Efficacy of different soilless substrates on tomato under hydroponic system

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/04/2018
Views (868)
current_issue_feature_image
publication_file

Efficacy of different soilless substrates on tomato under hydroponic system

Zia-Ul-Haq, Rai Niaz Ahmad, Jehangir Khan Sial, M. Yasin, M. Hanif
Int. J. Biosci. 12(4), 399-405, April 2018.
Copyright Statement: Copyright 2018; The Author(s).
License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Abstract

Hydroponic is an alternative food growing system to sustain agriculture in urban and water stress environment. The huge increase in population and alarming rate of water shortage caused more stress on agriculture resources thus there is a dire need to adopt this innovative agriculture of 21st century. It promises year round supply of quality vegetables with high yield. The performance and suitability of different substrates for the soilless culture of tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum) were studied at Institute of Hydroponics Agriculture, PMAS Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi, over a two growing seasons under greenhouse condition, during 2015-17, employing five different treatment (substrates) viz. T1 (coco imported), T2 (indigenous coco), T3 (indigenous coco +25% zero grade stone crush by weight), T4 (rice husk), T5 (rice husk +25% zero grade stone crush by weight). The results indicated that soilless substrates have significant effects on tomato production. First season study, demonstrated that the sole Coco-imported and indigenous rice husk is a very good substrate for greenhouse grown tomatoes. While during second growing season sole use of coco imported media significantly affected the tomato yield 7.03kg plant-1 followed by indigenous rice husk and lowest yield among the subtract was recorded in coco indigenous +25% zero-grade stone by weight. It was concluded from the study that the treatment T1 containing imported coco had the best performance for tomato plant growth under soilless substrates.

Ahmad F O, Khan K, Sarwar S, Hussain A, Ahmad S. 2007. Performance evaluation of tomato cultivars at high altitude. Sarhad J. Agric 23, 582-585.

Aly MM. 1992. Investigation of potential uses of Rice Husks in water treatment process. Ph.D thesis, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University p.110-135.

Anonymous. 2011. Agriculture statistics of Pakistan 2010-11, Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Govt. of Pakistan 1-2.

Anonymous. 2014. Pakistan Vision 2025. Planning commission, minisrry of planning development and reform. Govt of Pakistan. www.pc.gov.pk.

Awang Y, Shaharom AS, Mohamad RB, 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 sciences 4, 63-71.

Beltran JM, Manzur CL. 2005. Overview of salinity problems in the world and FAO strategies to address the problem. p. 311-313. In: Proceedings of the international salinity Forum. April 25-27, 2005. Riverside CA.

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 DL, Helmer T. 2009. A new wood fibre substrate for hydroponic tomato and pepper crops. Canad. J. Plant Sci 89, 1127-1132.

Govt. of Pakistan. 2008. Economic survey: economic advisor’s wing, finance division Islamabad. www.finance.gov.pk

Gruda N, Prasad M, Maher MJ. 2006. Soilless Culture. In: R. Lal (ed.) Encyclopedia of soil sciences. Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, FL, USA.

Gruda N. 2009. Do soilless culture systems have an influence on product quality of vegetables J. Appl. Bot. & Food Qual 82, 141-147.

Khan GS. 1998. Soil salinity/sodicity status of Pakistan. Soil Survey of Pakistan Lahore. 59p.

Nazir MS. 1994. Crop Production. National Book Foundation, Islamabad

Pitman MG, Lanchli A. 2002. Global impact of salinity and agriculture ecosystem. p. 3-20. In: Salinity: Environment Plant Molecules. A. Lanchli and U. luttage (Eds.), Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht. The Netherlands.

Raviv M, Wallach R, Silber A, Bar-Tal A. 2002. Substrates and their analysis. In D. Savvas & H. Passam, eds. Hydroponic production of vegetables and ornamentals, p. 25–102. Embrio publications, Athens, 463 pp.

Related Articles

Tumor suppressing ability of myrtenal in DMBA-induced rat mammary cancer: A biochemical and histopathological evaluation

Manoharan Pethanasamy, Shanmugam M. Sivasankaran, Saravanan Surya, Raju Kowsalya, Int. J. Biosci. 27(2), 141-150, August 2025.

Assessing tree diversity in cashew plantations: Environmental and agronomic determinants in buffer zones of Mont Sangbé National Park, western Côte d’Ivoire

Kouamé Christophe Koffi, Kouakou Hilaire Bohoussou, Serge Cherry Piba, Naomie Ouffoue, Sylvestre Gagbe, Alex Beda, Adama Tondossama, Int. J. Biosci. 27(2), 122-133, August 2025.

Anthelmintic potential of powdered papaya seed Carica papaya in varying levels against Ascaridia galli in broiler chicken

Roniemay P. Sayson, Mylene G. Millapez, Zandro O. Perez, Int. J. Biosci. 27(2), 114-121, August 2025.

Valorization of fish scale waste for the synthesis of functional gelatin-based biopolymers

N. Natarajan Arun Nagendran, B. Balakrishnan Rajalakshmi, C. Chellapandi Balachandran, Jayabalan Viji, Int. J. Biosci. 27(2), 102-113, August 2025.

Isolation and characterization of phosphate solubilising bacteria undernath Excoecaria agallocha L. of muthupet mangrove reserve

Ms. S. Alice Keerthana, V. Shanmugaraju, P. Arun, M. Poongothai, Int. J. Biosci. 27(2), 83-89, August 2025.

Hematological and biochemical parameters in mono- and associative invasions of domestic chickens by helminths and eimeria in Azerbaijan

Aygun A. Azizova, Ramin S. Mammadov, Ugur Uslu, Int. J. Biosci. 27(2), 76-82, August 2025.