Improving citrus bud grafting efficiency.


Journal

Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
18 10 2023
Historique:
received: 28 09 2022
accepted: 12 10 2023
medline: 23 10 2023
pubmed: 19 10 2023
entrez: 18 10 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Commercial citrus trees are composed of a scion grafted onto a rootstock. Because grafting is one of the most expensive methods of plant propagation, grafting efficiency is of large practical importance. The purpose of this study was to improve citrus bud-grafting efficiency. The effects of six factors that included BA, Tween-20, DMSO, type of solvent (water or EtOH), cardinal orientation of grafted bud, and type of supplemental light (LED, metal halide, none) on forty-four bud-grafting measures were determined using a multifactor design of experiment approach. Four measures useful for identifying treatments of practical value included the number of rootstock axial buds that formed shoots, the percentage of grafted buds that formed shoots, the length of the longest shoot formed from the grafted buds, and the total leaf area of the grafted bud shoots. The factors that most affected these responses were no supplemental light to minimize the number of shoots from rootstock axial buds, a south orientation and 5 mM BA to maximize the percentage of grafted buds that formed shoots, a north orientation and 5 mM BA to maximize the length of the longest grafted bud shoot, and 5 mM BA to maximize the leaf area of the grafted bud shoots.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37853071
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-44832-x
pii: 10.1038/s41598-023-44832-x
pmc: PMC10584891
doi:

Substances chimiques

Water 059QF0KO0R
Solvents 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

17807

Informations de copyright

© 2023. Springer Nature Limited.

Références

Plant Physiol. 2010 Apr;152(4):1914-27
pubmed: 20154098
Plant Cell Environ. 2014 Mar;37(3):742-57
pubmed: 23992149
Plant Cell. 2013 Mar;25(3):834-50
pubmed: 23524661
Plant Cell. 2006 Nov;18(11):2919-28
pubmed: 17114357
Plants (Basel). 2014 Apr 23;3(2):223-50
pubmed: 27135502
Plant Cell. 2003 Feb;15(2):495-507
pubmed: 12566587
Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol. 2001 Jun;52:89-118
pubmed: 11337393
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Apr 22;111(16):6092-7
pubmed: 24711430
Plant Physiol. 2012 Jan;158(1):487-98
pubmed: 22042819
FEBS J. 2022 Dec;289(24):8062-8070
pubmed: 34652884
New Phytol. 2017 Jan;213(2):511-524
pubmed: 27901272
Curr Biol. 2020 Jan 6;30(1):122-126.e2
pubmed: 31839452

Auteurs

Randall P Niedz (RP)

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Horticultural Research Laboratory, 2001 South Rock Road, Fort Pierce, FL, USA. randall.niedz@usda.gov.

Kim D Bowman (KD)

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Horticultural Research Laboratory, 2001 South Rock Road, Fort Pierce, FL, USA.

Articles similaires

Genome, Viral Ralstonia Composting Solanum lycopersicum Bacteriophages
Animals Dietary Fiber Dextran Sulfate Mice Disease Models, Animal
Semiconductors Photosynthesis Polymers Carbon Dioxide Bacteria
Fragaria Light Plant Leaves Osmosis Stress, Physiological

Classifications MeSH