Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In Brazil, the tamarind tree has been widespread and cultivated for centuries, primarily in the states of the Northeast region. Highly valued for its beauty and ability to provide shade, it is frequently used for ornamental purposes, landscaping, and urban greening, despite its slow growth rate. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of various organic substrates on the emergence and growth of tamarind seedlings. The experiment utilized tamarind seeds extracted from physiologically mature fruits harvested from trees in the Institute’s orchard; the seeds were depulped and left to air-dry in the shade. Once dried, the seeds were sownone per container in 280 mL tubes using the specified substrates. The study followed a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with five treatments, each consisting of four replicates of 100 seeds. The treatments compared various mineral-based substrates against a commercial substrate (Bioplant) and included combinations of sand, soil, perlite, vermiculite, and the commercial product. Thirty days after the emergence of the first seedling, the following variables were assessed: seedling emergence, emergence speed index, and mean emergence time. Ninety days after the emergence of the first seedling, the following parameters were evaluated: seedling height, number of leaves, root collar diameter, root length, fresh and dry mass of leaves, fresh and dry mass of roots, and fresh and dry mass of the stem. Overall, the commercial substrate "Carolina Soil" yielded the best results across the analyzed variables, demonstrating the highest germination rate, the fastest emergence, and the shortest mean emergence time indicating that its composition is highly beneficial for tamarind seed germination and seedling emergence. In the assessment of seedling growth, the pine bark substrate yielded the best results; however, regarding fresh and dry mass, different substrates proved superior for each respective variable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thomas et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: