	ns	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	1.00	0.97	0.83	0.84
TDM	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	ns	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	1.00	0.84	0.87
Height	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	ns	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	1.00	0.84
DC	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	ns	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	^ Significant to 1% of probability;	1.00

		N³ 3 Nitrogen (N); phosphor (P); potassium (K); calcium (Ca); magnesium (Mg).	P	K	Ca	Mg
		----------------------------g kg^-1----------------------------
	C² 2 Fertilizations: absent/control (C); Hoagland & Arnon solution (HA); solution of NO3NH4 (N); modified Hoagland & Arnon solution (HA+N).	16.05 c⁴ 4 The same capital letter between groups and lower-case letters within each group did not differ by the Tukey test at 5% of error probability.	5.40 a	23.70 b	37.51 a	3.55 a
	HA	18.34 c	5.60 a	32.74 a	14.06 b	2.49 b
S+C¹ 1 Substrates: sand + coconut fiber (S+C); sand + pine powder (S+P).	N	24.76 b	4.07 a	25.53 b	13.07 ba	2.40 b
	HA+N	36.13 a	5.89 a	28.35 ab	5.83 c	1.84 b
	Average	23.82 A	5.24 B	27.58 B	17.62 A	2.57 A
	C	20.51 b	7.67 a	39.83 a	24.17 a	2.62 a
	HA	21.13 b	7.10 ab	36.05 a	18.84 a	2.60 a
S+P	N	19.40 b	4.75 c	38.98 a	8.10 b	2.31 a
	HA+N	29.10 a	5.29 bc	40.25 a	7.31 b	2.32 a
	Average	22.53 A	6.20 A	38.78 A	14.61 B	2.46 A
	CV(%)	13.0	18.6	11.2	27.0	23.3

		N³ 3 Nitrogen (N); phosphor (P); potassium (K); calcium (Ca); magnesium (Mg).	P	K	Ca	Mg
		----------------------------g kg^-1----------------------------
	C² 2 Fertilizations: absent/control (C); Hoagland and Arnon solution (HA); solution of NO3NH4 (N); modified Hoagland & Arnon solution (HA+N).	4.77 b⁴ 4 The same capital letter between groups and lower-case letters within each group did not differ by the Tukey test at 5% of error probability.	4.19 b	30.92 ab	7.00 a	1.44 a
	HA	4.77 b	6.80 a	35.39 a	5.59 a	1.05 a
S+C¹ 1 Substrates: sand + coconut fiber (S+C); sand + pine powder (S+P).	N	6.23 b	1.94 c	23.77 b	4.72 a	1.39 a
	HA+N	15.76 a	6.52 a	11.17 c	5.91 a	1.43 a
	Average	7.88 A	4.86 B	25.31 A	5.81 A	1.33 A
	C	7.26 ab	7.95 a	36.83 a	5.42 a	1.75 a
	HA	7.67 ab	7.41 ab	14.37 b	7.22 a	1.43 ab
S+P	N	5.29 b	5.46 b	15.08 b	5.49 a	1.11 b
	HA+N	9.74 a	7.05 ab	34.52 a	5.41 a	1.92 a
	Average	7.49 A	6.97 A	25.20 A	5.88 A	1.55 A
	CV(%)	21.20	19.70	19.90	26.40	25.90

		N³ 3 Nitrogen (N); phosphor (P); potassium (K); calcium (Ca); magnesium (Mg).	P	K	Ca	Mg
		----------------------------mg pot-1¹ 1 Substrates: sand + coconut fiber (S+C); sand + pine powder (S+P). ----------------------------
	C² 2 Fertilizations: absent/control (C); Hoagland & Arnon solution (H); solution of NO3NH4 (N); modified Hoagland & Arnon solution (H+N).	3.27 c⁴ 4 The same capital letter between groups and lower-case letters within each group did not differ by the Tukey test at 5% of error probability.	2.40 c	16.82 b	5.57 c	0.92 c
	HA	16.61 c	10.28 b	55.85 a	14.62 b	2.65 b
S+C¹ 1 Substrates: sand + coconut fiber (S+C); sand + pine powder (S+P).	N	20.40 b	5.27 c	57.12 a	13.75 b	3.61 b
	HA+N	61.58 a	20.88 a	45.04 a	19.20 a	4.85 a
	Average	25.46 B	9.71 B	43.71 B	13.28 B	3.01 B
	C	18.43 c	15.21 c	71.89 c	16.73 c	3.66 c
	HA	17.81 c	12.80 c	32.20 d	16.42 c	2.88 c
S+P	N	37.65 b	26.01 b	93.58 b	28.96 b	6.40 b
	HA+N	86.01 a	36.53 a	202.32 a	33.34 a	11.36 a
	Average	39.97 A	22.64 A	100.00 A	23.86 A	6.08 A
	CV(%)	20.30	22.60	25.50	16.90	22.40

		³ 3 Hydrogenionic potential (pH) and electrical conductivity (EC) of the distinct substrates of desert rose cultivated in different fertilizations after 150 days. pH	EC (mS cm-1)
			EC (mS cm-1)
	C² 2 Fertilizations: absent/control (C); Hoagland & Arnon solution (HA); solution of NO3NH4 (N); modified Hoagland and Arnon solution (HA+N).	5.83 ⁴ 4 The same capital letter between groups and lower-case letters within each group did not differ by the Tukey test at 5% of error probability. a	1.92 a
	HA	5.66 a	2.15 a
S+C¹ 1 Substrates: sand + coconut fiber (S+C); sand + pine powder (S+P).	N	5.58 a	2.31 a
	HA+N	5.31 a	2.33 a
	Average	5.6 B	2.18 A
	C	6.76 a	1.06 b
	HA	6.49 a	1.54 a
S+P	N	6.02 b	1.87 a
	HA+N	5.95 b	2.01 a
	Average	6.31 A	1.62 B
	CV(%)	12.9	16.52

Sociedade Brasileira de Floricultura e Plantas Ornamentais Av. Av. Peter Henry Rolfs, s/n, 36570-000 - Viçosa, Minas Gerais - Brasil, (32) 3379-4983, Tel: (32) 3379-4983 - Viçosa - MG - Brazil
E-mail: editor.ornamentalhorticulture@gmail.com

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] *Corresponding author: guilhermecito@hotmail.com