RNA-­seq analysis of Eucalyptus genotypes that differ in carbon allocation.

Carbon allocation is the process of translocation of photosynthate from source to sink organs, and though its physiology is well known, the genetic mechanisms involved in its regulation are still poorly understood. Since differences in levels of gene expression may largely explain the observed phenotypic variation, and there is great variability among species of Eucalyptus, we decided to perform a gene expression analysis of four contrasting Eucalyptus genotypes to gain insight into the mechanisms that lead to differences in carbon allocation.X-MEETING 2012

Uso de fotoprotetor foliar em mudas de eucalipto em condição de deficit hídrico.

Objetivou-se com este estudo avaliar o uso de um fotoprotetor foliar sob o crescimento inicial de clone comercialde eucalipto em diferentes demandas hídricas atmosféricas, associadas a estresse hídrico. A pesquisa foi desenvolvida em casas de vegetação climatizadas na Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo. Mudas de híbrido Eucalyptus urophylla x Eucalyptus grandis foram transplantadas para vasos plásticos e após aclimatação foram induzidas a ciclos de estresse hídricopela suspensão da reposição de água até que o solo atingisse 30% da água disponível, com posterior reposição de água para o nível da capacidade de campo. No final do experimento, foram avaliadas as variáveis de crescimento: altura, diâmetro, área foliar, massa seca da parte aérea, raízes e total. O experimento foi implantado em quatro diferentes condições de demanda atmosférica (Temperatura inferior, Temperatura intermediária, Temperatura superior com DPV alto e Temperatura superior com DPV baixo) e dois níveis de fotoprotetor foliar (com e sem), com cinco repetições. Para o material genético avaliado, a alta demanda atmosférica atuou como um fator estressante para as mudas em crescimento inicial, sendo que a aplicação dofotoprotetor foliar favoreceu o crescimento das plantas sob estresse hídrico, nessas condições. Portanto, a aplicação de fotoprotetor foliar pode ser vista como uma alternativa para atenuar os efeitos de condições de estresse abiótico em mudas de eucalipto.Made available in DSpace on 2019-01-11T23:34:38Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 UsoFotoprotetorFoliar.pdf: 631817 bytes, checksum: 60146d6d82560478affe2ca309ef6171 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-10-08bitstream/item/184055/1/UsoFotoprotetorFoliar.pd

Comparative transcriptome analysis of eucalyptus genotypes that differ in carbon allocation.

P0120

Leaf gas exchange in a clonal eucalypt plantation as related to soil moisture, leaf water potential and microclimate variables

In order to determine how environmental and physiological factors affect leaf gas exchange in a 9-year-old clonal eucalypt plantation (Eucalyptus grandis Hill ex. Maiden hybrids) in the State of Espirito Santo, Brazil, the diurnal patterns of predawn leaf water potential (Ψpd), and leaf gas exchange were monitored from November 1995 to August 1996. Soil water content (Θ) and microclimatic variables were also recorded. Most of the rainfall during the experimental period occurred from October to December 1995 and from March to April 1996, causing a significant variation in Θ and Ψpd. A high positive correlation (r2=0.92) was observed between Ψpd and Θ measured at 0.3 m depth from the soil surface. During conditions of high soil water availability, the maximum values of stomatal conductance for water vapor (gs) and net photosynthetic rate (A) were over 0.4 mol m–2 s–2 and l5 µmol m–2 s–1, respectively. The results showed that Ψpd and leaf gas exchange of the examined trees were susceptible to changes in the water content of the upper soil layers, where the major concentration of active roots occur. Multiple linear regression analysis indicated that photosynthetic active radiation (Q), vapor pressure deficit (VPD), atmospheric CO2 molar fraction (Ca), and Ψpd were the most important factors controlling gs whereas Q and VPD were the main microclimatic variables controlling A

RNA-seq analysis of Eucalyptus genotypes that differ in carbon allocation.

Poster G19