SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.28 número1¿La severidad de un incendio forestal modifica la composición, diversidad y estructura de los bosques templados de Jalisco?Riesgo de infestaciones por los descortezadores Dendroctonus mexicanus Hopkins y Dendroctonus frontalis Zimmermann en bosques de Michoacán índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Journal

Artigo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • Não possue artigos similaresSimilares em SciELO

Compartilhar


Revista Chapingo serie ciencias forestales y del ambiente

versão On-line ISSN 2007-4018versão impressa ISSN 2007-3828

Rev. Chapingo ser. cienc. for. ambient vol.28 no.1 Chapingo Jan./Abr. 2022  Epub 02-Fev-2024

https://doi.org/10.5154/r.rchscfa.2020.08.049 

Scientific articles

Fertilization of two genetic groups of Pinus patula Schiede ex Schltdl. & Cham. in a four-year progeny trial

Iván J. Velázquez-Castro1 

Arnulfo Aldrete

Javier López-Upton1 

Miguel Á. López-López1 

Jorge D. Etchevers-Barra2 

1 Colegio de Postgraduados, Postgrado en Ciencias Forestales. km 36.5 carretera México-Texcoco. C. P. 56230. Montecillo, Texcoco, Estado de México, México.

2 Colegio de Postgraduados, Postgrado en Edafología. km 36.5 carretera México-Texcoco. C. P. 56230. Montecillo, Texcoco, Estado de México, México.


Abstract

Introduction:

Genetic improvement and nutritional management are used to increase productive capacity.

Objective:

To analyze the effect of traditional and controlled-release fertilizers, as well as the way to define the doses (technically or empirically), on growth of 20 tree families of Pinus patula Schiede ex Schltdl. & Cham.

Materials and methods:

Four fertilization treatments were applied: 1) control; 2) “technical”, based on foliar analysis; 3) controlled release (18-6-12 + 2CaO + 3.5 Mg + 2.1 Si + microelements); and 4) mixture of agricultural fertilizers in nutrient concentrations similar to the controlled-release treatment. Height, diameter, biomass index, number of whorls, leaf mass, and growth initiation and cessation were evaluated in a group of 10 superior and 10 inferior three-year old families in Chignahuapan, Puebla. Data were analyzed with the MIXED procedure of SAS.

Results and discussion:

Trees showed no significant differences in growth, biomass production and growth initiation by fertilization effect, but showed significant differences by genetic quality (P ≤ 0.05). The genotype*fertilization interaction was significant; after one year of controlled-release fertilizer application, inferior genotypes had the highest values of relative rates of biomass production, diameter at root collar and height.

Conclusions:

Controlled-release fertilizers at appropriate doses and environmental conditions are a viable option to promote growth of young P. patula trees in the field.

Keywords: controlled-release fertilizer; genotypes; forest nutrition; growth rate; foliar analysis

Resumen

Introducción:

El mejoramiento genético y el manejo nutrimental son utilizados para aumentar la capacidad productiva.

Objetivo:

Analizar el efecto de fertilizantes tradicionales y de liberación controlada, así como la forma de definir las dosis (técnica o empíricamente), sobre el crecimiento de 20 familias de árboles de Pinus patula Schiede ex Schltdl. & Cham.

Materiales y métodos:

Se aplicaron cuatro tratamientos de fertilización: 1) control; 2) “técnico”, basado en análisis foliares; 3) liberación controlada (18-6-12 + 2CaO + 3.5 Mg + 2.1 Si + microelementos) y 4) mezcla de fertilizantes agrícolas en concentraciones nutrimentales semejantes al tratamiento de liberación controlada. La altura, diámetro, índice de biomasa, número de verticilos, masa foliar e inicio y cese de crecimiento se evaluaron en un grupo de 10 familias superiores y otro de 10 familias inferiores de tres años en Chignahuapan, Puebla. Los datos se analizaron con el procedimiento MIXED de SAS.

Resultados y discusión:

Los árboles no presentaron diferencias significativas en el crecimiento, producción de biomasa e inicio de crecimiento por efecto de la fertilización, pero sí por la calidad genética (P ≤ 0.05). La interacción genotipo*fertilización fue significativa; después de un año de la aplicación de fertilizantes de liberación controlada, los genotipos inferiores presentaron los valores más altos de las tasas relativas de producción de biomasa, diámetro al cuello de la raíz y altura.

Conclusiones:

Los fertilizantes de liberación controlada en dosis y condiciones ambientales adecuadas son una opción viable para promover el crecimiento de árboles jóvenes de P. patula en campo.

Palabras clave: fertilizante de liberación controlada; genotipos; nutrición forestal; tasa de crecimiento; análisis foliar

Highlights:

  • Fertilization applied in Pinus patula, one year later, generate no differences for the variables studied.

  • Trees show differences in growth and biomass due to genetic group effect.

  • Significant interaction between genetic quality of trees and fertilization was observed.

  • Controlled-release fertilizer promoted growth of superior genotypes.

  • Prescribed fertilizer dose, based on foliar analysis, generated a non-optimal response.

Introduction

Pinus is the most used genus to establish commercial forest plantations worldwide (Comisión Nacional Forestal [CONAFOR] & Colegio de Postgraduados [COLPOS], 2009). Pinus patula Schiede ex Schltdl. & Cham. var. patula, due to its high production capacity, it is important in countries of the southern hemisphere. (Dvorak et al., 2000); however, Mexico has a small planted area in spite of being the species' center of origin (Sáenz-Romero, Beaulieu, & Rehfeldt, 2011).

Water availability, light, climate, soil nutrients and individual genetics influence tree growth. The use of genetically superior trees with adequate nutrient management promotes performance of commercial forest plantations (Munsell & Fox, 2010) and it is a way to increase P. patula production in our country. Mexico reports advances in genetic improvement of P. patula by identifying more productive individuals or with higher wood quality (Bustillos-Aguirre, Vargas-Hernández, López-Upton, & Ramírez-Valverde, 2018; Valencia-Manzo & Vargas-Hernández, 2001), by establishing and studying the performance of new tree families selected in their natural range.

There are new technologies of improved effectiveness for plant nutrition such as controlled-release fertilizers, which are composed of traditional fertilizers coated with a polymer layer that, when wetted, are slowly released to the soil by diffusion, so that loss is minimized and time and energy required to be absorbed is reduced (Ali & Danafar, 2015; Chandra et al., 2019; Reyes-Millalón, Gerding, & Thiers-Espinoza, 2012). On the other hand, it has also been documented that inorganic fertilizers are effective in promoting P. patula growth (Lázaro-Dzul et al., 2012; Maliondo et al., 2005; Mavimbela, Crous, Morris, & Chirwa, 2018).

This experiment was designed to analyze the response of P. patula in productivity by combining genetic quality and nutritional condition in a progeny trial. The objective was to study the effect of traditional and controlled-release fertilizers, and of the doses defined technically or empirically, on the growth of 20 families of trees with different genetic quality, divided into a superior and an inferior group. The hypotheses were: 1) the effect of fertilizer doses defined by foliar analysis or empirical knowledge (based on previous experiments) is similar to each other; 2) the use of controlled release fertilizers and traditional agricultural fertilizers produces similar responses on tree growth; 3) growth initiation and cessation are influenced by fertilizer treatments; and 4) genotypic groups show similar responses to fertilizer application.

Materials and Methods

Study area

This experiment was conducted in a P. patula progeny trial established in September 2015 at the Agua Prieta property of the ejido Peñuelas Pueblo Nuevo, Chignahuapan, Puebla (19° 57’ 43’’ N, 98° 06’ 11’’ W, 2 555 m elevation). The climate is C(E)(w), semi-cold subhumid with summer rainfall, mean annual temperature of 13.5 °C and precipitation between 750 and 1 000 mm in the lower and upper parts, respectively (Pérez-Soto, Figueroa-Hernández, García-Núñez, & Godínez-Montoya, 2017). The soil is classified by INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía, 2013) as Durisol and Andosol.

The progeny trial is composed of 20 blocks with 100 half-sib families planted in plots of one tree per family, randomly placed in a 3 x 3 m real frame. Each individual was part of a family of trees with outstanding phenotypic characteristics, selected in the forest belonging to the ejido (20° 00' 11” N, 98° 07' 48” W, 2 894 m elevation). When trees were 3 years old, they were measured and evaluated with an analysis of variance; block effect adjusted means (blocking the environmental factor) helped to determine genetic quality of each group of families (Salaya-Domínguez, López-Upton, & Vargas-Hernández, 2012). Ten families of superior and 10 of inferior genetic quality were selected for the experiment, according to height performance, to compare response to fertilization treatments applied.

Soil sampling and foliar analysis were performed as diagnostic in June 2018. Soil samples were obtained from the first 30 cm depth randomly in 12 blocks selected for the experiment (due to homogeneous drainage characteristics). Three composite samples were generated and analyzed according to NOM-021-RECNAT-2000 (Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales [SEMARNAT], 2002). Leaf samples from three genetically “superior” and three “inferior” individuals were found according to the methodology used by Wells and Allen (1985). Samples were oven-dried for 72 h at 70 °C, ground and analyzed. N concentrations were determined by the micro-Kjeldahl method and those of P, K, Ca, Mg, Fe, Cu, Zn, Mn and B by coupled plasma induction optical emission spectrometry (Varian ICP OES 725-ES; Mulgrave, Australia), using digests with a mixture of H2SO4:HClO4 (2:1, v:v) (Alcántar-González & Sandoval-Villa, 1999).

Defining treatments

Treatment 1 corresponded to trees without fertilizer application, which were considered as controls. Treatment 2 or “technical” was defined by comparing the nutrient concentrations found in foliar analyses and critical concentrations reported by Sánchez-Parada, López-López, Gómez-Guerrero, and Pérez-Suárez (2018) for P. patula. To correct the deficiencies found, doses of 91 mL of Ca, 53 mL of Mn, 10 mL of Zn, and 5 mL of Fe were applied to the soil of each tree, using liquid fertilizers at concentrations of 10 %, 4 %, 8 %, and 8 % of those nutrients, respectively.

Treatment 3 was defined empirically based on other fertilization studies in related species and similar conditions (Reyes-Millalón et al., 2012; Štofko, 2010; Vázquez-Cisneros et al., 2018). The treatment involved the application of 20 g·tree-1 of a controlled-release fertilizer (percentage % by weight: N-NO3 = 5.80 %, N-NH4 = 6.60 %, P2O5 = 6.00 %, K2O = 12.00 %, CaO = 2.00 %, MgO = 3.50 %, Si = 2.10 %, S = 0.00 %, Fe = 0.40 %, Mn = 0.05 %, Cu = 0.04 %, Mo = 0.01 %, Zn = 0.06 % and B = 0.03 %, concentrations reported by the manufacturer), with a release time of six months depending on soil humidity and temperature.

Treatment 4 was established as a counterpart to the previous treatment, based on traditional agricultural fertilizers such as urea, phosphonitrate, magnesium sulfate, potassium nitrate and copper sulfate at doses of 4.32, 2.76, 2.46, 5.22 and 0. 04 g·tree-1, respectively; plus, phosphoric acid and liquid fertilizers of Ca at 10 %, Mn at 4 %, Zn at 8 % and Fe at 8 % at doses of 1.55, 0.87, 2.29, 0.13 and 0.24 mL·tree-1, respectively, to match the concentrations of the controlled-release fertilizer (excluding Si, Mo and B).

Treatments were applied in September 2018, randomized at the block level, so each treatment had three replicates. Each replicate included 20 families represented by a single tree. Treatments 2 and 4 were applied in solution, distributing them manually in the drip zone of tree crowns. Treatment 3 was applied in the same area, in the four cardinal points, placing the granules in a small opening at surface soil level, which was then covered.

Measurement of variables

The initial measurement of diameter at root collar (DRC, cm), diameter at 1.3 m height (DBH, cm), total height (TH, cm) and number of whorls (VERT) was made in October 2018. Diameters were measured using a Lufkin® diametric tape and height with a 5 m high Apex® stadia. The final measurement was made in November 2019.

Phenology was assessed in Julian days by determining the onset (YEMA_IN) in February (7, 11, 18 and 25) and the cessation of height growth (YEMA_F) in October (1, 11, 21 and 30) and November (14) 2019. Leaf sampling was done in November 2019 according to Wells and Allen (1985). The collected material was dried for three days in an oven at 70 °C and the mass of 100 needles (MASA_100, g) was obtained using a precision balance to hundredths of a gram (Chyo® JK-200, Chyo Balance Corp., Japan).

Other variables calculated were absolute growth rate (AGR) and relative production rate (RPR) for DRC, DBH, TH, VERT and biomass index [BI (dm3) = (DRC2 * TH)/1000] (Álvarez, Rodríguez, & Suárez, 1999), in addition to MASA_100, YEMA_IN and YEMA_F, using the formulas of Hunt (1990):

AGR=W2-W1t2-t1   

RPR=lnW2/W1t2-t1

where,

AGR = average total increment for a defined interval

RPR = average relative production rate for a defined interval

W(1,2) = current and previous period's increment for the variable evaluated (DRC, DBH, TH, IB and VERT)

t(1,2) = initial and final measurement dates (one year).

Model and Statistical Analysis

The statistical model of completely randomized blocks allows identifying the effects of each factor and interaction between them, which corresponds to:

yijkl=μ+Tl+Bi(l)+Gj+TGjl+BGijl+Fk(j)+TFjkl+εijkl     

where,

y ijkl = value of the individual of the k-th family, within the j-th genotypic group, in the i-th block nested in the l-th fertilization treatment

µ = population mean

T l = fixed effect of the l-th fertilization treatment

B i(l) = random effect of the i-th block nested in the l-th fertilization treatment ~NID(0,σb2)

G j = fixed effect of the j-th genotypic group of trees

TG jl = fixed effect of fertilization treatment and genotypic group interaction

RG ijl = random effect of interaction of replication and genotypic group ~NID0,σbg2

F k(j) = random effect of the k-th family nested in the genotypic group ~NID(0,σf(g)2)

TF jkl = random effect of treatment and family interaction within the genotypic group ~NID(0,σtf2)

ε jkl = error associated with these effects ~NID(0,σe2)

l = treatments 1, 2, 3 and 4

i = blocks 1, 2 and 3 per treatment

j = superior and inferior genotypes

k = 10 families per genotypic group.

Data were analyzed with the MIXED procedure of the SAS 9.4® statistical program using the Restricted Maximum Likelihood (REML) method to determine the existence of significant differences (SAS Institute, 2015); when present, mean separation was done by direct pairwise comparison (PROC MIXED).

Results

Foliar and soil analysis

Tables 1 and 2 show that the physicochemical characteristics of the soil were adequate for the development of P. patula, although organic matter was low; the nutrients P-Bray, Cu, Mg and K were found to be deficient, according to NOM-021-RECNAT-2000 (SEMAs RNAT, 2002). Table 3 shows the results of the foliar analysis, the "technical" fertilization dose was formulated, based on the nutrient deficiencies detected.

Table 1 Physicochemical characteristics of the soil where the Pinus patula progeny trial was established in the ejido Peñuelas, Pueblo Nuevo, Chignahuapan. 

Physicochemical Characteristic Value
Texture Clay
Bulk density 1.19 g·cm-3
Gravimetric moisture 28.67 % t field capacity and
(in sieved samples) 23.67 % at permanent wilting point
pH 5.45
Oranic matter 2.45%

Table 2 Soil nutrient concentrations of the Pinus patula progeny trial in the ejido of Peñuelas, Pueblo Nuevo, Chignahuapan. 

Nutrient Concentration
N 0.09%
Fe 21 ppm
Mn 35 ppm
Ca 8.12 cmol·kg-1
Zn 0.72 ppm
P-Bray 14.5 ppm
Cu 0.90 ppm
Mg 1.03 cmol·kg-1
K 0.26 cmol· kg-1

Table 3 Pinus patula foliar analysis and diagnosis based on critical concentrations reported by Sánchez-Parada et al. (2018). 

Composite sample N P K Ca Mg Fe Cu Zn Mn B
(%) (ppm)
Inferior genotypes
1 1.33 2 003.70 9 479.75 1 077.71 1 649.17 75.83 3.31 16.45 132.39 26.09
2 2.24 2 096.87 8 873.34 1 036.91 1 150.24 95.55 4.76 19.44 107.27 22.96
3 1.89 2 389.35 10 132.00 1 202.64 1 695.23 110.77 3.97 18.15 149.9 25.86
Mean ± standard error (A) 1.82 2 163.31 9 495.03 1 105.75 1 498.21 94.05 4.02 18.01 129.85 24.97
(±0.27) (±116.18) (±363.42) (±49.85) (±174.49) (±10.11) (±0.42) (±0.86) (±12.37) (±1.01)
Critical concentrations (B) 1.49 1 300.00 6 300.00 3 300.00 1 400.00 118.69 2.14 30.6 187.47 11.25
Diagnosis (A-B) 0.33 863.31 3 195.03 -2 194.25 98.21 -24.64 1.88 -12.59 -57.62 13.72
Superior genotypes
1 1.68 2 123.03 7 097.34 1 224.90 1 245.67 92.321 2.92 22.85 111.76 23.1
2 1.82 2 231.16 9 782.76 1 049.83 1 418.61 82.418 4.28 19.05 82.73 25.54
3 1.54 1 733.35 8 261.08 895.34 1 359.88 64.121 2.77 10.62 86.92 21.49
Mean ± standard error (A) 1.68 2 029.18 8 380.39 1 056.69 1 341.39 79.62 3.32 17.51 93.81 23.38
(±0.48) (±439.04) (±1 912.5) (±1 111.69) (±414.33) (±37.45) (±0.70) (±11.23) (±52.3) (±3.6)
Critical concentrations (B) 1.49 1 300.00 6 300.00 3 300.00 1 400.00 118.69 2.14 30.6 187.47 11.25
Diagnosis (A-B) 0.19 729.18 2 080.39 -2 243.31 -58.61 -39.07 1.18 -13.1 -93.67 12.13

According to Tables 4 and 5, the effects of fertilization treatments were not statistically different for the variables analyzed. However, genetic condition had a significant influence on absolute and relative growth rates of biomass index production (P ≤ 0.01), as well as relative production rates of height and diameter at root collar (P ≤ 0.05). On the other hand, absolute growth rate of diameter and growth initiation were significantly different with P = 0.09.

Fertilization treatments and genetic group had a significant interaction (P ≤ 0.05) on relative production rates of root collar diameter and biomass index, the same occurred with the relative rate of height production, but at a lower significance (P ≤ 0.10). For those variables, Figure 1 shows that interaction between treatment*genotypic group was statistically different (P ≤ 0.001) for the case of the superior group-controlled release fertilization treatment in contrast to the same treatment of the inferior group that generated the highest values. Control and controlled-release treatments of the inferior genetic group also caused significantly different effect (P ≤ 0.10) for the same variables (Figure 1); the controlled-release treatment generated a higher response on trees. In particular, the controlled-release treatment of the genetically superior group had a lower effect (P ≤ 0.10) on relative growth rate in total height compared to “technical” and agricultural fertilization treatments (Figure 1). The rest of the variables evaluated for the effects considered in Table 4 were not statistically different.

Table 4 Statistical significance of the evaluated effects derived from the analysis of variance in the Pinus patula progeny trial. 

Effect RPR BI RPR DRC RPR TH AGR BI AGR DBH YEMA_IN
Pr > F
Fertilization (F) 0.74 0.8 0.57 0.83 0.87 0.94
Genotype group (G) 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.09 0.09
Interaction F*G 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.54 0.51 0.92

AGR: absolute growth rate, RPR: relative production rate, BI: biomass index, DRC: diameter at root collar, TH: total height, DBH: diameter at breast height, YEMA_IN: initiation of growth.

Table 5 Absolute growth rate (AGR) and relative growth rate (RPR), 100 needle mass (g) and growth initiation and cessation of Pinus patula per treatment and genotypic group. 

Factor Height (cm·year-1) Diameter at root collar (cm·year-1) Biomass index(dm3·year-1) Diameter(cm·year-1) Whorls (units·year-1) Mass of 100 needles (g) Yema_in (Julian days) Yema_f (Julian days)
AGR RPR AGR RPR AGR RPR AGR RPR AGR RPR
Treatment
Treatment 1 155 ± 9.18 a 0.48 ± 0.02 a 3.8 ± 0.24 a 0.45 ± 0.02 a 38.61 ± 6.27 a 1.38 ± 0.06 a 2.82 ± 0.28 a 0.72 ± 0.07 a 4.7 ± 0.36 a 0.48 ± 0.02 a 2.77 ± 0.09 a 43.0 ± 0.85 a 312.6 ± 2.65 a
Treatment 2 154 ± 9.18 a 0.51 ± 0.02 a 3.9 ± 0.24 a 0.48 ± 0.02 a 36.45 ± 6.27 a 1.47 ± 0.06 a 2.90 ± 0.28 a 0.86 ± 0.07 a 4.2 ± 0.36 a 0.46 ± 0.02 a 2.87 ± 0.09 a 42.4 ± 0.85 a 316.9 ± 2.90 a
Treatment 3 157 ± 9.18 a 0.49 ± 0.02 a 4.2 ± 0.24 a 0.48 ± 0.02 a 43.77 ± 6.27 a 1.44 ± 0.06 a 3.06 ± 0.28 a 0.71 ± 0.07 a 4.2 ± 0.36 a 0.46 ± 0.02 a 2.91 ± 0.09 a 42.6 ± 0.84 a 308.6 ± 3.26 a
Treatment 4 157 ± 9.18 a 0.51 ± 0.02 a 4.0 ± 0.24 a 0.47 ± 0.02 a 36.83 ± 6.27 a 1.45 ± 0.06 a 3.12 ± 0.28 a 0.84 ± 0.07 a 4.4 ± 0.36 a 0.47 ± 0.02 a 2.80 ± 0.09 a 42.4 ± 0.84 a 313.0 ± 2.93 a
Genotype group
Inferior 154 ± 5.24 A 0.52 ± 0.01 B 3.9 ± 0.14 A 0.49 ± 0.01 B 34.96 ± 3.37 B 1.49 ± 0.04 B 2.86 ± 0.15 B 0.80 ± 0.04 A 4.2 ± 0.25 A 0.47 ± 0.02 A 2.80 ± 0.08 A 43.2 ± 0.53 B 312.1 ± 1.72 A
Superior 158 ± 5.24 A 0.47 ± 0.01 A 4.1 ± 0.14 A 0.45 ± 0.01 A 42.86 ± 3.37 A 1.38 ± 0.04 A 3.09 ± 0.15 A 0.76 ± 0.04 A 4.6 ± 0.25 A 0.47 ± 0.02 A 2.87 ± 0.08 A 42.0 ± 0.53 A 313.4 ± 1.78 A

Treatments: 1 = control, 2 = “technical” fertilization based on foliar analysis, 3 = controlled-release fertilization, 4 = traditional agricultural fertilization. ± standard deviation of the mean. Mean values followed by different letters are different from each other (P ≤ 0.10) by direct comparisons between pairs of means (PROC MIXED).

Figure 1 Relative production growth rates (RGR) of biomass index (BI), diameter at root collar (DRC) and total height (TH) absolute growth rates of BI and diameter (DBH), and growth initiation date (YEMA_IN) in control treatment (C), technical based on foliar analysis (Tec), controlled-release fertilizer (CR) and traditional agricultural fertilizer (TA) per genotypic group. Means with different capital letter (comparison between fertilizer treatments within each genotype) or lower-case letter (comparison between the two genotypes within each fertilizer treatment) are different from each other (P ≤ 0.10) by direct comparisons between pairs of means (PROC MIXED). 

On the other hand, growth initiation was faster for superior genotypes than for inferior genotypes for one day (P ≤ 0.10) (Tables 4 and 5). Growth cessation could only be determined for 61 trees, which had an average growth period of 270 days, while 179 continued to grow, presumably due to the occurrence of the last rains in the month of November.

Table 6 shows that, at the family level within genotypic groups (F k(j) ), absolute and relative growth rates for the number of whorls had significant differences (P ≤ 0.01). This was also the case for the mass of 100 needles, but at a lower significance (P ≤ 0.10). The interaction effect between fertilization and families (TF jkl ) was significant in the case of absolute growth rate of diameter at root collar (P = 0.06) and relative production rate of number of whorls (P = 0.07).

Table 6 Statistical significances of effects evaluated at the family level, from the analysis of variance in the Pinus patula progeny trial. 

Effect AGR VERT RPR VERT MASA_100 AGR DRC
Pr > F
Fertilization (F) 0.7045 0.7823 0.6779 0.7099
Genotype group (G) 0.0494 0.9414 0.4504 0.1989
F*G interaction 0.9077 0.8883 0.445 0.66
Family (Group) <0.001 0.005 0.0987 0.9403
Fertilization*Family (Group) 0.1848 0.0642 0.9969 0.0553

AGR: Absolute growth rate, RPR: Relative production rate, VERT: number of whorls, MASA_100: mass of 100 needles, DRC: diameter at root collar.

Discussion

Foliar nutrient concentrations were found within the range of normal values found by Louw and Scholes (2003) for samples taken in the growing season, except for Ca, Mn and Fe which were found in the lower limits, which is consistent with the comparison of critical concentrations reported by Sánchez-Parada et al. (2018).

Growth results were higher than those found by Gómez-Cárdenas, Vargas-Hernández, Jasso-Mata, Velázquez-Martínez, and Rodríguez-Franco (1998), who reported height growths of 108 and 66 cm in 4-year-old P. patula during two successive 300-day growing seasons in Texcoco, Mexico. However, the results were lower than those reported by Salazar-García et al. (1999) with height increments between 174 ± 43 cm and 203 ± 43 cm in one year for two provenances from Zacatlán, an area close to the present study, in 1.5-year-old unfertilized plantations of the same species. This situation also occurred in the case of the number of growth cycles (5.51 ± 1.50 and 5.77 ± 1.32) compared to those found in this experiment (AGR_VERT).

The few observed differences of the families evaluated may be related to the fact that the trial is in a relatively different water stress level site than where their parents grow; even though the collection area and the trial are 5 km apart, mean annual precipitation is 795 vs. 724 mm and the aridity index is 0.064 vs. 0.075, respectively (Virginia Tech & USDA Forest Service, 2020). The lower water availability may have influenced tree growth because height and diameter depend on water availability in the previous and current year (Kozlowski, 1964); it also affects the efficiency in the use of other resources (Binkley, Stape, & Ryan, 2004), as indicated by Vásquez-García et al. (2015), who found no differences with the application of traditional agricultural fertilizers in P. patula when light was the limiting resource.

Genetic adaptations to provenance can also limit growth, even when environmental conditions are favorable. For example, in a provenance experiment in Huauchinango, a temperate and humid site, and the provenance of Tlaxco, Tlaxcala, a cold and dry site, P. patula grew poorly (Salazar-García et al., 1999). Moreover, these authors found that elevation of provenance was negatively correlated with the number of growth cycles (r = -0.80) and the increase in height (r = -0.82); that is, the origins of higher altitude had lower growth in height and fewer cycles generated per year.

The absence of response to fertilization in this experiment contrasts with that reported by Reyes-Millalón et al. (2012), who demonstrated the efficiency of controlled-release fertilizers on growth of Pinus radiata D. Don with doses of 10 to 20 g in seedlings, 46 months after establishment. The results also contrast with the study of Vázquez-Cisneros et al. (2018), who report that some treatments with traditional agricultural fertilizers generated the same response as slow-release fertilizers in Pinus greggii Engelm. ex Parl. var. greggii, one year after applying 7 to 14 g of fertilizers during the experiment. Štofko (2010) had significant results in 3-year-old plantations of Picea abies (L.) H. Karst, applying controlled-release fertilizer (50 g), and in Larix decidua Mill. he recorded differences in height from the first year. Previous studies suggests that both fertilizer dose and plantation age may have been a limiting factor in the response to fertilization in this study.

For the present case, growth initiation date was slightly advanced by fertilization treatments, as reported by Fløistad (2002) and Pan, Jacobs, and Li (2017) in saplings of P. abies and Pinus tabuliformis Carrière, respectively, although the effect was not statistically significant. However, the genetic effect was significant, which is consistent with the fact that phenology in Pinus possesses heritable genetic control for both bud break, bud dormancy, and cold requirements for induction (temperature and photoperiod) (Cooke, Eriksson, & Junttila, 2012).

Results obtained by Salaya-Domínguez et al. (2012) and Bustillos-Aguirre et al. (2018) suggest that P. patula has low to moderate genetic control and genotype*environment (G*E) interaction at early ages. The G*E interaction can be affected by fertilization, particularly in N and P use (Li, McKeand, & Allen, 1991; Zhang, Zhou, & Yang, 2013), which occurred in this experiment as a joint response of all families within the genotypic group and not because of the existence of particularly efficient families in the use of applied nutrients. This contrasts with that reported by Zas, Pichel, Martíns, and Fernández-López (2006) in P. radiata, who reported positive effects on height with the use of traditional agricultural fertilizers and found that some families had greater efficiency in the use of nutrients; however, when analyzed as a whole, the family*fertilization interaction was not significant, apparently due to differences in fertility of each site, prior to fertilization. Martins, Sampedro, Moreira, and Zas (2009), in a similar experiment with Pinus pinaster Aiton, found significant differences for height in the five years they evaluated the plantations. These authors determined the efficiency of the use of foliar analysis to correct nutrient deficiencies in two of the three sites evaluated and demonstrated the existence of genotype interactions with nutrient availability.

Conclusions

Fertilization formulas for three-year-old Pinus patula trees, including the one proposed from the foliar analysis, showed no significant responses in growth and biomass production in the year of evaluation. However, trees show significant differences because of the effect of the genetic group and the genotype*fertilization interaction, where superior and inferior genotypes showed higher values of absolute growth and relative production rate, respectively. The controlled-release fertilizer caused the highest growth in the superior genotypes in contrast to the traditional fertilizers that were not statistically different from the control. The use of controlled-release fertilizers seems to be a viable option to promote growth of young plantations in the field, if applied in adequate doses and formulas and if adequate environmental conditions exist to optimize its use.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank CONACYT for the grant awarded to the first author to carry out this study and the ejido of Peñuelas in Pueblo Nuevo, Chignahuapan, Puebla, for the facilities provided.

References

Alcántar-González, G., & Sandoval-Villa, M. (1999). Manual de análisis químico de tejido vegetal: guía de muestreo, preparación, análisis e interpretación. Chapingo, México: Sociedad Mexicana de la Ciencia del Suelo, Universidad Autónoma Chapingo. [ Links ]

Ali, S., & Danafar, F. (2015). Controlled-release fertilizers: Advances and challenges. Life Science Journal, 12(11), 33-45. Retrieved from http://www.lifesciencesite.com/lsj/life121115/005_17565life121115_33_45.pdfLinks ]

Álvarez, J., Rodríguez, J., & Suárez, D. (1999). Mejoramiento de la productividad de plantaciones de Pinus radiata D. Don, a través de un método racional de fertilización. Bosque, 20(1), 23-36. Retrieved from http://revistas.uach.cl/pdf/bosque/v20n1/art03.pdfLinks ]

Binkley, D., Stape, J. L., & Ryan, M. G. (2004). Thinking about efficiency of resource use in forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 193(1-2), 5-16. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2004.01.019 [ Links ]

Bustillos-Aguirre, C. V., Vargas-Hernández, J. J., López-Upton, J., & Ramírez-Valverde, G. (2018). Repetibilidad de parámetros genéticos de las características de ramificación en progenies de Pinus patula. Madera y Bosques, 24(1), 1-10. doi: 10.21829/myb.2018.2411131 [ Links ]

Chandra, M. S., Lal, M., Naresh, R. K., Yadav, S., Kumar, R., Kumar, R., … Lavanya, N. (2019). Role of polymer coated fertilizers (PCFS) an advance technology for improving nutrient use efficiency and crop productivity: A review. International Journal of Chemical Studies, 7(6), 2667-2679. Retrieved from http://www.chemijournal.com/archives/2019/vol7issue6/PartAR/7-6-475-496.pdfLinks ]

Comisión Nacional Forestal (CONAFOR), & Colegio de Postgraduados (COLPOS). (2009). Situación actual y perspectivas de las plantaciones forestales comerciales en México. Zapopan, México: Comisión Nacional Forestal-Colegio de Postgraduados. [ Links ]

Cooke, J. E. K., Eriksson, M. E., & Junttila, O. (2012). The dynamic nature of bud dormancy in trees: Environmental control and molecular mechanisms. Plant, Cell and Environment, 35(10), 1707-1728. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2012.02552.x [ Links ]

Dvorak, W. S., Hodge, G. R., Kietzka, J. E., Malan, F., Osorio, L. F., & Stanger, T. K. (2000). Pinus patula. In CAMCORE Cooperative (Ed.), Conservation & testing of tropical & subtropical forest tree species by the CAMCORE cooperative (pp. 148-173). Raleigh, USA: Carolina State University. [ Links ]

Fløistad, I. S. (2002). Effects of excessive nutrient supply and short day treatment on autumn frost hardiness and time of bud break in Picea abies seedlings. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 17(4), 295-303. doi: 10.1080/02827580260138053 [ Links ]

Gómez-Cárdenas, M., Vargas-Hernández, J. J., Jasso-Mata, J., Velázquez-Martínez, A., & Rodríguez-Franco, C. (1998). Patrón de crecimiento anual del brote terminal en árboles jóvenes de Pinus patula. Agrociencia, 32(4), 357-363. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266391132Links ]

Hunt, R. (1990). Basic growth analysis. London, UK: Unwin Hyman. [ Links ]

Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI). (2013). Conjunto de datos perfiles de suelos. Escala 1:250 000 serie II (continuo nacional). Retrieved May 23, 2020 from https://www.inegi.org.mx/app/biblioteca/ficha.html?upc=702825266707Links ]

Kozlowski, T. T. (1964). Shoot growth in woody plants. The Botanical Review, 30(3), 335-392. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4353695Links ]

Lázaro-Dzul, M. O., Velázquez-Mendoza, J., Vargas-Hernández, J. J., Gómez-Guerrero, A., Álvarez-Sánchez, M. E., & López-López, M. A. (2012). Fertilización con nitrógeno, fósforo y potasio en un latizal de Pinus patula Schl. et Cham. Revista Chapingo Serie Ciencias Forestales y del Ambiente, 18(1), 33-42. doi: 10.5154/r.rchscfa.2011.01.001 [ Links ]

Li, B., McKeand, S. E., & Allen, H. L. (1991). Genetic variation in nitrogen use efficiency of loblolly pine seedlings. Forest Science, 37(2), 613-626. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233523956%0AGeneticLinks ]

Louw, J. R., & Scholes, M. C. (2003). Foliar nutrient levels as indicators of site quality for Pinus patula in the Mpumalanga escarpment area. The Southern African Forestry Journal, 197(1), 21-30. doi: 10.1080/20702620.2003.10431718 [ Links ]

Maliondo, S. M. S., Mtui, E. B., Chamshama, S. A. O., Nsolomo, V. R., Msanya, B. M., & Mhando, M. L. (2005). Early response of second-rotation Pinus patula stands to nitrogen and phosphate fertilizers at Sao Hill forest plantation, Tanzania. Journal of Tropical Forest Science, 17(1), 413-418. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/23616528Links ]

Martins, P., Sampedro, L., Moreira, X., & Zas, R. (2009). Nutritional status and genetic variation in the response to nutrient availability in Pinus pinaster. A multisite field study in Northwest Spain. Forest Ecology and Management, 258(7), 1429-1436. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.06.041 [ Links ]

Mavimbela, L. Z., Crous, J. W., Morris, A. R., & Chirwa, P. W. (2018). The importance of harvest residue and fertiliser on productivity of Pinus patula across various sites in their first, second and third rotations, at Usutu Swaziland. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science, 48(5), 1-14. doi: 10.1186/s40490-018-0110-1 [ Links ]

Munsell, J. F., & Fox, T. R. (2010). An analysis of the feasibility for increasing woody biomass production from pine plantations in the southern United States. Biomass and Bioenergy, 34(12), 1631-1642. doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.05.009 [ Links ]

Pan, J., Jacobs, D. F., & Li, G. (2017). Combined effects of short-day treatment and fall fertilization on growth, nutrient status, and spring bud break of Pinus tabulaeformis seedlings. iForest, 10(1), 242-249. doi: 10.3832/ifor2178-009 [ Links ]

Pérez-Soto, F., Figueroa-Hernández, E., García-Núñez, R. M., & Godínez-Montoya, L. (2017). Genética y fertilización en la producción agrícola. Texcoco, México: ECORFAN. Retrieved from https://www.ecorfan.org/handbooks/Ciencias de la Biologia Agronomia y Economia T-I/HCBAE_TI.pdfLinks ]

Reyes-Millalón, J., Gerding, V., & Thiers-Espinoza, O. (2012). Fertilizantes de liberación controlada aplicados al establecimiento de Pinus radiata D. Don en Chile. Revista Chapingo Serie Ciencias Forestales y del Ambiente, 18(3), 313-328. doi: 10.5154/r.rchscfa.2011.08.060 [ Links ]

Sáenz-Romero, C., Beaulieu, J., & Rehfeldt, G. E. (2011). Variación genética altitudinal entre poblaciones de Pinus patula de Oaxaca, México, en cámaras de crecimiento simulando temperaturas de calentamiento global. Agrociencia, 45(3), 399-411. Retrieved from https://agrociencia-colpos.mx/index.php/agrociencia/article/view/887/887Links ]

Salaya-Domínguez, J. M., López-Upton, J., & Vargas-Hernández, J. J. (2012). Variación genética y ambiental en dos ensayos de progenies de Pinus patula. Agrociencia, 46(5), 519-534. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1405-31952012000500009Links ]

Salazar-García, J. G., Vargas-Hernández, J. J., Jasso-Mata, J., Molina-Galán, J. D., Ramírez-Herrera, C., & López-Upton, J. (1999). Variación en el patrón de crecimiento en altura de cuatro especies de Pinus en edades tempranas. Madera y Bosques, 5(2), 19-34. Retrieved from http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=61750203Links ]

Sánchez-Parada, A., López-López, M. Á., Gómez-Guerrero, A., & Pérez-Suárez, M. (2018). Critical nutrient concentrations and DRIS norms for Pinus patula. Preprints, 1-13. doi: 10.20944/preprints201801.0011.v1 [ Links ]

SAS Institute. (2015). The mixed procedure. SAS/STAT(R) 14.1 User’s Guide. Cary, USA: Author. Retrieved from https://support.sas.com/documentation/onlinedoc/stat/930/mixed.pdfLinks ]

Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT). (2002). Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-021-RECNAT-2000, que establece las especificaciones de fertilidad, salinidad y clasificación de suelos. Estudios, muestreo y análisis. México: Diario Oficial de la Federación. [ Links ]

Štofko, P. (2010). Effects of slow-release fertilizers of Silvamix and Silvagen line on growth of a young spruce and larch forest plantation three years after application. Folia Forestalia Polonica, Series A, 52(1), 54-60. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.30866 [ Links ]

Valencia-Manzo, S., & Vargas-Hernández, J. J. (2001). Correlaciones genéticas y selección simultánea del crecimiento y densidad de la madera en Pinus patula. Agrociencia, 35(1), 109-120. Retrieved from https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=30235110Links ]

Vázquez-Cisneros, I., Prieto-Ruíz, J. A., López-López, M. A., Wehenkel, C., Domínguez-Calleros, C. P. A., & Muñoz-Sáez, F. E. (2018). Growth and survival of a plantation of Pinus greggii Engelm. ex Parl. var. greggii under different fertilization treatments. Revista Chapingo Serie Ciencias Forestales y del Ambiente, 24(2), 251-264. doi: 10.5154/r.rchscfa.2017.05.036 [ Links ]

Vásquez-García, I., López-López, M. Á., Ángeles-Pérez, G., Trinidad-Santos, A., Jiménez-Casas, M., & Aguilar-Benítez, G. (2015). Aclareo y fertilización química en la productividad primaria neta de plantaciones de Pinus patula Schiede ex Schltdl. et Cham. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Forestales, 6(31), 82-93. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/remcf/v6n31/v6n31a7.pdfLinks ]

Virginia Tech & USDA Forest Service. (2020). Research on forest climate change: Potential effects of global warming on forests and plant climate relationships in Western North America and Mexico. Retrieved May 31, 2020, from http://charcoal.cnre.vt.edu/climate/Links ]

Wells, C., & Allen, L. (1985). A loblolly pine management guide: When and where to apply fertilizer. Asheville, USA: US Department of Agriculture-Forest Service-Southern Forest Experiment Station. Retrieved from http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/viewpub.php?index=921Links ]

Zas, R., Pichel, F., Martíns, P., & Fernández-López, J. (2006). Fertilization x genotype interaction in Pinus radiata open pollinated families planted in three locations in Galicia (NW Spain). New Forests, 32(3), 253-263. doi: 10.1007/s11056-006-9000-0 [ Links ]

Zhang, Y., Zhou, Z., & Yang, Q. (2013). Genetic variations in root morphology and phosphorus efficiency of Pinus massoniana under heterogeneous and homogeneous low phosphorus conditions. Plant and Soil, 364(1-2), 93-104. doi: 10.1007/s11104-012-1352-y [ Links ]

Received: August 14, 2020; Accepted: September 30, 2021

*Corresponding author: aaldrete@colpos.mx; tel.: +52 595 952 0200 ext. 1467.

Creative Commons License This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License