Research Article

Tomato Yield and Quality Response to Water Application Technique and Management

Tom Gashari
Busitema University, Uganda
Semwogerere Twaibu
Busitema University, Uganda
* Corresponding author
Samuel Baker Kucel
Busitema University, Uganda
David Magumba
Busitema University, Uganda
DOI icon 10.24018/ejeng.2021.6.7.2692

Read Counter
497

Downloads
388

Citations

Share

Article Sidebar

Submitted 2021-12-05
Published 2021-12-29

Read counter = 497 times

Table of Contents

Article Main Content

Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill) is one of the most important and has the highest acreage of any vegetable crop in the world. Such quantitative analysis is based on the assessment of data from sequential collections of plant traits linked to environmental conditions, as well as yield potential under optimal growth conditions. The objective in this study was to evaluate the performance of tomato crop under furrow, basin and hosepipe irrigation techniques in Kabos, Serere District of Eastern Uganda. The materials and methods used in this study included tools like water pump (model DCX2-50D), Tomato variety Rionex, weighting scale, CROPWAT 8.0 software, CANOPEO software among others. Generally, quantitative techniques through several experiment designs were used. Daily and monthly weather variables, in-situ primary datasets of plant height, canopy cover percentages and fruit characteristics, and weight of harvested tomatoes were measured at three growth stages and analyzed using RCBD experiment with six treatments and four replications.

Findings showed that overhead treatments had lowest rate of rotten yield compared to basin and furrow but had highest rate of discolored fruits attributed to sunshine and impact of water pressure during irrigation. Rotting of yield was highest in basin treatments. The rotting was attributed to water logging, poor drainage that accelerated fungal infection in the tomatoes. Furrow treatments had better drainage which reduced quantity of nonmarketable yield. There was no significant difference on the weight of tomatoes below 65g. This meant that fruit weight was independent of irrigation method. Treatments under hosepipe irrigation-overhead. Conclusively, water management practices have big impact on the crop yield giving a relationship that yield is directly proportional to water management practices, which however, should be followed by detailed soil and water analysis through such studies. The Safe-Water-for Food (SWFF) target can be reached and eventually reduce on the global hunger syndrome.

Keywords: Hunger, Irrigation, Safe-Water-for-Food, Tomato Yield, Water Treatment

References

  1. Jensen C.R.; Battilani A.; Plauborg F.; Psarras G.; Chartzoulakis K.; Janowiak F.; Stikic R.; Jovanovic Z.; Li G.; Qi X.; Liu F.; Jacobsen S.; Andersen M. N. Deficit irrigation based on drought tolerance and root signalling in potatoes and tomatoes. Agricultural Water Management, 2010;98:403-413.
     Google Scholar
  2. Matos E. S., Shirahige F. H., Melo P. C. T. Desempenho de híbridos de tomate de crescimento indeterminado em função de sistemas de condução de plantas. Horticultura Brasileira, 2012;30:240-245.
     Google Scholar
  3. Robinah Sonko, Makerere University, Evelyn Njue, ETC – East Africa, James M. Ssebuliba, Makerere University, Andre de Jager, Wageningen University and Research Center, The horticultural sector in Uganda, January, 2015.
     Google Scholar
  4. Lopes FB, Souza F, Andrade EM, Meireles ACM, Caitano RF. Determinação do padrão do manejo da irrigação praticada no Perímetro Irrigado Baixo a Acaraú, Ceará, via análise multivariada. Irrig. Botucatu. 16(3):301-316. Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) For fresh consumption. Ciência Rural, 2004;34:329-335.
     Google Scholar
  5. Siebert, S., Burke, J. , Faures, J. M.,; Frenken, K., Hoogeveen, J. , Döll, P., Portmann, F. T. Groundwater use for Irrigation, a Global Inventory, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 14(10):1863–1880, 2010.
     Google Scholar
  6. Ferreira S. M. R., Freitas R. J. S., Lazzari E. N. Identity and quality standards of tomatoes. Visão Acadêmica, Curitiba, v. 5, n. 1, p. 19-26, Jan.- Jun./2004.
     Google Scholar
  7. Hamlyn, G.Jones, (2004)Irrigation scheduling: advantages and pitfalls of plant-based methods Journal of Experimental Botany, 2004;55(407):2427–2436. https//doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erb213.
     Google Scholar
  8. José A. Monte; Daniel F. de Carvalho; Leonardo O. Medici; Leonardo D. B. da SilvaII; Carlos Pimentel. Growth analysis and yield of tomato crop under different irrigation depths, 2013.
     Google Scholar
  9. Pereira, A. R.; Machado, E. C. Análysis of quantitative do crescimento vegetal. Campinas: Instituto Agronômico de Campinas. 1987. 33p. Boletim Técnico, n.114.
     Google Scholar
  10. Favati, F.; Lovelli, S.; Galgano, F.; Miccolis, V.; Di Tommaso, T.; Candido, V. Processing tomato quality as affected by irrigation scheduling. Scientia Horticulturae, p122, 2009.
     Google Scholar
  11. FAO. Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56. FAO, for wheat crop using field experiment and simulation modeling: Agri. water Manage. 96.
     Google Scholar
  12. Prakash, B. A. Yield and Fruit Quality of Tomatoes (Lycopersicon Esculentum Mill)., 53(2):102-107. 2012.
     Google Scholar
  13. Allen R.G., L.S. Pereira D. Raes and M. Smith, 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration Guidelines.
     Google Scholar
  14. Al-Kaisi, M. M and I. Broner (3/13). Quick Facts… Water stress during critical growth periods reduces yield and quality of crops.extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/.../crop-water-use-and-growth-stages-4-715.
     Google Scholar
  15. Douglas C. Montgomery. Applied statistics and probability for engineers. —3rd ed. p. cm. ISBN 0-471-20454-4 (acid-free paper) Runger, George C. II. Title. QA276.12.M645 2002 519.5—dc21 2002016765.
     Google Scholar