Impact of three irrigation frequencies on the behavior of tomato developed in organic substrates
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59741/agraria.v12i2.509Keywords:
compost, greenhouse, organic manureAbstract
Different studies have suggested that the use of organic fertilizers e.g., vermicompost, compost and its derivatives, as part of the substrates can provide nutrients and retain moisture while promoting the development of crops. To validate this supposition, it was tested the effects of the application of different growth media and different frequencies of watering. The evaluated treatments (T1-T9) included three mixtures of: 1) vermicompost: sand (VC:S; ratio 1:1, by volume), 2) compost: sand (C:S; ratio 1:1, by volume) and 3) vermicompost: compost: sand (VC:C:S; ratio 1:1:2, by volume)combined with three watering frequencies: 1) daily (WD), 2) every two days (WE2D) and 3) every three days (WE3D). Tomato seeds were sown in polystyrene trays with 200 cavities, padded with peat moss; seedlings were transplanted 34 days after sowing in 18 L black plastic bags. The experiment lasted 144 days after transplant. Treatments effect on the development of tomato was evaluated considering the variables: number of fruits, soluble so lids content, fruit weight and yield. A split plot randomized complete block experimental design with four replications was used. The big plot corresponded to the frequencies of watering and subplots to the mixtures. Data were statistically analyzed by analysis of variance and means were separated by the LSD0.05 test. Results demonstrated that treatment T3 [mixture VC:C: A (ratio 1:1:2, by volume) with WD, gene rated the maximum higher yields, 14.76 kg m-2. Additionally, treat ments T3, T6 and T9 showed productivity of 17.19, 24.94 y 50.91 kg m-3, respectively.
Downloads
References
Vermicomposting: A Better Option for Organic Solid Waste Management. J. Hum. Ecol. 24(1): 59-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09709274.2008.11906100
Atiyeh, R.M., N. Arancon, C.A. Edwards, J.D. Metzger. 2000. Influence of earthworm-processed pig manure on the growth and yield of greenhouse tomatoes. Bio res. Technol. 75: 175-180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(00)00064-X
Atiyeh, R.M., C.A. Edwards, S. Subler, J.D. Metzger. 2001. Pig manure vermicompost as a component of a horticultural bedding plant medium: effects on physicochemical properties and plant growth. Biores. Technol. 78: 11-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(00)00172-3
Bansal, S., K.K. Kapoor. 2000.Vermicomposting of crop residues and cattle dung with Eiseniafoetida. Biores. Technol.73: 95-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(99)00173-X
Bastida-Tapia, A. 2001. El medio de cultivo de las plantas. Sustratos para la agricultura moderna. Serie de publicaciones AGRIBOT No. 4. Universidad Autónoma Chapingo, Chapingo, México. 72 p.
Cristóbal-Alejo, J., E. Herrera-Parra, V. Reyes-Oregel, E. Ruiz-Sánchez, J.M. Tun-Suárez y T. Celis-Rodríguez. 2010. Glomusintraradices para el control de Meloido gyneincognita (kofoid&white) Chitwood en condiciones protegidas. Fitosanidad 14(1): 25 -29.
De-la-Cruz-Lázaro, E., M.E. Estrada-Botello, V. Roble do-Torres, R. Osorio-Osorio, C. Márquez-Hernández, R. Sánchez-Hernández. 2009. Producción de tomate en invernadero con composta y vermicomposta como sustrato. Universidad y Ciencia–Trópico Húmedo. 25(1): 59-67.
De-Matos-Pires, R.C., P.R. Furlani, R. Vasconcelos-Ri beiro, D. Bodine-Junior, E. Sakai, A.L. Lourenção, A. Torre-Neto. 2011. Irrigation frequency and substrate volume effects in the growth and yield of tomato plants under greenhouse conditions. Scientia Agricola (Pira cicaba, Braz.) 68(4): 400-405. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-90162011000400002
Diez, J.M. 2001. Tipos varietales. En: El cultivo del tomate. Nuez, F. (ed.). Mundi-Prensa. D.F. 796 p.
Dorais, M., A.P. Papadopoulos, A. Gosselin. 2001. Influen ce of electrical conductivity management on greenhouse tomato yield and fruit quality. Agronomie 21: 367-383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/agro:2001130
Ferreira M., M.M., G.B. Ferreira, P.C.R. Fontes. 2003. Produção do tomateiro em função de doses de nitrogê nio e da adubação orgânica em duas épocas de cultivo. Hort. Bras. 21(3): 468-473. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-05362003000300011
Flores, J., W. Ojeda-Bustamante, I. López, A. Rojano, I. Salazar. 2007. Requerimientos de riego para tomate de invernadero. TERRA Latinoamericana. 25(2):127-134.
Goykovic-Cortés, V., G. Saavedra-del-Real. 2007. Algunos efectos de la salinidad en el cultivo del tomate y prácticas agronómicas de su manejo. IDESIA (Chile). 25(3):47 – 58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-34292007000300006
Manivannan, S., M. Balamurugan, K. Parthasarathi, G. Gunasekaran, L.S. Ranganathan. 2009. Effect of vermi compost on soil fertility and crop productivity-beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). J. Environ. Biol. 30(2): 275-281.
Márquez-Quiroz, C., P. Cano-Ríos, A. Moreno-Reséndez, U. Figueroa-Viramontes, E. Sánchez-Chávez, E. de-la-Cruz-Lázaro, V. Robledo-Torres. 2014. Efecto de la fertilización orgánica sobre el rendimiento y con tenido nutricional de tomate saladette en invernade ro. Información Técnica Económica Agraria (ITEA). 110(1): 3-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12706/itea.2014.001
Martínez-Martínez, L., V.A. Velasco-Velasco, J. Ruiz Luna, J.R. Enríquez-del Valle, G.V. Campos-Ángeles, M.L. Montaño-Lugo. 2013. Efecto del nitrato de calcio y sustratos en el rendimiento del tomate. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas (Pub. Esp. 6): 1175-1184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29312/remexca.v0i6.1281
Marouelli, W.A., W.L.C. Silva, C.L. Moretti. 2004. Pro duction, quality and water use efficiency of processing tomato as affected by the final irrigation timing. Hort. Bras. 22(2): 226-231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-05362004000200013
Muñoz-Arboleda, F. 2009. Importancia del agua en la nutrición de los cultivos. Carta Trimestral. CENICA ÑA. 31(3 y 4): 16-18
Nieto-Garibay, A., B. Murillo-Amador, E. Troyo-Diéguez, J.A. Larrinaga-Mayoral, J.L. García-Hernández, 2002. El uso de compostas como alternativa ecológica para la producción sostenible de Chile (Capsicum annuum L.) en zonas áridas. Interciencia 27(8): 417-421.
Olivares-Sáenz, E. 1993. Programa de Diseños Experimentales. V. 2.4. Facultad de Agronomía–UANL. Marín, México.
Peralta, I.E., S. Knapp, D.M. Spooner. 2005. New Species of Wild Tomatoes (Solanum Section Lycopersicon: Solanaceae) from Northern Peru. Syst. Bot. 30(2): 424–434. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1600/0363644054223657
Peréz-Rivas, M. B., M. Albarracín, H. Moratinos, F. Za pata-Navas. 2012. Rendimiento y calidad de fruto en cuatro cultivares de tomate (Solanum lycopersicon L.) bajo condiciones protegidas. Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 29: 395-412
Ramesh, P., M. Singh, A.S. Rao. 2005. Organic farming: Its relevance to the Indian context. Current Science 88(4): 561-568.
Rodríguez-Dimas, N., P. Cano-Ríos, U. Figueroa-Viramontes, A. Palomo-Gil, F. Favela-Chávez, V. de P. Álvarez-Reyna, C. Márquez-Hernández, A. Moreno Reséndez. 2008. Producción de tomate en invernade ro con humos de lombriz como sustrato. Rev. Fitotec. Mex. 31: 265-272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35196/rfm.2008.3.265
Santiago, J., M. Mendoza y F. Borrego. 1998. Evaluación de tomate (Lycopersicon esculentum, Mill) en inverna dero: criterios fenológicos y fisiológicos. Agron. Mesoamericana. 9(1): 59-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15517/am.v9i1.24633
Schmidt Jr., R.H. 1989. The aridzones of Mexico: climatic extremes and conceptualization of the Sonoran Desert. J. Arid Environ. 16: 241-256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-1963(18)30940-6
Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera (SIAP). 2005. Producción de jitomate rojo orgánico. http://www.siap.gob.mx/ (8 agosto 2011).
Vásquez-Ortiz, R., J.C. Carrillo-Rodríguez, P. Ramírez Vallejo. 2010. Evaluación morfo-agronómica de una muestra de jitomate nativo del centro y sureste de México. Naturaleza y Desarrollo 8(2): 49-64.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
PLUMX Metrics
