Abstrakt
Studies were conducted with tomato of Admiro F1 cultivar grown in greenhouse in the years 2008 and 2009. Four substrates were applied: 1) rape straw, 2) rape straw + high peat (3 : 1 v:v), 3) rape straw + pine bark (3 : 1 v:v), 4) rockwool (100 × 20 × 7.5 = 15 dm3). Straw, cut into pieces, (2–3 cm), were placed in plastic boxes (height of the box ca. twice large as width) of the capacity of 15 dm3. In each box/slab there grew two plants. The experiment was conducted using the complete randomization method in seven repetitions. Dripping fertigation was applied in a closed system without nutrient solution recirculation. Daily nutrient solution consumption was once up to 4.2 dm3 in 10–12 doses with about 20% overflow. In the conducted studies it was demonstrated that the cut rape straw is a very good substratum for greenhouse grown tomato. Higher fruit yields were obtained from growing in rape straw + pine bark substratum compared to rockwool, and
the differences were not significant. The dry matter content in fruit grown in organic substrata was significantly higher compared to rockwool. The content of N-total in fruit grown in rockwool was significantly lower compared to organic substrata. During tomato vegetation about 60% rape straw was mineralized.
Bibliografia
Blom M., 2011. Organic greenhouses: development of the regulatory framework within Europe. Acta Hort. 915, 31–37.
Domeno I., Irigoyen N., Muro J., 2009. Evolution of organic matter and drainages in wood fibre and coconut fibre substrates. Sci. Hort., 122(2), 269–274.
Dorais M., Menard C., Begin E., 2007. Risk of phytotoxicity of sawdust substrates for greenhouse vegetables. Acta Hort., 761, 589–594.
Dyśko J., Kowalczyk W., Kaniszewski S., 2009. The influence of pH of nutrient solution on yield and nutritional status of tomato plants grown in soilless culture system. Veget. Crop. Res. Bull. 70, 59–69.
Ehret D. L., Helmer T., 2009. A new wood fibre substrate for hydroponic tomato and pepper crops. Canad. J. Plant Sci. 89(6), 1127–1132.
Elings A., Meinen E., Campen J., Stanghellini C., Gelder A., 2007. The photosynthesis response of tomato to air circulation. Acta Hort., 761, 77–84.
Evans M.R., Vancey L., 2007. Physical properties of processed poultry feather fiber-containing greenhouse root substrates. HortTechnology, 17(3), 301–304.
Evans W.B., Bi G., Fain G.B., 2011. Addition of pulp mill ash raises pH, modifies physical properties, and alters young tomato plant growth and mineral nutrition in a peat-based substrate. J. Plant Nutr., 34(12), 1894–1903.
Fernandes C., Cora J.E., Braz L.T., 2007. Reuse of sand, crushed sugarcane and peanut hull-based substrates for cherry tomato cultivation. Sci. Agric., 64(6), 630–635.
Gachukia M.M., Evans M.R., 2008. Root substrate pH, electrical conductivity and macroelement concentration of sphagnum peat-based substrates amended with parboiled fresh rice hulls or perlite. Hort. Technol., 18(4), 644–649.
Hao X., Wang Q., Khosla S., 2008. Responses of greenhouse tomatoes to summer CO2 enrichment. Acta Hort., 797, 241–246.
Kaniszewski S., Dyśko J., Kowalczyk W., Wojtysiak J., Wrocławski Z., Dziedziczak K., 2010. Effect of nitration of organic materials on nitrogen availability and yield of tomato in soilless culture. Veget. Crop Res. Bull., 72, 71–81.
Kowalczyk K., Gajc-Wolska J., Marcinkowska M., 2011a. The influence of growing medium and harvest time on the biological value of cherry fruit and standard tomato cultivars. Veget. Crop Res. Bull., 74, 51–59.
Kowalczyk K., Gajc-Wolska J., Radzanowska J., Marcinkowska M., 2011b. Assesment of chemical composition and sensory quality of tomato fruit depending on cultivar and growing conditions. Acta Sci. Pol., Hortorum Cultus, 10(4), 133–140.
Mahamud S., Manisah M.D., 2007. Preliminary studies on sago waste as growing medium for tomato. Acta Hort., 742, 163–168.
Nurzyński J., 2002. Plonowanie i skład chemiczny pomidora uprawianego w podłożu z wełny mineralnej oraz słomy. Zesz. Probl. Post. Nauk Rol., 485, 257–262.
Nurzyński J., 2006 a. Plonowanie i skład chemiczny pomidora uprawianego w szklarni w podłożach ekologicznych. Acta Agrophysica, 7(3), 681–690.
Nurzyński J., 2006 b. The yileding of greenhouse tomato grown in straw and rockwool. Folia Hort., 18(2), 17–23.
NiChualain D., Carlile W., Hynes C., Phelan G., O’Haire R., Doyle O.P.E., 2011. Nutrient status of CO-composited indigenous irish wastes, and their use in growing media. Acta Hort., 891, 85–92.
Raviv M., 2011a. The future of composts as ingredients of growing media. Acta Hort., 891, 19–32.
Raviv M., 2011b. Suppressing soil-borne diseases of container – grown plants using composts. Acta Hort., 893, 169–181.
Stanghellini C., Kempkes F.L.K., Incrocci L., 2009. Carbon dioxide fertilization in Mediterranean greenhouses: when and how is it economical? Acta Hort., 807, 135–142.
Schmutz U., Sumption P., Lennartsson M., 2011.Economics of UK organic protected cropping. Acta Hort., 915, 39–46.
Tzortzakis N.G., Economakis C.D., 2007. Shredded maize stems as an alternative substrates medium: effect on water and nutrient uptake by tomato in soilless culture. Inter. J. Veget. Sci., 13(4), 103–122.
Van der Lans C.J.M., Meijer R.J.M., Blom M., 2011. A view of organic greenhouse horticulture worldwide. Acta Hort., 915, 15–22.
Voogt W., de Visser P,H.E., van Winkel A., Cuijpers W.J.M., van de Burgt G.J.H.M., 2011.
Nutrient management in organic greenhouse production: navigation between constraints. Acta Hort., 915, 75–82.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
