Fruit Quality and Plant Productivity of A Cherry Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme) Grown under Different Irrigation Regimes during the Reproductive Phase
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48048/tis.2024.7589Keywords:
Deficit irrigation, Flowering stage, Fruit size, Lycopene, Root to shoot ratio, Total soluble solid, Tomato, Water deficitAbstract
The impact of water deficit severity and the specific growth stages at which water stress is applied have been found to have significant implications for both tomato yield and fruit quality. Recent findings have highlighted the influence of water deficits during the reproductive phase on tomato fruit quality. This study aimed to assess the effects of deficit irrigation on tomato fruit quality and overall plant productivity. Cherry tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme) were grown in a greenhouse from August to November 2022. Three distinct watering regimes were implemented: Daily watering (T1), watering every 3 days (T2) and watering every 7 days (T3), starting from the flowering stage and continuing through subsequent plant development stages. The mean soil metric potentials (SMP) were −4.9, −29.7 and −52.8 kPa for T1, T2 and T3, respectively. Various traits of fruit size, fruit biomass, total soluble solids (TSS), water content, glucose content and lycopene content were measured. Additionally, the overall plant biomass and root-to-shoot ratio were evaluated. The results revealed that traits of the fruit size, such as diameter, length, volume and fresh weight, were most favorable when plants were subjected to the T2 watering regime, while higher and lower watering frequencies led to smaller fruit sizes. Interestingly, the TSS concentration had the most pronounced response to drought stress, indicating increased fruit sweetness. However, the fruit water content, glucose content and lycopene content remained unaffected by the different watering regimes. Furthermore, plants subjected to the T3 with the minimum SMP at −196.4 kPa exhibited enhanced development of the root system, prioritizing resource acquisition such as water and mineral nutrients over shoot components. In conclusion, this study provided valuable insights for agricultural practitioners, offering a range of alternatives that can inform optimal irrigation strategies that effectively enhance the quality of cherry tomato yields.
HIGHLIGHTS
- Water deficits during the reproductive phase have a notable impact on tomato fruit quality
- Three distinct watering regimes, including daily watering (T1), watering every 3 days (T2) and watering every 7 days (T3), were implemented, with mean soil metric potentials for T1, T2 and T3 recorded at −4.9, −29.7 and −52.8 kPa, respectively
- T2 watering regime resulted in the most favorable fruit size (diameter, length, volume and fresh weight), while higher and lower watering frequencies led to smaller fruit sizes
- Total soluble solid concentration showed a pronounced response to drought stress, indicating increased fruit sweetness, while glucose content and lycopene content were unaffected by different watering regimes
- The study provides valuable insights for agricultural practitioners, suggesting alternative irrigation strategies to enhance the quality of cherry tomato yields
GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT
Downloads
Metrics
References
DD Nangare, Y Singh, PS Kumar and PS Minhas. Growth, fruit yield and quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) as affected by deficit irrigation regulated on phenological basis. Agr. Water Manag. 2016; 171, 73-9.
E Koh, S Charoenprasert and AE Mitchell. Effects of industrial tomato paste processing on ascorbic acid, flavonoids and carotenoids and their stability over one-year storage. J. Sci. Food Agr. 2012; 92, 23-8.
AF Vinha, RC Alves, SVP Barreira, A Castro, ASG Costa and MBPP Oliveira. Effect of peel and seed removal on the nutritional value and antioxidant activity of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) fruits. LWT Food Sci. Tech. 2014; 55, 197-202.
MS Lenucci, D Cadinu, M Taurino, G Piro and G Dalessandro. Antioxidant composition in cherry and high-pigment tomato cultivars. J. Agr. Food Chem. 2006; 54, 2606-13.
R Murshed, F Lopez-Lauri and H Sallanon. Effect of water stress on antioxidant systems and oxidative parameters in fruits of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L, cv. Micro-tom). Physiol. Mol. Biol. Plants 2013; 19, 363-78.
RN Barbagallo, ID Silvestro and C Patanè. Yield, physicochemical traits, antioxidant pattern, polyphenol oxidase activity and total visual quality of field-grown processing tomato cv. Brigade as affected by water stress in Mediterranean climate. J. Sci. Food Agr. 2013; 93, 1449-57.
F Deeba, AK Pandey, S Ranjan, A Mishra, R Singh, YK Sharma, PA Shirke and V Pandey. Physiological and proteomic responses of cotton (Gossypium herbaceum L.) to drought stress. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2012; 53, 6-18.
S Hao, H Cao, H Wang and X Pan. The physiological responses of tomato to water stress and re-water in different growth periods. Sci. Horticulturae 2019; 249, 143-54.
JG Wallace, X Zhang, Y Beyene, K Semagn, M Olsen, BM Prasanna and ES Buckler. Genome-wide association for plant height and flowering time across 15 tropical maize populations under managed drought stress and well-watered conditions in Sub-Saharan Africa. Crop Sci. 2016; 56, 2365-78.
MM Nuruddin, CA Madramootoo and GT Dodds. Effects of water stress at different growth stages on greenhouse tomato yield and quality. Hortscience 2003; 38, 1389-93.
YG Yin, Y Kobayashi, A Sanuki, S Kondo, N Fukuda, H Ezura, S Sugaya and C Matsukura. Salinity induces carbohydrate accumulation and sugar-regulated starch biosynthetic genes in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L. cv. ‘Micro-Tom’) fruits in an ABA-and osmotic stress-independent manner. J. Exp. Bot. 2010; 61, 563-74.
W Klunklin and G Savage. Effect on quality characteristics of tomatoes grown under well-watered and drought stress conditions. Foods 2017; 6, 56.
R Sivakumar and S Srividhya. Impact of drought on flowering, yield and quality parameters in diverse genotypes of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Adv. Horticultural Sci. 2016; 30, 3-11.
TS Du and SZ Kang. Efficient water-saving irrigation theory based on the response of water and fruit quality for improving quality of economic crops. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2011; 42, 245-52.
J Chen, S Kang, T Du, R Qiu, P Guo and R Chen. Quantitative response of greenhouse tomato yield and quality to water deficit at different growth stages. Agr. Water Manag. 2013; 129, 152-62.
J Cui, G Shao, J Lu, L Keabetswe and G Hoogenboom. Yield, quality and drought sensitivity of tomato to water deficit during different growth stages. Sci. Agr. 2020; 77, e20180390.
F Favati, S Lovelli, F Galgano, V Miccolis, TD Tommaso and V Candido. Processing tomato quality as affected by irrigation scheduling. Sci. Horticulturae 2009; 122, 562-71.
C Kirda, M Cetin, Y Dasgan, S Topcu, H Kaman, B Ekici, MR Derici and AI Ozguven. Yield response of greenhouse grown tomato to partial root drying and conventional deficit irrigation. Agr. Water Manag. 2004; 69, 191-201.
C Patanè and SL Cosentino. Effects of soil water deficit on yield and quality of processing tomato under a Mediterranean climate. Agr. Water Manag. 2010; 97, 131-8.
JA Zegbe-Domínguez, MH Behboudian, A Lang and BE Clothier. Deficit irrigation and partial rootzone drying maintain fruit dry mass and enhance fruit quality in “Petopride” processing tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). Sci. Horticulturae 2003; 98, 505-10.
OO Osunkoya, TK Sheng, NA Mahmud and N Damit. Variation in wood density, wood water content, stem growth and mortality among twenty-seven tree species in a tropical rainforest on Borneo Island. Austral Ecol. 2007; 32, 191-201.
SA Jaywant, H Singh and KM Arif. Sensors and instruments for brix measurement: A review. Sensors 2022; 22, 2290.
JY Serpen. Comparison of sugar content in bottled 100 % fruit juice versus extracted juice of fresh fruit. Food Nutr. Sci. 2012; 3, 1509-13.
GL Miller. Use of dinitrosalicylic acid reagent for determination of reducing sugar. Anal. Chem. 1959; 31, 426-8.
G Anthon and DM Barrett. Standardization of a rapid spectrophotometric method for lycopene analysis. Acta Horticulturae 2007; 758, 111-28.
KD Bonifas, DT Walters, KG Cassman and JL Lindquist. Nitrogen supply affects root: Shoot ratio in corn and velvet leaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 2005; 53, 670-5.
JJ Tejada-Alvarado, JB Meléndez-Mori, NC Vilca-Valqui, JC Neri, RY Ayala-Tocto, E Huaman-Huaman, ERA Gill, M Oliva and M Goñas. Impact of wild solanaceae rootstocks on morphological and physiological response, yield, and fruit quality of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) grown under deficit irrigation conditions. Heliyon 2023; 9, e12755.
D Wang, Y Kang and S Wan. Effect of soil matric potential on tomato yield and water use under drip irrigation condition. Agr. Water Manag. 2007; 87, 180-6.
CC Shock, EBG Feibert and LD Saunders. Irrigation criteria for drip-irrigated onions. HortScience 2000; 35, 63-6.
Y Kang and S Wan. Effect of soil water potential on radish (Raphanus sativus L.) growth and water use under drip irrigation. Sci. Horticulturae 2005; 106, 275-92.
Y Kang, FX Wang, HJ Liu and BZ Yuan. Potato evapotranspiration and yield under different drip irrigation regimes. Irrigat. Sci. 2004; 23, 133-43.
J Wei, G Liu, D Liu and Y Chen. Influence of irrigation during the growth stage on yield and quality in mango (Mangifera indica L). PLos One 2017; 12, e0174498.
M Dorais, AP Papadopoulos and A Gosselin. Influence of electric conductivity management on greenhouse tomato yield and fruit quality. Agronomie 2001; 21, 367-83.
G Tapia, J Méndez and L Inostroza. Different combinations of morpho-physiological traits are responsible for tolerance to drought in wild tomatoes Solanum chilense and Solanum peruvianum. Plant Biol. 2016; 18, 406-16.
ND Diego, MC Sampedro, RJ Barrio, I Saiz-Fernández, P Moncaleán and M Lacuesta. Solute accumulation and elastic modulus changes in six radiata pine breeds exposed to drought. Tree Physiol. 2013; 33, 69-80.
N Loutfy, MA El-Tayeb, AM Hassanen, MFM Moustafa, Y Sakuma and M Inouhe. Changes in the water status and osmotic solute contents in response to drought and salicylic acid treatments in four different cultivars of wheat (Triticum aestivum). J. Plant Res. 2012; 125, 173-84.
I Sperdouli and M Moustakas. Interaction of proline, sugars, and anthocyanins during photosynthetic acclimation of Arabidopsis thaliana to drought stress. J. Plant Physiol. 2012; 169, 577-85.
D Bartels and R Sunkar. Drought and salt tolerance in plants. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2005; 24, 23-58.
JM Mirás-Avalos, R Alcobendas, JJ Alarcón, P Valsesia, M Génard and E Nicolás. Assessment of the water stress effects on peach fruit quality and size using a fruit tree model, QualiTree. Agr. Water Manag. 2013; 128, 1-12.
KK Jangid and P Dwivedi. Physiological responses of drought stress in tomato: A review. Int. J. Agr. Environ. Biotechnol. 2016; 9, 53-61.
K Kobashi, H Gemma and S Iwahori. Abscisic acid content and sugar metabolism of peaches grown under water stress. J. Am. Soc. Horticultural Sci. 2000; 125, 425-8.
NKS Rao, RM Bhatt and AT Sadashiva. Tolerance to water stress in tomato cultivars. Photosynthetica 2000; 38, 465-7.
S Lu, T Li and J Jiang. Tomato key sucrose metabolizing enzyme activities and gene expression under NaCl and PEG iso-osmotic stresses. Agr. Sci. China 2009; 8, 1046-52.
A Luo, C Zhou and J Chen. The associated with carbon conversion rate and source-sink enzyme activity in tomato fruit subjected to water stress and potassium application. Front. Plant Sci. 2021; 12, 681145.
W Zhengjing, C Zhihui, M Huanwen, Z Yanli and X Qiang. Diurnal variation of invertase activities and sugar content in tomato leaves. Acta Bot. Boreali Occidentalia Sin. 2007; 27, 705-9.
NJ Atkinson, TP Dew, C Orfila and PE Urwin. Influence of combined biotic and abiotic stress on nutritional quality parameters in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). J. Agr. Food Chem. 2011; 59, 9673-82.
V Conti, M Romi, M Guarnieri, C Cantini and G Cai. Italian tomato cultivars under drought stress show different content of bioactives in pulp and peel of fruits. Foods 2022; 11, 270.
MC Ayuso-Yuste, F González-Cebrino, M Lozano-Ruiz, AM Fernández-León and MJ Bernalte-García. Influence of ripening stage on quality parameters of five traditional tomato varieties grown under organic conditions. Horticulturae 2022; 8, 313.
RK Toor and GP Savage. Antioxidant activity in different fractions of tomatoes. Food Res. Int. 2005; 38, 487-94.
ME Balibrea, J Dell’Amico, MC Bolaŕn and F Pérez-Alfocea. Carbon partitioning and sucrose metabolism in tomato plants growing under salinity. Physiol. Plantarum 2000; 110, 503-11.
TD Sharkey, TL Vassey, PJ Vanderveer and RD Vierstra. Carbon metabolism enzymes and photosynthesis in transgenic tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) having excess phytochrome. Planta 1991; 185, 287-96.
HD Coleman, J Yan and SD Mansfield. Sucrose synthase affects carbon partitioning to increase cellulose production and altered cell wall ultrastructure. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Unit. States Am. 2009; 106, 13118-23.
R Buchi, M Bachmann and F Keller. Carbohydrate metabolism in source leaves of sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum L.), a starch-storing and stachyose-translocating labiate. J. Plant Physiol. 1998; 153, 308-15.
C Seehuber, L .Damerow and M Blanke. Regulation of source: Sink relationship, fruit set, fruit growth and fruit quality in European plum (Prunus domestica L.)-using thinning for crop load management. Plant Growth Regul. 2011; 65, 335-41.
L Taiz and E Zeiger. Plant physiology. 4th ed. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, 2006, p. 244-6.
BR Fondy and DR Geiger. Effect of Rapid changes in sink-source ratio on export and distribution of products of photosynthesis in leaves of Beta vulgaris L. and Phaseolus vulgaris L. Plant Physiol. 1980; 66, 945-9.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Walailak University
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
