Evaluation of Compatibility between Indigenous Durian Rootstocks in Southern Thailand and Commercial Varieties

Authors

  • Surasak Promsakul 1 Agricultural Innovation and Management Division (Plant Science), Faculty of Natural Resources, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, 90110
  • Korakot Nakkanong 1 Agricultural Innovation and Management Division (Plant Science), Faculty of Natural Resources, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, 90110, 3 Tropical Fruit and Plantation Crops, Faculty of Natural Resources, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, 90110
  • Natthakorn Woraathasin 2 Department of Technology and Industry, Faculty of Science and Technology, Prince of Songkla University, Pattani, 94000
  • Thanyakorn Rongsawat 3 Tropical Fruit and Plantation Crops, Faculty of Natural Resources, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, 90110
  • Charassri Nualsri 1 Agricultural Innovation and Management Division (Plant Science), Faculty of Natural Resources, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, 90110, 3 Tropical Fruit and Plantation Crops, Faculty of Natural Resources, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, 90110

Keywords:

Grafting, Incompatibility, Phenolic compound, Lignin content, Indigenous durian

Abstract

The major obstacle in vegetative propagation by grafting in fruit crops is incompatibility between rootstock and scion. Graft incompatibility may occur sometimes and possibly reduced growth and yield of the scion. This research aims to study the development of graft union, phenolic and lignin content at above, below the graft union and graft union as well. Growth of Monthong and Chanee grafted on to different indigenous durian rootstocks were measured to ensure grafting success. Monthong and Chanee monografts were included as controls. Results showed that at 28 days after grafting, the graft union was completed across the entire length of the union and the better well form graft union was obtained when Chanee was used as scion than Monthong. The highest successful grafting was recorded in Chanee grafted on Nok and Chanee monografted (96.67%). Phenolic compound content at graft union was higher than those above and below the graft union. The highest level of phenolic content was recorded at 21 days and gradually decrease at 45 days after grafting. In contrast, lignin was getting higher over the time after grafting and the highest content of lignin was measured above the graft union. Growth of scions after grafting, it was found that Monthong and Chanee grafted on Nok showed the highest growth represented by shoot growth, stem diameter, graft union diameter and leaf number.

References

Buchloh, G. 1960. The lignification in stock-scion junctions and its relation to compatibility. In Phenolics in plants in health and disease. (ed. J.B. Pidham) Vol.IIII, pp. 67-71. Oxford, UK/New York: Pergamon Press.

Canas, S., Assunção, M., Brazão, J., Zanol, G. and Eiras-Dias, J.E. 2014. Phenolic compounds involved in grafting incompatibility of Vitis spp: development and validation of an analytical method for their quantification. Phytochemical Analysis 26(1): 1-7.

Elstner, E.F., Obwald, W., Volpert, R. and Schempp, H. 1994. Phenolic antioxidants. Acta Horticulturae 381: 301-335.

Ermel, F.F., Kervella, J., Catesson, A.M. and. Poëssel, J.L. 1999. Localized graft incompatibility in pear/quince (Pyrus communis/Cydonia oblonga) combinations: multivariate analysis of histological data from 5-month-old grafts. Tree Physiology 19(10): 645- 654.

Errea, P. and Borruey, C. 2004. Early detection of graft compatibility in apricot/Prunus combinations. Acta Horticulturae 658: 555–558.

Errea, P., Felipe, A. and Herrero, M. 1994. Graft establishment between compatible and incompatible Prunus spp. Journal of Experimental Botany 45: 393–40.

Errea, P., Garayb, L. and Marı´nb, J.A. 2001. Early detection of graft incompatibility in apricot (Prunus armeniaca) using in vitro techniques. Physiologia Plantarum 112: 135–141.

Fan, J., Yang, R., Li, X., Zhao, W., Zhao, F. and Wang, S. 2015. The processes of graft union formation in tomato. Horticulture, Environment and Biotechnology 56(5): 569–574.

Gebhardt, K. and Goldbach, H. 1988. Establishment, graft union characteristics and growth of Prunus micrografts. Physiologia Plantarum 72(1): 153–159.

Hartmann, H. T., Kester, D.E., Jr. Davies, F.T. and Geneve, R.L. 2002. Plant propagation: principle and practices. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Incorporated.

Herrero, J., Carrasco, A.E. and Zapata, J.M. 2014. Arabidopsis thaliana peroxidases involved in lignin biosynthesis: in silico promoter analysis and hormonal regulation. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 80: 192-202.

Hudina, M., Orazem, P., Jakopic, J. and Stampa, F. 2014. The phenolic content and its involvement in the graft incompatibility process of various pear rootstocks (Pyrus communis L.). Journal of Plant Physiology 171: 76-78.

Khotcharat, N. 2016. The study on compatibility of white root disease tolerant rubber rootstocks with clone RRIM 600. Science in Plant Science Prince of Songkla University.

Lim, T.K. and Chan, L.G. 1986. Fruit rot of durian caused by Phytophthora palmivora. Pertanika 9: 269-276.

Mahunu, J.K., Adjei, P.Y. and Asante, A.K. 2012. Anatomical studies on graft formation in cashew (Anacardium occidentale L.). Agriculture and Biology Journal of North America 3: 150–153.

Marinova, D., Ribarova, F. and Atanassova, M. 2005. Total phenolics and total flavonoids in Bulgarian fruits and vegetables. Journal of the University of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy 40(3): 255-260.

Miao, L., Li, S., Bai, L., Anwar, A., Li, Y., He, C. and Yu, X. 2019. Effect of grafting methods on physiological change of graft union formation in cucumber grafted onto bottle gourd rootstock. Scientia Horticulturae 244: 246-259.

Moing, A., Carbonne, F., and Gaudillere, J.P. 1990. Growth and carbon partitioning in compatible and incompatible peach/plum grafts. Physiologia Plantarum 79(3): 540–546.

Moreira-vilar, F.C., Siqueira-Soares, R.D.C., Finger-Teixeira, A., Oliveira, D.M.D., Ferro, A.P., Rocha, G.J.D., Ferrarese, M.D.L., Santos W.D.D. and Ferrarese-Filho, O. 2014. The acetyl bromide method is faster, simpler and presents best recovery of lignin in different herbaceous tissues than klason and thioglycolic acid methods. PLoS ONE 9: e1 10000.

Mudge, K., Janick, J., Scofield, S. and Goldschmidt, E.E. 2009. A history of grafting. Horticultural Reviews 35: 437-493.

Naim, A., Hakim, L. and Indriyani, S. 2016. The survival rate of grafted-seedling of durian (Durio zibethinus Murr.) in the indigenous agroforestry orchards of Osingnese in Banyuwangi, East Java, Indonesia. International Journal of Research Studies in Agricultural Sciences 2: 13-22.

Office of Agricultural Economics. 2019. Data of production of durian in 2019. Available from: http://www.oae.go.th/assets/portals/ 1/fileups/prcaidata/files/durian.(1)62pdf [Accessed on 3 March 2019].

Olmstead, M.A., Lang, N.S., Ewers, F.W. and Owens, S.A. 2006. Xylem vessel anatomy of sweet cherries grafted onto dwarfing and nondwarfing rootstocks. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 131: 577–585.

Pereira, I.D.S., Fachinello, C.J., Antunes, C.E.L., Campos, D.A. and Pina, A. 2014. Incompatibilidade de enxertia em Prunus. Ciencia Rural 44: 1519–1526.

Pereira, I.D.S., Pina, A., Antunes, L.E.C., Campos, A.D. and Fachinello, J.C. 2018. Genotypic differences in cyanogenic glycosides levels of compatible Prunus persica P. persica and incompatible P. persica P. mume combinations. Bragantia 77(1): 1–12.

Pina, A. and Errea, P. 2005. A review of new advances in mechanism of graft compatibility–incompatibility. Scientia Horticulturae 106(1): 1–11.

Pina, A., Errea, P. and Martens, H.J. 2012. Graft union formation and cell-to-cell communication via plasmodesmata in compatible and incompatible stem unions of Prunus spp. Scientia Horticulturae 143: 144-150.

Prabpree, A., Sangsil, P., Nualsri, C. and Nakkanong, K. 2018. Expression profile of phenylalanine ammonia-lyase (PAL) and phenolic content during early stages of graft development in bud grafted Hevea brasiliensis. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology 14: 88–95.

Schoning, U. and Kollmann, R. 1997. Phloem translocation in regeneration in vitro-heterografts of different compatibility. Journal of Experimental Botany 48: 289–295.

Somsri, S. 1987. Study of scion varieties on native durian (Durio zibethinus L.) rootstock. Department of Horticulture, Kasetsart University.

Somsri, S. 2008. Thai durian and breeding: a case study of Chanthaburi 1, Chanthaburi 2, Chanthaburi 3. Bangkok: Department of Agriculture Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives.

Sunthornchainaksang, P. 2005. Anatomy and morphology of flowering plants. Bangkok: Top Publishing House.

Salesses, G. and Bonnet, A. 1992. Some physiological and genetic aspects of peach/plum graft incompatibility. Acta Horticulturae 315:177-186.

Treutter, D. and Feucht, W. 1991. Accumulation of phenolic compounds above the graft union of cherry trees. Gartenbauwissenschaft 56: 134-137.

Turnbull, C.G.N. 2010. Grafting as a research tool. Plant Developmental Biology, Methods in Molecular Biology 655: 11–26.

Wolf, T.K. and Pool, R.M. 1998. Effects of rootstock and nitrogen fertilization on the growth and yield of chardonnay grapevines in New York. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 39: 29-33.

Downloads

Published

2024-06-10

How to Cite

Promsakul, S., Nakkanong, K. ., Woraathasin, N. ., Rongsawat, T. ., & Nualsri, C. . (2024). Evaluation of Compatibility between Indigenous Durian Rootstocks in Southern Thailand and Commercial Varieties. Songklanakarin Journal of Plant Science, 11(1), 44–53. Retrieved from https://www.sjplantscience.com/index.php/ojs/article/view/74

Issue

Section

01-Plant Breeding