Responses of forage watermelon genotypes submitted to different water supply

References

• Acar B, Acar R, Uzan B, Direk M. 2014. Effect of different irrigation levels on forage watermelon yield in middle anatolian region of turkey. Int J Agricult Econ Develop. 2:10–15. http://www.academicjournals.org/AJB.
   Google Scholar
• Akashi K, Yoshida K, Kuwano M, Kajikawa M, Yoshimura K, Hoshiyasu S, Inagaki N, Yokota A. 2011. Dynamic changes inthe leaf proteome of a C3 xerophyte, Citrullus lanatus (wild waatermelon), in reponse to water déficit. Planta. 233:947–960. doi:10.1007/s00425-010-1341-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aoac - Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 2016. Official methods of analysis of AOAC International. Ed., Latimer Jr., G.W. 20th ed. Washington (D.C.). p. 3100.
   Google Scholar
• Carmo RILGS, Silva ES, Monteiro Neto JLL, Trassato LB, Medeiros RD, Porto DS. 2015. Agronomic performance of watermelon cultivars in the Cerrado region of Boa Vista. Rev Agro@mbiente. 9:268–274. doi:10.18227/1982-8470ragro.v9i3.2531
   Google Scholar
• Chitarra MI, Chitarra AB. 2005. Pós - colheita de frutos e hortaliças: fisiologia e manuseio. 2nd ed. Lavras: UFLA; p. 85.
   Google Scholar
• Doorenbos J, Pruitt WO. 1984. Las necessidades de agua de los cultivos. Roma: FAO, (FAO. Riego y Drenaje, 24); p. 194.
   Google Scholar
• Embrapa – Empresa brasileira de pesquisa agropecuária. 2013. Sistema brasileiro de classificação de solos. 3th. Rio de Janeiro: Centro Nacional de Pesquisa de Solos; p. 353.
   Google Scholar
• Fahad S, Bajwa AA, Nazir U, Anjum SA, Farooq A, Zohaib A, Sehrish Sadia S, Nasim W, Adkins S, Saud S, et al. 2017. Crop production under drought and heat stress: plant responses and management options shah. Front Plant Sci. 8:1–16. doi:10.3389/fpls.2017.01147
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira VM. 2012. Coeficiente de cultura e lâmina ótima de irrigação para a melancia, na microrregião de Teresina, PI. 99 f [Tese (Doutorado em Agronomia) – UNESP]. Botucatu.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer G, Ramírez F, Casierra-Posada F. 2016. Ecophysiological aspects of fruit crops in the era of climate change. A Review Agron Colomb. 34:190–199. doi:10.15446/agron.colomb.v34n2.56799
   Google Scholar
• Gama RNCS, Dias RCS, Alves JCSF, Damaceno LS, Teixeira FA, Barbosa GS. 2013. Taxa de sobrevivência e desempenho agronômico de melancia sob enxertia. Horticult Bras. 31:128–132. doi:10.1590/S0102-05362013000100020
   Google Scholar
• Hsiao TC. 1973. Plant responses to water stress. Ann Review Plant Physiol. 24:519–570. doi:10.1146/annurev.pp.24.060173.002511
   Google Scholar
• Ipa – Empresa Pernambucana de Pesquisa Agropecuária. 2008. Cavalcanti, F.J.A. Recomendações de Adubação para o Estado de Pernambuco. 2th ed. Recife. p. 198.
   Google Scholar
• Kawasaki S, Miyake C, Kohoci T, Fujii S, Uchida M, Yokota A. 2000. Responses to wild watermelon to drought stress: accumulation of an ArgE homologue and citrulline in leaves during ware deficit. Plant Cell Physiol. 41:864–873. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10965943.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopez-Alonso M. 2012. Trace Minerals and Livestock: Not Too Much Not Too Littlet. ISRN Vet. Sci. 2012: 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2012/704825.
   Google Scholar
• Melo AS, Suassuna JF, Fernandes PD, Brito MEB, Suassuna AF, Aguiar Netto AO. 2010. Crescimento vegetativo, resistência estomática, eficiência fotossintética e rendimento do fruto da melancieira em diferentes níveis de água. Acta Scient Agro. 32:73–79. doi:10.4025/actasciagron.v32i1.2136
   Google Scholar
• Nogueira ARA, Souza GB. 2005. Tecido vegetal. Manual de laboratórios: solo, água, nutrição vegetal, nutrição animal e alimentos. São Carlos: Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste; p. 334.
   Google Scholar
• Pereira JMG .2012. Produção, trocas gasosas e estado nutricional da melancia, submetida a diferentes lâminas de irrigação e doses de boro [64 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Agronomia) - Centro de Ciências Agrárias]. Fortaleza: Universidade Federal do Ceará.
   Google Scholar
• Rodrigues AM, Vaz ESR. 2013. Utilização da melancia na alimentação de novilhos. Agroforum. 30:33–38. http://www.ipcb.pt/images/ESA/Agroforum/pdfs/30.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Santos RM. 2016. Análise dialélica e inter-relação entre caracteres em cultivares de melancia forrageira. 84 f [Tese (Doutorado em Recursos Genéticos Vegetais) - Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana]. Feira de Santana.
   Google Scholar
• Santos RM, Melo NF, Fonseca MAJ, Queiroz MAA. 2017. Combining ability of forage watermelon (Citrullus lanatus var. Citroides Germplasm Rev Caat. 30:768–775. doi:10.1590/1983-21252017v30n325rc
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sas, Statistical analysis system institute. 2011. SAS/STAT User’s guide version 9,2. Cary: SAS Institute; p. 8621.
   Google Scholar
• Silva CL, Bassi NSS, Rocha Junior WF. 2016. Technologies for rational water use in Brazilian agriculture. Rev Amb Água. 11:1–11. doi:10.4136/ambi-agua.1808
   Google Scholar
• Silva RLV, Araújo GGL, Socorro EP, Oliveira RL, Garcez Neto AF, Bagaldo AR. 2009. Levels of forage watermelon meal in diets for sheep. Rev Bras Zootec. 38:1142–1148. doi:10.1590/S1516-35982009000600023
   Google Scholar
• Singh A, Aggarwal N, Aulakh GS, Hundal RK. 2012. Ways to maximize the water use efficiency in field crops – a review. Greener J Agricult Sci. 2:108–129. doi:10.15580/GJAS.2012.4.JPAS11-018
   Google Scholar
• Sniffen CJ, O’Connor JD, Van Soest PJ, Fox DG, Russell JB. 1992. A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets: II. Carbohydrate and protein availability. J Anim Sci. 70:3562–3577. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1459919.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabiri B, Agbenorhevi JK, Wireko-Manu FD, Ompouma EI. 2016. Watermelon seeds as food: nutrient composition, phytochemicals and antioxidant activity. Int J Nutr Food Sci. 5:139–144. doi:10.11648/j.ijnfs.20160502.18
   Google Scholar
• Taiz L, Zeiger E. 2013. Fisiologia vegetal. 5th ed. Porto Alegre: Artmed; p. 820.
   Google Scholar
• Tardieu F. 2013. Plant response to environmental conditions: assessing potential production, water demand, and negative effects of water deficit. Front Physiol. 4:1–11. doi:10.3389/fphys.2013.00017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thornton PK. 2010. Livestock production: recent trends, future prospects. Phil Trans Royal Soc B. 365:2853–2867. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0134
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urban J, Ingwers MW, McGuire MA, Teskey RO. 2017. Increase in leaf temperature opens stomata and decouples net photosynthesis from stomatal conductance in Pinus taeda and Populus deltoides x Nigra. J Exp Bot. 68:1757–1767. doi:10.1093/jxb/erx052
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Soest PJ. 1994. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. Ithaca: Cornell University Press; p. 476.
   Google Scholar
• Yu M, Ding G, Gao G, Zhao Y, Sai K. 2018. Leaf temperature fluctuations of typical psammophytic plants and their application to stomatal conductance estimation. Forests. 9:1–13. doi:10.3390/f9060313
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang SB, Mei Sun M, Cao KF, Hu H, Zhang JL. 2014. Leaf photosynthetic rate of tropical ferns is evolutionarily linked to water transport capacity. PLoS One. 9:1–10. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0084682
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhengbin Z, Ping X, Hongbo S, Mengjun L, Zhenyanf LC. 2011. Advances a water use efficiency. Crit Reviews Biotech. 31:1–13. doi:10.3109/07388551.2010.531004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar