Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

Orta Anadolu Koşullarında Aşılı ve Aşısız Domateste (Lycopersicon esculentum) Damla ve Karık Yöntemlerinin Toprakta Tuz Dağılımı, Meyve Verimi ve Su Kullanım Etkinliği Üzerine Etkileri

Salinity Distrubution, Water Use Efficiency and Yield Response of Grafted and Ungrafted Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) Under Furrow and Drip Irrigation with Moderately Saline Water in Central Anatolian Condition

Journal Name:

  • Gaziosmanpaşa Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2010

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
A field study with tomato was carried out at Ankara University, Horticultural Research Station in two consecutive years. The aim of the study is to determine the effects of grafting and irrigation methods on yield and water use of tomato and salinity distribution within the soil. Grafted and ungrafted tomato cultivars were grown using drip and furrow irrigation methods. Salinity of irrigation water (electrical conductivity) was 1.9 dS/m and the SAR (sodium adsorption ratio) was below 1.0. The mean fruit yields were 4671, 4391, 4109 and 3457 g/plant for drip-grafted, drip-ungrafted, furrow-grafted and furrow-ungrafted treatments, respectively. Seasonal total evapotransprations were 810.0 and 771.5 mm under drip irrigation, 957.0 and 928.2 mm under furrow irrigation in 2005 and 2006, respectively. Total irrigation water requirement (applied water) were 731 and 714 mm under drip irrigation, 881 and 871 mm under furrow irrigation in 2005 and 2006, respectively. Water use efficiencies (WUE) were 12.92, 12.14, 9.38 and 7.90 kg/m3 for drip-grafted, drip-ungrafted, furrow-grafted and furrow-ungrafted treatments, respectively. Monthly soil samplings indicated that the salinity distribution decreased towards the root zone (wetted area beneath the emitters and plants) with drip irrigation and increased towards the root zone (furrow ridges and plants) with furrow irrigation.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Ankara Üniversitesi, Ayaş Bahçe Bitkileri Araştırma İstasyonunda, 2005 ve 2006 yıllarında yürütülen bu çalışmada, aşılı ve aşısız fide kullanılan domates, damla ve karık yöntemleri ile sulanmıştır. Çalışmanın amacı, aşılı ve aşısız domateste sulama yöntemlerinin, verim, su kullanım etkinliği ve toprak profilindeki tuzluluk dağılımına etkilerinin belirlenmesidir. Bu amaçla aşılı ve aşısız domates bitkileri damla ve karık yöntemleri ile sulanmıştır. Sulama suyunun elektriksel iletkenliği 1.9 dS/m ve SAR değeri 1.0’dan küçüktür. Ortalama meyve verimi, damla-aşılı, damla-aşısız, karık-aşılı ve karık-aşısız için sırasıyla, 4671, 4391, 4109 ve 3457 g/bitki olarak belirlenmiştir. Sırasıyla, 2005 ve 2006 yıllarında, toplam mevsimlik bitki su tüketimi, damla yönteminde 810. ve 771.5 mm, karık yönteminde ise 957.0 ve 928.2 mm olarak bulunmuştur. Toplam sulama suyu ihtiyacı (uygulanan sulama suyu miktarı) 2005 ve 2006 yılları için sırayla, damla yönteminde, 731 ve 714 mm, karık yönteminde, 881 ve 871 mm olarak bulunmuştur. Su kullanım etkinliği, damla-aşılı, damla-aşısız, karık-aşılı ve karık-aşısız için sırasıyla, 12.92, 12.14, 9.38 ve 7.90 kg/m3 olarak ölçülmüştür. Her ay alınan toprak örnekleri sonucunda elde edilen profil tuzluluk dağılımları, damla yönteminde damlatıcılardan ıslak çepere doğru, karık yönteminde ise karıklardan bitki köklerine doğru artış gösterdiği belirlenmiştir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastrmx_159097_27_pp_101-111.pdf
  • 2
101-111
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Ayars, J.E., Schoneman, R.A., Dale, F., Meso, B., and Shouse, P., 2001. Managing subsurface drip irrigation in the presence of shallow ground water. Agricultural Water Management 47 (2001) 243±264
Biles, C.L, Martyn, R.D, and Wilson, H.D., 1989. Isozymes and general proteins from various watermelon cultivars and tissue types. HortScience 24: 810–812
Çetin, Ö., Yıldırım, O., Uygan, D., ve Boyacı, H., 2001. Irrigation scheduling of drip irrigated tomatoes using class A pan evaporation. Turk. J Agric For. 26:171-178.
Cuartero, J. and Fernandez-Munoz, R., 1999. Tomato and salinity. Scientia Horticulturae 78, 83–125.
Estan, M., Martinez-Rodriguez, M. M., Perez-Alfocea, F., Flowers, J.T., and Bolarin, M. C., 2005. Grafting raises the salt tolerance of tomato through limiting the transport of sodium and chloride to the shoot. Journal of Experimental Botany, Vol. 56, No. 412, pp. 703–712.
Fernandez-Garcia, N. and Carvajal, M. 2003. Grafting, a Useful Technique for Improving Salinity Tolerance of Tomato?. Proc. IS on Greenhouse SalinityEds: A. Pardossi vdActa Hort 609.
Fernandez-Garcia, N., Martinez, V., Cerda, A. and Carvajal, M. 2002. Water and nutrient uptake of grafted tomato plants grown under saline conditions. J Plant Physiol.159:899-905.
Fernandez-Garcia, N., Martinez, V., Cerda, A. and Carvajal, M. 2004 Fruit quality of grafted tomato plants grown under saline conditions. Journal of horticultural Science & Biotechnology . vol. 79, no:6, pp. 995-1001
Gawad, G. A., Arslan, A., Gaihbe, A., and Kadouri, F., 2005. The effects of saline irrigation water management and salt tolerant tomato varieties on sustainable production of tomato in Syria (1999–2002) Agricultural Water Management 78 (2005) 39–53
Greenway, H. and Munns, R., 1980. Mechanisms of salt tolerance in nonhalophytes. Annu Rev Plant Physiol 31: 149-190
Hanson, D. and May, D., 2004. Effect of subsurface drip irrigation on processing tomato yield, water table depth, soil salinity, and profitability. Agricultural Water Management. 68 (1). pp 1–17.
Jensen M.E., and Burman R.D., (Ed.), Allen R.G., 1989. Evapotranspiration and irrigation water requirements. ASCE Manual Rep. Eng. Pract. No: 70, NY.
Kahlon, M.S., Josan, A.S., Khera, K.L. and Choudhary, O.P., 2007. Effect of drip and furrow methods of irrigation on tomato under two irrigation levels. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. Vol. 41, Issue : 4. Print ISSN : 0367-8245.
Khah, E.M., Kakava, E., Mavromatis, A., Chachalis, D., and Goulas, C., 2006. Effect of grafting on growth and yield of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) in greenhouse and open-field. Journal of Applied Horticulture, 8(1): 3-7.
Lee, J.M., 1994. Cultivation of grafted vegetables I. Current status, grafting methods, and benefits. HortScience 29: 235–239
Malash, N., Flowers, T. J., and Ragab, R., 2005. Effect of irrigation systems and water management practices using saline and non-saline water on tomato production. Agricultural Water Management. 78 (1), pp 25-38.
Malash, N. M., Ali, F. A., Fatahalla, M. A., Khatab, E. A., Hatem, M. K. and Tawfic, S., 2008. Response of tomato to irrigation with saline water applied by difrent irrigation methods and water management strategies. International journal of plant protection, 2 (101-116).
G.D.SEMİZ, E.YURTSEVEN
111
Martorana, M., Giuffrida, F., Leonardi, C., and Kaya, S., 2007. Influence of Rootstock on Tomato Response to Salinity Proc. VIIIth IS on Protected Cultivation in Mild Winter Climates Eds.: A. Hanafi and W.H. Schnitzler Acta Hort. 747, ISHS.
Öztekin, G. B., Leonardi, C., Caturano, E., and Tüzel, Y., 2009. Role of Rootstocks on Ion Uptake of Tomato Plants Grown under Saline Conditions. Proc. IS on Prot. Cult. Mild Winter Climate Eds.: Y. Tüzel et al. Acta Hort. 807, ISHS.
Qaryouti, M.M., Qawasmi, W., Hamdan H. and Edwan, M., 2007. Tomato Fruit Yield and Quality as Affected by Grafting and Growing System Proc. Ist IS on Fresh Food Quality Eds. A.N. Fardous vd Acta Hort. 741.
Santa-Cruz, A. and Cuartero, J., 2002. Response of Plant Yield And Leaf Ion Contents to Salinity in Grafted Tomato Plants. Proc. 5th IS Protect. Cult. Mild Winter Clim. Acta Hort. 559, ISHS 2001.
Singandhupe, R.B., Rao, G.G.S.N., Patil, N.G., and Brahmanand, P.S., 2003. Fertigation studies and irrigation scheduling in drip irrigation system in tomato crop (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) Europ. J. Agronomy 19 (2003) 327/340.
Sutton, K.F., Lanini, W. T., Mitchell, J. P., Miyao, E. M., and Shrestha, A., 2006. Weed Control, Yield, and Quality of Processing Tomato Production under Different Irrigation, Tillage, and Herbicide Systems. Weed Technology Vol 20 (4) pp 831–838.
Tachibana, S., 1982. Comparison of effects of root temperature on the growth and mineral nutrition of cucumber cultivars and figleaf gourd. J Jpn Soc Hort Sci 51(3): 299–308.
Tachibana, S., 1988. The influence of root temperature on nitrate assimilation by cucumber and figleaf gourd. J Jpn Soc Hort Sci 57: 440–447.
Tachibana, S., 1989. Respiratory response of detached roots to lower temperatures in cucumber and figleaf gourd grown at 20 °C root temperature. J Jpn Soc Hort Sci 58: 333–337.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com