Efficacy of INM practices on Growth and Yield of Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)

Introduction

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.), (European Commission Directive 2013/45/ EU) is one of the most common, leading, widely consumed, popular, staple, day neutral, self-pollinated, annual and economically important solanaceous fruit vegetable crops.¹ Tomato occupies a prime position in the list of protective foods since it consists of vitamins, minerals and antioxidants which are essential for human health.² In the recent decades, the consumption of tomato has been associated with prevention of several diseaseviz. low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, homocysteine, platelet aggregation, and blood pressure^3,4 mainly due to its antioxidant contents including carotenes, (lycopene as well as carotene), ascorbic acid, and phenolic compounds.⁵

The average productivity of tomato in our country is highest (30-35tonnes/ha) and this is mainly attributed to the favourable environmental condition and adoption of high yielding hybrids. However, India is yet to attain the yield potential (80-120t^-ha) due to low adoption of poor agronomic practices and incidence of insect, pests, diseases and other abiotic factors.⁶ Yield potentiality of tomato largely depends on various agronomical factors. Among these factors, plant nutrition is an important that affects growth and yield of tomato.⁷ Tomato is a heavy feeder crop becauseonce the plant has developed sufficient root system, and above-ground biomass, it starts producing flowers, which rapidly develop into the first fruitlets, and they, in turn, start a long process of development and accumulation of sugars, organic acids, vitamins, pigments and anti-oxidants that enrich this fruit with their specific health values and requires large quantities of chemical fertilizers.⁸ Since last decade, tomato production has increased due to increased use of fertilizers and use of high yielding varieties. Tomato crop consumes around 280 kg N, 55 kg P₂O₅ and 540 kg K₂O ha^-1 for producing 30 t ha^-1 of fruit yield.⁹ However, excessive use of chemical fertilizers for tomato production not only pollutes the environment, soil and underground water but also makes the soil acidic and reduces the soil fertility gradient. On the other hand, high cost of chemical fertilizers makes crop production uneconomical for small and marginal farmers.The use of integrated nutrient management practice is mainly concerned towards the protection of soil productivity and to provide essential nutrients to the cultivated plants at a most favourable level for sustaining the desired yield through optimization of the benefits from all probable sources of organic, inorganic and biological ingredients in an integrated way. Keeping these facts in view, the present investigation entitled “Efficacy of INM practices on growth and yield of Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)” was carried out.

Materials and Methods

The present research work entitled “Efficacy of INM practices on growth and yield of Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)” was carried out at Agricultural Research Farm, School of Agricultural Sciences and Engineering, IFTM University, Lodhipur Rajput, Moradabad during summer season, 2020 with the variety of NBH-333 IMP. It is a short duration variety of tomato, which matures in 70-75 days. The plant habit is semi determinate; fruit shape is square round and weights around 90-100g. NHB-333 is tolerant to tomato yellow leaf curl virus. There were total fifteen treatment combinations i.e. T₁(100%RDF), T₂(75%RDF) T₃(50%RDF), T₄(100%RDF + Vermicompost), T₅(75%RDF + Vermicompost), T₆(50%RDF + Vermicompost), T₇(100%RDF + PSB ), T₈(75%RDF + PSB), T₉(50%RDF + PSB), T₁₀(100%RDF + Vermicompost + PSB),T₁₁(75%RDF + Vermicompost + PSB),T₁₂(50%RDF + Vermicompost + PSB), T₁₃(Vermicompost), T₁₄(PSB) and T₁₅(Control), all treatments allocated in field in randomized block design manner and replicated thrice. The seedlings were raised in nursery bed with proper scientific procedure, sowing of seeds in nursery bed in the month of March. The recommended dose of fertilizers (RDF) was applied @150:60:60 (N:P:K) Kg/ha, vermicompost @25 Quintal/ha. The phosphorus solublizing bacteria (PSB) @ 2 ml/litre water was used as the seedling treatments in the experiment. The soil of experimental site was sandy loam having pH -7.3, E.C.- 0.90 ds/m, available N – 87.75 kg/ha, available P – 13.5 kg/ha, available K-198 kg/ha and 0.39 % of organic carbon.

Twenty five days old seedlings were transplanted in well prepared field according to treatment combination at the spacing of 45cm. x 60 cm. To minimize the transplanting shock, transplanting of seedling was done in the evening and light irrigation was done just after transplanting. Gap filling was done within 10 days of transplanting to maintain uniform crop stand in the field.All cultural operations i.e. irrigation, weeding, staking and plant protection measures were performed during the crop period. Growth and yield attributing parameters were recorded and analysed with F-test.

Result and Discussion

Effect of (INM) Practices on Growth Parameters of Tomato

It is evident from Table–1 that treatment T₁₀(100 % RDF + Vermicompost + PSB) has recorded significantly highest value of plant height at 30 DAT (59.17 cm) as ompared to all other treatments, but it was found to be statistically at par with treatment T₇(100 % RDF + PSB), T₁(100 % RDF and T₄(RDF+ Vermicompost), where 55.70 cm, 58.50 cm and 56.67 cm plant height, respectively were recorded.Minimum plant height (33.27cm) was recorded under control.

Table 1: Effect of INM Practices On Growth Parameters of Tomato. Click here to view Table

Plant height at 45 days after transplanting, the treatment T₁₀ being at par with treatment T₄ and T₇ recorded significantly highest value of plant height (87.60 cm, 87.13 cm, and 86.90 cm, respectively) as compared to all other treatments. The data pertaining to plant height at 60 DAT also followed the similar trend and 97.60 cm, 97.13 cm and 96.90 cm plant height were recorded under the treatment T₁₀(100 % RDF + Vermicompost + PSB), T₄(100 % RDF + Vermicompost)  and T₇(100 % RDF + PSB), respectively.The plant height for T₁ was par at 60 DAS and 90 DAS, though at par with treatments reporting highest values. It shows the slow release of nutrients from organic sources and solubilization by PSB. This could be mainly attributed to the beneficial effects of full dose of NPK, application of organic manure i.e. vermicompost and seedling treatment with PSB, which improved the physical, chemical and biological conditions of the soil as well as solubilisation of phosphorus by PSB  and thus resulted in better plant height. The similar findings were also reported by^10,11 in tomato.

Data presented in table 1 clearly revealed that no. of primary branches at 30, 45 and 60 days after transplanting significantly influenced by the different integrated nutrient management practices.  Maximum numbers of primary branches (9.63) at 30 DAT was recorded under the treatment T₁₀ (100 % RDF + Vermicompost + PSB) which was statistically at par with treatment T₇(100 % RDF + PSB), as well as T₁(100 % RDF)where 9.57 primary branches/ plant was recorded. Maximum no. of primary branches per plant at 45 DAT and 60 DAT was recorded under the treatment T₁₀ (100 % RDF + Vermicompost + PSB), where 15.53 and 20.53 branches per plant respectively were recorded. However, treatment T₁₀was statistically at par with the treatment T_4, T₇ and T₁₁. Minimum no. of primary branches per plant at i.e. 6.17, 10.37 and 13.37, respectively were recorded at 30, 45 and 60 DATunder the control.This is mainly attributed due to the beneficial effect of chemical fertilizers along with the application of vermicompost and seedling treatment with PSB. Organic fertilizers have capacity to improve water holding capacity of the soil, source of different macro and micro nutrients they improve the availability of different macro and micronutrients to the plants, which in turn improves the growth of plants as well PSB act as catalysis for phosphorus solubilisation. The results obtained are in close conformities with the findings of ¹² in INM practices of tomato.

Data pertaining to plant spread (Table-1)  at 30, 45 and 60 DAT clearly shows that plant spread statistically influenced by the various integrated nutrient management practices and show the similar trend at 30, 45 and 60 days after transplanting. Maximum plant spread i. e. 60.30 cm, 75.83 cm and 80.30 were recorded 30, 45 and 60 DAT, respectively under the treatment T₁₀ (100 % RDF + Vermicompost + PSB) followed by treatment T₁₁(75 % RDF + Vermicompost + PSB), where 59.67 cm, 73.17 cm and 78.17 cm plant spread were recorded at 30, 45 and 60 DAT, respectively. This might also be attributed to the fact that application of Vermicompost and PSB along with chemical fertilizers was beneficial in improving the growth and development of plants. Similar results were also reported by¹³ in tomato.

Effect of INM Practices on Yield Parameters of Tomato

Data illustrated in table-2 on different yield attributing parameters i.e., weight/fruits, number of fruits/plant, weight of fruits/plant and fruits yield significantly influenced by the different integrated nutrient management practices. Maximumweight/fruit (98.77g.), maximum no. of fruits/ plant (29.20), weight of fruits/plant (2.88 kg.) and maximum fruits yield (78.77 tonnes/ha ) was recorded under the treatment T₁₀(100 % RDF + Vermicompost + PSB) followed by treatment T₁₁(75 % RDF + Vermicompost + PSB), where 96.30g weight/fruit, 28.27 fruits/plant, 2.67 g. fruits/plant and 75.80 t^-ha yield was recorded. However, minimum values of yield attributing charecters were recorded under the control. It appears from the findings that supply of nutrients from organic and inorganic sources, i.e. vermicompost and chemical fertilizers with PSB improves the partitioning of photo-assimilates from source to sink (leaf to fruit) and thereby increases the fruit weight. These finding are close conformity with the findings of¹⁴ in garlic. Similar findings were also reported by ^10,12 in tomato.

Table 2: Effect of INM Practices on Growth Parameters of Tomato. Click here to view table

Acknowledgment

We cordially acknowledge the Director Professor. K.P. Singh and Additional Director Mr. K.K. Bansal, School of Agricultural Sciences and Engineering, IFTM University, Moradabad UP India 244102 for providing all necessary support to complete the thesis of M. Sc. Ag. Horticulture (Vegetable Science) degree course.

Funding Source

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

1. Tekale, G.S., Saravaiya, S.N., Jadhav, P.B., Tekale, C.D. and Patel, R.P.Integrated Nutrient Management (INM) on Nutrient Availability, Uptake and Yield of Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) cv. “Gujrat Tomato-2”. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 2017; 6(5):864-874.
2. Kallo, G. Tomato. In: Genetic improvement of vegetable crops. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press, 1993; Pp. 6.
3. Willcox, J.K., Catignani, G.L. and Lazarus, S.Tomatoes and cardiovascular health, Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 2003; 43(1):1-18
4. Sharoni, Y. and Levi, Y. Cancer prevention by dietary tomato lycopene and its molecular mechanisms. Tomatoes, Lycopene & Human Health, A.V. Rao, Ed., 2006; 111–125, Caledonian Science Press Ltd, Barcelona, Spain
5. Periago, M.J., Garcıa-Alonso, J. and Jacob, K. Bioactive compounds, folates and antioxidant properties of tomatoes (Lycopersicum esculentum) during vine ripening. International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition, 2009;60(8):694-708.
6. Pandey, S.K. and Chandra, K.K. Impact of integrated nutrient management on tomato yield under farmers field conditions. Journal of Environmental Biology, 2013; 34:1047-1051.
7. Dumas Y, Dadomo M, Di Lucca G, Grolier P. Effects of environmental factors and agricultural techniques on antioxidant content of tomatoes.Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,2003; 83(5):369-382.
8. Samaila, A., Amans, E. B., Abubakar, I. U., Babaji, B. A. Nutritional quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) as influenced by mulching, nitrogen and irrigation interval. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2011; 3: 266-70
9. Akhtar, M.E., Khan, M.Z., Rashid, M.T., Ahsan, Z. And Ahmad, S. Effect of potash application on yield and quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentumMill.). Pakistan Journal of Botany, 2010;42(3):1695-1702.
10. Prativa, K.C. and Bhattarai, B.P. Effect of Integrated Nutrient Management on the Growth, Yield and Soil Nutrient Status in Tomato. Nepal Journal of Science and Technology, 2011;12:23-28.
11. Manohar, S.V.S., Paliwal, R., Matwa, J. and Leua, H.N. Integrated nutrient management in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentumMill) cv. ROCKY. Asian Journal of Horticulture, 2013;8(2):414-417.
12. Kumar, R., Kumar, S., Meena, R.K., Kumar, P. and Rawat, R. Effect Of Integrated Nutrient Management On Growth, Yield And Quality Of Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) cv. Pusa Ruby. Plant Archives, 2017; 17(2):1197-1200.
13. Etissa, E., Dechassa, N., Alamirew, T., Alemayehu, Y. and Desalegn, L.Growth and physiological response of tomato to various irrigation regimes and integrated nutrient management practices. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 2014;9(19):1484-1494.
14. Suthar S. Impact of vermicompost and composted farmyard manure on growth and yield of garlic (Allium stivum) field crop. International Journal of Plant Production2009b;3 (1): 27-38.
15. Jat, P.K., Kumar, V. and Singh, S.P. Impact of integrated nutrient management on growth, yield and quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.).Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 2018; 7(4):453-458.