Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T19:36:56.113Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Different Materials of Substrates in the Production of Chili Apple Seedlings (Capsicumpubescens R. and P.) Grajales ST

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 February 2014

Martha L. Domínguez ,
Oscar G. Villegas ,
Héctor Sotelo ,
Carlos M. Acosta ,
Mario Pérez  and
Diana Rodríguez
Martha L. Domínguez
Affiliation:
Faculty of Chemical Sciences and Engineering. University Autonomous of the State of Morelos, Cuernavaca, Morelos 62209, Mexico.
Oscar G. Villegas
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agricultural Sciences. University of the State of Morelos, Cuernavaca, Morelos 62209, Mexico.
Héctor Sotelo
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agricultural Sciences. University of the State of Morelos, Cuernavaca, Morelos 62209, Mexico.
Carlos M. Acosta
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agricultural Sciences. University of the State of Morelos, Cuernavaca, Morelos 62209, Mexico.
Mario Pérez
Affiliation:
Institute of Horticulture. University Autonomous of Chapingo. Chapingo, 56230, Mexico.
Diana Rodríguez
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agricultural Sciences. University of the State of Morelos, Cuernavaca, Morelos 62209, Mexico.
Get access

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of 12 substrates in the seedling growth of chili apple (Capsicum pubescens R. & P.) hybrid Grajales ST. The substrates were prepared with different proportions of five materials: perlite, coconut fiber, loam, Sunshine3 ® and wood dust. The seeds were sown in trays of 50 cavities. For the substrates were determined physical and chemical properties. Significant differences in growth parameters of seedlings are the effect of the substrate. Based on the remarkable accumulation of dry matter of each of the organs of the seedling, and their relative distribution, one can surmise a seedling quality with 47.70 % dry matter in leaves, 35.34 % in stem and 16.95 % in root. The substrate with better features for the production of chile apple seedlings was prepared with 25 % loam and 75 % perlite (v/v), which showed retention of 85.5 % moisture, electrical conductivity of 0.03 dS·m-1 and total porosity of 62.5 %.

Keywords

fiberporositypolymer
Type
Articles
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1613: Symposium 4D – New Trends in Polymer Chemistry and Characterization-2013 , 2014 , pp. 89 - 94
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Maroto, J. V., Horticultura herbácea especial (Mundi-Prensa, 2002) pp. 120–125.Google Scholar
Pérez y, M. Castro, B., El chile manzano, (Universidad Autónoma Chapingo, 2009) pp. 10–15.Google Scholar
Weston, L. A. and Zandstra, B. H., Hort Science 24, 88–90 (1989).Google Scholar
Markovic, V., Djurovka, M., and Ilin, Ž., Acta Horticulturae 462, 163–167 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taga, T., Técnicas de trasplante en el cultivo de tomate (Centro Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria y Forestal, 2003) pp 1–5.Google Scholar
Saldaña, S. Producción hidropónica y transformación agroindustrial del tomate saladette (Lycopersiconesculentum) . Curso precongreso. XVI Congreso Nacional de Ingeniería Bioquímica, V International Biochemical Engineering, VI Jornadas Científicas de Biomedicina y Biología Molecular. Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Chiapas (2008).Google Scholar
Nicola, S. and Basoccu, L., Acta Horticulturae 361, 519–526 (1994).Google Scholar
Cornillon, P., Acta Horticulturae 487, 133–137 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pastor, J.N., Terra 17, 231–235 (1999).Google Scholar
Abad, M., Noguera, P.. Los sustratos en los cultivos sin suelo, editado por Urrestarazu, M. (Mundi-Prensa, 2000) pp 137–184.Google Scholar
Andrade-Rodríguez, M., Ayala-Hernández, J. J., Arce, J., Acosta-Durán, C. M., Alia-Tejacal, I., López-Martínez, V., Villegas-Torres, O. G., Revista Investigación Agropecuaria 4, 9–16 (2007).Google Scholar
Díaz-Serrano, F. R., Selección de sustratos para la producción de hortalizas en invernadero. Memorias del IV Simposio Nacional de Horticultura. Invernaderos: Diseño, Manejo y Producción. Torreón, Coah, México (2004).Google Scholar
Quesada, G., Méndez, C.. Agronomía mesoamericana 16, 171–183 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peña, A., Magdaleno, J., Mora, R., Becerra, P., Evaluación de sustratos y plásticos para la producción de plántula de tomate de cascara (PhysalisixocarpaBrot.) . VIII Congreso Nacional Agronómico. Universidad Autónoma Chapingo (2005).Google Scholar
Magdaleno, J. J., Peña, A., Castro, R., Castillo, A. M., Galvis, A., Ramírez, F., Becerra, P. A., Revista Chapingo Serie horticultura 12, 153–158 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García, E., Modificaciones al sistema de clasificación climática de Köppen (para adaptarlo a las condiciones de la República Mexicana) (Larios, 1981) México. pp. 251 Google Scholar
Steiner, A. A., The universal solution, Proceedings of 6th International Congress on Soilles. Culture. Lunteren, The Netherlands pp. 633–649 (1984).Google Scholar
Ansorena, J., Sustratos. Propiedades y caracterización (Mundi-Prensa, 1994) pp. 172 Google Scholar
Peil, M., Gálvez, J. L., Agrociencia 11, 5–11 (2005).Google Scholar