Effects of irrigation water amount and humic acid dosage on yield, quality and water use of tomato

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20231210

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to explore the effects of humic acid application under different irrigation water conditions on the yield, quality and water use of tomato in facilities, three humic acid application treatments were set up under three irrigation water conditions respectively. The effects of these treatments on the growth, photosynthetic characteristics, yield, quality, and water use efficiency of tomato in the facility were studied, and the optimal treatment was selected by principal component analysis. The results showed that the plant height of HA2 and HA3 treatments were significantly higher than that of CK under W2 and W3 treatments at seedling stage. The plant height of W3HA3 treatment before flowering was also significantly higher than that of CK treatment. The net photosynthetic rate and stomatal conductance of W3HA3 treatment were significantly higher than those of CK. The soluble sugar content of W1HA3 and W2HA3 were significantly higher than that of CK. The soluble solids content of CK was significantly lower than that of treatments except W2HA1 and W3HA1. The titratable acid content of W1HA1, W1HA2, W1HA3 and W2HA1 treatments were significantly higher than that of CK. Compared with CK, the yield of W3HA3 treatment was significantly higher. Compared with CK, the water consumption of W1, W2 and W3 treatments were significantly reduced, the water use efficiency was significantly improved, and the irrigation water use efficiency was significantly improved. Furthermore, the comprehensive score of W3HA3 treatment was the highest, that was, 15% reduction in irrigation combined with humic acid instead of 30% rotted chicken manure could promote tomato growth and photosynthesis, and improve tomato yield, quality and water use efficiency.

Key words: tomato, irrigation, humic acid, yield, quality, water use efficiency

CLC Number:

S365、S641.2

SONG Zhi, GUO Xinsong, FAN Zhongqing, QIAO Jiale, YIN Jing, SUN Xiao, LIU Tongxin, HONG Pizheng, DING Fangjun, YANG Yongcheng. Effects of irrigation water amount and humic acid dosage on yield, quality and water use of tomato[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2025, 66(2): 336-343.

Figures/Tables 7

References 30

[1]	聂斌, 李文刚, 江丽华, 等. 不同灌溉方式对设施番茄土壤剖面硝态氮分布及灌溉水分效率的影响[J]. 水土保持研究, 2012, 19(3): 102-107.
[2]	CHAUDHARY P, SHARMA A, SINGH B, et al. Bioactivities of phytochemicals present in tomato[J]. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 2018, 55(8): 2833-2849.
[3]	郝淼, 曲兆鸣, 李兵, 等. 基于设施番茄生产效益的最佳灌水量和控释氯化钾用量组合[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2022, 28(5): 894-905.
[4]	寇长林, 骆晓声, 巨晓棠. 优化施氮对设施番茄土壤硝态氮残留及土壤氮平衡的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2021, 27(5): 837-848.
[5]	潘昭隆, 刘会芳, 赵帅翔, 等. 基于土壤电导率控制的养分供给对设施番茄生长、产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2022(1): 163-171.
[6]	TAHOUN A M M A, EL-ENIN M M A, MANCY A G, et al. Integrative soil application of humic acid and foliar plant growth stimulants improves soil properties and wheat yield and quality in nutrient-poor sandy soil of a semiarid region[J]. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 2022, 22(3): 2857-2871.
[7]	SUWARDI. The role of humic substances to improve degraded soils for increasing crops production[J]. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2021, 694(1): 012005.
[8]	顾鑫, 任翠梅, 杨丽, 等. 天然煤炭腐植酸对盐碱土改良效果的研究[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2017, 36(9): 57-61.
[9]	SUN C X, BEI K, LIU Y H, et al. Humic acid improves greenhouse tomato quality and bacterial richness in rhizosphere soil[J]. ACS Omega, 2022, 7(34): 29823-29831.
[10]	TRINGOVSKA I. The effects of humic and bio-fertilizers on growth and yield of greenhouse tomatoes[J]. Acta Horticulturae, 2012(960): 443-449.
[11]	郭彬, 莫彦, 吴忠东, 等. 覆膜与水分控制对宁夏设施滴灌番茄产量与品质的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2021, 40(3): 48-55.
[12]	李旭峰, 马娟娟, 郑利剑, 等. 生育期水分亏缺和施氮对设施番茄叶片酶活性和水氮利用效率的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2022, 40(3): 121-128, 196.
[13]	赵文举, 马锋, 曹伟, 等. 水肥耦合对基质栽培番茄产量及品质的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2022, 38(2): 95-101.
[14]	葛建坤, 平盈璐, 龚雪文, 等. 水分亏缺对温室覆膜滴灌番茄根系生长及吸水量的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2022, 41(3): 1-9.
[15]	王振华, 陈潇洁, 吕德生, 等. 水肥耦合对加气滴灌加工番茄产量及品质的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2020, 36(19): 66-75.
[16]	JANNIN L, ARKOUN M, OURRY A, et al. Microarray analysis of humic acid effects on Brassica napus growth: Involvement of N, C and S metabolisms[J]. Plant and Soil, 2012, 359(1): 297-319.
[17]	VACCARO S, ERTANI A, NEBBIOSO A, et al. Humic substances stimulate maize nitrogen assimilation and amino acid metabolism at physiological and molecular level[J]. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture, 2015, 2(1): 5.
[18]	吴燕. 灌溉方式对日光温室樱桃番茄生理特性及产量品质的影响[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2009.
[19]	张健利, 王振华, 宗睿, 等. 水气互作对滴灌加工番茄生长及品质的影响[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2022, 38(2): 453-461.
[20]	贾利东, 郭向红, 雷涛, 等. 不同水分-沸石量-埋深对滴灌番茄光合特性的影响[J]. 节水灌溉, 2021(12): 65-69.
[21]	王琦, 孙雯, 武俊英, 等. 不同灌水量下喷施腐植酸对燕麦光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2021(1): 98-103.
[22]	张志芬, 付晓峰, 赵宝平, 等. 腐植酸对重度干旱胁迫下燕麦叶片可溶性糖组分和内源激素的影响[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2018, 23(9): 11-20.
[23]	BERTIN N, GÉNARD M. Tomato quality as influenced by preharvest factors[J]. Scientia Horticulturae, 2018, 233: 264-276.
[24]	李欢欢, 刘浩, 孙景生, 等. 水肥耦合对温室番茄产量、水分利用效率和品质的影响[J]. 排灌机械工程学报, 2018, 36(9): 886-891.
[25]	ETIENNE A, GÉNARD M, LOBIT P, et al. What controls fleshy fruit acidity? A review of malate and citrate accumulation in fruit cells[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2013, 64(6): 1451-1469.
[26]	ALI SULIMAN A, ABRAMOV A G, SHALAMOVA A A, et al. Effect of humic acid and naphthalene acetic acid on vegetative growth and fruit quality of tomato plants Lycopersicon esculentum[J]. RUDN Journal of Agronomy and Animal Industries, 2020, 15(1): 30-39.
[27]	VALDRIGHI M M, PERA A, AGNOLUCCI M, et al. Effects of compost-derived humic acids on vegetable biomass production and microbial growth within a plant (Cichorium intybus)-soil system: a comparative study[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 1996, 58(2/3): 133-144.
[28]	张水勤, 袁亮, 林治安, 等. 腐植酸促进植物生长的机理研究进展[J]. 腐植酸, 2018(1): 46.
[29]	蔡晓, 吴祥运, 王东, 等. 水氮互作对滴灌夏玉米生长及水分利用效率的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2020, 39(6): 33-42.
[30]	周丽平, 袁亮, 赵秉强, 等. 腐植酸的组成结构及其对作物根系调控的研究进展[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2022, 28(2): 334-343.

处理	腐熟鸡粪/ (kg·hm^-2)	腐殖酸/ (kg·hm^-2)	灌溉水量/ mm
CK	75 000	0	260
W1HA1	67 500	9 231	143
W1HA2	60 000	18 462	143
W1HA3	52 500	27 692	143
W2HA1	67 500	9 231	182
W2HA2	60 000	18 462	182
W2HA3	52 500	27 692	182
W3HA1	67 500	9 231	221
W3HA2	60 000	18 462	221
W3HA3	52 500	27 692	221

处理	腐熟鸡粪/ (kg·hm^-2)	腐殖酸/ (kg·hm^-2)	灌溉水量/ mm
CK	75 000	0	260
W1HA1	67 500	9 231	143
W1HA2	60 000	18 462	143
W1HA3	52 500	27 692	143
W2HA1	67 500	9 231	182
W2HA2	60 000	18 462	182
W2HA3	52 500	27 692	182
W3HA1	67 500	9 231	221
W3HA2	60 000	18 462	221
W3HA3	52 500	27 692	221

处理	净光合速率/ (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	气孔导度/ (mol·m^-2·s^-1)	胞间CO₂浓度/ (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	蒸腾速率/ (mmol·m^-2·s^-1)
CK	22.96±0.28 b	0.98±0.05 bcd	305.25±3.62 ab	8.69±0.07 a
W1HA1	20.94±0.15 c	0.81±1.21 e	248.65±7.58 c	8.17±1.06 bc
W1HA2	20.91±0.15 c	0.85±0.09 e	257.16±6.63 c	8.03±0.06 c
W1HA3	20.97±0.25 c	0.92±0.05 cde	264.71±12.69 c	7.98±0.38 c
W2HA1	20.55±0.18 c	0.97±0.07 bcd	251.65±14.78 c	8.48±0.51 ab
W2HA2	21.05±0.28 c	1.00±0.11 bc	269.13±3.14 c	8.39±0.12 ab
W2HA3	21.59±0.61 c	1.02±0.03 bc	275.14±5.58 bc	8.49±0.14 ab
W3HA1	23.19±0.59 b	1.02±0.07 bc	320.57±7.32 a	8.64±1.12 a
W3HA2	23.59±0.57 b	1.08±0.03 b	308.19±6.66 a	8.76±0.39 a
W3HA3	25.53±0.63 a	1.24±0.03 a	314.41±15.06 a	8.75±0.06 a
F_W	56.33^**	39.27^**	26.93^**	24.87^**
F_HA	6.04^**	6.89^**	0.32 NS	0.06 NS
F_W×F_HA	5.63^**	4.35^*	1.19 NS	0.60 NS

处理	净光合速率/ (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	气孔导度/ (mol·m^-2·s^-1)	胞间CO₂浓度/ (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	蒸腾速率/ (mmol·m^-2·s^-1)
CK	22.96±0.28 b	0.98±0.05 bcd	305.25±3.62 ab	8.69±0.07 a
W1HA1	20.94±0.15 c	0.81±1.21 e	248.65±7.58 c	8.17±1.06 bc
W1HA2	20.91±0.15 c	0.85±0.09 e	257.16±6.63 c	8.03±0.06 c
W1HA3	20.97±0.25 c	0.92±0.05 cde	264.71±12.69 c	7.98±0.38 c
W2HA1	20.55±0.18 c	0.97±0.07 bcd	251.65±14.78 c	8.48±0.51 ab
W2HA2	21.05±0.28 c	1.00±0.11 bc	269.13±3.14 c	8.39±0.12 ab
W2HA3	21.59±0.61 c	1.02±0.03 bc	275.14±5.58 bc	8.49±0.14 ab
W3HA1	23.19±0.59 b	1.02±0.07 bc	320.57±7.32 a	8.64±1.12 a
W3HA2	23.59±0.57 b	1.08±0.03 b	308.19±6.66 a	8.76±0.39 a
W3HA3	25.53±0.63 a	1.24±0.03 a	314.41±15.06 a	8.75±0.06 a
F_W	56.33^**	39.27^**	26.93^**	24.87^**
F_HA	6.04^**	6.89^**	0.32 NS	0.06 NS
F_W×F_HA	5.63^**	4.35^*	1.19 NS	0.60 NS

处理	可溶性糖含量/(g·kg^-1)	可溶性固形物含量/(g·kg^-1)	可滴定酸含量/(g·kg^-1)	维生素C含量/(mg·kg^-1)
CK	22.67±0.66 b	45.40±0.67 d	2.53±0.26 c	194.0±9.1 a
W1HA1	26.62±1.67 ab	50.28±1.66 abc	4.45±0.08 a	213.2±7.6 a
W1HA2	27.18±0.93 ab	52.14±1.07 ab	4.38±0.34 a	215.1±8.4 a
W1HA3	28.80±1.91 a	53.24±0.31 a	4.32±0.25 a	215.5±4.6 a
W2HA1	25.09±1.07 ab	49.05±1.07 bcd	3.54±0.21 b	207.2±2.6 a
W2HA2	26.30±0.66 ab	50.17±0.94 abc	3.39±0.39 bc	209.3±5.2 a
W2HA3	27.75±2.34 a	50.75±1.12 abc	2.85±0.06 bc	214.0±0.6 a
W3HA1	24.36±0.61 ab	47.21±0.48 cd	2.85±0.21 bc	194.6±8.0 a
W3HA2	26.20±0.72 ab	49.93±1.65 abc	2.75±0.23 bc	205.3±2.8 a
W3HA3	27.22±0.87 ab	50.55±1.13 abc	2.55±0.03 c	210.4±3.8 a
F_W	8.93^**	3.78^*	31.92^**	5.61^*
F_HA	3.96^*	3.79^*	1.62 NS	1.17 NS
F_W×F_HA	0.85 NS	0.26 NS	3.79^*	0.30 NS