Paper · 2013 · Glasnik Sumarskog fakulteta

Effect of indole-butyric acid on the rooting of ficus cuttings

Matilda Djukic; Danijela Djunisijevic-Bojovic; Mihailo Grbic; et al.

6
claims
9
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Propagation by cuttings is one of the most successful methods of vegetative propagation of floral crops. In addition to applications in interior decoration, ficuses belong to the group of plants that will potentially be used in green spaces of Belgrade due to global climate changes. In this paper, the possibility of rooting stimulated by adding different concentrations of the indolbytric acid phytohormone was investigated in the commonly cultivated species Ficus benjamina L. and Ficus elastica Roxb.. This is the most commonly used phytohormone in the propagation of ornamental plants due to its stability and stimulation of the rooting process, i.e. its favourable impact on the formation of adventitious roots, their size, number and weight. In this research, the rooting percent of cuttings was 100 % in F. benjamina and 77.66 % in F. elastica. It was found that the highest dose (2 %) of the phytohormone significantly increased all indicators of rooting success in F. benjamina and that the application of weaker concentrations also showed good success. The rooting of F. elastica cuttings was not successful without phytohormones, and the best results were achieved at the phytohormone concentration of 2 %, which increased the dry weight of the roots of this ficus about 4 times. It would be useful to examine higher concentrations of this phytohormone and also some combinations with other rooting stimulators, to be able to make sound recommendations on the optimal dose for the mass production of these ficuses.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 6

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

F. benjamina cuttings rooted at 100%.

Taxon
F. benjaminaFicus benjaminae0
Outcome
rooting percent of cuttingse0
Value
100 %e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ficus benjamina
Ficus benjamina · TaxonKENPEI · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the rooting percent of cuttings was 100 % in F. benjamina”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 767–824 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

F. elastica cuttings rooted at 77.66%.

Taxon
F. elasticaFicus elasticae0
Outcome
rooting percent of cuttingse1
Value
77.66 %e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ficus elastica
Ficus elastica · TaxonVuThiAnh · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“77.66 % in F. elastica”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 829–851 · show in text ↑
e1

“the rooting percent of cuttings was 100 % in F. benjamina”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 767–824 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

A 2% phytohormone dose significantly increased all rooting indicators in F. benjamina.

Taxon
F. benjaminaFicus benjaminae0
Treatment
highest dose (2 %) of the phytohormonee0
Outcome
all indicators of rooting successe0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ficus benjamina
Ficus benjamina · TaxonKENPEI · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the highest dose (2 %) of the phytohormone significantly increased all indicators of rooting success in F. benjamina”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 871–987 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Weaker phytohormone concentrations also showed good rooting success in F. benjamina.

Taxon
F. benjaminaFicus benjaminae1
Treatment
weaker concentrationse0
Outcome
good successe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ficus benjamina
Ficus benjamina · TaxonKENPEI · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the application of weaker concentrations also showed good success”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 997–1062 · show in text ↑
e1

“the rooting percent of cuttings was 100 % in F. benjamina”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 767–824 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

F. elastica cuttings did not root successfully without phytohormones.

Taxon
F. elasticaFicus elasticae0
Treatment
without phytohormonese0
Outcome
rooting of F. elastica cuttings was not successfule0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ficus elastica
Ficus elastica · TaxonVuThiAnh · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The rooting of F. elastica cuttings was not successful without phytohormones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1064–1140 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 2% phytohormone, F. elastica root dry weight increased about fourfold.

Taxon
F. elasticaFicus elasticae1
Treatment
phytohormone concentration of 2 %e0
Outcome
dry weight of the rootse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
about 4 timese0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ficus elastica
Ficus elastica · TaxonVuThiAnh · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the best results were achieved at the phytohormone concentration of 2 %, which increased the dry weight of the roots of this ficus about 4 times”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1146–1290 · show in text ↑
e1

“77.66 % in F. elastica”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 829–851 · show in text ↑

class · growth · Ficus elastica (rubber plant)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
See all 2 papers →

class · growth · Ficus benjamina (weeping fig)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.