Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Effect of Nutrient Solution Concentration on Growth, Yield, and Fruit Quality of Tomato Grown Hydroponically in Single-Truss Production System Cover

Effect of Nutrient Solution Concentration on Growth, Yield, and Fruit Quality of Tomato Grown Hydroponically in Single-Truss Production System

Journal of Horticultural Research
Volume 31 (2023): Issue 2 (December 2023)
By: Nawab Nasir and  Tatsuo Sato  
Open Access
|Dec 2023

Figures & Tables

Figure 1.

Daily mean temperatures of plant canopy and medium during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production tomato cycles
Daily mean temperatures of plant canopy and medium during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production tomato cycles

Figure 2.

The time course of nutrient solution concentrations expressed as EC in the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cycles
The time course of nutrient solution concentrations expressed as EC in the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cycles

Figure 3.

Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on plant height during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 10, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error
Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on plant height during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 10, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error

Figure 4.

Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on stem diameter during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 10, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error
Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on stem diameter during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 10, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error

Figure 5.

Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on the leaf number per plant during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 10, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each represent the standard error
Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on the leaf number per plant during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 10, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each represent the standard error

Figure 6.

Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on intensity of leaf color during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 10, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error
Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on intensity of leaf color during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 10, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error

Figure 7.

Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on nitrate concentration in petiole sap during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 10, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error
Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on nitrate concentration in petiole sap during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 10, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error

Figure 8.

Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on leaf area during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 4, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error
Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on leaf area during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 4, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error

Figure 9.

Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on the dry weight of whole plant (stem + leaves + flowers and fruit) during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 4, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error
Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on the dry weight of whole plant (stem + leaves + flowers and fruit) during the spring (A), summer (B), and winter (C) production cyclesThe same letters indicate nonsignificant differences as determined by multiple comparisons using the Tukey's HSD test. n = 4, p = 0.05. Vertical bars on each data point represent the standard error

Effect of nutrient solution concentration expressed as EC on yield of marketable tomato fruit and their appearance in the spring, summer, and winter production cycles

Production cycleTreatmentFine fruit (number per plant)Fine fruit (g per plant)Mean fruit weight (g)Cracked fruit (number per plant)
SpringEC 1.43.8 ± 0.06723.8 ± 4.0 a186 ± 3.7 a0.07 ± 0.01
EC 1.23.7 ± 0.07706.7 ± 11.2 a191 ± 4.7 a0.04 ± 0.01
EC 1.03.7 ± 0.07625.8 ± 20.8 b172 ± 6.51ab0.08 ± 0.02
EC 0.83.8 ± 0.08573.1 ± 20.5 b150 ± 7.3 b0.06 ± 0.01
SummerEC 1.40.5 ± 0.11 b62.8 ± 18 b118.4 ± 9.90.06 ± 0.01 b
EC 1.21.2 ± 0.11 a173.7 ± 22 a141.1 ± 7.50.13 ± 0.03 ab
EC 1.01.1 ± 0.15 a155.0 ± 15.8 a132.9 ± 8.20.19 ± 0.04 a
EC 0.80.6 ± 0.09 b68.3 ± 8.2 b115.8 ± 8.90.1 ± 0.01 ab
WinterEC 1.62.1 ± 0.04220.6 ± 0.21d104.4 ± 2.1b0.7 ± 0.09
EC 1.42.2 ± 0.08270.1 ± 0.41a119.7 ± 4.9a0.6 ± 0.09
EC 1.22.2 ± 0.04267.0 ± 0.40b121.3 ± 2.3a0.9 ± 0.09
EC 1.02.3 ± 0.04259.0 ± 0.40c113.1 ± 1.9ab0.7 ± 0.09

Effect of nutrient solution concentrations expressed as EC on soluble solid concentration and acidity of tomato fruit in the spring, summer, and winter production cycles

Production cycleTreatmentSSC (%)Acidity (%)SSC to acidity ratio
SpringEC 1.45.4 ± 0.12 a0.75 ± 0.027.4 ± 0.4
EC 1.24.8 ± 0.15b0.75 ± 0.026.5 ± 0.3
EC 1.04.7 ± 0.13b0.69 ± 0.016.8 ± 0.3
EC 0.84.7 ± 0.18b0.66 ± 0.037.4 ± 0.4
SummerEC 1.45.4 ± 0.08 a0.95 ± 0.04 a5.8 ± 0.3 b
EC 1.24.9 ± 0.15 b0.69 ± 0.02 b7.2 ± 0.2 a
EC 1.04.8 ± 0.13 b0.73 ± 0.03 b6.7 ± 0.2 ab
EC 0.84.7 ± 0.11 b0.71 ± 0.03 b6.8 ± 0.3 ab
WinterEC 1.66.1 ± 0.130.78 ± 0.049.3 ± 1.9
EC 1.45.7 ± 0.150.71 ± 0.038.1 ± 0.2
EC 1.25.9 ± 0.170.74 ± 0.048.1 ± 0.3
EC 1.06.1 ± 0.060.71 ± 0.038.9 ± 0.5

Daily uptake of macronutrients by tomato plants during the spring, summer, and winter production cycles

TreatmentN (mg per plant)P2O5 (mg per plant)K2O (mg per plant)MgO (mg per plant)CaO (mg per plant)
EC 1.426.22 ± 3.30a12.90 ± 1.69a56.05 ± 7.34a10.12 ± 1.32a27.64 ± 3.62a
EC 1.218.10 ± 2.43ab8.74 ± 1.20ab37.96 ± 5.21ab6.85 ± 0.94ab18.72 ± 2.57ab
EC 1.013.84 ± 1.68b6.73 ± 0.78b29.24 ± 3.39b5.27 ± 0.61b14.41 ± 1.67b
EC 0.89.39 ± 1.14b4.50 ± 0.54b19.58 ± 2.34b3.53 ± 0.42b9.65 ± 1.15b
EC 1.414.51 ± 2.17a6.77 ± 0.89a29.44 ± 3.87a5.31 ± 0.70a14.52 ± 1.91a
EC 1.219.06 ± 1.62a9.08 ± 0.74a39.47 ± 3.24a7.12 ± 0.58a19.46 ± 1.59a
EC 1.013.92 ± 0.94ab6.74 ± 0.54a29.28 ± 2.38a5.28 ± 0.43a14.44 ± 1.17a
EC 0.88.46 ± 0.57b4.09 ± 0.29b17.79 ± 1.27b3.21 ± 0.23b8.77 ± 0.62b
EC 1.610.10 ± 3.173.52 ± 0.8714.05 ± 3.492.98 ± 0.748.14 ± 2.02
EC 1.415.00 ± 3.265.63 ± 1.1622.47 ± 4.634.76 ± 0.9813.02 ± 2.68
EC 1.213.80 ± 3.425.31 ± 1.2221.18 ± 4.864.49 ± 1.0312.27 ± 2.81
EC 1.010.01 ± 2.483.96 ± 0.9715.80 ± 3.893.35 ± 0.829.15 ± 2.25
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/johr-2023-0034 | Journal eISSN: 2353-3978 | Journal ISSN: 2300-5009
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 141 - 158
Submitted on: Apr 1, 2023
Accepted on: Oct 1, 2023
Published on: Dec 27, 2023
Published by: National Institute of Horticultural Research
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year
Keywords:
growth,
nutrient solution concentration,
quality,
tomato,
yield
Related subjects:
Life sciences,
Biotechnology,
Plant science,
Ecology,
Life sciences, other

© 2023 Nawab Nasir, Tatsuo Sato, published by National Institute of Horticultural Research
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 31 (2023): Issue 2 (December 2023)Next article