4.2 Article

Comparison between diploid and tetraploid citrus rootstocks: morphological characterization and growth evaluation

Journal

BRAGANTIA
Volume 73, Issue 1, Pages 1-7

Publisher

INST AGRONOMICO
DOI: 10.1590/brag.2014.007

Keywords

Citrus; morphology; leaf color; height; dwarfing

Funding

  1. CAPES (Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior, Brazil)
  2. CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico, Brazil)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tetraploid citrus rootstocks may present different morphological characteristics and growth when compared to diploid ones. This worked aimed at comparing morphological characteristics and height growth of diploid and tetraploid plants from the rootstocks 'Swingle' citrumelo [C. paradise Macf. Chi Poncirus trifoliate (L.) Raf], citrange 'Troyer' (C. sinensis (L.) Osb. Chi P. trifoliata) and citranges 'Fepagro C 13 ' and 'Fepagro C 37 ' [C. sinensis cv. Pera Chi P. trifoliata] during twelve months. Diploid (2n=18) and tetraploid (2n=36) plants originated from the same seed were identified, cultivated and evaluated every 45 days regarding color, height, petiole length, leaf length and central leaflet width. Significant differences were observed for the evaluated characteristics: the average of petiole length was 1.78 cm in the diploid and 0.99 cm in the tetraploid plants; the average of leaf length was 2.32 cm in the diploid and 2.95 cm in the tetraploid plants; the average of central leaflet width was 1.33 cm in the diploid and 1.69 cm in the tetraploid plants. Moreover, tetraploid plants had darker and thicker leaves than the diploid ones. Variation regarding height was observed and the diploid plants presented higher growth than the tetraploid ones. As tetraploid plants are smaller, have a slow height growth and wider and longer leaves. Key words: Citrus, morphology, leaf color, height, dwarfing.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available