Effect of doses of nitrogen in the agronomy and physiology of yellow passion fruit
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15517/am.v31i1.36815Keywords:
maximum monetary utility, resource productivity, bioeconomy, econometricsAbstract
Introduction. The passion fruit plant is important as fresh fruit and in the agroindustry, since its rich in minerals and vitamins and also has potential for domestic consumption and exportation. It has been shown that nitrogen (N) has an influence on fruit yield but there is no information on the optimal N range for maximum production. Objective. Determine the agronomic, physiological, and phenological response, yield and quality of fruit in the cultivation of parchita passion fruit against different doses of nitrogen. Materials and methods. At the Universidad Central de Venezuela, Maracay, Venezuela from April 2014 to march 2015, passion fruit plants were planted in a completely randomized design, six replicates, and six plants per experimental unit, a control (8 g N plant-1 (T1)) was evaluated and three doses of N (100 (T2), 200 (T3) and 300 (T4) g plant-1), an a dose of 50 and 300 g plant-1 of P2O5 and K2O, respectively were evaluated. The evaluated variables were: plant height, number of leaves, photosynthesis rate (A), transpiration (E), stomach conductance (Gs), chlorophyll index (CI), total leaf N content in doses at flowering and fruiting, yield, and fruit quality. Results. Higher doses of N obtained higher values in height, number of leaves, plant precocity, chlorophyll index, net photosynthesis, and foliar N content and lower values in T1. The variables Gs, A and E, did not show significant differences between the treatments. A 55 % yield reduction was obtained in the control treatment compared to the 200 g N plant-1 treatment which obtained the highest yield. The average fruit weight was significantly higher in T3. Conclusion. The best nitrogen dose in passion fruit plants was 200 g N plant-1.
Downloads
References
Barham, B.L., J.P. Chavas, D. Fitz, V. Ríos, and L. Schechter. 2014. The roles of risk and ambiguity in technology adoption. J. Econ. Behav. Organization 97:204-218. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2013.06.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2013.06.014
Belasco, E.J., M.R. Taylor, B.K. Goodwin, and T.C. Schroeder. 2009. Probabilistic models of yield, price, and revenue risks for fed cattle production. J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 41:91-105. doi:10.1017/S1074070800002571 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1074070800002571
Berk, J.B., and J. Walden. 2013. Limited capital market participation and human capital risk. Rev. Asset Pricing Stud. 3(1):1-37. doi:10.1093/rapstu/rat003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rapstu/rat003
Cienfuegos-Rivas, E.G., M.A.R. D-Orúe-Ríos, M. Briones-Luengo, y J.C. Martínez-González. 2006. Estimación del comportamiento productivo y parámetros genéticos de características predestete en bovinos de carne (Bos taurus) y sus cruzas, VIII Región, Chile. Arch. Med. Vet. 38:69-75. doi:10.4067/S0301-732X2006000100010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0301-732X2006000100010
García-Muñiz, J.G., E.G. Martínez-González, R. Núñez-Domínguez, R. Ramírez-Valverde, R. López-Ordaz, y A. Ruiz-Flores. 2008. Comparación de ecuaciones para ajustar curvas de lactancia en bovinos. Rev. Cient. FCV-LUZ 18(2):160-169.
Guerrero, S.C., y O.O. Melo. 2017. Una metodología para el tratamiento de la multicolinealidad a través del escalamiento multidimensional. Cienc. Desarrollo 8(2):9-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19053/01217488.v8.n2.2017.5239
Gustavsson, J., C. Cederberg, U. Sonesson, R. Van-Otterdijk, and A. Meybeck. 2011. Global food losses and food waste. FAO, Rome, ITA.
Hardaker, J.B., J.W. Richardson, G. Lien, and K.D. Schumann. 2004. Stochastic efficiency analysis with risk aversion bounds: a simplified approach. Aust. J. Agric. Res. Econ. 48:2:253-270. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8489.2004.00239.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8489.2004.00239.x
Hernández, J., S. Rebollar, F.J. González, E. Guzmán, B. Albarrán, y A. García. 2011. La cadena productiva de ganado bovino en el sur del Estado de México. Rev. Mex. Agroneg. 29:672-680.
Hidalgo, C., M.P. Rodríguez, y R. Álvarez. 2012. El efecto de las subvenciones en la ganadería española: un análisis mediante un modelo de frontera estocástica. Pecvnia 14(ene-jun):93-106. doi:10.18002/pec.v0i14.594 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18002/pec.v0i14.594
INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Geografía Estadística e Informática). 2017. Índice nacional de precios al consumidor. INEGI, Ciudad de México, MEX. https://www.inegi.org.mx/programas/inpc/2018/ (consultado 06 nov. 2019).
Iracheta-Lara, I.Z., E. Iglesias-Martínez, G. Méndez-Zamora, M.E. Esparza-Vela, y E. Santellano-Estrada. 2017. Modelado de riesgos para el sistema vaca-cría del estado de Chihuahua utilizando indicadores socioeconómicos y ambientales. Rev. Mex. Cien. Pecu. 8:193-200. doi:10.22319/rmcp.v8i2.4443 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22319/rmcp.v8i2.4443
Jarvis, L.S. 1974. Cattle as capital goods and ranchers as portfolio managers: an application to the Argentine cattle sector. J. Political Econ. 82:489-520. doi:10.1086/260209 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/260209
Lambert, D.K., and B.A. McCarl. 1989. Sequential modeling of white wheat marketing strategies. Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy 11:105-115. doi:10.1093/aepp/11.1.105 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aepp/11.1.105
Lee, C.F., J.E. Finnerty, and H.Y. Chen. 2010. Risk-aversion, capital asset allocation, and markowitz portfolio-selection model. In: C.F. Lee et al., editors, Handbook of quantitative finance and risk management. Springer, Boston, MA, USA. p. 69-92. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-77117-5_5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77117-5_5
Lefebvre, M., and F.M. Vieider. 2014. Risk taking of executives under different incentive contracts: experimental evidence. J. Econ. Behav. Organizat. 97:27-36. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2013.10.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2013.10.008
Levy, H. 1969. A utility function depending on the first three moments. J. Finance 24:715-719. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1969.tb00395.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1969.tb00395.x
Mballa, L.V., y A.Y. Sauceda. 2018. Análisis del hambre en el estado de Zacatecas bajo el modelo de Mínimos Cuadrados Ordinarios. Econ. Soc. Territorio XVIII(57):487-523. doi:10.22136/est01164 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22136/est01164
Morales-Hernández, J.L., F. J. González-Razo, y J. Hernández-Martínez. 2018. Función de producción de la ganadería de carne en la zona sur del Estado de México. Rev. Mex. Cien. Pecu. 9:1-13. doi.org/10.22319/rmcp.v9i1.4345 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22319/rmcp.v9i1.4345
Noussair, C.N., S.T. Trautmann, and G. Kuilen. 2014. Higher order risk attitudes, demographics, and financial decisions. Rev. Econ. Stud. 81:325-355. doi:10.1093/restud/rdt032 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdt032
OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2009. Managing risk in agriculture: a holistic approach. OECD Publishing, Paris, FRA. doi:10.1787/9789264075313-1-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264075313-1-en
Posadas, R., S. Rebollar, J. Hernández, F.J. González, A. Rebollar, y E. Guzmán 2011. Niveles de optimización económica en bovinos engordados en corral. En A.M. Arras-Vota, y O.A. Hernández-Rodríguez, editores, Administración, agrotecnología y redes de conocimiento. Pearson, MEX. p. 55-62.
Ramaswami, B. 1992. Production risk and optimal input decisions. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 74:860-869. doi:10.2307/1243183 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1243183
Ramírez, J.I., A. Rebollar, S. Rebollar, B. Jaramillo, y F.J. González. 2017. Estudio de viabilidad económica para una engorda de bovinos en corral en el sur del estado de México. Rev. Mex. Agroneg. 41:742-753.
Richardson, J.W., and J.L. Outlaw. 2008. Ranking risky alternatives: innovations in subjective utility analysis. In: C.A. Brebbia, and E. Beriatos, editors, Risk analysis VI, WIT Transactions on Information and Communication Technologies series, Vol 39. Wit Press, GBR. p. 213-224. doi:10.2495/RISK080231 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2495/RISK080231
Schroeder, T.C., O.C. Grunewald, S.A. Langemeier, and D.M. Allen. 1989. An analysis of live cattle option hedging strategies. Agribusiness 5(2):153-168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6297(198903)5:2<153::AID-AGR2720050207>3.0.CO;2-Q
Segura-Correa, V., y A. Castellanos-Ruelas. 1999. Efecto de la suplementación fosforada sobre la utilidad de peso de bovinos en pastoreo en Yucatán, México. Vet. Méx. 30(3):257-261.
Shankar, S. 2012. Production economics in the presence of risk. Aust. J. Agric. Res. Econ. 56:597-620. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8489.2012.00600.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8489.2012.00600.x
SNIIM (Sistema Nacional de Información e Integración de Mercados). 2017. Precio promedio ponderado de la leche. SNIIM, Ciudad de México, MEX. http://www.economia-sniim.gob.mx/2010prueba/PecComparativo.asp?var=Bov (consultado 4 nov. 2019).
Wold, S., A. Ruhe, H. Wold, and W.J. Dunn. 1984. The collinearity problem in linear regression. The partial least squares (PLS) approach to generalized inverses. J. Sci. Stat. Comp. 5:735-743. doi:10.1137/0905052 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1137/0905052
Wooldridge, J. 2010. Introducción a la econometría: un enfoque moderno. Cengage Learning Editores, Ciudad de México, MEX.
Zhang, R., T.J. Brennan, and A.W. Lo. 2014. The origin of risk aversion. PNAS 111:17777-17782. doi:10.1073/pnas.1406755111 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1406755111
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Gustavo Adolfo Rodríguez-Yzquierdo, Carmen Amalia Basso-de-Figuera, Marta Barrios-García, Rommel Igor León-Pacheco, Mercedes Pérez-Macias (Autor/a)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1. Proposed policy for open access journals
Authors who publish in this journal accept the following conditions:
a. Authors retain the copyright and assign to the journal the right to the first publication, with the work registered under the attribution, non-commercial and no-derivative license from Creative Commons, which allows third parties to use what has been published as long as they mention the authorship of the work and upon first publication in this journal, the work may not be used for commercial purposes and the publications may not be used to remix, transform or create another work.
b. Authors may enter into additional independent contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in this journal (e.g., including it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book) provided that they clearly indicate that the work was first published in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to publish their work on the Internet (e.g. on institutional or personal pages) before and during the review and publication process, as it may lead to productive exchanges and faster and wider dissemination of published work (see The Effect of Open Access).
How to Cite
