Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 11 No. sp4 (2024): Recent Advances in Agriculture by Young Minds - I

Nourishing plant health and growth through the application of nutrients and plant growth regulator mixture in tomato

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.5466
Submitted
2 October 2024
Published
20-12-2024
Versions

Abstract

A pot culture experiment was conducted to investigate the influence of foliar application of nutrients and plant growth regulators (PGRs) on the growth and physiological attributes of tomatoes. The trial was carried out at the
Department of Crop Physiology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, India. Various nutrient-PGR combinations (T1-T9) were applied at two distinct developmental stages: 25 and 50 days after transplanting (DAT).
The growth traits, including plant height, number of branches, leaf area and total dry matter production (TDMP), showed significant variation in response to the foliar application of the nutrient-PGR mixture. In addition, several
physiological parameters, such as the chlorophyll index and chlorophyll fluorescence, exhibited notable differences among the treatments. Application of tomato booster II (T8), a foliar nutrient-PGR mixture containing nitrogen (N),
phosphorus (P), potassium (K), calcium (Ca), manganese (Mn), copper (Cu), naphthaleneacetic acid (NAA) and salicylic acid (SA), significantly enhanced plant growth. This was evidenced by increased plant height (34.1 cm and 67.2 cm) and leaf area (265.89 cm² and 1448.55 cm² plant-1) at 30 and 60 DAT, respectively. Additionally, plants treated with tomato booster II (T8) showed improved root development, characterized by a substantial increase in total root length (4402.86 cm), root volume (58.9 cm³) and root surface area (1807.84 cm²). Moreover, T8-treated plants exhibited a significant increase in spectral reflectance, indicative of enhanced photosynthetic efficiency, reaching a maximum of 81.8% following two foliar applications. These results suggest that tomato booster II (T8) is a promising nutrient-PGR mixture for enhancing tomato growth and development.

References

  1. Perveen R, Suleria HA, Anjum FM, Butt MS, Pasha I, Ahmad S. Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) carotenoids and lycopenes chemistry; metabolism, absorption, nutrition and allied health claims-A comprehensive review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2015;55(7):919-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2012.657809
  2. Burton-Freeman B, Reimers K. Tomato consumption and health: Emerging benefits. Am J Lifestyle Med. 2011;5(2):182-91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1559827610387488
  3. Attia MS, Abdelaziz AM, Al-Askar AA, Arishi AA, Abdelhakim AM, Hashem AH. Plant growth-promoting fungi as biocontrol tool against fusarium wilt disease of tomato plant. J Fungi. 2022;8(8):775. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8080775
  4. Li J, Wang C, Yang L, Qiu F, Li Y, Zheng Y, et al. Enhancing tomato resistance by exploring early defense events against Fusarium wilt disease. Phytopathol Res. 2023;5:24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42483-023-00176-y
  5. Fatehpuria PK, Sasode RS. Scenario of early blight and leaf curl of tomato in Gwalior Districts of Madhya Pradesh. Indian J Ecol. 2022;49(2):549-52.
  6. Chintapalli I, Rayalcheruvu U. Leaf curl disease: A significant constraint in the production of tomato—Impact, challenges, and management. In: Viškelis P, Urbonaviciene D, Viškelis J, editors. Tomato—From Cultivation to Processing Technology. London: IntechOpen; 2022. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106733
  7. Datnoff LE, Elmer WH, Huber DM. Mineral Nutrition and Plant Disease. St. Paul (MN): The American Phytopathological Society; 2007.
  8. Huber D. The role of mineral nutrition in defense. In: Horsfall JG, Cowling EB, editors. Plant Disease: An Advanced Treatise. New York: Academic Press; 1980. p. 381-405. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-356405-4.50028-9
  9. Pandey R, Vengavasi K, Hawkesford MJ. Plant adaptation to nutrient stress. Plant Physiol Rep. 2021;26(4):583-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40502-021-00636-7
  10. Serrani JC, Fos M, Atarés A, García-Martínez JL. Effect of gibberellin and auxin on parthenocarpic fruit growth induction in the cv Micro-Tom of tomato. J Plant Growth Regul. 2007;26:211-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-007-9014-7
  11. Nazar R, Iqbal N, Syeed S, Khan NA. Salicylic acid alleviates decreases in photosynthesis under salt stress by enhancing nitrogen and sulfur assimilation and antioxidant metabolism differentially in two mungbean cultivars. J Plant Physiol. 2011;168(8):807-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2010.11.001
  12. Li T, Huang Y, Xu Z-S, Wang F, Xiong A-S. Salicylic acid-induced differential resistance to the tomato yellow leaf curl virus among resistant and susceptible tomato cultivars. BMC Plant Biol. 2019;19:173. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-019-1784-0
  13. Rademacher W. Plant growth regulators: Backgrounds and uses in plant production. J Plant Growth Regul. 2015;34:845-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-015-9541-6
  14. Bulgari R, Franzoni G, Ferrante A. Biostimulants application in horticultural crops under abiotic stress conditions. Agronomy. 2019;9(6):306. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9060306
  15. Rouphael Y, Spíchal L, Panzarová K, Casa R, Colla G. High-throughput plant phenotyping for developing novel biostimulants: From lab to field or from field to lab? Front Plant Sci. 2018;9:1197. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01197
  16. Sebilo M, Mayer B, Nicolardot B, Pinay G, Mariotti A. Long-term fate of nitrate fertilizer in agricultural soils. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2013;110(45):18185-9. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1305372110
  17. Lapidot M, Friedmann M, Pilowsky M, Ben-Joseph R, Cohen S. Effect of host plant resistance to tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV) on virus acquisition and transmission by its whitefly vector. Phytopathology. 2001;91(12):1209-13. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO.2001.91.12.1209
  18. Bhadiyatar AA, Patel JM, Patel PM, Malav JK. Effect of potassium and sulphur on growth, yield attributes and yield of summer groundnut in loamy sand. Pharma Innovation. 2022;11(2):2704-7.
  19. Matoh T, Kobayashi M. Boron and calcium, essential inorganic constituents of pectic polysaccharides in higher plant cell walls. J Plant Res. 1998;111:179-90. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02507164
  20. Bhadane RS, Prajapati KR, Ombase KC, Patel DB. Effect of seed priming and foliar spraying of PGRs on morpho-physiology, growth and yield in green gram (Vigna radiata L.). Legume Res. 2022;45(4):435-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.18805/LR-4434
  21. Chen Y, Zhang Z, Liu Y, Zhu Y, Cao H. Models of dry matter production and yield formation for the protected tomato. In: Li D, Chen Y, editors. Computer and computing technologies in agriculture V. CCTA 2011. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol 368. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2012. p. 278–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27281-3_34.
  22. Poorter H, Nagel O. The role of biomass allocation in the growth response of plants to different levels of light, CO2, nutrients and water: A quantitative review. Aust J Plant Physiol. 2000;27(12):595-607. https://doi.org/10.1071/PP99173_CO
  23. Roosta HR, Hamidpour M. Mineral nutrient content of tomato plants in aquaponic and hydroponic systems: Effect of foliar application of some macro-and micro-nutrients. J Plant Nutr. 2013;36(13):2070-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2013.821707.
  24. Lambers H, Plaxton WC. Phosphorus: Back to the roots. In: Plaxton WC, Lambers H, editors. Annual plant reviews volume 48: Phosphorus metabolism in plants. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; 2015. p. 1–22.
  25. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118958841.ch1.
  26. Wang X, Yun J, Shi P, Li Z, Li P, Xing Y. Root growth, fruit yield and water use efficiency of greenhouse grown tomato under different irrigation regimes and nitrogen levels. J Plant Growth Regul. 2019;38:400-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-018-9850-7
  27. M’hamdi O, Égei M, Pék Z, Ilahy R, Nemeskéri E, Helyes L, et al. Root development monitoring under different water supply levels in processing tomato plants. Plants. 2023;12(20):3517. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12203517
  28. Shanmugapriya P, Latha KR, Pazhanivelan S, Kumaraperumal R, Karthikeyan G, Sudarmanian NS. Cotton yield prediction using drone derived LAI and chlorophyll content. J Agrometeorol. 2022;24(4):348-52. https://doi.org/10.54386/jam.v24i4.1770
  29. Tripathi R, Tewari R, Singh KP, Keswani C, Minkina T, Srivastava AK, et al. Plant mineral nutrition and disease resistance: A significant linkage for sustainable crop protection. Front Plant Sci. 2022:883970. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.883970
  30. Knudson LL, Tibbitts TW, Edwards GE. Measurement of ozone injury by determination of leaf chlorophyll concentration. Plant Physiol. 1977;60(4):606-8. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.60.4.606
  31. Mahmood R, Yaseen M. Influence of calcium carbide formulations on growth, yield and nitrogen uptake of wheat under field conditions. J Plant Nutr. 2016;39(5):609-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2015.1047520
  32. Khokhar A, Sharma V, Singh M, Yousuf A, Sandhu PS, Kumar V, et al. Effect of potassium and magnesium application on growth, yield and nutrient uptake of rainfed maize in the sub-montaneous region of Punjab, India. J Plant Nutr. 2022;45(14):2202-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2022.2063732
  33. Ren M, Mao G, Zheng H, Wang W, Tang Q. Growth changes of tomato seedlings responding to sodium salt of alpha-naphthalene acetic acid and potassium salt of fulvic acid. Sci Rep. 2023;13:4024. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-31023-x
  34. Moustaka J, Moustakas M. Early-stage detection of biotic and abiotic stress on plants by chlorophyll fluorescence imaging analysis. Biosensors. 2023;13(8):796. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios13080796
  35. Sakhonwasee S, Phingkasan W. Effects of the foliar application of calcium on photosynthesis, reactive oxygen species production, and changes in water relations in tomato seedlings under heat stress. Hortic Environ Biotechnol. 2017;58:119-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13580-017-0194-1
  36. Park B, Wi S, Chung H, Lee H. Chlorophyll fluorescence imaging for environmental stress diagnosis in crops. Sensors. 2024;24(5):1442. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24051442
  37. Darvishsefat A, Abbasi M, Schaepman ME. Evaluation of spectral reflectance of seven Iranian rice varieties canopies. J Agric Sci Technol. 2011;13:1091-104.
  38. Alejandro S, Höller S, Meier B, Peiter E. Manganese in plants: From acquisition to subcellular allocation. Front Plant Sci. 2020;11:300. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.00300

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.