4.3 Article

Temperature effects on Acrocomia aculeata seeds provide insights into overcoming dormancy in neotropical savanna palms

期刊

FLORA
卷 223, 期 -, 页码 30-37

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.flora.2016.04.011

关键词

Macaw palm; Germination; Dormancy breaking; Stratification; Cerrado

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico-CNPq

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Seed tolerance to the elevated temperatures of soils during the spring/summer seasons or due to the passage of fire is an important adaptation for Cerrado (neotropical savanna) seeds. The present work evaluated the influence of elevated temperatures on the seed viability and germination of the palm tree Acrocomia aculeata. The seeds were immersed in water at 70 degrees C (thermal shock) for 1, 3, 5, 10, 30, 60, 120, 300, 420 and 600 s. In another experiment, seeds were maintained in dry (heat treatment) or moist (stratification) conditions, at temperatures of 35, 40, 20/30, 18/35 degrees C, or at room temperature (mean 22 degrees C) for 15, 30 or 60 days. The effects of these treatments on embryo viability as well as on seed germination were evaluated. Embryo survival was high until 300 s of exposure to thermal shock; high mortality was observed with longer exposures. Thermal shocks did not stimulate seed germination, and high rates of seed deterioration were observed with exposure to high temperature for 300 s or more. Heat treatments, at any temperature, did not stimulate germination, while stratification at 35 degrees C for 30 and 60 days resulted in increased germination (13 and 25% respectively). The temperature of 40 degrees C, in both dry and moist conditions, resulted in the loss of embryo viability. Acrocomia aculeata seeds have a considerable tolerance to high temperatures; furthermore, stratification at 35 degrees C is probably important in overcoming seed dormancy in soil seed banks and constitutes a successful propagation method for the species. (C) 2016 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

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

4.3
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