Research Article |
Corresponding author: Cássio Cardoso Pereira ( cassiocardosopereira@gmail.com ) Academic editor: Anurag Dhyani
© 2022 Nathália Ribeiro Henriques, Cássio Cardoso Pereira.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Henriques NR, Pereira CC (2022) Lessons from a tropical deciduous shrub species: leaf fall can play a more important role than rain in leaf budding. Neotropical Biology and Conservation 17(4): 239-251. https://doi.org/10.3897/neotropical.17.e93846
|
In the Cerrado, the sequential chaining of phenological events during the dry season is a pattern observed in many plant species. In this season, many plants completely lose their leaves, and soon after deciduous, there is an expressive production of leaf buds. In this study, we investigated the effect of irrigation and early defoliation on the triggering of leaf budding of the deciduous species Peixotoa tomentosa A.Juss. in the dry season of a seasonal environment with water restrictions. Therefore, we set up an experiment with three groups of plants: control (n = 15), irrigation treatment (n = 15), and removal treatment (n = 15), and after the complete deciduousness of the plants, we carried out phenological monitoring of the development of leaf buds in these plants. From July to August 2022, the leaf budding phenology of the 45 individuals was evaluated twice a week. To test whether there is a difference in the number of leaf buds between treatments, we built generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs). Plants in the removal treatment had a statistically higher number of leaf buds produced than the plants in the irrigation and control groups (P < 0.05). However, the control group and the irrigation treatment did not differ from each other (P > 0.05). We showed that early defoliation influenced the triggering of leaf buds in P. tomentosa, increasing the production of young leaves in their individuals in a seasonal environment with water restrictions. Irrigation was not able to break the dormancy of leaf buds. Our findings contribute to a better understanding of the triggering of vegetative phenophases in deciduous Cerrado plants, showing that leaf fall may play a more important role than rain in the production of leaf buds in the dry season.
Cerrado, leaf buds, leaf fall, Malpighiaceae, phenology, savanna, seasonality
In the Cerrado, the sequential chaining of phenological events during the dry season is a pattern observed in many plant species (
Water stress is an important physiological trigger for leaf abscission (
Leaf bud production is linked to a wide range of adaptive responses to seasonal stresses (
Knowledge of seasonal plant variations has been considered essential for the study of the ecology and evolution of the Cerrado and for understanding the spatio-temporal organization of available resources (
In this study, we investigated the effect of irrigation and early defoliation on the triggering of leaf budding of the deciduous species Peixotoa tomentosa A.Juss. in the dry season amidst a seasonal environment with water restrictions. We tested the following hypotheses: (i) The irrigation of plants in the water deficit period increases the production of leaf buds; and (ii) The early removal of senescent leaves accelerates the production of leaf buds. In light of these hypotheses, we made the following predictions: (i) Irrigation reduces water stress and serves as a stimulus to break the dormancy of leaf buds; (ii) Early leaf removal promotes the rehydration of branches due to reduced transpiration and a reallocation of nutrients that are transferred to the growth of young leaves. To test the hypotheses above, we set up an experiment with three groups of plants: control, irrigation treatment, and removal treatment, and after the complete deciduity of the plants, we carried out the phenological monitoring of the development of leaf buds in these plants.
The study was carried out in the municipality of Congonhas, Minas Gerais, southeastern Brazil (Fig.
Map of the geographic location of the study area in Congonhas, Minas Gerais, Brazil. The boundaries of Brazilian phytogeographic domains were adapted from shapefiles available from the
A Overview of the Cerrado Típico, a subdivision of the Cerrado sensu stricto phytophysiognomy that occurs in the study area. B Exposed soil by the action of termites and armadillos, evidencing the red latosol under the study area. CPeixotoa tomentosa A.Juss. shrub marked with biodegradable tape. Photo credits: Cássio Cardoso Pereira.
P. tomentosa is a shrub species of the Malpighiaceae family, reaching up to 3 m in height (Fig.
Before the experiment, we marked 45 plants in May 2022 and divided them into 3 groups, the control group (n = 15), removal treatment (n = 15) and irrigation treatment (n = 15). We randomly marked mature individuals with an average height of 1.5 m, separated by a minimum distance of 10 m between them, to avoid possible sampling of leaf buds from the same individual. All individuals were marked with biodegradable tape, and the chosen area was close to a water source, necessary for one of the treatments.
At the end of June, when we observed that the leaves of the individuals were starting to fall, the plants of the removal treatment had all the leaves manually removed early. In the irrigation treatment, the individuals were watered with a watering can at regular intervals of five days, with approximately 2.5 L of water, between July 4th (after the plants lost their leaves and before the beginning of leaf budding) and August 23th (the last week of the experiment). The amount of water used did not soak the soil. We chose to use a smaller volume of water, as the excess could hinder the oxygenation of the roots, rotting them and harming the development of the plants.
From July 4th to August 25th, the phenology of the 45 individuals was evaluated twice a week. To assess leaf budding, we counted all leaf buds of all individuals in this period. Finally, we collected daily precipitation data at the
To verify if the irrigation treatment provided a different environmental condition for the plants, a soil collection was carried out on August 12 (four days after the plants were watered this week). On that date, 15 soil samples were collected close to the root of individuals from the irrigation treatment and the control treatment.
Sampling was performed with PVC tubes, approximately 4.5 cm in diameter, which penetrated about 20 cm into the soil. After removal from the soil, the samples were transferred to paper bags and taken to the laboratory for verification of the wet weight, with the aid of a precision digital balance. After weighing, the samples were placed in an oven for 48h at approximately 70 °C and then weighed to verify the dry weight.
To evaluate the behavior of the population at each phenological follow-up date, we constructed time series plots with the mean of leaf buds of all 15 individuals for each of the 12 evaluated dates (Table
Time series data showing the number and mean (± SE) of leaf buds found in each of the 12 phenological monitoring dates for the 15 individuals of Peixotoa tomentosa A.Juss. in the control, irrigation, and removal treatments. SE = Standard Error.
Treatments | Phenology Dates | Plant Individuals | Mean of Leaf Buds | SE | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | ||||
Control | Jul 18th | 2 | 3 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 3 | 5.07 | 0.52 |
Control | Jul 21th | 4 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 6.07 | 0.33 |
Control | Jul 25th | 3 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 4 | 10 | 5.87 | 0.45 |
Control | Jul 28th | 4 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 7 | 4 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 6.40 | 0.38 |
Control | Aug 1st | 3 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5.47 | 0.31 |
Control | Aug 4th | 4 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5.40 | 0.31 |
Control | Aug 8th | 2 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4.33 | 0.32 |
Control | Aug 11th | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 2.40 | 0.31 |
Control | Aug 15th | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1.47 | 0.31 |
Control | Aug 18th | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0.53 | 0.22 |
Control | Aug 22th | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.47 | 0.17 |
Control | Aug 25th | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Irrigation | Jul 18th | 5 | 7 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 7 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 2 | 4.87 | 0.55 |
Irrigation | Jul 21th | 7 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 6.47 | 0.26 |
Irrigation | Jul 25th | 8 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 9 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 11 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 6.53 | 0.46 |
Irrigation | Jul 28th | 7 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 6.87 | 0.35 |
Irrigation | Aug 1st | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5.40 | 0.21 |
Irrigation | Aug 4th | 6 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6.00 | 0.20 |
Irrigation | Aug 8th | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5.07 | 0.21 |
Irrigation | Aug 11th | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2.93 | 0.32 |
Irrigation | Aug 15th | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.47 | 0.22 |
Irrigation | Aug 18th | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.33 | 0.19 |
Irrigation | Aug 22th | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.27 | 0.15 |
Irrigation | Aug 25th | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Removal | Jul 18th | 9 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 9 | 6 | 4 | 11 | 8 | 9 | 7 | 5 | 12 | 7.13 | 0.68 |
Removal | Jul 21th | 10 | 8 | 4 | 6 | 9 | 13 | 11 | 8 | 9 | 12 | 11 | 14 | 11 | 5 | 14 | 9.67 | 0.80 |
Removal | Jul 25th | 7 | 11 | 4 | 4 | 13 | 9 | 12 | 12 | 11 | 8 | 10 | 11 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 8.67 | 0.80 |
Removal | Jul 28th | 8 | 9 | 2 | 4 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 10 | 10 | 8 | 12 | 9 | 6 | 6 | 8.00 | 0.66 |
Removal | Aug 1st | 8 | 8 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 8 | 10 | 7 | 10 | 8 | 7 | 7.33 | 0.58 |
Removal | Aug 4th | 4 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 9 | 5 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 1 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 6.07 | 0.67 |
Removal | Aug 8th | 3 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 9 | 8 | 2 | 6 | 7 | 10 | 7 | 5 | 5.67 | 0.65 |
Removal | Aug 11th | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 8 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 3.40 | 0.55 |
Removal | Aug 15th | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 2.47 | 0.42 |
Removal | Aug 18th | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1.07 | 0.28 |
Removal | Aug 22th | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.33 | 0.16 |
Removal | Aug 25th | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
To test whether there is a difference in the mean number of leaf buds between treatments, we built generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs). The mean values of the number of leaf buds of the 15 individuals of each treatment were calculated along with the eight phenological observation dates (Table
Number and mean of leaf buds found in each individual of Peixotoa tomentosa A.Juss. from the control, irrigation, and removal treatments along the 12 phenological monitoring dates.
Treatments | Plant Individuals | July 2022 | August 2022 | Mean of Leaf Buds | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
18th | 21th | 25th | 28th | 1st | 4th | 8th | 11th | 15th | 18th | 22th | 25th | |||
Control | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2.08 |
Control | 2 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2.83 |
Control | 3 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 3.58 |
Control | 4 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.75 |
Control | 5 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.17 |
Control | 6 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.67 |
Control | 7 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.42 |
Control | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.50 |
Control | 9 | 3 | 8 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.25 |
Control | 10 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.17 |
Control | 11 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3.50 |
Control | 12 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4.33 |
Control | 13 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4.17 |
Control | 14 | 7 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3.50 |
Control | 15 | 3 | 7 | 10 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4.42 |
irrigation | 1 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4.08 |
irrigation | 2 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.08 |
irrigation | 3 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.17 |
irrigation | 4 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.50 |
irrigation | 5 | 3 | 8 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.42 |
irrigation | 6 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4.00 |
irrigation | 7 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.42 |
irrigation | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.67 |
irrigation | 9 | 3 | 8 | 11 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.50 |
irrigation | 10 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.17 |
irrigation | 11 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4.25 |
irrigation | 12 | 3 | 7 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4.00 |
irrigation | 13 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.08 |
irrigation | 14 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.00 |
irrigation | 15 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.42 |
removal | 1 | 9 | 10 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.75 |
removal | 2 | 3 | 8 | 11 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5.00 |
removal | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2.42 |
removal | 4 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2.83 |
removal | 5 | 8 | 9 | 13 | 9 | 5 | 9 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5.58 |
removal | 6 | 6 | 13 | 9 | 9 | 7 | 5 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5.25 |
removal | 7 | 9 | 11 | 12 | 10 | 10 | 8 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5.83 |
removal | 8 | 6 | 8 | 12 | 8 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5.67 |
removal | 9 | 4 | 9 | 11 | 10 | 5 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5.92 |
removal | 10 | 11 | 12 | 8 | 10 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4.42 |
removal | 11 | 8 | 11 | 10 | 8 | 10 | 6 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 5.67 |
removal | 12 | 9 | 14 | 11 | 12 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5.75 |
removal | 13 | 7 | 11 | 5 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5.42 |
removal | 14 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.17 |
removal | 15 | 12 | 14 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 6.08 |
The estimation of the relative water content (RWC) of each soil sample was made according to the formula: RWC = (Ww-Dw)/Ww × 100, where Ww = wet weight and Dw = dry weight (Table
Values of wet weight, dry weight, and relative water content (RWC) for the 15 soil samples from the irrigation treatment and the control group.
Treatments | Plant Individuals | Wet Weight (g) | Dry Weight (g) | Relative Water Content (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
control | 1 | 303.19 | 294.53 | 2.86 |
control | 2 | 282.50 | 273.91 | 3.04 |
control | 3 | 247.36 | 238.35 | 3.64 |
control | 4 | 279.59 | 267.13 | 4.46 |
control | 5 | 281.69 | 272.78 | 3.16 |
control | 6 | 290.60 | 278.81 | 4.06 |
control | 7 | 286.83 | 273.62 | 4.61 |
control | 8 | 228.65 | 218.78 | 4.32 |
control | 9 | 269.47 | 261.61 | 2.92 |
control | 10 | 284.83 | 277.70 | 2.50 |
control | 11 | 262.87 | 255.17 | 2.93 |
control | 12 | 280.67 | 275.82 | 1.73 |
control | 13 | 266.75 | 259.92 | 2.56 |
control | 14 | 281.11 | 273.49 | 2.71 |
control | 15 | 273.76 | 268.67 | 1.86 |
irrigation | 1 | 293.87 | 275.59 | 6.22 |
irrigation | 2 | 317.14 | 299.24 | 5.64 |
irrigation | 3 | 290.02 | 273.51 | 5.69 |
irrigation | 4 | 292.22 | 277.07 | 5.18 |
irrigation | 5 | 335.14 | 312.45 | 6.77 |
irrigation | 6 | 327.33 | 308.57 | 5.73 |
irrigation | 7 | 295.60 | 289.56 | 2.04 |
irrigation | 8 | 336.13 | 324.28 | 3.53 |
irrigation | 9 | 285.25 | 278.57 | 2.34 |
irrigation | 10 | 281.86 | 271.54 | 3.66 |
irrigation | 11 | 285.57 | 277.93 | 2.68 |
irrigation | 12 | 311.72 | 302.27 | 3.03 |
irrigation | 13 | 296.40 | 287.05 | 3.15 |
irrigation | 14 | 239.22 | 232.21 | 2.93 |
irrigation | 15 | 293.86 | 282.80 | 3.76 |
There were no rainfall records during the evaluation period (0 mm of rainfall between July 1st and August 25th).
The mean leaf buds ranged from 9.67 (± 0.80 SE) in the removal treatment on July 21th to zero in all groups from August 25th onwards. The evaluated individuals of P. tomentosa presented leaf buds from July 18th. Subsequently, as these leaf buds developed into young leaves, the number of leaf buds dropped throughout August (Fig.
Time series analysis showing the mean of leaf buds (points) and the standard error (vertical limits) of the 15 individuals of Peixotoa tomentosa A.Juss. in each of the 12 observation dates between July and August 2022. Control group ( A), irrigation treatment (B), and removal treatment (C).
Plants in the removal treatment (4.98 ± 0.29 SE) had a statistically higher number of leaf buds produced than the plants in the control group (3.62 ± 0.16 SE) and in the irrigation treatment (3.85 ± 0.11 SE) (F2.41 = 14.995, P = 0.0001). The control group and the irrigation treatment did not differ from each other (P > 0.05) (Fig.
Pairwise comparisons (P < 0.05; GLMM/Tuckey’s post hoc test. α = 0.05) showing the differences between the control group, irrigation, and removal treatments. * = Significant difference between treatments.
Treatments | Control | Irrigation | Removal |
---|---|---|---|
Control | – | 0.671 | 0.0001* |
Irrigation | 0.671 | – | 0.0001* |
Removal | 0.0001* | 0.0001* | – |
The soil of the plants in the irrigation treatment presented a statistically higher relative water content (4.16% ± 0.40 SE) than that found in the soil of the plants in the control group (3.16% ± 0.23 SE, F1.27 = 7.670, P = 0.01).
Our findings showed that early defoliation influenced the triggering of leaf buds on P. tomentosa, increasing the production of young leaves in its individuals in a seasonal tropical environment with water restrictions. However, irrigation was not able to break the dormancy of leaf buds.
Many Cerrado woody plants have an extensive root system that, in many cases, penetrates deeper into the soil, reaching the water table. These roots, by remaining humid throughout the year, ensure a stable water source for plants, minimizing the effects of seasonal water deficit (
Although irrigation was not related to leaf budding, the removal of senescent leaves proved to be an important factor in triggering young leaves. The reduction in transpiration appears to be a key factor in triggering the leaf buds of P. tomentosa (
Evidence is accumulating that the timing and intensity of the vegetative phenophases of deciduous plants are changing as a result of climate change (
Our findings contribute to a better understanding of the triggering of vegetative phenophases in Cerrado deciduous plants, showing that leaf fall may play a more important role than rainfall in the production of leaf buds in the dry season.
The authors would like to thank CSEC, PPG-ECMVS and CAPES for continuous support. This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – Brasil (CAPES) – Finance Code 001.