Growth, fruit yield and quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) as affected by deficit irrigation regulated on phenological basis

D.D. Nangare, Yogeshwar Singh, P. Suresh Kumar and P.S. Minhas

Agricultural Water Management, 2016, vol. 171, issue C, 73-79

Abstract: A field experiment was conducted for two years (2013–15) to evaluate the response of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) to deficit irrigation (DI) with drippers. The options tried were either the regulated DI on the basis of climatological approach i.e. irrigation water equalling 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0 times the evapotranspiration (ET) or DI (0.6xET) at phenological stages (vegetative, flowering, fruiting, vegetative-cum-flowering, vegetative-cum-fruiting and flowering-cum-fruiting stages) and disrupting irrigation (15 days) at either of vegetative, flowering and fruiting stage. Compared with the full irrigation (FI; 78.0Mgha−1) the regulated deficit irrigation though did not affect the marketable fruit yield (MFY) at RDI0.8, there was loss of about one-fourth MFY with RDI0.6. Nevertheless the water productivity (19.2kgm−3) was the maximum under RDI0.8. When the deficit irrigation was applied at different growth stages, MFY was rather improved by 4% with DI0.6(VS) while DI0.6(FL) showed little effect and a decline of 7% was monitored with DI0.6(FT). The DI applied at either of two stages (DI0.6(VS+FL); DI0.6(FL+FT); DI0.6(VS+FT)) resulted in 14–18% decline in MFY. The crop was able to tolerate interruptions of irrigation for 15 days at the above phenological stages i.e. simulating canal closures and the decline in yield was only 3–7%, the highest being at fruiting stages (IIFT). The major advantage of DI was improvement in quality in terms of total soluble solid, ascorbic acid, acidity and colour index (lycopene) though the fruit size was affected. It was concluded that benefits of deficit irrigation in terms of improved quality and water productivity while sustaining fruit yield could be achieved with regulated DI at 0.8xET and DI at 0.6xET during vegetative stage followed by flowering.

Keywords: Deficit irrigation; Tomato; Drip irrigation; Phenological stages; Irrigation withholding; Water productivity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (19)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377416301007
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:171:y:2016:i:c:p:73-79

DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2016.03.016

Access Statistics for this article

Agricultural Water Management is currently edited by B.E. Clothier, W. Dierickx, J. Oster and D. Wichelns

More articles in Agricultural Water Management from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().