تأثیر خصوصیات فیزیکی بسترهای کاشت بر رشد و کارایی مصرف آب در پرورش نشای گوجه‌فرنگی گلخانه‌ای

نوع مقاله: مقاله کامل

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی سابق کارشناسی ارشد، پردیس کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی دانشگاه تهران، کرج

2 دانشیار، پردیس کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی دانشگاه تهران، کرج

3 استاد، پردیس کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی دانشگاه تهران، کرج

چکیده

یکی از مهم‌ترین ارکان سیستم‌های کشت بدون خاک، بستر کشت می‌باشد. پرورش‌دهندگان گیاهان معمولاً بر اساس خصوصیات فیزیکی و شیمیایی، نسبت به انتخاب بسترها اقدام می‌نمایند. به‌منظور بررسی اثر برخی از مهم‌ترین خصوصیات فیزیکی بسترهای کشت بر رشد و کارایی مصرف آب نشای گوجه­فرنگی گلخانه‌ای، ویژگی‌های فیزیکی 50 بستر ترکیبی اندازه‌گیری گردید و سپس سه بستر با خصوصیات فیزیکی مشابه (ظرفیت نگهداری آب، حجم هوای مؤثر و خلل و فرج مؤثر) مورد مطالعه و بررسی قرار گرفتند. آزمایشی در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با 3 تیمار، 3 تکرار و 12 مشاهده در هر واحد آزمایشی، طراحی و اجرا گردید. نتایج نشان داد که بیشترین وزن خشک کل بوته، سطح برگ و تعداد برگ در بستر ترکیبی ماسه-کوکوپیت و کمترین مقدار در بستر پرلیت-ورمیکولیت به­دست آمد. بسترهای ماسه-کوکوپیت و پرلیت کوکوپیت تأثیر یکسانی بر صفات قطر و ارتفاع و ارتفاع اولین گره داشتند. بستر ماسه کوکوپیت، بیشترین کارایی مصرف آب آبیاری معادل 17/1 گرم ماده خشک بر لیتر آب مصرفی را دارا بود و بستر پرلیت-ورمیکولیت، کمترین کارایی معادل 34/0 گرم ماده خشک بر لیتر آب مصرفی را نشان داد. بر اساس نتایج به­دست آمده از این پژوهش، مشخص گردید که اگرچه بسترهای مورد مطالعه دارای ظرفیت نگهداری آب یکسانی بودند؛ اما بهترین رشد و کارایی مصرف آب در بستر ماسه-کوکوپیت، که دارای میزان آب سهل‌الوصول (59 درصد) بیشتری بود حاصل گردید. نتایج نشان می­دهد که دارا بودن ظرفیت نگهداری آب یکسان در دو بستر، الزاما به معنی رفتار مشابه آن­ها نیست و خصوصیات دقیق­تر دیگری نیز دخالت دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

The effects of substrate physical properties on growth and irrigation water use efficiency of greenhouse tomato transplant

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hossein Mazari 1
  • Mojtaba Delshad 2
  • Abdolkarim Kashi 3
1 Former M.Sc. Student, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
2 Associate Professor, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
3 Professor, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
چکیده [English]

Substrate is one of the most important factors in soilless cultures. Growers of horticultural crops usually select substrates based on physical and chemical characteristics. In order to evaluate the effects of some of the most important physical properties of media, on growth and irrigation water use efficiency of greenhouse tomato transplant, physical properties (water holding capacity, effective air filled pore space and effective pore space) of 50 mixed media were measured. Media which had the same physical properties among the mixed media were selected as experimental treatments to grow greenhouse tomato transplants. Randomized complete block design with 3 replications and 12 observations in each experimental unit was used for the experiment. Results showed that maximum and minimum plant total dry weight, leaf area and leaf number was recorded in sand-cocopeat and perlite-vermiculite media, respectively. Sand- cocopeat and perlite-cocopeat media had the same values of stem diameter, plant height and height of the first node especially during first 2 weeks. Maximum and minimum irrigation water use efficiency (1.17 g/l and 0.34 g/l) occurred in sand-cocopeat and perlite-vermiculite media, respectively. Results indicated that although studied media had the same water holding capacity, but the best growth and irrigation water use efficiency was obtained on sand-cocopeat medium which had a higher amount of easily available water. According to results, it can be concluded that the same water holding capacity of two media doesn’t necessarily guarantee similar results from them and other properties must be taken in account.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Asily available water
  • effective air-filled pore space
  • tomato transplant
  • water-holding capacity
  1. Abuarab, M., Mostafa, E. & Ibrahim, M. (2013). Effect of air injection under subsurface drip irrigation on yield and water use efficiency of corn in a sandy clay loam soil. Journal of Advanced Research4(6), 493-499.
  2. Allaire, S. E., Caron, J., Duchesne, I., Parent, L. É. & Rioux, J. A. (1996). Air-filled porosity, gas relative diffusivity, and tortuosity: Indices of Prunus × Cistena sp. growth in peat substrates. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science121(2), 236-242.
  3. Awang, Y., Shaharom, A. S., Mohamad, R. B. & Selamat, A. (2009). Chemical and physical characteristics of cocopeat-based media mixtures and their effects on the growth and development of Celosia cristata. American journal of agricultural and biological sciences4(1), 63-71.
  4. Barker, A. V. & Pilbeam, D. J. (Eds.). (2015). Handbook of plant nutrition. Chemical Rubber Company press.
  5. Benito, M., Masaguer, A., De Antonio, R. & Moliner, A. (2005). Use of pruning waste compost as a component in soilless growing media. Bioresource technology96(5), 597-603.
  6. Bilderback, T. E., Fonteno, W. C. & Johnson, D. R. (1982). Physical properties of media composed of peanut hulls, pine bark, and peatmoss and their effects on azalea growth. Journal American Society for Horticultural Science, 107(3), 522-525.
  7. Bowman, D. C., Evans, R. Y. & Paul, J. L. (1990). Fertilizer salts reduce hydration of polyacrylamide gels and affect physical properties of gel-amended container media. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science115(3), 382-386.
  8. De Boodt, M., Verdonck, O., (1972). The physical properties of substrates in horticulture. Acta Horticult, 26, 37-44.
  9. DIN, EN. (2012). 13041. Soil Improvers and growing media–Determination of physical properties–Dry bulk density, air volume, water volume, shrinkage value and total pore space. German Version prEN, Beuth, Berlin/Cologne.
  10. Fei, C., Zhaohui, S., Yuguo, Z. & Shijun, L. (2001). Analysis of physical and chemical properties of reed residue substrate. Journal-Nanging Agricualtural University24(3), 19-22.
  11. Gruda, N. (2005). Growth and quality of vegetables in peat substitute growing media. Ph.D. Diss., Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany.
  12. Haddad, M. (2007). Effect of three substrates on growth, yield and quality of tomato by the use of geothermal water in the south of Tunisia.  Journal of Food Agriculture and Environment5(2), 175.
  13. Handreck, K. A. & Black, N. D. (2002). Growing media for ornamental plants and turf. UNSW press.
  14. Kang, J. Y., Lee, H. H. & Kim, K. H. (2001, September). Physical and chemical properties of inorganic horticultural substrates used in Korea. In International Symposium on Growing Media and Hydroponics 644 (pp. 237-241).
  15. Mazari, H., Delshad, M. & Kasha, A. (2016). Study of the effect of substrates with different effective air-filled pore space on greenhouse tomato transplant growth. Iranian Journal of Horticultural Science, 47(3), 407-419. (in Farsi)
  16. Merhaut, D. J. (2007). Handbook of plant nutrition. Elsevier press.
  17. Michiels, P., Hartmann, R. & Coussens, C. (1992, September). Physical properties of peat substrates in an ebb/flood irrigation system. In International Symposium on Horticultural Substrates other than Soil in situ 342 (pp. 205-220).
  18. Milks, R. R., Fonteno, W. C. & Larson, R. A. (1989). Hydrology of horticultural substrates. II. Predicting physical properties of media in containers. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science (USA).
  19. Pill, W. G. & Goldberger, B. C. (2009). Growth of Tomato in Biosolids–Woodchip Co‐compost with Varying Proportions of Peat Moss and Perlite Subjected to Two Fertilization Regimes. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis40(15-16), 2440-2459.
  20. Prasad, M. (1979). Physical properties of media for container-grown crops. I. New Zealand peats and wood wastes. Scientia Horticulturae10(4), 317-323.
  21. Prasad, M. & Chualáin, D. N. (2004). Relationship between particle size and air space of growing media. Acta Horticulturae, 161-166.
  22. Raviv, M. & Blom, T. J. (2001). The effect of water availability and quality on photosynthesis and productivity of soilless-grown cut roses. Scientia Horticulturae88(4), 257-276.
  23. Raviv, M., Lieth, J. H. & Wallach, R. (2000, May). The effect of root-zone physical properties of coir and UC mix on performance of cut rose (cv. Kardinal). In World Congress on Soilless Culture: Agriculture in the Coming Millennium 554 (pp. 231-238).
  24. Raviv, M., Wallach, R., Silber, A. & Bar-Tal, A. (2002). Substrates and their analysis. Hydroponic production of vegetables and ornamentals.
  25. Roosta, H. R. & Afsharipoor, S. (2012). Effects of different cultivation media on vegetative growth, ecophysiological traits and nutrients concentration in strawberry under hydroponic and aquaponic cultivation systems. Advances in Environmental Biology, 6(2), 543-555.
  26. Shinohara, Y., Hata, T., Maruo, T., Hohjo, M. & Ito, T. (1997, May). Chemical and physical properties of the coconut-fiber substrate and the growth and productivity of tomato (Lycopercicon esculentum Mill.) plants. In International Symposium on Growing Media and Hydroponics 481 (pp. 145-150).
  27. Silber, A. & Bar-Tal, A. (2008). Nutrition of substrate-grown plants. Soilless Culture Theory and Practice. M. Raviv and H. Lieth (eds.) Ed. Elsevier. Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pp, 291-339.
  28. Stanhill, G. (1986). Water use efficiency. Advances in Agronomy39, 53-85.
  29. Verdonck, O. & Demeyer, P. (2001, September). The influence of the particle sizes on the physical properties of growing media. In: International Symposium on Growing Media and Hydroponics 644 (pp. 99-101).
  30. Wallach, R. (2008). Physical characteristics of soilless media. Soilless culture: theory and practice, 1st edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 41-116.
  31. Wilson, G. C. S. (1985, June). Tomato production in different growing media. In: Symposium on Nutrition, Growing Techniques and Plant Substrates 178 (pp. 115-120).