EFFE T ()F ITRO(;EN ANI) U()R()N ()N THE GROWTH ANI> YIELI> OF TOMATO (Lycopersicon esiculentum Mill.)
MD. ENAMUL I-IAQUE
MASTER OF SCI ENe.:
IN
SOIL CIE E
()EPART~IENT OF SOIL S IEl CE
.. IIER-E-BA GLA AGRIC LTlJRAL lJ I ERSITY DHAKA -1207
DECEMBER, 2007
EFFE T OF ITROGEN A D B()R()N () THE (;ROWTH ANI) \,1 ELl) OF TOMATO tLycopersicon esculentum Mill)
By
MD. ENAMUL IIAQlJE
Reg. No. 02161A Thesis
Submitted to the Department of Soil Science Faculty of Agriculture
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE (M.S.) IN
SOIL SCIENCE
Semester: July - December. 2007 Approved By:
..
,...
.
0-1111
pi
rviso r(Dr. Gopi Nath Chandra Sutradhar) Professor
Department of Soil Science Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University,
Dhaka-1207
Supervisor
(Dr. Alok Kumar Paul) Professor
Department of Soil Science Sher-e-Bangia Agricultural
Univ
ersity,Dhaka-1207
...
Chairman A.T.M. Shamsuddoha
Associate professor Department of Soil Science Sher-e-Bangia Agricultural University,
en
SOIL CJ'E1{(!E,Sher-e-Bangia Agricultural
CPll(fPPIC)fPE
Thi~ is to certify that thesis entitled,
·"tEif'PECT oq.'1(JrrtlWflE!N
;4!ND(IJ()IRp']{ (YJ( fJ!JPE
q~ ~ 'YJtELq) or ~(Jtr submitted to the
I
further certify that such help or source of information, as has been availed of during the course of this investigation has duly been University, Dhaka in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of ~~ CYF
SCll£N(!E(!MS.) in
SOI£ SCI'EN(!Eembodies the result of a piece of bona fide research work ca rried out by
9ff./D, l£1{~V£l(~QVtE, Registration No.
02161under my supervision and guidance. No part of the thesis has been submitted for any other degree
or diploma.
Dated.~.I .•.~~ 'UV"7-
acknowledged
byhim.
Supervisor
(Dr. Alok Kumar Paul) Professor
Department of Soil Science r-e-Bangla Agricultural University.
Ilhaka-1207
Place: Dhaka, Bangladesh
ffpauses are due to tlil'.)f{miglity god, tli, oreat, tlie graclOlls, merciful ana supreme ruler
cif
tlie universe to compiete ,lie r~se(If(1iUork...aruf thesis ~U((f..Ssfu{fyfor 11i('.aegn·£,of tstaster
of
Sere"c,· inSml5c,"etw:.
J cx:prts~ tlie deepes: sense c1gratitutU, sincere apprecuuum amllieartjeft l1ufe6teaness to my reveretui' research supervisor (1)1'. jf(ok. 'Kumar lPau(, Professor, f!)q)tlrtmettt of Sort Science, .slier-t.lBangw )lgn'cu{tura{ 'University, (Dfia~ for liis schotastic guidance, innovative sugge.st,oTl, constant supenision and inspiration, ('o{ua6k adIlia a"d liefpfu{ criticism in
carryrna out tfie research"I(l(lritaruf preparation
of
this manuscript.1 deem it a proud pm ,koe to ack_nO'ufldiJe my gratifu{Tlt>.ss, 6ou"JTess oratitutk and 6est reoard's tv my respect a 6ft· co-supen isor (Professor f])r. qop '~latli ClialU{ra SUiradhar, (Department
of
Soi! Science, Sfwr-e..(Bano{a ~oricuftura{ University, (J)fial{.a,for liis la{ua6fe advice, const ructn tcriticism ana factual comments in upgratfi,'IJ llie research uorf<:.It is a great pleasure and pn'vr{eoe to e.x:press my profound gratitut!e ana sincere reganls to jfss(l{:,at e CJ>r(lfi~ssvr(.'1.9,(. Slia1nsudaolia. Cliaimul1l, (l)t'part ment
of
)0,[ SCience, Sfzer-e-fBangt4..ft8ricu{tura(Vn;rurity, (Dfrak.,a,for nis fiefp, heartiest co operatum, tjJirienlouitiance) 1'a{ua6fe advice, canstructtue criticism and jaclfit;u and support.s "LeOtd to untferrafi.! tliis
research ~wo~
SpeCUJ{ appreciation and warmest gratItude are eut1laed tv m)' esteemed teachers Professor IDr. !Jluru{ lslam, ssoaate professor ~l1a.jfsaauzzaman 'J(/iall, ssistant professor ~\fSI.
"ljrose }afian and jfssrstallt professor
9rla.
'MosfiarrajJ{ossaitl, tDt'partmellt of5m{ Sooue, Slier-e...t'Ratlofajf8ricunuro( 'Unit ersity. Vfiali,p., wlio pro,,~{eJ' creatu e Sut19tstiOIlS, guidance and constant inspiration from the 6eg,-nning to the completionof
the researcli Uot{ Their contribution, (orle and' affection wouf.dpersist inffl)' memory for C:OUIIt{eSS tfil)OS.flO' praISes are due to tliejf(miolity goa, tfie oreal) th«Oft1CldllS, m~rrif"( a luisupreme ruier
cif
tlic unr, CfStY to comptet« tfie research Uor(aruf thesis succcsifuffy jor tIi,' deoree
cif
!Master of• ctettce HISo;(Scienu.
I express tfie deepest sense of orat;tuae. sincere appreciation ami Ii~llrtfdl lfuk6tetiness to my
Tellt."'rena research .\Upt'~(isor (Dr.)1f.o( 'Kumar (Paur, (Jlr'ofe~s()f, (/)epart ment (if SOl( Screnee.
jfier-e..l8af'8fa tgricuftura( University, (Dfial{.a for fris schoiastic 8l/idallct) innovative sU98tS1wn, constant supt."'"ision ami inspiration, (arua6fe mince and' fitfpful criticism III
carrying out tlie research 'wor(ana preparation of tfris manuscnp'.
1 deem it a proud' pri1rjkoe to acl?!,oultdiJe my gratefu(ness, 6ounJre.ss oratltutie and' best 'feoaras tt' my respectable co-supervisor (Professor f[)r. 90pt.5\"atli Cfialwra Sutradhar;
(Department
of
.Soi( Science, Sfrer-t..lBano{a }fOricu(tura( 'Unit ersity, q)fUlF«z,for fiis {'(z(uafif.e adoite, const ruct ire erit iclsm anti "factuai comments in upgratfiflO tfie research (( ork~It as a o"al p(easU" and privifege to e.:(]Jressmy profound' gratit ud't.·and sincere reoards to ,1'Ss('lcUJte(Pmfessor )1.'l:!J..1. Sfiamsudifofia. Cfiairman, ttsepart ment
cif
SOl!Science, Sher-e-fBanofa)fon'cu{tura('Vnir ersity, (Dlial{.a.for liis (re{p. (U'anles! co operation, efficient gu;aance.
('a(ua6Ce advice, constructive criticism and jacifiti'es and' supports ""Oeti 1.0 umkrtalig this research '" o~
'_~CtQ( apprecwtwn and warmest nrat1twie are e:(Jtlufta to my esteemed' teachers lProftssor Dr. ~Nuru( Islam, jlssociatt professor ?tfd. )1saduzzama71 'J(/ian) jfssastant professor ~"fst.
jffrose Jalia" ana j1ssastant professor !Md. ?t10sfiarra! 'J{ossai". (Department
of
Soil Science, 5Jier.e..lHa"ofa /'gricuftura[ 'University; (Dfiak,a, (4fio pro,ridi.·,f creatu e sunefst;OIlS. guU[allct and constant inspiration from tfie fieginninn to the completioncif
tfie research 1(or~ Their contribut U>Il, {(:;r t! ana affection 14,ouid' persist in my memory for ((lU"t(CSS da)'s.Barn I expresse my cordia{ tliank.§ to Iecturers !Md.Saifu{ lslam fRliuryan, '}tfd. Issal<, Sat/tat Clit)" J'Jiury, Jliamn 'L'a~r, Department of ..~Ol( Science, Slier e-f&JIIg(a JfgrUuftura{
Vnn'ers'ty, l[)lialla, for tlie,r encouragement and act we co-operat ion c{un"9 tlie enter period
of
the. rr,srarc:li.
/ am 8rat'!_fu[ to fA-fc{!Monrnuzaman, Senior Scietttif'rc Officer, • 0'[ 'R.r.sourceIDerelopment Institute (.rfU)!), Dliaf(.g,for prcwitfi"9 me u;tli ,fie (a60ratoryjac,fitli.'s.
J expresses my urifatlioma6k tributes, sincere gratitudi.· and lirurtftu intfe6teaness from my core
of
heart to my fatlier !Md. flsfiraf»«
mother !_,a,.frs.1<f6e/ig (HeBum, C( nose. 6(esSltlB.inspiration, sacrifice, and moral. support opened tlit Bate and pat ttlto nay
of
my liiofier study.1want to sa)' tnalll<§, to aO"of my classmates and'fnelltls,jor tfieir acuve encouraqement and inspiration.
(P/;Jce:
Dliai{g
Dated: H)tli(/)ecem6er, 2007 r 1£'Enamul Haque
Abstract
A field experiment was conducted at the research farm
or
Sher-e-Bangia Agricultural Univcrsity, Dhaka. during November 200(l to March 2007 to stud) the effects of nitrogen and boron on growth and yield of tomato. I he experiment was laid out in a Randomized Complete Block Design (R "HI)) with three replication s of each treatment. The unit plot size was 3.96 rn2 (2.2 In x 1.8 01).There were 12treatment combinations in the experiment comprising 4 levels ofN (0.60. 120 and IROkg/ha designated as No. N60• 120and N180• respectively) and 3 level 01'13
to.
0.4 and 0.6 kg/ha designated as Bo. B04 and B06• rc pcctively). The indiv idual and combined effects of nitrogen ( ) and boron (13 on growth, ~ ield and nutrient content in tomato plants were studied. With increasing the levels of N. all the yield contributing characters and yield of tomato increased up to the) 20 kg N/ha. Application of N II 120 kg/ha gave the highest plant height (122.46 ern).Hower clusters per plant (9.67). flowers per cluster (10.44). fruits per cluster (5.76). fruits per plant (52.44). fruit weight per plant (1.60 kg). fruit weight per plot ( 19.14 kg) and fruit yield (48.33 t/ha). Application of B a 0.6 kg/ha also gave the highest values of all these parameters. "Ihe interaction effect ofN II 120 kg/ha and B a 0.6 kg/ha produced the highest plant height (142.2 em). flower clusters per plant (12.67).
no"
ers per cluster (11.67). fruit per cluster (6.33). fruit per plant (67.33). fruit "eight per plant (1.953 kg). fruit \v eight per plot (23.20 kg) and fruit) ield (58.59 t/ha). I he highest and B content in plants \\ a observ ed with 180 kg N/ha. Howcx er, application of N had no significant effect on B content in plant and so for the application of B on the N content in plant. Maximum content in post harvest soils was found in 180kg Nzha,CO~1flTS
CHAPTER ITEMS
ACKNOWL.:O(;EMENT
ABSTRACT
I..IST OF TABLES LIST 0." FIGtJ RES LIST
or
APPENJ)IXLIST OF APPENDIX FI(;URES
L INTRODlJCTION
REVIEW OF LITERATURE MATERIAI ...S AND METHODS RESlJL T ....AND 01 CU IONS
Effect of Nand B on growth and)' icld of tomato Plant height
Number of flower cluster per plant Number of flower per cluster Number of fruit per cluster Number of fruits per plant Fruit weight per plant Fruit weight per plot Fruit ) ield (tIha
Effects of and B on nutrient content in tomato plants and in post han est soil
Nitrogen content in plants Boron content in plants
Nitrogen content in post han est soi I SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
R.:Ff:RENCES
2.
3.
4
4.1.4.1.1.
4.1.2.
4.1.3 4.1.4.
4.1.5.
4.1.6.
4.1.7.
4.1.8.
4.2.
4.2.1.
4.2.2.
4.2.3.
5.
6.
PAGE NO.
III
v
Vl
\'11
\ II
5
24
37 37
37 38
39 41 4142
44 44 4747
48
50
56
TABLE ITEMS PAGE
NO. NO.
Morphological characteristics of experimental field Ph) ical and chemical properties
or
the experimental soil2 3
4
5
Effect uf on arow th and \ ield attributes....
-
of tomato Effect of B on growth and) icld attribute!' of tomatoInteraction effect of and B on growth and yield attributes of tomato
6 7 R
Effect of N on yield and yield attributes of tomato Effect of B on yield and yield attributes of'tomaio
Interaction effect ofN and B on) icld and yield attributes
or
tomato9 Effect of N on nutrient content in plants of tomato and N content in post han est soil
Effect of B on nutrient content in plants of tomato and content in post han est soil
Interaction effect of and B on nutrient content in plants of tomato and post harvest soil
10
I I
26 26
40 40
43
45 45
46
49
49
50
£1sq'CYF f£lqV~
Figure ITEMS Page
No. No.
I. Map show ing the experimental site under stud) 25
"')
-.
I ". outor
the experiment 30cist
(YF)f<J!CPfE:NIDIX
ITEMS
Monthly records of meteorological observation at the 1 period of experiment (November. 2006 to March. 2007)
LIST
(YF)t(/!Cpf£!Nt])IXPlqV<R!AS
I FI~~~E I
ITEMSI
PAGENO.I
Effect of nitTOgen levels on the fruit yield of tomato
u
II Effect of boron levels on the fruit yield of tomato ITI
III
Combined effect of nitrogen and boron on the fruir yield JVof tomato
Chapter I
INTRODUCTIO
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTI()N
Tomato iLycopersicon esculentum Mill.), belongs to the family Solanaceae. is one of the most popular and quality vegetables grown in Bangladesh. It is popular for its taste. nutritional status and various uses. It was originated in tropical America (Salunkc et al...(987). particularly in Peru. Ecuador. Bolivia of the Andes (Kallo, 1986). Tomato is cultivated all 0\er the country due to it adaptability to \\ ide range of soil and climate (Ahmed. )976). It rank third. next to potato and sweet potato. in terms of world vegetable production (FAO. 2(02) and tops the list of canned vegetables (Choudhury. 1979). The soil and climate conditions of 'Ainter season of Bangladesh are congenial for tomato cultivation. Among the winter vegetable crops grown in Bangladesh. tomato ranks second in respect of production to potatoes and third inrespect of area (BBS, 20(4).
In Bangladesh. tomato has great demand throughout the) car, but its production is mainly concentrated during the w inter season. Recent statistic!' show ed that tomato covered 42080 acres of land and the total production \"US approximately
131 thousand metric tons (BBS. 2006). rhus. the 3\crage ) icld is quite 10\\ as compared to that of other tomato producing countries uch as India (15.14 tlha).
Japan (52.82 t/ha), USA (65.22 t/ha), China (30.39 t/ha) and Fg) pt (34.0 t/ha) (FAO. 2002). "Ihe low yield of tomato in Bangladesh. howcv cr. i. not an
indication of the low yielding potentiality of this crop. I'his is mainly due to the use of low yielding variety and lack of improved cultural practices including
Sc..
insufficient upply of required nutrient elements. water and poor disease management (Ali et al.. 1994). Out of these. proper fertilizer management practices may improve this situation greatly. Ali and Gupta ( 197M)reported that N.
P. K and B fertilizers significantly increased the yield of tomato.
In Bangladesh. there is a great possibility of increasing tomato yield per unit area w ith the proper lISC of fertilizers. The profit from the lISC of commercial fertilizer.
has been so often demonstrated by experiment that there is no doubt about the nece sity of using the right fertilizer and economic returns re ulting from them.
Research results of scientists also indicated the positiv e response of fertilizer application in increasing ) ield of different species of tomato.
or
omato requires large quantity of readily available fertilizer nutrient (Gupta and Shukla, 1977).Indeterminate type of tomato. vegetative and rcproductiv e stage 0\crlaps and the plants need nutrients up to fruit ripening. To get one- ton fresh fruit. plants need to absorb on an average 2.5 - 3 kg N. 0.2 - 0.3 kg P and 3.0 - 3.5 kg K (Hedge, 1997).
In absence of other production constraints. nutrient uptake and ) ield are very closely related.
Nitrogen is an essential and important determinant for grow th and dcvcloprnent of crop plant (Tanaka et al., 1984). Nitrogen is a constituent part of proteins, the basis of life. the nucleic acids (RNA. DNA). chlorophy II. phospharnide and other organic compounds. Nitrogen is essential for building up protoplasm and protein.
which induce cell division and initial mcristcmatic activity when applied in optimum quantity (Singh and Kumar. 1969). Nitrogen has the largest effect on yield and quality of tomato (Xin et al.. 1997). It also promote vegetative growth,
flower and fruit set of tomato. It significantly increa c the growth and )' ield of tomato (Bose and om. 1(90). Nitrogen use efficiency depends on the soil N content and method of its application. Nitrogen is critically deficient and is the most limiting clement in soils of Bangladesh (Haque, 19M3). Deficit or nitrogen results in poor growth and stunting of plants (Makashcva, I'J83) and consequently reduction in crop)' iclds (Machler et al .. 1988; Radin et (II.. 1(88). In general.
starter dose of nitrogen fertilizer is being practiced in Bangladesh for the cultivation of tomato. And the average fruit 'Weight increased markedly "hen the nitrogen doses 'Were increased. Optimum plant density and nitrogen level in soil are the prerequisites for obtaining higher yield of tomato. Nitrogen increase the vegetative growth and delayed maturity of plants. Exccssiv e usc of this clement may produce too much of vegetative growth, thus fruit production rna) be impaired (Maini et al., 1959~ Singh et al.. 1972). Nitrogen (N) deficiency is widespread in Bangladesh.
Crops differ in their sensitivity to boron deficiency. l'omatos in general have a high boron requirement (Mengel and Kirkby, 1987). Fruit and seed set failure is a major reason for lower ) ield of rabi crops and this problem can he attributed to boron deficiency, as reported in tomato (Rahman et al., }993; Islam et al .. 1997).
Boron deficiency may cause sterility i.e less fruits per plant attributing lower ) ield (Islam and Anwar, 1994). Deficiency of B causes restriction of water absorption and carbohydrate metabolism which ultimate affects fruit and seed formation and thus reduces ) ield. In fertilizer schedule. an inclusion of B often decides the success and failure of the crops (Dwivedi et al., 1(90). It is reported that the ranges between deficiency and toxicity of B arc quite narrow ami that an
judicial usc of B fertilizer. lnformation in our country to that end meager.
practically application of B can he extremely toxic to plant at concentrations 0111) lightly
abov e the optimum rate (Gupta et al.• )985). I his emphasize the need for a
In Bangladesh. there is limited information on the effect
or
nitrogen and boron ongrow th and )0ield or tomato. III vic" of these limitations. a field experiment containing the treatments of nitrogen and boron was conducted \\ ith the.:follow ing obicciiv es:
• to tudy the growth and) ield performance or tomato b) using different doses of nitrogen and boron fertilizers.
• to stud) the interaction effect of nitrogen and boron on grow tho nutrient content in different plant parts and uptake b) tomato plants.
• to identify the suitable doses of nitrogen and huron fertilizers for better ) icld
or
tomato in Deep Red-Brown Terracce Soil of Tejgaon • cries.Cliapter II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Nitrogen (N) and boron (B) are the most important nutrient clements for maximizing the ) ield of tomato. The proper fertilizer management essentially influences it's growth and yield performance. Experimental evidences showed that there is a profound influence of nitrogen (N) and boron (B) fertilizers on this crop.
The fertilizer requirements. however. varies \\ ith the oi I and cultural conditions.
Research \\ orks done in v arious parts of the w orld including Bangladesh is not adequate and conclusive. Some of the important and informativ e work conducted at home and abroad in this aspect. have been furnished in this chapter.
2.1 EfTect of nitrogen (N) on Tomato:
Ceylan et al. (200 I) conducted a field experiment to assess the effect of ammonium nitrate and urea fertilizers at O. 12. 24. 36 kg Nlha on nitrogen uptake and accumulation in tomato plants under field
I
l'urkcyI
conditions. "J he total nitrogen. NOrN and N03-N contents of leaves and fruits were determined. On the first and second han est dates, the highest NO - and NOr amounts in tomato leaves and fruit were ohtained upon treatment \\ ith 36 kg /ha, Ammonium nitrate application increased nitrate and nitrite accumulation compared to urea application. Ihc highest) icld was recorded upon treatment with 24 kg N/ha.Raghav (200 I) conducted a field experiment evaluating two F I h) brids of tomato (Naveen and Vaishali), three plant spacings (75 em x 50 ern. 75 em x 75 em and
7'- em 100 em) anti four levels of nitrogen (0. 75. ) 50. 225 and 3()O kglha during 1995-96 and 19')6-97 at the Research Station. agina of (,.B. Pant Univ crsity of Agriculture and I echnology, Pantnagar (Uttar Pradesh, India) on sandy loam soil. Navccn F I hybrids gave significantly higher yield during both years. followed by Vaishali using closer spacing (75 cm x 50 ern). Among the various levels of nitrogen. 300 kglha was found to be best in improving the growth and yield of both cultivars.
ainju et al. (2001) stated that cover crops can influence soil properties, fruit yield.
and growth of above and belowground biomas of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum), The influence of legume. i.e. hairy vetch (Vicia villosa) and crimson clover (Trifolium incarnatum). and non-legume. i.e. rye (Sccalc ccreale). cover crops and N fertilizer application (0. 90. and 180 kg Nlha) on tomato yield, root growth, and soil N and C concentrations. were examined and compared. The) measured fresh market yield. biomass (dry weight of fruits. stems and leaves), N uptake and root growth by using the minirhizotron method. and soil inorganic N.
organic N and organic C concentrations on a Greenv ille tine sand) loam (fine- loamy. kaolinitic. thermic. Rhodic Kandiudults) in ) ')9(1 and 1997 in Fort Valle).
Georgia, USA. Hail) vetch, crimson clover and the application of 90 and 180 kg Nlha resulted in a greater increase in fruit yield. N uptake and biomass of tomatoes. compared with rye or 0 kg N/ha. The soil inorganic N at 48 days after transplanting (DAT) in 1')')6. and at 36 DAT in 1997. were greater with hail) vetch and 90 and 180 kg Nlha than with 0 kg Nlha. Rye increased tomato root growth relative to 0 kg Nlha due to higher biomass yield. and soil organic C and N
levels.
A Held study was undertaken b) Khalil et
ClI.
(2001) in Pe hawar, Pakistan in the summer of 19')5-'>6 to determine the appropriate nitrogen fertilizer lor maximum tomato (cv. Peshawar local) ,)ield and its effect on various agronomic characters of tomato. I rcatments comprised: untreated control: 150 kg ammonium nitrate/he:150 kg ammonium nitrate/he
+
100 kg Plha+
50 kg Krha; ISO kg ammonium sulfate; 150 kg ammonium sulfate/ha+
100 kg Plha+
50 kg Kzha: 150 kg urea/ha:150 kg urca/ha -t 100 kg Plha
+
50 kg Klha. Generally. ammonium sulfate fertilizer was the must efficient source of nitrogen for tomato production. followed b) urea and ammonium nitrate. The ammonium sulfate+
P + K treatment was the bt: t among all treatments \\ ith respect to days to flower initiation (57 days). days to first picking (94 days). weight of individual fruit (50.X g). weight of total fruit per plant (1990 g) and yield (21865 kg/ha).or
he control resulted in the significantly lowest response with respect to different agronomic characters under study.It was hypothesized by Li et al. (2003) that soil N variability, and fertilization and cropping management affect potato {Solanum tuberosum L.) gro\\lh and fertilizer N efficiencv. The fertilizer N treatments consisted of a control. side-dress at rates
'"
of 70. I05 and 140 kg ha-1• and split applications (at seeding and bloom at rates of 70+70. 105+70 and 140+70 kg ha", respectively, Soil acidity was corrected with limestone following the plow down of the sod. Years of cropping. main effect of treatment. and year and fertilizer N interaction were significant Oil total and marketable tuber yields and N uptake. which were significantly related to soil N.
and root growth. In 2-3 ) ears. the side-dress N (140 kg ha-') increased significantly tuber yields (11.4-19.8%) compared to the split N POi 70 kg ha-I).
llighcr split N had no effect on tuher ) ield and N uptake but increased re idual
81 harvc l. Unu ed fertilizer N was strongly linked (R2 O.'JX) 10 fertilizer N rates.
Ravinder et al. (20()O) found in experiments at Solan in 1996 and 1997. eight tomato hybrids (Meenakashi, Manisha, Menka, Solan Sagun, I· 1-5XI::.C-174023.
EC-174023XEC-174041. Rachna and Naveen) "ere treated with four NPK combination ( 100:75:55: 150: 112.5:82.5: 200: 150: I 10: 250: 187.5: 137.5 kg N:P20S:K20 ha"). The number of marketable fruits per plant and yield per plant were highest in Mcnka followed b) Manisha. Of the fertilizers treatments.
200:150:110 kg N:PzOs:K20 ha-I produced the highest yield.
Faria et al. (2000) reported that rates and periods of application "ere studied for application of N via drip irrigation to processing tomatoes (cv. IPA-5) growing in sandy soil in Petrolina, Brazil. during 1993-94. The N rates tested were: a total of 45. 90 or 135 kg Nzha applied up to 25. 50 or 75 days alter transplanting.
Application of N in irrigation water was more efficient than soil application. In 1993. yields were highest (73.43 t/ha) with N at 90 kg/hu applied daily for 75 days after transplanting. whereas in 1994. yields were highest (67.86 tlha) with N at 90
kg/ha applied dai I) for 50 days after transplanting. I he 10\\er ) ields obtained in 1994 were attributed to soil compaction following the earlier experiment.
Application ofN for only 25 days after transplanting generally gav c poor yields.
Gupta and Sengar (2000) conducted experiments with tomato C\. Pusa Gaurav treated with N at O. 40. 80 and 120 kglha and K at O. 30 and 60 kg/ha in a tield experiment in Madhya Pradesh. India during rabi 1992-93 and 1993-94.
application re ultcd in increases in plant height. number of fruit per plant, fruit weight and fresh ) ield. Increasing N rare produced a corre ponding increase in ) ield and) ield components, except total soluble solids
n
SS) content. K increasedvegetative growth. yield and
rss
content. Increasing K rate up to 60 kglha increased growth parameters like plant height. and also increased fruit weight and marketable yield.Felipe and Casanova (2000) investigated the effects of N (0. 90. 180 and 270 kglha). P (P20.s. O. 135, 270 and 405 kglha). and K (K20. 0, 90, ] 80 and 270 kglha) on the) ield and number of fruits of tomato were investigated in the field in Venezuela. The best treatment. with the highest) ield and number of fruits per plant. was 180 kg N. 270 kg P20-;. and 180 kg K20/ha. It was possible to decrease the application of nutrients. particularly P. 1 he increased) ield was not due to
larger fruits. hut to an increase in the number of fruits. N had a profound effect on the number of fruits.
Field studies on Pellic Vertisol in Cyprus were conducted h) Papadopolos et at.
(2000) to investigate the response of drip-irrigated tomato to COI1\ cntional soil P fertilizer application as Triple Superphosphate (TSP) and fertigation when P i applied in the form of Urea Phosphate (UP). Monoamrnonium Phosphate (MAP) or Diammonium Phosphate (DAP). The Nand P applied in oil were 300 and 94 kglha. An equivalent amount of P and an amount of 70 kg Plha in combination with 150. 300 and 450 kg Nlha were applied with irrigation water at a total amount of 200 mm of water. 'I he K applied was 450 kglha in all treatments. Irrigation was applied when the soil water potential was between 0.03 and O'()4 MPa and at full
growth of plants wa equivalent to 0.8 of pan evaporat ion from a screened US W A Class A pan. Similar treatments were tested using auhcrgines. I he results indicated that fertigation, irrespective of the combination of fertilizers. was superior to soil application. N application was more efficient when applied with the irrigation water. UP as a source of P gav e the highest) icld in hoth tomato and aubergine.
love tigations carried out by Hafidh (2000) during spring seasons of 1994 and 1995 in I ibya consisted of :! experiments regarding the earl) growth of tomato (C\. Rio Grand)., I'he first experiment considered the effect of earl) Napplication (0. 50. 100. 150 and 200 rng/Iitre) to seedlings, while the econd one inv cstigatcd plant response to N (100 mg/litre) applied after transplanting in relation to seedling age (I, 2. 3 or 4 weeks old), Results indicated that there "ere no significant effects of early N application on growth regardless of concentration.
Vegetative growth characteristics were significantly lower in plants grown with N in comparison with those grown without it. In older seedlings. stem length. and fresh and dry weight of 2-week-old plants grow n with N \\ ere signi ficantly higher than those 01'3- and 4-week-old transplants.
Singh et al. (2000) conducted an experiment in Uttar Pradesh. India, to determine the suitable rate and application of N fertilizers for obtaining optimum growth and yield of tomato C\. Pusa Hybrid-Z. N was applied at 40 kglha basal. 40 kg/ha top dressing. 80 kg/ha in 2 splits (40 kglha basal -t 40 kg/ha top dressing). 50 kg/ha in 2 splits (40 kg/ha basal + 10 kglha foliar). 60 kglha (40 kg/ha basal + 20 kgJha foliar). 70 kg/ha (40 kglha basal + 30 kg/ha foliar) and 80 kglha (40 kg/ha basal +
20 kg/ha top dressing
+
20 kg/ha foliar). at XOkg/ha applied in 3 splits produced the highest) icld and biomass. Increasing N rate resulted in increasing biomass and) ield.Duraisamy et (1/. (I (99) conducted experiments with four rates (0. 50. 75 and 100° II) ot recommended N. A. brasilense culture (applied b) dipping seedling roots in 200 gil 0 litres, or soil application of 2 kg/ha), compostcd coir pith (C P.
] _.5 t/ha) and farmyard manure (FYM. 12.5 t/ha) to rain ted tomatoes (cv Paiyur- I) in a field experiment in India. Fruit yield was higher in crops supplied with orgam fertilizers (A. brasilense,
cell
and FYM) than those supplied \\ith inorganic N. Among the organic fertilizers. CCt> resulted in the highe t fruit ) ield (14.68 t/ha), Brix and acidity were not significantly affected by organic or inorganic fertilizer treatment. 75% N + CCP resulted in the highest cost: benefit ratio (1 : 9.(2).Hossain and Mohanty (1999) conducted trials at Bhawanipatna, Orissa. India over 3 years (1995-1997) with tomato (cv. Punjab Chhuhara) plants growing in a cia) soil (pi I6.5) were supplied w ith 0 - 90 kg N ha and 0 - 60 kg Kzha, Application
or
90 kg N/ha and 40 kg Kzha resulted in the highest fruit \\ eight (58.0 g) and total ) ield (341.9 qlha).
harma et 01 (1999) conducted a field experiment inv01\ ing 4 lev cis of nitrogen (100. ]50.200 and 250 kg N/ha). 3 levels of phosphorus (60. 120 and 180 kg P.z05Iha) and 3 tomato hybrids (Naveen, MTII-16 and Rupali) and a local cultiv aT (Solan lola) at Solan, India. to study the response of tomato h) brids to "'-c and P.
AlI the hybrids gav c significantly higher total Iruit yickls than the local cultivar.
Navecn recorded the greatest total fruit yield. while remaining "ere statistically at par with M fll-16 and Rupali. Application of 200 kg N/ha resulted in ignificantly greater fruit size and mean fruit weight. compared to the other application rates, A significant improvement in plant height. fruit size and total fruit yield "as observed with the application of phosphorus from 60 to IRO kg P2()slha.
Singh and Sharma (1999) stated that during 1994-95. five tomato varieties were grown under different fertility levels (0. 150. 200 and 250 kg N/hu). Iialf of this was applied at transplanting time and the second half as two top dressings at 45 days after transplanting and after first fruit picking. Information on 6 ~ ield components was recorded. Plant height. number of leave . number of first order laterals, percentage fruit set. fruit weight and ) icld increased \\ ith increa: ing N level. Ajanta gave the best yields.
Banerjee et al. (1997) stated the effects of N fertilization (0. 75. 100 or 125 kg Nlha) and planting pattern (60 x 30 or 60 x 45 em with single side planting. or 60 x 45. 60 x 60 or 90 x 45 cm with both side planting. accommodating 36, ~4. 45. 33 and 30 plants/plot (3.6 x 1.8 rn), respectiv ely) on fruit) icld of tomato CV. Hisar Lalima (Sel- t8) were studied in Hisar, India. during rabi
1\\
inter) seasons of 1990- 91, 1991-92 and 1995-96. Total fruit ) ield/plant and q/ha were significantlyinfluenced by both N and planting treatments. Ihe highest total fruit) icldJplant (g) was recorded from treatments of 125 kg N/ha and spacing of 90 x 45 em in
t991-92 and t995-96. t25 kg N/ha and spacing of 60 x 45 cm (single side planting) in 1990-91. The lowest yields were recorded from the treatment combination of no N and a spacing 60 x 45 ern (single side planting) in all years.
1he highest total fruit yield (q/ha) was obtained from a treatment combination of 125 kg N/ha and a spacing of 60 x 45 cm (both side planting).
Four experiments were conducted by Barakart and Gahr ( 199M) during the 19lJ6 and 1997 autumn seasons in El-Bostan district of 17.g)pt on newly reclaimed sandy soil. l'he effects of inoculating with non-symbiotic Nrfixing bacteria of the genera Azotobacter. Azospirillum and Klebsiella alone (single hiofcrtilizcrs) or together (mixed biofertilizer) on tomato CV. Castle Rock seedling growth were examined.
The effects of also apply ing N fertilizer at O. 50. 100 or ISO kglfeddan on growth.
fruit yield and chemical composition of tomato plants were al 0 studied. Results revealed that tomato seedling growth was greatly improved h) inoculation with the single or mixed biofertilizer, Total fruit yield was highest in both) cars w hen plants were inoculated with a mixture of the three genera of Nrtixing bacteria and
100 kg N/feddan was applied. [I feddan=0.42 ha.]
Kishan et al. (1997) conducted field trials in 1996-97 on a clay loam soil at Port Blair. India with tomato cultivars NDT-3. NDT-44-1 ~A V'I-2 J
r,
Selection- I 0 and Phule-16 with O. (l0. 90 or 120 kg N/ha (half at transplanting and half at I month after transplanting). NDT-3. NOT -44-1 and AV f-2 J 1 took significantly fewer days to 50% flowering than Selcction-LO and Phule-Iti. Phule-16 produced fruits with greatest length, breadth and weight, which resulted in significantly higheryield (208.5 q/ha) than the other cultivars. Nitrogen application significantly increased plant height and number of branches per plant compared to the control treatment. Application of 90 or 120 kg N/ha gave significantly larger and heavier fruits, and significantly higher tomato yields. than the other rrcatrucnts. It is
suggested that cultivars Phule-16 and A V r-2 J'l given ~() kg N/ha are uitable for culti ation in Andamun and Nicobar Islands.
Pandey et al. (1997) conducted a trial at Jabalpur, India in rabi [winter] 1981, with tomato cultivars Acc-99 and Sweet-72 with 0, 40. 80 or 120 kg Nand O. 40 or 80 kg Plha. Fruit yields increased as N rate increased up to 80 kg/ha and as Prate increased. Overall. fruit yield was highest (499.5 q/ha) in Ace-99 gi\ en 80 kg N
+
80 kg Plha.Pandey et al. (1996) conducted an experiment during the rabi [w inter ] season of 1981 at Jabalpur, India with tomato cultivars Acc-99 and "weet-72 growing on a clay loam with O. 40, 80 or 120 kg N and O. 40 or SO kg P/ha. I·ruit yield increased as N rate increased up to SO kg/ha and as P rate increased up to 80 kg/ha, Then:
was no significant difference between cultivars for fruit yicld hut then: was an interaction between Nand Prates. Overall the highest yield (499.50 q/ha) was obtained from Acc-90 given 80 kg/ha each of Nand P.
hanna (1995) then studied the effects of N (30. 60. 90 or 120 kg/ha). P (30 or 60 kg PlOslha) and K (30 or 60 kg K20lha) on seed production of tomato (C\. Solan Gola), growing in Ilimachal Pradesh. Plant height. fruit number. seed yield/plant and seed yicldlha increased with increasing rates of Nand P. I he highest yields of seeds were obscrv cd with 120 kg Nlha and 60 kg P.2()<;lha. Plant height. fruit number. seed yield/plant and seed yield/ha decreased with increasing rates of K:
the highest seed yield ( 172 kg/ha) was observed at 30 kg K2()/ha.
Field experiments were conducted b) Huett (1993) with tomato cv. Flora-Dade on krasnozem soil to examine the effects of N(Ies than or equal to 420 kg/ha) and K (less than or equal to 120 kglha) on fruit yield and quality and leaf nutrient composition. I he yield and quality of fruits at all sites was not affected h) N or K
fertil izer rate. Marketable yield was 83-1 18 t/ha and fruit firmness (compression) was 0.97-1.27 mrn. These results indicate that the application of supra-optimal rates of N and K to semi-determinate fresh market tomatoes
or
cv. Flora-Dade is not detrimental to yield, composition or fruit firmness. I·or a 70 t/ha crop. 130 kg Nlha and 208 kg Klha are equivalent to the amounts removed b) fruits.Oikeh and Asiegbu (1993) conducted experiments with tour organic manure and NPK fertilizer, each at 4 rates, under field conditions for their cornparativ e effects on tomato (cv. Rossol VFN) growth and yield. Fruit yields "ere best with swine or poultry manure applied at 10 t/ha (yields of 49 and 47 t/ha, rcspcctiv ely). Yields of 42 - 47 tlha were obtained with sewage sludge or rabbit manure applied at 20 tlha.
while with NPK the best yield (35 t/ha) was obtained with
too
kg N -t- 40 kg P + 100 kg Klha.A study was carriedout hy Ahmad and Chaudhry (1990) on tomato cv. Rorna V.F.
at Maidugari, Nigeria during 1986-87. N (as urea) was applied at O.40. 80. 120.
160.200 and 240 kg/ha, in two equal doses at 2 and 5 w ecks after transplanting. K at 30 kg/ha and P at 60 kg/ha were applied to the soil before transplanting.
Flowering time was delayed with increasing rates of N. from 26 days in the control (zero N) to 45 days at 240 kg Nlha. Yield parameters. including number of fruits set. number of fruits harvested. individual fruit weight and fruit w eight/plant,
howed gradual increases reaching peaks at 200 kg Nlha. he) ond which the)' ield potential showed a downward trend. I he highest yield (47.6 t/ha) was obtained with application of 200 kg Nlha compared with onlj 9 tlha for the control.
Hegde and Srinivas (1989) carried out 2-) cars field trials at Ilcssaraghatta.
Bangalore, with the cultivar Arka Saurahh. plants receiving N at 0, 80. 160or 240 kglha were irrigated at 4 soil matric potentials (-25. -45. -65 and -85 k Pa at 15 em depth). Data were tabulated on plant height. numher of hoot /plant. fruiting clusters/plant .. DM production. root weight. number of fruits/plant, fruit weight, marketable) icld. spoilage. total) ield. fruit quality. and water u e efficiency. The highest yields generally over the 2 years (493.0 - 610.0 q/ha) were obtained with N at 160 kglha and irrigation at -65 kPa.
Grela et al. (1988) reported that nitrogen was applied at O. 8. 160or 240 kg/ha to tomato cultivars Campbell 28. Petornech and Roma VF/P-73 at a planting density of I or 2 plants/hole. Plant height. and the number of leaves. flowers and roots per plant increased with increasing N rates up to 160 kg/ha, and then decreased. The higher planting density produced taller plants and more lea \ cs but few er flow ers and roots per plant.
2.1 Effect of boron (8) on Tomato:
Smit and Combrink (2004) observed insufficient fruit set of tomatoes 0\\ing to poor pollination in 10\\ cost greenhouses is a problem in South Africa. as bumblebee pollinators may not be imported. Since sub-optimum boron (B) ICH:1s may also contribute to fruit set problems. this aspect was investigated. Four
nutrient solutions with only B at different level. (0.02: 0.16: 0.32 and 0.64 mg L-1)
were used. I caf anal) St:S indicated that the uptake of 'a. Mg. Na, Zn and B increased with higher B levels, At the 10" B level. leaves were brittle and appeared pale-green and very high flower abscission percentages were round. At 0.16 mg kg·1 B-level. fruit set, fruit development, colour. total soluble solids, firmness and shelf life seemed to he close to optimum. The highest B-lcvcl had no detrimental effect Oil any of the ) icld and quality related parameters.
Ben and Shani (20()3) stated that Boron is essential to growth at 10\\
concentrations and limits growth and) icld \\ hen in excess. The influences of B and water supply on tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) were investigated
in Iy imcters, Boron levels in irrigation water were 0.02, 0.37. and 0.74 mol m-3•
Conditions of excess boron and of water deficits were found to decrease)' ield and transpiration of tomatoes. Both irrigation water quantity and boron concentration influenced water usc of the plants in the same manner as they influenced yield.
Chude et al. (200 I ) reported that plant response to soil and appl ied boron \ aries widely among species and among genoty pes \\ ithin a species. This a ....scrtion \\ as verified by comparing the differential re sponses of Roma VF and Dandino tomato (I..)copersicon lycopersicum [Lycopersicon esculcntum[) cultiv ars to a range of boron levels in field trials at Kadawa (110 39' N. go 2' E) and Samaru (110 12', 7°
37' E) in Sudan and northern Guinea savanna. respectively, in Nigeria. Boron levels were O. 0.5, 1.0. 1.50. 2.0 and 2.5 kg/ha replicated three times in a randomized complete block design. Treatment effects were cvaluated on fruit yield and nutritional qualities of the two tomato cultivars at han est. I here was a
highly significant (P O.OI) interaction between B rate and cultivars, \.\ ith Dandino producing higher ) iclds than Rorna VF in both ) cars and location . Total
oluble olids, titratablc acidity and reducing sugar contents of the two cultiv ars differed significantly (J1 0.05). Generally, Dandino contained higher amounts of these indexes than Roma VF. This cultivar seems to be more B efficient than Roma VF even at low external B level.
Yadav et al. (200 I) conducted an experiment during 1990 and 1991 in Hisar, Haryana, India to evaluate the effect of different concentrations of zinc and boron on the vegetative growth. flowering and fruiting of tomato. I'he treatments compri ed five levels of zinc (0. 2.5. 5.0. 7.50 and 10.0 ppm) and four levels of boron (0. 0.50. 0.75 and 1.00 ppm) as soil application. as well as 0.5% zinc and 0.3% boron as foliar application. The highest values for secondary branches. leaf area. total chlorophyll content. fresh weight fruit length. fruit breadth and fruit number were obtained with the application of 7.5 ppm zinc and 1.0 ppm boron.
A greenhouse experiment involving 4 rates of B(0, 5, I() and 20 mg B/kg) and 3 rates of Zn (0. 10 and 20 mg Zn/kg) was conducted b) Gune et al. (2000) in tomato plants (cv. Laic). B toxicity symptoms occurred at B rates of 10 and 20 rng/kg. These symptoms were less in plants grown with applied Zn. Fresh and dry weights of the plants clearly decreased with applied B. Zn treatments partially depressed the inhibitory effect of B on growth. Increased rates of B increased the concentrations of B in plant tissues: higher concentrations were observed in the absence of applied Zn. Zn
+
B treatments increased the concentration of Zn in plantsA grecnhou c experiment was conducted by Singaram and Prahha (1999) on tomato hybrid Navcen (115 days duration) and non-hybrid C\. 0.3 (lOS days duration) to e\ aluatc the interaction of naturally occurring a \\ ith applied B .. , he Ca concentration in different parts of the tomato plant varied significantly among
treatments. Foliar spray (0.3%) accounted for higher content of B in the shoot.
Application of boronated superphosphate and 30 kg borax/ha resulted in higher B content in shoots similar to that of foliar application. Soil application of borax at 30 kg/ha accounted tor higher accumulation of H. 1he equivalent Ca : R ratio in the shoot was significantly and negatively correlated with the fruit) icld.
Gunes et al. (1999) carried out a greenhouse experiment involv ing 4 levels of boron (0, 5, 10and 20 mglkg) and 3 levels of zinc (0. 10and 20 rug/kg) on tomato cv. Lale. Boron toxicity symptoms occurred at 10-20 mg B/kg. These symptoms were partially alleviated in plants grown with applied Zn. Fresh and dry plant weights were strongly depressed by applied B. IIowcver, Zn treatments reduced the inhibitory effect of B on growth. Increased I~\cis of B increased the concentrations of B in plant tissues to a greater extent in the absence of applied Zn. Both Zn and B treatments increased Zn concentration of the plants.
Plese et al.(1998) observ ed in a greenhouse trials in tomato cv. Diva on a sand) red-yellow podzol and supplied with O. 1.0 or 2.0 g B/pit (containing 2 plants} as boric acid, with or without foliar applications of 0.6% eaCh at intervals of 7 days or 14 days. Application of 1.0 g B/pit with foliar application ufO.6% CaCI2 at 14- day intervals or application of 0.60/0 CaCI2 at intervals of 7 days without B resulted
in the 10\\est percentages of fruits affected b) blo scm-end rot (3.6 and 4.8%.
respectiv ely ).
Prasad et al. (1997) carried out a field experiment in rabi
I
winter] 1991-94 on an acidic red loam soil at Ranchi, India on tomato cv. Pusa Ruby plants with soil boron application (0.00. 4.54. 9.09. 13.63 or I R.I R kg borax/ha) at final field preparation or a foliar boron application (0.0. 1.0. 1.5. 2.0 or 2.5 kg borax/he) at 25 days after transplanting, Boron application significantly increa ed tomato) ield compared to the control treatment, with the highest) ields produced on plots given a foliar application of2.5 kg boraxlha (48.74. 152.61 and 227.67 q/ha in 1991-92.1992-93 and 1993-94. respectively). Foliar application of borax at 2.5 kglha also gave the highest average yield (143.06 qlha) and the highest net additional income (Rs 7324).
Oyewole and Aduayi (1992) conducted experiment with a local variety of tomato (Ife plum cv, 51(91) in pots for 5 months in soil treated \\ ith B at concentrations of O. I, 2. 4, 8 and 16 p.p.m. as 1-13B03• and Ca at O. 40. MOand 160 p.p.m. as Ca(OH)2. The relationship between OM and water-soluble B was positive while that between pl I and B was negativ e. Application of B at 2 p.p.m. increased leaf number. stem diameter. number of flowers and fruit) icld, and reduced per cent flower abortion. Boron application at rates higher than 2 p.p.m. induced leaf chlorosis followed by necrosis of nodes and roots. Fruit yield correlated positiv dy with soil H. stem diameter and floral number, Plant B was positively correlated with soil B. Calcium when applied singly at higher levcis (80 and 160 p.p.m.)
increased total chlorophyll content of thc leaf. Tomato fruit yield \\ as greatest
(166 g/plant at B : ~a treatment combination
or
2 p.p.m. B (4.48 kg/ha) and 160 p.p.lll. a ( 58.4 kg/hu a).Baevre (1990) reported from an experiment on growing the glasshouse cultivar Jet in peat with different levels of B (1.4. 2.2 or 4.6 g/m3). reduced mean fruit weight and increased the proportion of fruits weighing between 5 and 30 g. Increased B supply improved fruit shape and reduced hollowness
I
puninessI.
especial I) in fruits with a salable weight. The effect of B on seed development was most marked for small fruits. B rate had no significant effect on the relationship between seed weight/fruit and fruit weight.Carpena and Carpcna (1987) stated that tomatoes (C\. Marglobc) gro\\ n hydroponically with automatic control of solution composition and environment.
and the R supply was held constant at each of 5 levcis (from 0.02 to 3.00 p.p.m.).
Data on the effects of B supply on the contents of <) leaf macro- and micro- elements at 5 growth stages {from vegetative 10 full fruiting) are shown graphically and discussed: and data on the ratios between leaf B and the 9 other nutrients are tabulated for the same growth stages and discussed. Such data should assist in understanding the importance of B in the general metabolism of the plant and indicate more accurately than visual symptoms what lev el of B adversely affect the fruit yield.
Sarker et al. (1996) carried out an experiment at Gangachara Series of Mithapukur. Rangpur. Results indicated that the highest tuber ) ield of potato 28.72 tJha was produced by combined effect of 150 kg N
+
60 kg P+
120 kg K + 20 kg S+
20 kg Zn+
2 kg B + 15 kg Mg +5 t cowdung per hectare.I fkar et al. (1995) carried out an experiment to stud) the response of potato C\.
Desiree to the application of boron fertilizer in Pakistan using 4 lev el of boron O.
1. 1.5 and 2 kglha). I he crop also rcceiv ed a basal drc ing
or
NPK fertilizers and FYMt5
t/ha). Applicationor
1.5 kg B/ha gave the highest tuber ) ieldor
10.9 t/hacompared \\ ith the control) ield of 7.9 t/ha.
Lozek et al. (1992-93) studied in a mall plot trial on loam) brown soil in 1992- 93~ potatoes \\ ere gi\ en foliar applications
or
2 kg sodiumhumare and/or 0.5 kg Mn. 0.2 kg B or both. Without foliar fertilizer application. tuber yield was average 20.1- t/ha. Yield increased b) 4.2% with sodium humate alone. 11.7-15.7% with Mn and lor B and 17.8 - 2 .6% v.ith sodium humate -+ Mn and/or B. I uber nitrate content was 45.5 rug/kg in the control and increased to 50.5 mglkg \\ ith Mn alone and 47.2 mg \\ ith B alone: it decreased \\ ith the other treatments and was 10\\est (30.1 rug/kg) w ith sodium humate + B.Pregno and Arour ( 19(2) conducted an experiment to find out boron deficiency and toxicity in potato C\. Sebago on an oxisol
or
the Atherton Iablclands at NorthQueensland. Australia. In this field trial 5 doses of boron (0. 2. 4, 8 and 12 kg B/ha) were used. It \\as obscrv ed that total tuber ,) icld was the highest \\ hen .2 kg Blha was applied and it was followed b) 4 kg/ha. Plant height was not increased b) 10\\ rates of boron but w as reduced b) 8 and 12 kg B ha compared \\ ith no D.
Quaggio and Ramos ( 1986) studied the influence of micronutrient boron on the production 01 potato. Boron was applied at the rules 01'0. •6. l)and 12 kg/ha a boric acid. I he authors found that the effect
or
boron \\<Is more pronounced on the yield of large sized tubers than on the small ones.Palkovics and (') ori (1984) determined the effect of boron on the grow th and ) ield of potato cv. Somogy on rust) forest soil. II was obscrv cd that the
application of boron contributed to ) ield increment and to the improv ernent of tuber quality. I he critical k\ cl of B was 60 mg/kg of foliage and abov e this. B content depres cd yield.
Orner et at, (1 ~K2) stated that the boron at any concentration had little effect on plant and tuber number: but marketable tuner), ield was increased \\Jith increasing concentration of boron,
Grewal and 1 rehan (1981) studied the effect of trace clements on potato and observ ed that some cultiv er how ed a marked response to Zn and B application while others showed little response.
Awasthi and Grewal tl~77) worked with potatoes on slightly acidic soils at Shillong, India. using soil application of 25 kg ZnS04/ha or foliar application of 0.1% boron solution. I he authors observed that both Zn and B application
increased tuber yield b) 100-150 kg/ha.
Chapter III
MATERIALS AND METHO)
Chapter 3
1 TERIALS A D METIIOf)S
I he experiment "as conducted at the Research farm
or
Sher-c-Banglu Agricultural University, Sher-e-Bangia Nagar. Dhaka. during Nov ember 2006 to March 2007 to examine the effect or nitrogen (N) and boron (B) on thc growth and yield of tomato.3.1 Experimental site and soil
1 he experimental site was located at 23°77 'latitude and 90°3 I longitude (Fig.
I). 1 he soil of the experimental site belongs to I cjgaon cries under the Agro- ecological zone. Madhupur Tract (A EZ -28), w hich falls into Deep Red Brow n Terrace Soil. Soil samples were collected from the experimental plots to a depth of 0- J5 em from the surface before initiation of the experiment and anal) zed in the laboratory. I he morphological characteristics
or
the experimental field and physical and chemical properties of initial soil are shown in ~Iable 1 & ~.respectiv ely .
BA GLADES
~
«> &l 120 Kilo
'NOlA
LEGEND
Dhaka Division
Chittagong Division Rajshahi Division Khulna Division SyJhet Div.sion Barisal Division
Bengal
.. Experimental Site
Fig.l. Map show ing the experimental site under stud)
Table I. Morpholo~ical haracteristics of experimental field Morphological Feature Cha ractertstles
Location Sher-e Bangia Agri]. University Farm. Dhaka
AFZ No. and name A EZ-28. Mudhupur '1 raet
:-
General soil t) pe Deep Red Brown Terrace Soil
Soil Series Tcjgaon
Topography Fairly leveled
Depth of Inundation Above flood level
Drainage condition Well drained
Land type Highland
--.-
--
Table 2. Physical and chemical properties of the experimental soil Soil properties
A. Physical properties
I.Particle size anal) sis of soil.
% Silt
% lay 2. Soil texture
B. Chemical properties I.Soil pl-J
2. Organic carbon ('Yo) 3. Organic matter to/c,) 4. I otal N (%)
5. C : N ratio
6. Available P (ppm)
7. Exchangeable K (melt OOg soil) 8. Available (ppm)
9. Available B (ppm)
%,Sand
Value
31.50 39.14 29.16 Sill) eta) loam
5.8 0.57 0.98 0.07 8 : 1
3.5
0.21 16.75
O. 6
3.2 limate
I he experimental area has sub tropical climate characterized h) heavy rainfall during May to September and scant rainfall during rest of the) car.
r
he annual precipitation of the site is 2152 mrn and potential e apotranspiration is 1297 mm.l'he .1'eragc rnaxunum. temperature lS.. 30 34 ()".I anu average nununurn•• temperature . ") 1 ""I Io
IS _._ • Ihe uv erugc mean temperature is 25.170 • I he experimcnt w as done during the rabi season. I'cmperature during the cropping period ranged betv vcen 12.20 0 to 2l).2 0 . 1he humidity varied from 71.52 0/.) to R 1.2 5%. 'I he day length \\ as reduced to I
n.S
11.0 hours ani) and there wa: a \ cry lillie rainfall from the beginning of the experiment to han esting (appcndi I).3.3 Seeds and
,"'3riety
Ruma. a high yielding variety of tomato (Lycopersicon csculentum Mill.) developed b) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BA RI). Gazipur was used as lest crop. Seeds were collected from Bangladesh Agricultural Research
Institute (BAR I). Gazipur.
3.4 Raising of seedlings
The land elected for nurser) beds were wel! drained and were sandy loam l)pc soil. The area wa well prepared and converted into loose friable and dried mass to obtain fine tilth. All weeds and dead roots were removed and the soil \\ ..is mixed with well rotten cowdung at the rate of 5 kg/bed. 'I he size of each seed bed ,..as 3m x 1rn, raised 10 (0 12 em (approximately) above the ground lev cl maintaining
a spacing of 50 em between (he beds. Two seed beds ,..ere prepared for raising the
seedlings. I en ( 10) grams of seed w ere So\ ..n in each seed bed on 25 October.
_006. After owing, the seeds were covered with light oil. Miral 3-GN \\3
applied in each seed bed (IS precautionary measure against ant and worns.
ornplete germination
or
the seeds took place with 5 days after seed '0\\ing.NCCCSSHr) shading \\ as made b) bamboo mal (chatai) Irorn scorching sunshine or rain. No chemical fertilizer \..as used in the seed bed.
A.
Nitrogen level: 4I).NO:
ontrol 2). N60: 60 kg Iha 3 .N120: 120 kg Iia 4). N180: ] 80 kg !I ha B. Boron level: 33.5 Design and layout of experiment
The experiment was laid out in a Randomized "'omplcte Block Design (ReBD) with three replications of each fertilizer treatment combinations. fertilizer treatment consisted
or
4 lev cls of Nand 3 levcis of B on the grow th and ~ ield of tomato.1 he stud) comprised the follow ing treatments:
I). BO : ontrol 2). BO.4: 0.4 kg B/ha J). BO.6: 0.6 kg Blha
1 here \ ere 12 treatment combinations.
r
he treatment combinations were aNoBn ontrol (\\ ithout Nand B application) NoBo4j 0 kg N/ha" 0.4 kg Blha
NoBo l> 0 kg N/ha • 0.6 kg B/ha
NbOBO 60 kg N/ha I
o
kg B/haN()oBu1 60 kg N/ha +0.4 kg B/ha N6oBo 6 ()O kg N/ha+O.6 kg B/ha N12aBo 120 kg Iha+O kg B/ha
120Bo4 120 kg Iha+O.4 kg B ha
120B06 120 kg Iha+O.6 kg Blha N,goBo IXOkg
Iha"
0 kg B/haNI80B04 180 kg N/ha 0.4 kg R/ha NnsoB06 1XOkg N/ha+O.6 kg B/ha
Fertilizer treatments were randomly distributed III each block. bach block consisted of 12 plots.
Replication 1
~Jrcatmcnt 12
Total number of plot
36
Indiv idual plot. ize 2.2m x 1.8 111 (3.96 m ~2 Block tu block distance 0.75 rn
Plot to Plot di ranee O.- m Row to row distance 60 em Plant to plant distance -5 ern Eacb plot contain 12 plants
1he lay out of the experiment is shown in I·ig. 2.
3.6 ollection and processing of soil sample
Soil samples from the e pcrirncntal field were collected before land preparation to a depth of 0-15 em from the surface on the basi of composite sampling method.
l'hc collected soil \ Us air dried ground and passed through a 2-01111 sieve and stored in a clean, dried plastic container for ph) sical and chemical analysis.
3.7 Land preparation
The land was first ploughed \\ ith a tractor drawn disc plough on 25 0\ember 2006. Ploughed soil wa brought into desirable tilth condition h) four operations of ploughing and harrow ing \\ ith count') plough and ladder. Ihe stubbles of the prcv ious crops and weeds were rcrnov ed. The land operation \\ as completed on 27 Nov ember 2006. 'I he indiv idual plots were made b) making ridges (20 ern high) around each plot to restrict lateral runoff of irrigation \\ atcr.
3.8 Application of fertilizers
The P. K. Sand Zn fertilizers were applied according to Fertilizer Recommendation luidc through Triple super pho phate ('I SP). Muriate of potash (f\.1J»). J)psum and Zinc oxide. rcspcctiv ely. ( nc third (1/ ) of whole amount of Urea and full amount of MP. 1 P, G) psurn, Zinc 0 ide and Boric acid were applied at the time or final land preparation. Inc remaining Urea \vas lop dressed
in two equal installments- at 20 day after transplanting (DAT) and 50 OAT.
respectiv ely.
3.9 Transplanting of seedlings
Healthy and uniform sized () da) s old seedlings were uprooted from the seed OI.!U and were transplanted in the experimental field on 2M Nov ember. 2006 maintaining a spacing of 60 em and 55 em bctw cen the rows and plants.
respectively. I he seed bed was watered before uprooting the seedlings so as to minimize the damage of the roots. This operation was curried out during late hours in the evening. 'Ihe seedlings were watered after transplanting. Shading wa..s provided b) piece of banana leaf sheath for three days to protect the seedlings from the direct un. A strip of the same crop was established around the experimental field as border rop to do gap tilling and to check the border effect.
3.10 Gap filling and weeding
When the seedlings were established, the soil around the base of"each seedling was pulverized. A few gaps lilting \\ ere done 0) health) plants from the border
whenev er it \\US required. Weeds of different types wen: controlled manually and rernov ed from the field on t 7 December 2006. Second and third weeding \\ ere done on 31 December. 2006 and 20 January, 2007. re pectix ely,
3.11
Irrigation
Irrigation \\3S done at three times. I'he first irrigation was given in the field on 18 December 2006 at 20 days after transplanting (DJ\
n
through irrigation channel.The second irrigation \".:IS given at {he stage of' maximum vegetative growth stage (35 DA I ). on 2 January, 2007. The final irrigation was gi\ en at the: stage of fruit formation (55 DAr) )on 22 January, 2007.
3.12 Pe t management
The crop was infested \\ ith cutworm. leaf hopper and other. I he in cct were controlled successfully 0) spray ing Malathion :::'7 I iI 2ml IL water. I he insecticide was spray ed fortnightly from one week after transplanting to one w cek
before
firsthan
esting. Miral -(iNwas
also applied during final land preparation as soil amendments. During loggy weather prccaurionury measures against disease infestation specially late blight of tomato was taken 0) spray ing Dithanc M-45 fortnightlya
2 gil .3.13 Harvesting
Fruit \\ ere han estcd at 5 days interv als during maturity to ripening stage. The maturity of the crop \..as determined on the basis of red colouring of fruits.
J Ian esting \'US started lrorn 6 March. 2007 and completed 0) 29 March. 2007.
3.14 Collection of
experimentaldata
Ten (10) plants from each plot \..ere selected randomly and \..ere tugged for the data collection. I he sample plants were uprooted and dried propcrlj in the sun.
Data were collected on the follow ing parameters:
1) Plant height (em)
2) Number of flower cluster per plant 3) Number of flower per cluster
4) Number of fruit per cluster 5) Number of fruit per plant
6)Weight of fruit per plant (kg)
7) Weight of fruit per plot (kg) 8) Fruit yield (t/ha)
9) Nitrogen content in plants (0/0) 10) Boron content in plants (0/0)
II) Nitrog~n content in post harvest soil (%)
2) Organic carbon (%)
Organic carbon in soil was determined h) Walkley and Blacks (1934) wet oxidation method. The underlying principle is to oxidize the organic carbon \\ ith an excess of I N K2Crz()7 in presence of cone, J12$< 4 and to titrate the residual
K2Cr207 olution \\ ith 1 N FeS04 solution. 1 he re ult was expressed in percentage.
3.15 Methods for ~oil Analysis
I) Partlcle size analysis of soilParticle size anal) sis of the soil \\ as done h) h) dromcter method (Bouy oucos, 1927). 1 he te rtural class ,\ as determined using Marshall's I riangular o-ordinate as designated h) USDA.
3) C/N ratio
The C/N ratio ,..as calculated from the percentage
or
organic carbon and total4) Soil organic matter
Soil organi matter content was calculated 0) multiply ing the percent \ alue of organic carbon \, ith the Van Bcmmelcn factor. 1.724 as described hy Piper ( 1942).
00 organic matter %) organic carbon x t.724
6) Total nitroge
