Selection of cassava varieties for biomass and protein production in semiarid areas from Bahia

  • Oliveira E
  • Dos Santos P
  • Pires A
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The selection of cassava varieties for cultivation in semiarid regions constitutes an alternative to generate income and for animal feed. The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential for biomass and protein production of seven cassava varieties in semiarid area from Bahia. Eleven agronomic shoot (SH) and root (ROT) traits, as well as crude protein (CP), were evaluated using a randomized block design with four replications in Senhor do Bonfim (BA). Principal component analysis (PCA) and correlations analysis were carried out among the traits. Significant differences were found among varieties for all traits except for dry matter content of the shoots. Important variations were identified for crude protein content (17.9 to 25.13%), root yield (8.17 to 19.79 t.ha-1), yield of the upper third of the aerial part (from 9.36 to 15.89 t.ha-1) and dry matter yield of the shoot (1.99 to 3.14 t.ha-1), crude protein content in the shoot (0.37 to 0.64 t.ha-1) and roots (from 0.12 to 0.37 t.ha-1). According to the PCA the first two components accounted for over 77% of the variation, and traits related to yield were the main sources of diversity among the cassava varieties. Most of the correlations were positive and favorable for the selection of the most suitable varieties for production in semiarid regions. Although, grouping the cassava varieties based on PCA was not possible, varieties 'BRS Verdinha' showed good potential for protein production and variety 'Izabel de Souza' as a producer of biomass (shoot and roots).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Oliveira, E. J. de, Dos Santos, P. E. F., Pires, A. J. V., Tolentino, D. C., & Santos, V. da S. (2016). Selection of cassava varieties for biomass and protein production in semiarid areas from Bahia. Bioscience Journal, 32(3), 661–669. https://doi.org/10.14393/bj-v32n3a2016-32957

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free