2004
DOI: 10.1023/b:agfo.0000049435.22512.2d
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Growth and yield of coffee plants in agroforestry and monoculture systems in Minas Gerais, Brazil

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
44
1
20

Year Published

2007
2007
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 101 publications
(75 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
10
44
1
20
Order By: Relevance
“…The presence of branches with higher leaf area during the cold and dry season at higher shade levels is a consequence of the greater leaf retention in these trees, as reported by Campanha et al (2004). This can be due to the lower rate of soil moisture loss during the dry season as a consequence of the shading.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 52%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The presence of branches with higher leaf area during the cold and dry season at higher shade levels is a consequence of the greater leaf retention in these trees, as reported by Campanha et al (2004). This can be due to the lower rate of soil moisture loss during the dry season as a consequence of the shading.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 52%
“…One of the reasons for this choice is the growth and yield reduction observed in shaded coffee trees compared with coffee trees under full sun (Campanha et al, 2004;Morais et al, 2006). In particular, under conditions of restricted water and nutrient availability the negative effect of low radiation on production becomes more evident (Da Matta, 2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This should be translated into obvious advantages to the production of coffee plantations in dry and hot environments (DaMatta, 2004a;DaMatta and Ramalho, 2006), provided that shading is not excessive. Nevertheless, it should be emphasized that under optimal or near-optimal edaphoclimatic conditions for coffee cultivation, such as those of the highlands (600-900 m above sea level) of southeastern Brazil, shading provides little, if any, benefit to the crop; in most cases it is even detrimental (Camargo, 1990;Campanha et al, 2004;Morais et al, 2006). Further comments on benefits and risks of using shade trees and criteria for selecting adequate species for agroforestry coffee systems are beyond the scope of this paper, so the reader is referred to comprehensive reviews by Beer (1987) and Beer et al (1998).…”
Section: Shading and Agroforestry Sys-temsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A espécie Coffea arabica L. é originária das florestas da Etiópia, onde pode ser encontrada sob a proteção das árvores. Entretanto, as cultivares mais difundidas atualmente foram melhoradas geneticamente para apresentar alta produção em condições de pleno sol, o que pode ter causado a perda da capacidade de adaptar-se a diferentes ambientes (CAMPANHA et al, 2004). Contudo, VOLTAN et al (1992) e MORAIS et al (2004, trabalhando com cultivares melhoradas para pleno sol, observaram que Coffea arabica L. apresenta uma elevada plasticidade fenotípica, podendo se adaptar a várias condições de disponibilidade de radiação, o que permite o seu cultivo em sistemas agroflorestais com resultados satisfatórios.…”
unclassified
“…Porém, alguns autores apontam que cafeeiros sob sombra apresentam maiores taxas fotossintéticas, maior crescimento, maior resistência à seca e produções mais constantes ao longo dos anos, uma vez que a redução da radiação pelas árvores e a manutenção do microclima ao longo do ano pode evitar danos por fotoinibição e fotooxidação, reduzindo o efeito da bianualidade sobre a produção (BEER et al, 1997;FAHL et al, 1989;FREITAS et al, 2003;CAMPANHA et al, 2004).…”
unclassified