Next Article in Journal
Response of Crop Performance and Yield of Spring Sweet Potato (Ipomoea batatas [L.] Lam) as Affected by Mechanized Transplanting Properties
Next Article in Special Issue
Humic Acid Improves the Resilience to Salinity Stress of Drip-Irrigated Mexican Lime Trees in Saline Clay Soils
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of Exogenous Tryptophan on Primary Metabolism and Oxidative Stress and Their Relationship with Seedling Germination and Vigor of Glycine Max L.
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 13
Issue 6
10.3390/agronomy13061610
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Photosynthetic Assimilation of the Guava (Psidium guajava) cv. Paluma under Different Pruning and Fruit Thinning Intensities

by
Adaniel Sousa dos Santos
1,*,
Gustavo Alves Pereira
1,
Wéverson Lima Fonseca
2,
Alan Mario Zuffo
3,
Jenilton Gomes da Cunha
1,
Nemilda Pereira Soares
1,
Estefenson Marques Morais
1,
Antônio Afonso Sousa do Nascimento
1,
Djavan Pinheiro Santos
4,
Murilo de Sousa Almeida
1,
Jorge González Aguilera
5,
Luis Morales-Aranibar
6,
Eliseo Pumacallahui Salcedo
6,
Richar Marlon Mollinedo Chura
7,
Wilberth Caviedes Contreras
8 and
Roger Ccama Alejo
7
1
Departamento de Ciências Agrárias, Universidade Federal do Piauí, Campus Professora Cinobelina Elvas, BR 135, km 3—Planalto Horizonte, CEP, Bom Jesus 64900-000, PI, Brazil
2
Departamento de Agropecuária, Universidade Federal do Piauí, Colégio Técnico de Bom Jesus (CTBJ), Bom Jesus 59270-000, PI, Brazil
3
Departamento de Agronomia, Universidade Estadual do Maranhão, Balsas 65800-000, MA, Brazil
4
Solo Agrícola—Consultoria e Projetos, Cristino Castro 64920-000, PI, Brazil
5
Department of Crop Science, State University of Mato Grosso do Sul, Cassilândia 79540-000, MS, Brazil
6
National Intercultural University of Quillabamba, La Convenciòn, Cusco 08741, Peru
7
Departamento Académico de Ciencias Físico Matemáticas, Universidad Nacional del Altiplano-Puno, Puno 21001, Peru
8
Departamento Académico de Ciencias Básicas, Universidad Nacional Amazónica de Madre de Dios (UNAMAD), Madre de Dios 17001, Peru
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2023, 13(6), 1610; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13061610
Submission received: 16 May 2023 / Revised: 8 June 2023 / Accepted: 10 June 2023 / Published: 15 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Effects of Modern Agricultural Management Practices on the Growth, Yield and Fruit Quality of Horticultural and Fruit Plants)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In guava plants, production pruning can be performed twice a year, and the return of growth is dependent on the physiological responses that are altered by the different cultivation environments and adopted management. From this perspective, this study aimed to characterize the photosynthetic dynamics of guava plants influenced by different pruning and fruit thinning intensities during two growing seasons in the region of Currais, Piauí, Brazil. The plants were distributed in a randomized block design with a factorial arrangement (3 × 3 × 2) consisting of three pruning intensities (short, medium, and long) and three fruit thinning intensities (0, 10, and 20%) during two growing seasons. The data were subjected to a cluster analysis and canonical discriminant analysis to discriminate treatment groups based on the variables. Through a cluster analysis for the evaluated treatments, it was possible to split the two pruning seasons into five different groups clustered for the first pruning season and the second pruning season. The highest assimilation values were observed in the first pruning season and especially in plants that received short pruning with 0% fruit thinning, medium pruning with 10% and 20% fruit thinning, and long pruning with 10% fruit thinning. Through the graphic representation of the canonical discriminant analysis, the first two variables explained 93.40% of the total variance contained in the nine original variables. The highest means of ambient PAR, transpiration, leaf temperature, internal carbon, and ambient temperature were observed in the second pruning season and in plants that received short pruning with 10% and 20% fruit thinning, medium pruning with 0% and 20% fruit thinning, and long pruning with 0%, 10%, and 20% fruit thinning favors a higher photosynthetic accumulation in guava plants. We observed a multiplicity of responses; however, short pruning with 10% thinning should be considered for both seasons.

1. Introduction

Guava (Psidium guajava L.) is a fruit species belonging to the Myrtaceae family, which is commonly found in regions with tropical and subtropical climates, showing hardiness and easy adaptation to different edaphoclimatic conditions [1]. In Brazil, this species is naturally distributed throughout the national territory, which makes it an important resource for local agricultural production [2,3].
Guava fruits are highly valued for their flavor and aroma and are considered extremely beneficial for human health due to their balanced nutrient content and high content of vitamin C, sugars, mineral salts, and fiber [4,5]. In addition, antioxidant and antimicrobial properties have been reported in various parts of the plant, such as the pulp, seeds, and leaves, which has aroused scientific interest in its potential use in the food and pharmaceutical industry [6,7]. Therefore, guava consumption has been associated with health benefits such as the prevention of chronic diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular diseases [8].
According to Costa et al. [9], guava is a species with socioeconomic viability in Brazilian agribusiness, contributing to human settlement in the countryside and improving the distribution of regional income. For this reason, this species has gained an increasing space in Brazil. Guava cv. Paluma, in particular, has proven to be a promising guava variety in terms of its agronomic and commercial potential [10]. Altendorf [11] reported that the world level of guava production was estimated at 6.5 million tons in 2017, with Brazil among the largest producers. Guava cv. Paluma has been widely cultivated in Brazil due to its excellent fruit quality and yield [12]. According to Altendorf et al. [11] and Uesu et al. [13], the largest guava producing states in Brazil are São Paulo and Pernambuco. These states offer favorable climatic and edaphological conditions for the successful cultivation of guava cv. Paluma [14,15]. Regarding the destination of guava production, Silva et al. [16] explain that it is mainly destined for fresh production. Fresh guava is in high demand in both domestic and international markets due to its unique flavor and health benefits [16]. On the other hand, Barbalho et al. [17] state that the food industry uses guava to produce candies, jellies, and frozen pulp. These processed guava products, especially jellies and pulps, have a high market acceptance and contribute significantly to the diversification of supply and added value [18].
Crop management practices, such as spacing and pruning, can significantly affect the phenological patterns of tropical fruit crops, with the objective of maximizing production [19]. According to Costa et al. [9] and Almeida [19], guava is a fruit species with an immediate response to pruning. In ecophysiological terms, pruning provides a uniform distribution of leaf area exposed to light, which, in turn, can maximize photosynthetic rates and direct the allocation of photoassimilates to produce better quality fruit with a higher market value. Research by Rodriguez et al. [20] demonstrated that proper pruning allows better control of vegetative growth, stimulating sprouting and the production of new stems, which favors the development of new reproductive structures and higher fruit production. Fruit thinning is indicated when excess fruit set occurs, and the number of fruits remaining on the plant after thinning directly affects the final fruit size and weight [21]. Studies by Alcântara et al. [22] have shown that early fruit thinning in guava cv. Paluma allows a greater accumulation of photoassimilates in the remaining fruit, resulting in a significant increase in fruit size and weight. Pruning and thinning are fundamental practices in guava crop management to maximize production and obtain high quality fruit. These practices allow an adequate distribution of photosynthetic energy and regulate the number of fruits on the plant, directly influencing final fruit size and weight.
Photosynthesis, the process by which plants convert light energy into chemical energy, plays a central role in plant metabolism, connecting internal plant processes with the external environment [23]. Chlorophyll pigments, specifically chlorophyll a and b, are the primary pigments responsible for capturing light energy during photosynthesis [24]. The synthesis and degradation of chlorophyll molecules are highly regulated processes influenced by various internal and external factors. Internal factors, such as the availability of enzymes and cofactors, as well as the number and activity of chloroplasts, have a direct impact on chlorophyll metabolism [25]. For example, the activity of enzymes involved in chlorophyll synthesis can be influenced by genetic factors and the physiological state of the plant [26]. In addition, the number and size of chloroplasts within a plant cell can affect total chlorophyll content and photosynthetic capacity [27]. External factors also play a crucial role in regulating chlorophyll metabolism and photosynthesis. CO2 concentration, for example, directly influences the rate of carbon fixation and the overall efficiency of photosynthesis [28]. Excess or limited soil water availability can affect stomatal conductance, which in turn influences CO2 uptake and water loss through transpiration [29]. Temperature is another critical external factor affecting photosynthesis, with each plant species having an optimal temperature range for efficient carbon assimilation [30]. Light intensity is a key factor affecting both the rate of photosynthesis and chlorophyll metabolism. High light intensity can lead to photoinhibition, which refers to the reduction of photosynthetic efficiency due to excess light energy [31]. On the other hand, low light intensity can result in low chlorophyll content and reduced photosynthetic activity [32]. The nitrogen content of the plant, mainly in the form of proteins and enzymes involved in photosynthesis, is another important factor influencing chlorophyll metabolism [33]. Nitrogen deficiency can lead to a decrease in chlorophyll content and a decrease in photosynthetic capacity [34].
Therefore, possible differences in leaf nitrogen contents and chlorophyll concentrations can have a significant impact on the photosynthetic capacity of the plant, as they can alter the photochemical and biochemical phases of photosynthesis, as well as the assimilation and transport of atmospheric CO2 to the carboxylation site of the Rubisco enzyme within the mesophyll (mesophyll conductance, gm) [35]. These processes are of utmost importance, as they affect both the quality and yield of guava. Nitrogen concentration in leaves is a crucial factor influencing photosynthesis and biomass production. According to studies by Bloom et al. [36], optimal nitrogen levels favor CO2 assimilation and carbohydrate production in plants. On the other hand, a nitrogen deficiency can limit photosynthetic activity, reduce plant growth, and negatively affect fruit quality [37]. Chlorophyll concentration in leaves also plays a crucial role in photosynthesis. Chlorophyll is the pigment responsible for capturing the light energy needed for photosynthesis. Studies by Lichtenthaler et al. [38] have shown that high chlorophyll concentrations are associated with higher photosynthetic rates and higher light use efficiency. Therefore, a higher chlorophyll concentration in guava leaves may result in a higher photosynthetic capacity and thus higher biomass production and better yields. Mesophyll conductance (gm) also plays an important role in photosynthesis, as it affects the entry of CO2 into the leaves and its diffusion to the chloroplasts, where carbon fixation takes place. According to research by Flexas et al. [39], high mesophyll conductance is associated with higher CO2 utilization efficiency and higher photosynthetic capacity. Therefore, an increase in mesophyll conductance may contribute to higher biomass production in guava plants.
From this perspective, the present study aimed to evaluate the photosynthetic dynamics of the guava cultivar Paluma under different pruning and thinning intensities by evaluating the ecophysiological data of the crop.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Cultivation Area and Planting Material

The study was conducted in a commercial orchard at the Rancho Vale das Serras farm in Currais, Piauí, Brazil (−09°00′24″ S, −44°24′39″ W, 277 m a.s.l.) from 2020 to 2022. The climate of the region is classified as Aw, i.e., tropical megathermal. The summers are hot and humid (November to April) and there is a clear dry winter season from May to October (July is the driest month) (Figure 1), according to data from the National Institute of Meteorology of Brazil (INMET) [40] recorded through automatic weather station A326. The total rainfall during the study period was 1005.0 mm, and the means of maximum and minimum temperature were 34.3 °C and 21.2 °C, respectively. The monthly means of air relative humidity ranged from 80.6% to 27.4%.
The soil is classified as a dystrophic yellow Oxisol with a sandy texture [41]. The physicochemical characteristics of the soil before the experiment was set up are shown in Table 1. The experimental area was established in January 2020 with plants of Psidium guajava L. spaced 3.0 m between plants and 4.0 m between rows. A micro-sprinkler irrigation system was adopted using emitters spaced every 1.5 m, a flow rate of 30 L h−1, and a wetting radius of 2 m.

2.2. Experimental Design

The experiment was conducted in a randomized block design set up in a factorial arrangement (3 × 3 × 2), with the plots consisting of three pruning intensities (short, medium, and long) and three fruit thinning intensities (0%, 10%, and 20%) split into four blocks with three plants per plot during two cultivation cycles.

2.3. Conduction of the Experiment

The guava plants were trained in a cup shape with three structural branches in different directions during two production cycles (2020 to 2022). Production pruning was performed in June 2020. Then, when the sprouts achieved a length of about 60 cm, they were directed to form the training system by removing the apical bud, thus favoring their lignification. After maturity, these branches received production pruning on 21 December 2020 (spring) and 21 July 2021 (winter), in each crop year.
The intensities of production pruning were classified based on the distance from the base at which the branches were pruned: short (pruned at 1/3 of their length, counting from the base), medium (pruned at 1/2 of their length, counting from the base), and long (pruned at 2/3 of their length, counting from the base). At every pruning time, 12 plants considered homogeneous for age, plant height, canopy formation, health, and vigor were selected from the center of the plot.
The fertilization Interventions were performed according to soil analysis for an estimated yield ranging from 20 to 40 t ha−¹, split according to the methodology proposed by Sousa and Lobato [42]. Phytosanitary and weed control were performed periodically. Crop management practices such as tying, elimination of excess branches (green pruning), and fertilization were performed whenever necessary.

2.4. Variables Analyzed

The parameters associated with gas exchange were evaluated using a portable infrared CO2 analyzer (IRGA), model LICOR 6400, during the reproductive stage. The analyses were performed on clear days during the dry (21 May 2021) and rainy seasons (17 December 2021) by measuring the absorbed CO2 (CO2 abs), leaf temperature (LT), ambient temperature (AT), ambient PAR (A_PAR), transpiration (T), assimilation (A), internal carbon (IC), and absorbed carbon (AC).

2.5. Statistical Analysis

The data were subjected to a clustering analysis of treatments performed by Ward’s method (formation of homogeneous clusters by the lowest minimum internal variance), using the Euclidean distance and Pearson’s coefficient as a reference. A canonical discriminant analysis was used to discriminate the groups of treatments as a function of the variables, represented by a biplot chart constructed for the first two canonical variables. Confidence ellipses of 95% were constructed to detected statistical differences (p < 0.05) between groups of treatments. All analyses were performed with the software R, version 3.6.1 [43]. The canonical discriminant analysis was performed using the candisc package [44].

3. Results

Through a cluster analysis for the evaluated factors (growing seasons, pruning intensities, and thinning intensities), it was possible to split the two pruning seasons into five different groups (Figure 2). The first growing cycle (C1) formed the groups GI (C1+PL+20%; C1+PM+0%), GIII (C1+PC+0%; C1+PM+10%; C1+PM+20%; C1+PL+10%), and GIV (C1+PC+10%; C1+PC+20%; EC1+PL+0%), and the group of treatments GII (C2+PM+10%; C2+ PC+0%) and GV (C2+PC+10%; C2+PC+20%; C2+PM+0%; C2+PM+20%; C2+PL+0%; C2+PL+10%; C2+PL+10%) clustered for the second pruning cycle (C2) (Figure 2).
Through the graphic representation of the canonical discriminant analysis, the first two variables explained 93.40% of the total variance contained in the nine original variables (Figure 2). When analyzing the distribution of weights of each variable, the first canonical variable (Can.1) is more strongly correlated to the variables of leaf temperature (LT), ambient temperature (AT), transpiration (T), assimilation (A), and internal carbon (IC), explaining 84.20% of the original variance. In contrast, the second canonical variable (Can.2) is more strongly related to the ambient PAR (A_PAR) and absorbed carbon (AC), retaining 9.20% of the original variance.
According to the two-dimensional plane formed by canonical variables Can1 and Can2 (Figure 3), the highest assimilation values were observed in the first pruning season and especially in the plants that received the treatments of group GIII, i.e., in plants that received short pruning with 0% fruit thinning, medium pruning with 10% and 20% fruit thinning, and long pruning with 10% fruit thinning.
On the other hand, the highest values of ambient PAT, transpiration, leaf temperature, internal carbon, and ambient temperature were observed in the second pruning season and in plants that received short pruning with 10% and 20% fruit thinning, medium pruning with 0% and 20% fruit thinning, and long pruning with 0%, 10%, and 20% fruit thinning (group of treatments GV) (Figure 3).
The highest means of absorbed carbon were also observed in the second pruning season and especially in plants that received the treatments of group GII, corresponding to plants subjected to short pruning with 0% fruit thinning and medium pruning with 10% fruit thinning (Figure 3).

4. Discussion

Fruit Pruning and Thinning Improves Gas Exchange in Guava Plants

Success in the management of the guava crop involves several management practices that allow the development of the plant and greater fruit production. Crop management practices, such as spacing and pruning, can significantly affect the phenological patterns of tropical fruit crops, with the objective of maximizing production [19]. The effect of the environment (season of cultivation) determines the productivity of any crop, and the gouge is no different. The total amount of light received during a crop’s growing season is related to its yield and is influenced by pruning which brings, as a consequence, a greater input of light to the plant [20]. Light in plants is assimilated in the photosynthesis process. In this process, plants convert light energy into chemical energy, playing a central role in plant metabolism [23].
The stimulation of metabolic processes in the plant through management influences the accumulated biomass and plant productivity, associated with a greater absorption of water and nutrients [45,46]. Simkin et al. [47] stated that plants would increase their photosynthetic rate with better light capture results, thus favoring the yield. Pruning influences the leaf area and structure and improves the capture and distribution of light in the canopy, promoting direct and indirect effects on photosynthesis.
Drastic pruning initially results in a smaller leaf area. However, the leaf area is re-established sometime after due to fast sprouting and the photosynthetically active formation of new leaves. As some studies have shown, pruning can stimulate the photosynthetic activity of leaves due to the elongation of leaves and the size of mesophyll cells, the increase in the chlorophyll content, and the extension of the daily period of stomatal opening. Pruning increases meristem activity and, as a result, the demand for photosynthates [48].
The time and intensity of pruning are important factors that should be considered, and they determine the productivity of fruit trees [49,50]. When pruning is performed at inappropriate times or intensities, it can negatively influence fruit production.
According to Pereira [51] and Silva et al. [52], for exclusively economic reasons, the months from October to February are recommended in Brazil as the best season for pruning aimed at fruit production, thus making better use of the periods with higher fruit demand. Guava plants can show budding problems or flaws in months with milder temperatures, normally from May to July [49,53].
It is also observed that pruning during the vegetative phase (September to November) implies leaf elimination, which are organs that synthesize organic substances, determining the productivity of the crop. Although the remaining leaves increase their photosynthetic efficiency as part of the plant’s effort to balance photosynthetic demand, this is insufficient to compensate for the production of photosynthesis at the previous levels, thus resulting in a weakening effect of pruning [50,52].
Knowing vegetative and reproductive organs during the phenological cycle and how the crop is conducted regarding pruning is essential to designing and managing irrigation. Crops subjected to intense pruning show a reduced canopy volume and, consequently, lower water consumption values during this period [49].
In their experiment conducted in the State of Paraíba, Silva et al. [16] observed that the mean daily transpiration of the guava cultivar “Paluma” in 2-year-old plants during regular irrigation periods in an orchard ranged from 38.7 L day−1 in plants with larger leaf areas to 19.8 L day−1 in plants with smaller leaf areas. After pruning, the mean values of this parameter decreased to 12.2 L day−1 and 9.1 L day−1, respectively. The water consumption of the plants throughout the studied period corresponding only to transpiration was 2327.4 L plant-1 and 1262.9 L plant−1 for the plants with larger and smaller leaf areas, respectively, which was affected by the leaf area and the local atmospheric demand.
The water potential of guava leaves and branches decreases progressively during the day. The highest water potential values are observed in the morning (7:00 to 8:00 am), while the lowest are verified in the early afternoon (12:00 to 15:00 pm), with sub-sequent rehydration of the plant [2,46,54]. Loss of cellular turgor is one of the first characteristics to appear when the plant is under water deficit, which, among other effects, limits stomatal opening, directly impacting plant gas exchange and causing an increase in leaf temperature [55,56,57].
It is necessary to mention that carbon assimilation by plants depends on the availability of all elements involved in the carbon flow process between the plant, the air, and the soil, responsible for the fixation, storage, and release of CO2 through dead organic matter and other components. The amount of carbon to be fixed by the vegetation depends on the photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), the floristic composition, and the structure of the canopy that composes the vegetation. This process is directly influenced by photosynthesis and is important for the yield [35,58,59]. Light intensity is a key factor affecting both the rate of photosynthesis and chlorophyll metabolism [31]. On the other hand, low light intensity (depending on the growing season and environmental conditions) can result in low chlorophyll content and reduced photosynthetic activity [32].
Therefore, pruning and thinning are important techniques for the physiological and productive development of the guava tree. While pruning is carried out to improve and/or stimulate the growth of new branches and shoots, it improves air circulation and light entry into the plant and increases fruit production. For producers, one of the problems is the commercialization of the entire fruit production at a single time in the year. Pruning as a management strategy allows staggered and continuous production, which can be a promising alternative for obtaining fruits fractionally in several months of the year and serving different audiences and markets [12,14,15,18]. Physiologically, pruning contributes to the hormonal regulation of the plant, especially in fruit trees, since it decreases auxin synthesis and apical dominance and favors cytokinin and gibberellin, which act on the lateral branching of productive branches [20,23] and favors a greater number of fruits. Thinning is used to remove excess fruit and ensure that the rest receive adequate nutrients and sunlight. Consequently, it reduces the number of drains that will receive photoassimilates from photosynthesis.
Short pruning with no thinning can have a positive effect on the uptake of photosynthesis in guava trees. With short pruning, the amount of guava leaves can be reduced, which can lead to an initial decrease in the rate of photosynthesis. However, new shoots that emerge after short pruning have younger, more photosynthetically efficient leaves, which can increase the overall rate of light uptake by plants.
On the other hand, medium pruning with fruit thinning of 10% and 20% can also have a positive effect on the assimilation of photosynthesis in guava trees. This technique can improve air circulation and light entry into the interior of the plant, which can increase the rate of photosynthesis. Long pruning with 10% thinning also resulted in better assimilation. Even though pruning is considered more drastic, it favors its ability to carry out photosynthesis and produce photosynthesis. It is assumed that the thinning of guava fruits, like what happens with other fruit trees, can induce the plant to produce large and better-quality fruits, since, in addition to removing the overload, in general, thinning eliminates fruits with defects, that is, sick, cursed, scratched, and malformed ones [5,9,20,46]. These aspects are crucial, especially when the fruit is intended for consumption in natura and therefore must have a good appearance. This is important, because in the production of guava for fresh consumption, more interesting than the volume of production obtained is the quality of the fruit produced.
Therefore, the importance of these two management techniques is evident to improving the agrophysiological aspects of guava trees and, with this, allowing greater physiological efficiency that will culminate in greater light absorption and consequently a greater production of photoassimilates and fruit development.

5. Conclusions

Short pruning with 0% fruit thinning, medium pruning with 10% and 20% fruit thinning, and long pruning with 10% fruit thinning in the first growing season favors a higher photosynthetic accumulation in guava plants. Although the separation of pruning times provided a multiplicity of responses, in view of the plant recovery process mediated mainly by photosynthetic capacity, short pruning with 10% thinning should be considered for both seasons.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.A.P. and N.P.S.; data curation, A.S.d.S., G.A.P., W.L.F., N.P.S., A.A.S.d.N. and E.P.S.; formal analysis, A.S.d.S., G.A.P., W.L.F., J.G.d.C. and D.P.S.; funding acquisition, A.M.Z., M.d.S.A., J.G.A., L.M.-A., E.P.S., R.M.M.C., W.C.C. and R.C.A.; investigation, A.S.d.S., A.M.Z., N.P.S., E.M.M., A.A.S.d.N., M.d.S.A., J.G.A., E.P.S., W.C.C. and R.C.A.; methodology, A.S.d.S., G.A.P., W.L.F., A.M.Z., E.M.M., A.A.S.d.N., M.d.S.A., J.G.A., L.M.-A., E.P.S., R.M.M.C. and W.C.C.; project administration, A.S.d.S., J.G.d.C., N.P.S., E.M.M., A.A.S.d.N., L.M.-A. and R.C.A.; resources, J.G.d.C., E.M.M., D.P.S., M.d.S.A., J.G.A., L.M.-A., E.P.S., R.M.M.C., W.C.C. and R.C.A.; software, G.A.P., J.G.d.C., E.M.M., D.P.S. and M.d.S.A.; supervision, G.A.P.; validation, A.S.d.S., A.M.Z., J.G.d.C., N.P.S., A.A.S.d.N., D.P.S., J.G.A., L.M.-A., E.P.S., R.M.M.C., W.C.C. and R.C.A.; visualization, A.S.d.S., W.L.F., A.M.Z., J.G.d.C., N.P.S., A.A.S.d.N., D.P.S., L.M.-A., R.M.M.C., W.C.C. and R.C.A.; writing—original draft, A.S.d.S., G.A.P., W.L.F., A.M.Z., J.G.d.C., N.P.S., E.M.M., A.A.S.d.N., D.P.S., M.d.S.A., J.G.A., L.M.-A., E.P.S., R.M.M.C., W.C.C. and R.C.A.; writing—review and editing, A.S.d.S., G.A.P., W.L.F., A.M.Z., J.G.d.C., N.P.S., E.M.M., A.A.S.d.N., D.P.S., M.d.S.A., J.G.A., L.M.-A., E.P.S., R.M.M.C., W.C.C. and R.C.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. IBGE—Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Tabelas 2017. Produção Agrícola Municipal; Permanentes, L., Ed.; IBGE: Brasília, Brazil, 2017; p. 118. [Google Scholar]
  2. Morales, R.G.F.; Resende, L.V.; Bordini, I.C.; Galvão, A.G.; Rezende, F.C. Caracterização do tomateiro submetido ao déficit hídrico. Sci. Agrac. 2015, 16, 9–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Oliveira, F.T.; Hafle, O.M.; Mendonça, V.; Moreira, J.N.; Junior, E.B.P.; Rolim, H.O. Respostas de porta-enxertos de goiabeira sob diferentes fontes e proporções de materiais orgânicos. Comun. Sci. 2015, 6, 17–25. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bonifácio, B.F.; Nobre, R.G.; Sousa, A.D.S.; Gomes, E.M.; Da Silva, E.M.; De Sousa, L.P. Efeitos da adubação potássica e irrigação com águas salinas no crescimento de porta-enxerto de goiabeira. Rev. Ciências Agrárias 2018, 41, 971–980. [Google Scholar]
  5. Fachi, L.; Garbugio, E.; Ferreira, A.; Machado, R.; Krause, W. Qualidade e correlação dos parâmetros físicos e químicos dos frutos de cultivares de goiaba. Sci. Electron. Arch. 2018, 11, 36–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Moraes, T.M.; Dantas, M.S.M.; de Sousa, C.A.; de Melo, E.A.; Bandeira, M.A.M. Antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of the extracts of Psidium guajava. Rev. Ciências Agrárias 2020, 43, 109–117. [Google Scholar]
  7. Nascimento, V.E.; Souza, E.L.; Lima, E.O.; Sousa, C.P. Evaluation of antioxidant activity of guava (Psidium guajava L.) seed extract by chemical and electrochemical assays. J. Food Biochem. 2018, 42, e12414. [Google Scholar]
  8. Vuong, Q.V.; Hirun, S.; Chuen, T.L.K.; Goldsmith, C.D. Fruit and Vegetable Consumption and Health: Benefits and Drawbacks. In Handbook of Food Bioengineering; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019; Volume 12, pp. 367–398, Food Bioconversion. [Google Scholar]
  9. Costa, A.D.F.S.D.; Costa, A.N.d. Plantio, formação e manejo da cultura. In Tecnologias Para a Produção de Goiaba; Costa, A.D.F.S.D., Costa, A.N.d., Eds.; Incaper: Vitória, Brazil, 2019; pp. 151–195. [Google Scholar]
  10. Costa, J.G.; Silva, A.V.C.; Araújo, F.L.F.; Araújo, E.F. Viabilidade socioeconômica da cultura da goiaba no município de Cruzeta/RN. Agropecuária Científica No Semi-Árido 2008, 4, 50–55. [Google Scholar]
  11. Altendorf, S. Mainstreaming a Niche Market. Food Outlook, 1st ed.; FAO: Roma, Italy, 2018; pp. 67–75. [Google Scholar]
  12. Altendorf, S. Guava World Production, Consumption and International Trade; FAO: Roma, Italy, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  13. Uesu, L.; Cecchin, D.; Uesu, M.; Ogino, M.; Pereira, C. Análise da viabilidade econômica da produção de goiaba em cachoeiras de macacu–rj. Enci Bios. 2018, 15, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Altendorf, S.; Couto, W.S.; Corrêa, J.C. Cultivation of Goiabeira; Embrapa Informações Tecnológicas: Brasília, Brazil, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  15. Uesu, Y.O.; Lima, M.B.; Pereira, A.V.A.; Capelini, V.K. Goiaba: O produtor pernambucano e o mercado mundial. Inf. Agropecuário 2015, 36, 7–15. [Google Scholar]
  16. Silva, B.B.; Moura, M.S.B.; Azevedo, P.V.; Soares, J.M. Medidas de transpiração de um pomar de goiabeiras pelo método do balanço de calor caulinar. Rev. Bras. Agrometeorol. 2002, 10, 19–27. [Google Scholar]
  17. Barbalho, S.M.; Farinazzi-Machado, F.M.; De Alvares Goulart, R.; Brunnati, A.C.S.; Otoboni, A.M.; Ottoboni, B.J.M.A. Psidium guajava (Guava): A plant of multipurpose medicinal plants. Med. Aromat. Plants 2012, 1, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  18. Barbalho, L.C.; Vidal, V.A.; Santana, L.R.; Santana, L.R.; Santos, D.C. Caracterização do sistema de produção de goiaba no Estado da Bahia. Rev. Agropecuária Técnica 2017, 38, 114–119. [Google Scholar]
  19. Almeida, M.L.L.D. Efeito da Adubação Nitrogenada Antes da poda de Frutificação Sobre Indicadores Fenológicos e de Produção da Goiabeira. Master’s Thesis, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, Brazil, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  20. Rodríguez, R.; Corrales, I.; Romero, M. Influence of pruning type on the vegetative and reproductive development of guava (Psidium guajava L.) trees. Sci. Hortic. 2010, 126, 189–193. [Google Scholar]
  21. García, D.; Ortiz, R.A.; Melgarejo, L.M. Influence of thinning and winter pruning on yield and fruit quality of ‘Tardío de Cieza’ apricot. Acta Hortic. 2017, 1161, 235–240. [Google Scholar]
  22. Alcântara, G.B.; Neto, F.B.; Ledo, A.S. Práticas de manejo na produção da goiabeira ‘Paluma’. Rev. Agric. Neotrop. 2015, 2, 34–40. [Google Scholar]
  23. Taiz, L.; Zeiger, E.; Møller, I.M.; Murphy, A. Plant Physiology and Development, 6th ed.; Sinauer Associates: Sunderland, MA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  24. Nelson, N.; Yocum, C.F. Structure and function of photosystems I and II. Annu. Rev. Plant. Biol. 2006, 57, 521–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Lichtenthaler, H.K. The stress concept in plants: An introduction. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1998, 851, 187–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Rissler, H.M.; Lindahl, M.; Vainonen, J.P. Regulation of chlorophyll biosynthesis. In Chlorophylls and Bacteriochlorophylls: Biochemistry, Biophysics, Functions and Applications; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2002; pp. 73–94. [Google Scholar]
  27. Terashima, I.; Inoue, Y. Chlorophyll fluorescence as a probe for photosynthesis research: An overview of experimental techniques. Photosynth. Res. 2008, 98, 533–557. [Google Scholar]
  28. Ainsworth, E.A.; Long, S.P. What have we learned from 15 years of free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2. New Phytol. 2005, 165, 351–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Flexas, J.; Bota, J.; Galmés, J.; Medrano, H.; Ribas-Carbó, M. Keeping a positive carbon balance under adverse conditions: Responses of photosynthesis and respiration to water stress. Physiol. Plant. 2006, 127, 343–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Berry, J.; Bjorkman, O. Photosynthetic response and adaptation to temperature in higher plants. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 1980, 31, 491–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Huner, N.P.A.; Öquist, G.; Sarhan, F.; Ivanov, A.G. Photoinhibition of photosynthesis in vivo results in singlet oxygen production detection via nitroxide-induced fluorescence quenching in broad bean leaves. Plant Physiol. 1998, 116, 49–59. [Google Scholar]
  32. Krause, G.H.; Weis, E. Chlorophyll fluorescence and photosynthesis: The basics. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1991, 42, 313–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Makino, A.; Mae, T.; Ohira, K. Photosynthesis and plant growth at elevated levels of CO2. Plant Cell Physiol. 2003, 44, 1311–1318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Evans, J.R. Photosynthesis and nitrogen relationships in leaves of C3 plants. Oecologia 1989, 78, 9–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Flexas, J.; Díaz-Espejo, A.; Conesa, M.A.; Coopman, R.A.; Douthe, C.; Gago, J.; Gallé, A.; Galmés, J.; Medrano, H.; Ribas-Carbo, M.; et al. Mesophyll conductance to CO2 and Rubisco as targets for improving. Plant Cell Environ. 2016, 39, 965–982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Bloom, A.J.; Chapin, F.S.; Mooney, H.A. Resource limitation in plants-an economic analogy. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 2002, 16, 363–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Marschner, P. Marschner’s Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants, 3rd ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  38. Lichtenthaler, H.K.; Buschmann, C.; Knapp, M. How to correctly determine the different chlorophyll fluorescence parameters and the chlorophyll fluorescence decrease ratio RFd of leaves with the PAM fluorometer. Photosynth. Res. 2005, 82, 389–409. [Google Scholar]
  39. Flexas, J.; Ribas-Carbó, M.; Bota, J.; Galmés, J.; Henkle, M.; Martínez-Cañellas, S.; Medrano, H. Decreased Rubisco activity during water stress is not induced by decreased relative water content but related to conditions of low stomatal conductance and chloroplast CO2 concentration. New Phytol. 2012, 196, 770–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. INMET—National Institute of Meteorology of Brazil. Glossário. 2022. Available online: http://www.inmet.gov.br/portal/index.php?r=home/page&page=glossario (accessed on 15 January 2022).
  41. Prado, M.R.V.; Moraes, M.F.D.; Ramos, F.T.; Santos, C.L.R.D.; Campos, D.V.B.D.; Barros, G.T. Use of buffer methods to estimate the potential acidity of Mato Grosso soils. Cienc. E Agrotecnologia 2020, 44, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Sousa, D.M.G.; Lobato, E. Cerrado: Correção do solo e adubação. In Recomedanção de Adubação Para Solos do Cerrado; Costa Sousa, D.M.G., Lobato, E., Eds.; Embrapa: Brasilia, Brazil, 2004; pp. 118–145. [Google Scholar]
  43. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; Published online 2020; European Environment Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  44. Friendly, M.; Fox, J. Candisc: Visualizing Generalized Canonical Discriminant and Canonical Correlation Analysis. R Package Version 0.6-5. Version (March 2015). Available online: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/candisc/index.html (accessed on 9 August 2022).
  45. Ort, D.R.; Baker, N.R. Consideration of photosynthetic efficiency at low light as a major determinant of crop photosynthetic performance. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 1998, 26, 555–565. [Google Scholar]
  46. Lopes, N.F.; Lima, M.G.S. Fisiologia da Produção, 1st ed.; UFV: Viçosa, Brazil, 2015; p. 492. [Google Scholar]
  47. Simkin, A.J.; Kapoor, L.; Doss, C.G.P.; Hofmann, T.A.; Lawson, T.; Ramamoorthy, S. The role of photosynthesis related pigments in light harvesting, photoprotection and enhancement of photosynthetic yield in planta. Photosyn. Res. 2022, 152, 23–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Mika, A. Physiological responses of fruit trees to pruning. Hortic. Rev. 2011, 8, 337–378. [Google Scholar]
  49. Serrano, L.A.L.; Marinho, C.S.; Lima, I.D.M.; Martins, M.V.V.; Ronchi, C.P.; Tardin, F.D. Fenologia da goiabeira’Paluma’sob diferentes sistemas de cultivos, épocas e intensidades de poda de frutificação. Bragantia 2008, 67, 701–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Poni, S.; Gatti, M.; Palliotti, A.; Dai, Z.; Duchêne, E.; Truong, T.T.; Tombesi, S. Grapevine quality: A multiple choice issue. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 234, 445–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Pereira, W.E. Desenvolvimento dos Ramos e Frutos de Seis Variedades de Goiabeira (Psidium guajava L.) no Período Seco do ano. Master’s Thesis, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, Brazil, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  52. Silva, M.J.R.D.; Tecchio, M.A.; Domiciano, S.; Leonel, S.; Balestrero, R.I. Phenology, yield and fruit quality of ‘Paluma’ guava tree at different pruning times. Cienc. E Agrotecnol. 2016, 40, 317–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Prajapati, R.K.; Singh, V.K.; Upadhayay, A.K. Future of crop diseases and climate change in Bundelkhand Agroclimatic Zone of Madhya Pradesh: A review. Ann. Plant Soil Res. 2018, 20, 86–98. [Google Scholar]
  54. Urdaneta, T.; Araujo, F.J.; Lugo, L. Estúdio comparativo sobre dos métodos para determinar el potencial hídrico en el cultivo del guayabo (Psidium guajava L.) en la Planicie de Maracaibo. Rev. Fac. Agron. 2003, 20, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  55. Monteiro, V.D.F.C.; Gonçalves, E.D.; Moura, P.H.A.; da Silva, L.V.; Martins, F.B.; Norberto, P.M. Phenological stages of the ‘Paluma’guava tree in a region of subtropical climate according to the BBCH scale. Rev. Ciências Agrárias 2021, 16, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Oliveira, I.; Meyer, A.; Afonso, S.; Gonçalves, B. Compared leaf anatomy and water relations of commercial and traditional Prunus dulcis (Mill.) cultivars under rain-fed conditions. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 1, 226–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Malta, A.O.; da Costa Araújo, R.; Medeiros, J.G.F.; da Costa, N.P.; da Silva, S.I.A. Produção da goiabeira (Psidium guajava L.) em sistema convencional e orgânico. Pesq. Agropec. Pernamb. 2018, 23, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Vega, M.L.B.P. Fitomonitoração e Modelagem de Fotossíntese em Jatobá (Hymenaea courbaril L.) com Redes Neurais Artificiais. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  59. Wang, B.; Gong, J.; Zhang, Z.; Yang, B.; Liu, M.; Zhu, C.; Yue, K. Nitrogen addition alters photosynthetic carbon fixation, allocation of photoassimilates, and carbon partitioning of Leymus chinensis in a temperate grassland of Inner Mongolia. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2019, 279, 910–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agronomy 13 01610 g001 550
Figure 1. Monthly means of temperature (T, °C), relative humidity (UR, %), and rainfall (mm) recorded in the experimental area from January 2020 to January 2022 by the automatic weather station A336 in Bom Jesus, Piauí, National Institute of Meteorology of Brazil [40].
Figure 1. Monthly means of temperature (T, °C), relative humidity (UR, %), and rainfall (mm) recorded in the experimental area from January 2020 to January 2022 by the automatic weather station A336 in Bom Jesus, Piauí, National Institute of Meteorology of Brazil [40].
Agronomy 13 01610 g001
Agronomy 13 01610 g002 550
Figure 2. Clustering of treatments in a dendrogram with the Euclidean distance considering the physiological variables of fruits of the guava cv. Paluma. E1: first production cycle, E2: second production cycle, LP: long pruning, MP: medium pruning, PS: pruning short, 0%: no thinning, 15%: a 15% thinning, 20%: a 20% thinning. GI to GV are the formed groups.
Figure 2. Clustering of treatments in a dendrogram with the Euclidean distance considering the physiological variables of fruits of the guava cv. Paluma. E1: first production cycle, E2: second production cycle, LP: long pruning, MP: medium pruning, PS: pruning short, 0%: no thinning, 15%: a 15% thinning, 20%: a 20% thinning. GI to GV are the formed groups.
Agronomy 13 01610 g002
Agronomy 13 01610 g003 550
Figure 3. Graphic representation of the canonical discriminant analysis (canonical variables Can1 and Can2) of the physiological variables of the guava cv. Paluma: assimilation (A), absorbed carbon (AC), transpiration (T), ambient PAR (A_PAR), ambient temperature (AT), leaf temperature (LT), and internal carbon (IC). GI to GV are the formed groups in Figure 2.
Figure 3. Graphic representation of the canonical discriminant analysis (canonical variables Can1 and Can2) of the physiological variables of the guava cv. Paluma: assimilation (A), absorbed carbon (AC), transpiration (T), ambient PAR (A_PAR), ambient temperature (AT), leaf temperature (LT), and internal carbon (IC). GI to GV are the formed groups in Figure 2.
Agronomy 13 01610 g003
Table
Table 1. Physicochemical characteristics of the soil in the experimental area at the depth of 0–20 cm, Currais, Piauí.
Table 1. Physicochemical characteristics of the soil in the experimental area at the depth of 0–20 cm, Currais, Piauí.
pHSOMPK+Ca2+Mg2+Al3+H + AlTSB
H2Og kg−1mg dm−3-------------------------cmolc dm−3---------------------------
5.07.21.100.10.510.120.401.712.230.62
CuFeMnZnVmSandSiltClay
--------------mg dm−3---------------------%---------------------g kg−1----------------
0.04145.37.780.5126.839.180435161
P, K, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn—Mehlich—1 extractor; Ca, Mg, and Al—KCl extractor—1 M/L; H + Al—Calcium acetate extractor at pH 7.0; Organic matter (OM)—Walkley–Black method.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Santos, A.S.d.; Pereira, G.A.; Fonseca, W.L.; Zuffo, A.M.; da Cunha, J.G.; Soares, N.P.; Morais, E.M.; Nascimento, A.A.S.d.; Santos, D.P.; de Sousa Almeida, M.; et al. Photosynthetic Assimilation of the Guava (Psidium guajava) cv. Paluma under Different Pruning and Fruit Thinning Intensities. Agronomy 2023, 13, 1610. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13061610

AMA Style

Santos ASd, Pereira GA, Fonseca WL, Zuffo AM, da Cunha JG, Soares NP, Morais EM, Nascimento AASd, Santos DP, de Sousa Almeida M, et al. Photosynthetic Assimilation of the Guava (Psidium guajava) cv. Paluma under Different Pruning and Fruit Thinning Intensities. Agronomy. 2023; 13(6):1610. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13061610

Chicago/Turabian Style

Santos, Adaniel Sousa dos, Gustavo Alves Pereira, Wéverson Lima Fonseca, Alan Mario Zuffo, Jenilton Gomes da Cunha, Nemilda Pereira Soares, Estefenson Marques Morais, Antônio Afonso Sousa do Nascimento, Djavan Pinheiro Santos, Murilo de Sousa Almeida, and et al. 2023. "Photosynthetic Assimilation of the Guava (Psidium guajava) cv. Paluma under Different Pruning and Fruit Thinning Intensities" Agronomy 13, no. 6: 1610. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13061610

APA Style

Santos, A. S. d., Pereira, G. A., Fonseca, W. L., Zuffo, A. M., da Cunha, J. G., Soares, N. P., Morais, E. M., Nascimento, A. A. S. d., Santos, D. P., de Sousa Almeida, M., Aguilera, J. G., Morales-Aranibar, L., Salcedo, E. P., Chura, R. M. M., Contreras, W. C., & Alejo, R. C. (2023). Photosynthetic Assimilation of the Guava (Psidium guajava) cv. Paluma under Different Pruning and Fruit Thinning Intensities. Agronomy, 13(6), 1610. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13061610

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop