Wood anatomical study of Chomelia obtusa Cham. et Schlecht
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X25445Abstract
The description of general, macroscopic and microscopic aspects of the wood is realized. The anatomial structure is compared with literature references to genus Chomelia and family Rubiaceae. The most striking anatomical details observed were the almost absence of axial parenchyma, the presence of septate and nonseptate fibres in wood, and Heterogeneous rays of Kribs's I type. Extremely numerous pores, of small diameters, and placed freqeuntly in multiples of 4 or more cells, are importante characteristics of transversal section of the wood.
Downloads
References
BREMEKAMP, C.E.B. Remarks on the position, the delimitation and the subdivision of the Rubiaceae. Acta Bot. Neerl,, 15:1-33. 1966.
COPANT. COMISION PANAMERICANA DE NORMAS TECNICAS. Descricion de caracteristicas generales, macroscopicas y microscopicas de las maderas de Angiospermas e Dicotiledóneas. COPANT, 30: 1-19, 1974.
DIMITRI, M.J. Enciclopedia Argentina de Agricultura y Jardineria. Tomo 1. Buenos Aires, Ed. ACME S.A.C.I., 1980. 1161 p .
KOEK-NOORMAN, J. A contribution to the wood anatomy of South American (chiefly Suriname) Rubiaceae. I. Acta Bot. Neerl.18 (1):108-123. 1969.
KOEK-NOORMAN, J. A contribution on the wood anatomy of South American (chiefly Suriname) Rubiaceae. I. Acta Bot. Neerl , 18(2):377-396.1969.
METCALFE , C.R. & CHALK, L. Anatomy of the Dicotyledons. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1972. 1500 p.
PIO CORRÊA, M. Dicionário das Plantas Uteis do Brasil e das Exóticas Cultivadas. Rio de Janeiro, Ministério da Agricultura, Instituto Brasileiro de Desenvolvimento Florestal, 1984. 747p.
RECORD, S.J. & HESS, R.W. Timbers of the New World. New Haven, Yale University Press, 1949. 640 p.
REITZ, R.; KLEIN, R.M. & REIS, A. Projeto Madeira do Rio Grande do Sul. Sellowia , 34-35: 1-525, 1983.
SCHULTZ, A.R. Os nomes científicos e populares das plantas do Rio Grande do Sul. Porto Alegre, PUC/EMMA, 1975. 146 p.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
