| |
|
|
|
Registro Completo |
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste. |
|
Data corrente: |
17/11/2022 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
17/11/2022 |
|
Tipo da produção científica: |
Artigo em Periódico Indexado |
|
Autoria: |
ANDRADE, B. G. N.; SOUZA, M. M. DE; AMAT, S.; REGITANO, L. C. de A.; OLIVEIRA, P. S. N. DE. |
|
Afiliação: |
BRUNO G. N. ANDRADE, Computer Science Department, Munster Technological University, MTU/ADAPT, Cork, Ireland; MARCELA M. DE SOUZA; SAMAT AMAT, Department of Microbiological Sciences, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, United States; LUCIANA CORREIA DE ALMEIDA REGITANO, CPPSE; PRISCILA S. N. DE OLIVEIRA, Universidade Federal de São Carlos, São Carlos, Brazil. |
|
Título: |
Microbiome genomics for livestock production. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2022 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Frontiers in Genetics, v. 13, 1000749, sep. 2022. |
|
Páginas: |
2 p. |
|
DOI: |
https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.1000749 |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
In the Anthropocene era we are living in, the environmental impact caused by the livestock industry must be addressed while meeting the feed standards required by the global population. These goals can be achieved through the improvement of key production phenotypes (i.e., feed efficiency and methane production), and the overall health of individual animals and the herd, reducing the use of natural resources. |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Porcine. |
|
Thesaurus Nal: |
Cattle; Genomics; Livestock production; Microbiome; Poultry. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
G Melhoramento Genético |
|
URL: |
https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/doc/1148414/1/EditorialMicrobiomeGenomics.pdf
|
|
Marc: |
LEADER 01135naa a2200265 a 4500
001 2148414
005 2022-11-17
008 2022 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
024 7 $ahttps://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.1000749$2DOI
100 1 $aANDRADE, B. G. N.
245 $aMicrobiome genomics for livestock production.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2022
300 $a2 p.
520 $aIn the Anthropocene era we are living in, the environmental impact caused by the livestock industry must be addressed while meeting the feed standards required by the global population. These goals can be achieved through the improvement of key production phenotypes (i.e., feed efficiency and methane production), and the overall health of individual animals and the herd, reducing the use of natural resources.
650 $aCattle
650 $aGenomics
650 $aLivestock production
650 $aMicrobiome
650 $aPoultry
653 $aPorcine
700 1 $aSOUZA, M. M. DE
700 1 $aAMAT, S.
700 1 $aREGITANO, L. C. de A.
700 1 $aOLIVEIRA, P. S. N. DE
773 $tFrontiers in Genetics$gv. 13, 1000749, sep. 2022.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste (CPPSE) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
URL |
Voltar
|
|
|
Registro Completo
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Arroz e Feijão. |
|
Data corrente: |
02/12/2021 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
03/12/2021 |
|
Tipo da produção científica: |
Artigo em Periódico Indexado |
|
Circulação/Nível: |
B - 1 |
|
Autoria: |
SILVA, J. G. da; NASCENTE, A. S.; SARMENTO, P. H. L. |
|
Afiliação: |
JOSE GERALDO DA SILVA, CNPAF; ADRIANO STEPHAN NASCENTE, CNPAF; PEDRO HENRIQUE LOPES SARMENTO, CNPAF. |
|
Título: |
Herbicides doses in the defoliation of common bean to anticipate mechanized harvesting. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2021 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Advances in Weed Science, v. 39, 2021. |
|
ISSN: |
2675-9462 |
|
DOI: |
https://doi.org/10.51694/AdvWeedSci/2021;39:00009 |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Background: The use of desiccant herbicides can allow the anticipation of common bean harvesting by providing a reduction in the humidity of plants and grains. Objective: Determine the effect of doses of desiccant herbicides on the moisture content of the plants (stems, leaves and grains), in the 100 grains mass, grain yield and physiological quality of the seeds of two contrasting common bean cultivars. Methods: The experimental design for each cultivar (BRS FC 104, super early cycle, 60 days from sowing to harvesting and BRS Estilo, normal cycle, 90 days from sowing to harvesting) as in randomized blocks in the factorial scheme 4 x 3 x 4, with four replications. Treatments consisted of four herbicides (ammonium glufosinate (200 g L-1 of active ingredient, ai), glyphosate (480 g L -1 of acid equivalent), diquat (200 g L -1 of ai) and paraquat (200 g L-1 of ai), with three doses (200 g L-1, 400 g L-1 and 600 g L-1 of ai per ha for ammonium glufosinate, diquat and paraquat, and 480 g L -1, 960 g L-1 and 1,440 g L-1 of ae per ha for glyphosate) with evaluations of the variables at 0, 3, 5 and 7 days after application of the herbicide. Results: All desiccants used provided faster drying of the botanical structures allowing faster harvesting in relation to control plants. The dosage of 200 g L-1 of the ai ha¹ in the cultivar BRS FC 104 and 1,440 g L-1 of ae per ha for glyphosate and 600 g L -1 of ai per ha for the others dessicants in the cultivar BRS Estilo were those that provided best plant drying. The use of desiccants in plants of common bean did not affect crop grain yield. The dosage of 600 g L -1 of ai per ha of the ammonium glufosinate desiccant provided a reduction in vigor and normal seedlings and an increase in abnormal seedlings in the cultivar BRS FC 104. Conclusion: All desiccant herbicides used allowed anticipation of common bean harvesting. MenosBackground: The use of desiccant herbicides can allow the anticipation of common bean harvesting by providing a reduction in the humidity of plants and grains. Objective: Determine the effect of doses of desiccant herbicides on the moisture content of the plants (stems, leaves and grains), in the 100 grains mass, grain yield and physiological quality of the seeds of two contrasting common bean cultivars. Methods: The experimental design for each cultivar (BRS FC 104, super early cycle, 60 days from sowing to harvesting and BRS Estilo, normal cycle, 90 days from sowing to harvesting) as in randomized blocks in the factorial scheme 4 x 3 x 4, with four replications. Treatments consisted of four herbicides (ammonium glufosinate (200 g L-1 of active ingredient, ai), glyphosate (480 g L -1 of acid equivalent), diquat (200 g L -1 of ai) and paraquat (200 g L-1 of ai), with three doses (200 g L-1, 400 g L-1 and 600 g L-1 of ai per ha for ammonium glufosinate, diquat and paraquat, and 480 g L -1, 960 g L-1 and 1,440 g L-1 of ae per ha for glyphosate) with evaluations of the variables at 0, 3, 5 and 7 days after application of the herbicide. Results: All desiccants used provided faster drying of the botanical structures allowing faster harvesting in relation to control plants. The dosage of 200 g L-1 of the ai ha¹ in the cultivar BRS FC 104 and 1,440 g L-1 of ae per ha for glyphosate and 600 g L -1 of ai per ha for the others dessicants in the cultivar BRS Estilo were those that prov... Mostrar Tudo |
|
Thesagro: |
Amônia; Colheita Mecânica; Dessecante; Feijão; Herbicida; Paraquat; Phaseolus Vulgaris. |
|
Thesaurus NAL: |
Beans; Desiccants; Diquat; Glufosinate; Glyphosate; Herbicides; Mechanical harvesting. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
F Plantas e Produtos de Origem Vegetal |
|
URL: |
https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/item/228378/1/aws-2021.pdf
|
|
Marc: |
LEADER 02812naa a2200337 a 4500
001 2136975
005 2021-12-03
008 2021 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
022 $a2675-9462
024 7 $ahttps://doi.org/10.51694/AdvWeedSci/2021;39:00009$2DOI
100 1 $aSILVA, J. G. da
245 $aHerbicides doses in the defoliation of common bean to anticipate mechanized harvesting.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2021
520 $aBackground: The use of desiccant herbicides can allow the anticipation of common bean harvesting by providing a reduction in the humidity of plants and grains. Objective: Determine the effect of doses of desiccant herbicides on the moisture content of the plants (stems, leaves and grains), in the 100 grains mass, grain yield and physiological quality of the seeds of two contrasting common bean cultivars. Methods: The experimental design for each cultivar (BRS FC 104, super early cycle, 60 days from sowing to harvesting and BRS Estilo, normal cycle, 90 days from sowing to harvesting) as in randomized blocks in the factorial scheme 4 x 3 x 4, with four replications. Treatments consisted of four herbicides (ammonium glufosinate (200 g L-1 of active ingredient, ai), glyphosate (480 g L -1 of acid equivalent), diquat (200 g L -1 of ai) and paraquat (200 g L-1 of ai), with three doses (200 g L-1, 400 g L-1 and 600 g L-1 of ai per ha for ammonium glufosinate, diquat and paraquat, and 480 g L -1, 960 g L-1 and 1,440 g L-1 of ae per ha for glyphosate) with evaluations of the variables at 0, 3, 5 and 7 days after application of the herbicide. Results: All desiccants used provided faster drying of the botanical structures allowing faster harvesting in relation to control plants. The dosage of 200 g L-1 of the ai ha¹ in the cultivar BRS FC 104 and 1,440 g L-1 of ae per ha for glyphosate and 600 g L -1 of ai per ha for the others dessicants in the cultivar BRS Estilo were those that provided best plant drying. The use of desiccants in plants of common bean did not affect crop grain yield. The dosage of 600 g L -1 of ai per ha of the ammonium glufosinate desiccant provided a reduction in vigor and normal seedlings and an increase in abnormal seedlings in the cultivar BRS FC 104. Conclusion: All desiccant herbicides used allowed anticipation of common bean harvesting.
650 $aBeans
650 $aDesiccants
650 $aDiquat
650 $aGlufosinate
650 $aGlyphosate
650 $aHerbicides
650 $aMechanical harvesting
650 $aAmônia
650 $aColheita Mecânica
650 $aDessecante
650 $aFeijão
650 $aHerbicida
650 $aParaquat
650 $aPhaseolus Vulgaris
700 1 $aNASCENTE, A. S.
700 1 $aSARMENTO, P. H. L.
773 $tAdvances in Weed Science$gv. 39, 2021.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Arroz e Feijão (CNPAF) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
Fechar
|
| Nenhum registro encontrado para a expressão de busca informada. |
|
|
