poster - International Conference of Agricultural Engineering
poster - International Conference of Agricultural Engineering poster - International Conference of Agricultural Engineering
6 Number of leaves 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 y = -0,0024x 2 + 0,4276x - 11,895 R 2 = 0,9286 y = -0,0043x 2 + 0,7324x - 23,105 R 2 = 0,9894 60 70 80 90 100 Solo Formosa Available water in soil (%vol) Figure 3. Number of leaves of papaya Solo and Formosa group as a function of available water in soil The dry matter accumulation by shoots of seedlings increased as a function of soil moisture, up to an estimated level of 83.2% with 2.3 g per seedling in genotype Solo and 2.6 g per seedling in the soil with 100% field capacity by a Formosa of papaya seedlings (Figure 4). In general, the accumulated water deficit caused the temporary wilting at times of higher temperature of some plants, affecting their physiology and consequent decrease in biomass production. 3,0 Shoot dry matter (g plant -1 ) 2,5 2,0 1,5 1,0 0,5 y = -0,0005x 2 + 0,1035x - 2,9739 R 2 = 0,93 y = -0,001x 2 + 0,1667x - 4,3574 R 2 = 0,8585 Solo Formosa 0,0 60 70 80 90 100 Available water in soil (% vol) Figure 4. Shoot dry matter of seedling of papaya Solo and Formosa group as a function of available water in soil Except for treatment with humidity at 100% of field capacity, where the values are similar between the two genotypes, the Solo papaya plants produced more dry mass of roots with increasing soil moisture in relation to Formosa (Figure 5). Comparing the values shown in Figures 4 and 5 showed that both genotypes produce more dry roots (2.6 and 2.3 g seedlings -1 ) that shoot (6.1 and 6.2 g seedlings -1 ).
7 Root dry matter (g plant -1 ) 8 7 6 5 4 y = 0,0025x 2 3 - 0,2981x + 10,931 R 2 = 0,915 2 y = -0,0017x 2 + 0,3454x - 11,336 1 R 2 = 0,8495 0 60 70 80 90 100 Available water in soil (%vol) Solo Formosa Figure 5. Root dry matter of seedling of papaya Solo and Formosa group as a function of available water in soil The data of total dry matter of papaya Solo group until the level of soil moisture of 96% of field capacity were significantly higher than the data of Formosa group (Figure 6). The behavior of these data was similar to those observed by roots of plants. In both genotypes, the highest values 9.2 and 8.3 g plant -1 obtained in the treatment of 100% and 96% soil moisture were higher than 2.28, 2.16, 1.63, 0,53 and 2.18 g plant -1 obtained by Costa et al. (2005), Negreiros et al. (2005), Melo et al. (2007), Kusdra et al. (2008) and Hafle et al. (2009) in papaya Solo and Famosa group in different substrates and volumes. Total dry matter (g plant -1 ) 10 9 8 7 6 5 y = 0,0019x 2 - 0,1679x + 7,0262 4 R 2 = 0,9725 3 2 1 y = -0,0026x 2 + 0,4992x - 15,658 R 2 = 0,9271 0 60 70 80 90 100 Available water in soil (%vol) Solo Formosa Figure 6. Total dry matter of seedling of papaya Solo and Formosa group as a function of available water in soil
- Page 183 and 184: This work, after applying Kennessey
- Page 185 and 186: TABLE 2 - Partial runoff coefficien
- Page 187 and 188: Figure 3 also reports a comparison
- Page 189 and 190: 2. Material and Methods The experim
- Page 191 and 192: TABLE 2: Summary of variance analys
- Page 193 and 194: BEZERRA, I. L.; GHEYI, H. R.; FERNA
- Page 195 and 196: 2. Materials and Methods The study
- Page 197 and 198: Figure 3. Hourly values of ET estim
- Page 199 and 200: Ortega-Farias, S.O., Cuenca, R.H.,
- Page 201 and 202: 2 Material end methods The wastewat
- Page 203 and 204: Queiroz et al. (2004) and (Fonseca
- Page 205 and 206: Reference list CEREDA, M.P. (2001)
- Page 207 and 208: 2. Data and Methods 2.1. Methods Ir
- Page 209 and 210: 3. Results The water balance model
- Page 211 and 212: Acknowledgments This work was carri
- Page 213 and 214: and the need to reduce costs, it be
- Page 215 and 216: 40 mm 65.30 59.00 8.70 8.10 60 mm 6
- Page 217 and 218: REFERENCES BERTRAND, J. P. et al. L
- Page 219 and 220: The mathematical modeling in the wa
- Page 221 and 222: OD (mg L -1 ) OD obs (mg L -1 ) TAB
- Page 223 and 224: OD (mg L -1 ) DBO (mg L -1 ) 8,00 7
- Page 225 and 226: Effect of Rice Straw Mulch on Runof
- Page 227 and 228: mg/L, 14.6 mg/L, and 1.2 mg/L, resp
- Page 229 and 230: 1 PAPAYA SEEDLINGS PRODUCTION FROM
- Page 231 and 232: 3 into an oven with circulating air
- Page 233: 5 14 12 Stem diameter (mm) 10 8 6 4
- Page 237 and 238: CAVALCANTE, L. F.; CORDEIRO, J. C.;
- Page 239 and 240: This document was created with Win2
- Page 241 and 242: extractable and non-extractable bou
- Page 243 and 244: MOD-E and MOD-B, and 65.99% and 80.
- Page 245 and 246: Houot, S., Barriuso, E., Bergheaud,
- Page 247 and 248: measures water content and electric
- Page 249 and 250: As observed, increasing the dischar
- Page 251 and 252: irrigation: a comparison of point a
- Page 253 and 254: field operations (STRECK et al., 20
- Page 255 and 256: 3. Results and discussions Table 1
- Page 257 and 258: 4. Conclusions It can be concluded
- Page 259 and 260: water maintenance. At the same time
- Page 261 and 262: TABLE 1 Stream discharge for each m
- Page 263 and 264: TABLE 5 Correlation analysis of wat
- Page 265 and 266: turbulent flow energy produced by w
- Page 267 and 268: The numerical model was validated a
- Page 269 and 270: 4. Conclusion FIGURE 6: The shape o
- Page 271 and 272: 2.1 Case study The Zayandeh-Rud bas
- Page 273 and 274: economic factors. In this is a very
- Page 275 and 276: FIGURE 1. Location of the Wuliangsu
- Page 277 and 278: WT( o C) (a) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5
- Page 279 and 280: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i)
- Page 281 and 282: • The effectiveness of the crop c
- Page 283 and 284: As evidenced by Rana et al. (2005),
6<br />
Number <strong>of</strong> leaves<br />
9<br />
8<br />
7<br />
6<br />
5<br />
4<br />
3<br />
2<br />
1<br />
0<br />
y = -0,0024x 2 + 0,4276x - 11,895<br />
R 2 = 0,9286<br />
y = -0,0043x 2 + 0,7324x - 23,105<br />
R 2 = 0,9894<br />
60 70 80 90 100<br />
Solo<br />
Formosa<br />
Available water in soil (%vol)<br />
Figure 3. Number <strong>of</strong> leaves <strong>of</strong> papaya Solo and Formosa group as a function <strong>of</strong> available water in soil<br />
The dry matter accumulation by shoots <strong>of</strong> seedlings increased as a function <strong>of</strong> soil moisture,<br />
up to an estimated level <strong>of</strong> 83.2% with 2.3 g per seedling in genotype Solo and 2.6 g per seedling in<br />
the soil with 100% field capacity by a Formosa <strong>of</strong> papaya seedlings (Figure 4). In general, the<br />
accumulated water deficit caused the temporary wilting at times <strong>of</strong> higher temperature <strong>of</strong> some<br />
plants, affecting their physiology and consequent decrease in biomass production.<br />
3,0<br />
Shoot dry matter (g plant -1 )<br />
2,5<br />
2,0<br />
1,5<br />
1,0<br />
0,5<br />
y = -0,0005x 2 + 0,1035x - 2,9739<br />
R 2 = 0,93<br />
y = -0,001x 2 + 0,1667x - 4,3574<br />
R 2 = 0,8585<br />
Solo<br />
Formosa<br />
0,0<br />
60 70 80 90 100<br />
Available water in soil (% vol)<br />
Figure 4. Shoot dry matter <strong>of</strong> seedling <strong>of</strong> papaya Solo and Formosa group as a function <strong>of</strong> available water in<br />
soil<br />
Except for treatment with humidity at 100% <strong>of</strong> field capacity, where the values are similar<br />
between the two genotypes, the Solo papaya plants produced more dry mass <strong>of</strong> roots with<br />
increasing soil moisture in relation to Formosa (Figure 5). Comparing the values shown in Figures 4<br />
and 5 showed that both genotypes produce more dry roots (2.6 and 2.3 g seedlings -1 ) that shoot<br />
(6.1 and 6.2 g seedlings -1 ).