<b>Response of orange Tree in irrigation levels</b> - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v26i2.1881

  • Altair Bertonha Irrigação e Engenharia - UEM
  • Antonio Carlos Andrade Gonçalves UEM
  • Paulo Sérgio Lourenço de Freitas UEM
  • Roberto Rezende UEM

Abstract

The experiment was conducted at the Centro Técnico de Irrigação of Universidade Estadual de Maringá in Maringa, state of Paraná. Brasil, in order to study the effect of irrigation in the orange tree (Citrus sinensis Osbeck) yield. The experimental design was entirely randomized with for rates of irrigation (L1= 10, L2 = 15, L3= 20 e L4 = 25mm). Irrigation was performed through a drip and controlled according to the evapotranspiration of the crop, estimated by a Class A pan. The production of fruits, the medium weight of the fruits, the productivity of fruits and the amount of soluble solid produced by tree presented a quadratic relationship in function of the irrigation sheets and the tenor of soluble solids of the juice presented a lineal relationship in function of the treatments. The production of orange fruit, the fruit weight average and the production of orange fruit presented quadratic relationship in function of the application of the irrigation water.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Altair Bertonha, Irrigação e Engenharia - UEM
Possui mestrado em Engenharia Agrícola pela Universidade Federal de Viçosa (1980) e doutorado em Agronomia pela Universidade de São Paulo (1997). Atualmente é professor associado c da Universidade Estadual de Maringá. Tem experiência na área de Engenharia Agrícola, com ênfase em Irrigação e Drenagem, atuando principalmente nos seguintes temas: águas residuais e hidrogeis. Currículo Lattes
Published
2008-04-11
How to Cite
Bertonha, A., Gonçalves, A. C. A., Freitas, P. S. L. de, & Rezende, R. (2008). <b>Response of orange Tree in irrigation levels</b&gt; - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v26i2.1881. Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy, 26(2), 185-191. https://doi.org/10.4025/actasciagron.v26i2.1881
Section
Agronomy

 

2.0
2019CiteScore
 
 
60th percentile
Powered by  Scopus

 

2.0
2019CiteScore
 
 
60th percentile
Powered by  Scopus