Figure 2 displays the average monthly data for greenhouse microclimate parameters, carbon dioxide, sunlight, humidity, and the highest and lowest air temperatures throughout the tomato-growing winter season, extended from October 2022 to March 2023. Microclimatic conditions significantly influence plant development. Variations in greenhouse conditions can significantly influence the photosynthesis process and overall plant health. During the plant's growth phase in October and November, the greenhouse experiences a maximum air temperature of 31.5− 41.3 °C and a minimum air temperature in the range of 8.2−10.5°C with an overall average temperature of 18.98−21.22 °C. During the fruit-bearing and fruit-ripening stages in December and January, the average temperature was recorded in the range of 18.35–20.77 °C.
The average carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration and light amount in the growing compartment while plants were in early vegetative growth stages were recorded within the range of 385.61−451.79 parts per million (ppm) and 94.62−240.45 watts per square meter (W/m²), respectively. The average carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration and light amount in the growing compartment, while plants were in the fruit-bearing and fruit-ripening phases were recorded at 437.51−510.30 ppm and 104.13−136.64 W/m², respectively. The availability of optimum ranges of temperature, light, and CO2 is highly recommended for the optimal growth of cherry tomatoes. Tomatoes Plants can grow at their fastest rate within the optimum range of day duration and light intensity [25]. In the present study, plants showed a maximum growth rate at the end of January and March. The available average growing conditions during these months were: temperature, 20.77−25.06°C; CO2 468.29−510.30 ppm. Light: 136.64−155.02 W/m². These results are consistent with previous findings [1, 34].
2.1 Vegetative growth parameters
All the representative plants in each row showed an exceedingly significant interaction (P<0.001) between the total plant growth parameters and the observation dates (Table 2). The graphical representation, labeled Figure 3, illustrates the cumulative plant height per row and the daily growth rate variation. On the 148th day following the transplantation of tomato plants into the greenhouse experimental chamber, the average plant heights in rows 1, 2, and 3 were much higher—4.72 cm per day—at the start of February, when the average temperature inside the greenhouse was 21.32 °C and day length was about 10 h. A sudden decrease in plant growth rate was observed in the middle of February, when the average 10-day temperature was 17.98 °C, CO2 was 402 ppm, and light intensity was 134 W/m2. It might also be the hot outdoor weather conditions that reduced the daytime light exposure. The total number of leaves per plant was significantly different on each observation date. An average of 3 to 5 leaves emerges every week on each plant. The total number of leaves varied in relation to the change in total height of the plant and plant orientation in the greenhouse. Plants in the western section (anterior part) of the greenhouse exhibited low height, and as a result, they appeared with a smaller number of leaves (Figure 5). The progressive rise in the cumulative leaf count exhibited sustained constancy throughout the entire duration of the observation period, persisting until the final day of examination.
Leaf area is an important indicator of plant growth and productivity. It has been found that plants with a large leaf area produce more fruit. In the present study, the leaf below each inflorescence was brought under observation. The results showed a direct relationship between productivity and leaf area. The leaf area was significantly different among the observed leaves (P = 0.02). The 3rd leaf showed the highest leaf area, followed by leaf numbers 8 th and 9th . The 7th leaf appeared with the lowest leaf area, followed by the 2nd and 1st (Figure 4). Leaves in the range of two to four were found between two successive inflorescences.
Row 3 plants in the southeastern section of the greenhouse, where the plants received ample exposure to early morning sunlight and generally remained under consistent solar irradiance, exhibited a comparatively shorter stature and a higher leaf count in comparison to other rows' plants. Row 3 plants appeared with the maximum number of total leaves per plant, with an average of 80 leaves per plant, followed by Row 1 and Row 2, which exhibited mean total leaf counts of 76 and 75 leaves per plant, respectively, on the final day of observation.
The average distance between the two leaves was low in the case of Row 3 plants (6.5 cm) as compared to Row 1 and Row 2 (8.5 cm and 7.8 cm, respectively). The interstitial spacing between the two nascent upper leaves was greater as compared to the middle-young and older leaves close to the root. (Figure 6).
A non-significant (P = 0.626) interaction between the growth rate of mature-older leaves in each row and observation dates was found. While a significant change in the growth rate of middle-young and upper nascent leaves was found (P<0.009, P<0.012, respectively), it was observed that older leaves, which have attained the length of 40 cm, show a slow growth rate as compared to newly emerged upper leaves (10–15 cm) and leaves at intermediate growth stages (15–30 cm).
The observed growth rates of the older mature leaf, middle young leaf, and newly emerged upper leaf were recorded as follows: mature leaf: 0.003988 m2/day; middle leaf: 0.008733 m2/day; top newborn leaf: 0.010722 m2/day (Figure 7). An inconsistent change in leaf growth rate on each observation date was observed. Different leaf morphological responses have also been observed throughout the study. Leaves exhibited wilting due to reduced temperatures and diminished light intensity in the months of January and February. Leaves exposed to low temperatures displayed signs of wrinkling and damage to their cuticles. All the plants showed indistinctive stem diameter growth (Table 2). A significant change was observed in the stem diameter of plants at their top, middle, and base sections across various observation dates, with corresponding p-values of P<0.012, P=0.028, and P<0.001, respectively. The measured stem diameter on the top was in the range of 9.32mm to 13.43 mm, while in the middle part and close to the base, it was in the range of 10.48mm to 16.62mm and 5.52 mm to 10.39 mm, respectively
2.2 plants productivity parameters.
In the present study, tomato plants showed a distinctive productivity behavior in response to greenhouse conditions (Table 3). The difference among the plants on number of inflorescences, length of inflorescence, number of fruits per inflorescence, average fruit mass per inflorescence, fruit dry matter per inflorescence, fruit height per inflorescence and fruit diameter per inflorescence. was highly significant. A direct influence of greenhouse conditions on inflorescence length, number of fruits, and total mass per inflorescence was observed. High temperature fluctuations during the fruiting setting stages have greatly influenced the yield potential of each inflorescence. Inflorescence, which received an exceedingly optimum temperature, appeared to have maximum yield potential.
Table 2. Growth parameters (mean values ± SD) in response to greenhouse conditions in winter-grown cherry tomatoes.
Observation Dates
|
Older leaf growth rate (m²)
|
Mature leaf growth rate (m²)
|
Nascent leaf growth rate (m²)
|
Stem diameter growth rate at base
(mm)
|
Stem diameter growth rate in middle (mm)
|
Stem diameter growth rate at top
(mm)
|
Total height of plant
|
Total number of leaves plants¯¹
|
21-12-2022
|
0.194 ±0.013
|
0.158 ±0.011
|
0.051 ±0.011
|
10.07±0.867
|
11.46±0.99
|
5.83±0.328
|
169.88 ±5.38
|
32.13±1.52
|
06-01-2023
|
0.201 ±0.013
|
0.166 ±0.011
|
0.058 ±0.013
|
10.64±0.637
|
12.24±0.62
|
6.58±0.580
|
210.22 ±8.18
|
36.11±0.83
|
13-01-2023
|
0.207 ±0.016
|
0.174 ±0.011
|
0.077 ±0.014
|
11.06±0.622
|
12.89±0.94
|
7.29±0.638
|
230.77 ±8.52
|
39.44±0.50
|
20-01-2023
|
0.211 ±0.018
|
0.180 ±0.013
|
0.088 ±0.013
|
11.46±0.428
|
13.45±1.13
|
7.75±0.401
|
255.11 ±7.87
|
42.77±1.07
|
27-01-2023
|
0.214 ±0.022
|
0.184 ±0.014
|
0.099 ±0.011
|
11.86±0.378
|
13.98±1.16
|
8.20±0.364
|
279.00 ±7.88
|
46.44±0.50
|
03-02-2023
|
0.224 ±0.023
|
0.194 ±0.010
|
0.114 ±0.007
|
12.48±0.546
|
14.39±1.13
|
8.58±0.289
|
301.55 ±13.03
|
51.88±1.01
|
13-02-2023
|
0.227 ±0.025
|
0.201±0.006
|
0.125 ±0.004
|
12.84±0.405
|
14.92±1.08
|
8.90±0.301
|
325.22± 13.53
|
56.00±2.60
|
02-03-2022
|
0.230 ±0.029
|
0.209 ±0.008
|
0.135 ±0.008
|
13.26±0.541
|
15.50±1.30
|
9.36±0.442
|
381.22 ±29.13
|
68.11±2.52
|
27-03-2022
|
0.231 ±0.029
|
0.215 ±0.008
|
0.147 ±0.006
|
12.85±0.552
|
15.84±1.00
|
9.86±0.512
|
454.88 ±29.94
|
77.00±2.64
|
F
|
0.793
|
6.748
|
22.493
|
6.053
|
4.458
|
19.879
|
78.638
|
131.875
|
P
|
0.626
|
0.009
|
<.001
|
0.012
|
0.028
|
<.001
|
<.001
|
<.001
|
P < 0.05…*, 0.01…**, 0.001…*** ns = non-Significance level.
A non-significant difference was observed between total fruit mass per inflorescence and average fruit mass per inflorescence (Table 3). In terms of productivity parameters, there was also a great difference between and among the plants in each row (Figure 8). The experimental results showed a non-significant difference among the plants in each row in terms of the total number of inflorescences per plant.
On average, each plant produced one inflorescence in a week. Each plant produced 20 to 22 total inflorescences during its 4-month lifespan. A direct relationship was found between the height of the plant and the total number of inflorescences. The plants with maximum height appeared to have a greater number of inflorescences as compared to other low-height plants. The inflorescence length significantly varied (P<0.001) as the order of inflorescence changed on each plant. Inflorescence number 6 appeared with a maximum average length of 47.54 cm, followed by inflorescence numbers 5 and 7 (46.54 cm, 45.23 cm, respectively). Inflorescence numbers 1 and 2 showed minimum growth, with an average of 19.89 cm and 25.35 cm in all three rows on the last observation day (Figure 9). The number of fruits also significantly differed from inflorescence to inflorescence (P<0.001). Inflorescence number 4 produced the maximum number of fruits, followed by inflorescence numbers 5 and 9, respectively, of all plants ‘rows (Table 3). The lowest number of fruits produced was inflorescence number 2, followed by inflorescence numbers 1 and 7, respectively. The total fruit mass was not significantly different among the inflorescences of each plant's rows (P = 0.296). Inflorescence number 10 had the largest total fruit mass (243 g), followed by inflorescence numbers 6 and 3 (240.27 g and 235.41 g, respectively). Interestingly, the inflorescence with the highest number of fruits (number 4) did not appear with the highest total fruit mass (g); the possible reason behind this was the mass of individual fruit on each truss (Figure 10).
Inflorescence number 2 appeared with the highest average fruit mass (14.40 g), followed by Inflorescence number 1 and Inflorescence number 3 (12.54g, 12.86g). In the present findings, a direct relationship was observed between the fruit attachment order on each truss and fruit mass. On most of the trusses, the first five fruits were large and high in mass and diameter. Fruits in the middle of each inflorescence were mostly medium-sized and had a low diameter and mass.
The fruits of each inflorescence were not significantly different from each other in view of their diameter (P = 0.322). Inflorescence number 2 appeared with the highest fruit diameter (30.23 mm), followed by Inflorescence number 1 and Inflorescence number 3 (28.37 mm and 28.87 mm, respectively). The increase in the size of fruits in terms of their length and size can be attributed to the cooperative influence of phosphorus, potassium, and water. These elements aid in the production of auxins, which play a pivotal role in elongating cells by enhancing their ability to absorb water and osmotic solutes.
Table 3. Productivity parameters (mean values ± SD) in response to greenhouse conditions in winter-grown cherry tomatoes.
Inflorescence number.
|
Inflorescence Length. (cm)
|
Number of fruits.
|
Total Fruit mass (g)
|
Average fruit mass(g)
|
Fruit Dry matter (%)
|
Fruit diameter (mm)
|
Shelf days
|
1
|
19.90±0.55
|
13.00±0.66
|
181.46±20.06
|
12.54±1.39
|
3.16±0.08
|
28.97±1.8868
|
14.00±2.00
|
2
|
25.36±1.72
|
13.00±0.57
|
183.84±37.80
|
14.40±2.43
|
3.69±0.61
|
30.23±1.2818
|
14.00±1.00
|
3
|
35.54±5.43
|
17.44±1.83
|
235.41±56.50
|
12.86±2.81
|
7.78±0.16
|
28.87±2.7486
|
13.67±2.08
|
4
|
38.83±2.83
|
34.67±4.48
|
161.63±37.02
|
11.08±2.39
|
10.31±3.88
|
28.74±1.7164
|
16.67±1.15
|
5
|
46.56±7.00
|
31.22±2.21
|
178.17±47.30
|
11.83±1.81
|
13.89±4.24
|
27.30±0.7007
|
21.67±1.52
|
6
|
47.54±6.13
|
26.00±2.81
|
240.27±36.76
|
9.79±0.85
|
11.49±3.44
|
28.35±0.6140
|
17.67±0.57
|
7
|
45.23±6.65
|
14.33±0.66
|
226.80±19.27
|
9.71±1.10
|
11.83±0.9
|
28.47±2.0001
|
19.67±1.15
|
8
|
36.17±5.08
|
18.22±6.25
|
213.19±11.75
|
9.95± 0.71
|
9.85±0.791
|
26.82±1.2453
|
16.33±1.15
|
9
|
32.33±5.57
|
28.78±9.91
|
220.76±10.83
|
10.26±0.36
|
10.18±0.8
|
26.57±1.6044
|
16.32±2.08
|
10
|
27.67±3.14
|
27.00±1.33
|
243.22±81.81
|
11.72±3.43
|
9.47±0.304
|
26.87±1.9358
|
15.00±1.00
|
F
|
22.700
|
36.078
|
1.479
|
1.604
|
210.726
|
1.401
|
0.998
|
p
|
<.001
|
<.001
|
0.296
|
0.260
|
<.001
|
0.322
|
0.475
|
P < 0.05…*, 0.01…**, 0.001…*** ns = non-Significance level
2.3 Nutritional composition of tomato fruit.
One of the key measures of tomato fruit quality and its suitability for various applications is referred to as dry matter content. The dry matter content of tomato fruit is a crucial quality trait with significant implications for its market value. This attribute primarily refers to the proportion of solid material in the fruit, excluding water content. Present findings found a significant difference in dry matter contents for each inflorescence (Table 3). An inverse relationship has also been investigated between average fruit mass and fruit dry matter (%). Inflorescences with the highest average fruit mass, Inflorescence number 2, followed by 1 and 3, were low in dry matter content (3.16-3.69%). The dry matter contents were high in the case of inflorescence number 5 (13.89%), followed by inflorescence numbers 7 and 6 (11.83% and 11.49%, respectively). In view of shelf days, a non-significant relationship (p = 0.475) was found among the fruits of each inflorescence (Table 3). The 5th inflorescence's fruits (22 days), followed by the 7th and 6th (20 days and 18 days, respectively), survived the maximum number of days at room temperature (Figure 11). In the present study, we found a direct relationship between fruit dry matter contents and the number of fruit-keeping days (Figure 12). Inflorescent fruits with high dry matter content survived a higher number of days in their intact form at room temperature. Fruits containing a significant amount of dry matter exhibit favorable attributes, including enhanced flavor, increased efficiency in processing, improved resilience during transportation, and extended shelf life in storage. In the present study, we found a high brix (%) in inflorescence number 8 (8.85%), followed by inflorescence numbers 7 and 5 (8.22%, 8.10%), respectively (Table 4). Most of the solid substances in tomato fruits consist of carbohydrates, with the primary ones being sugars that can dissolve in water. Our result on the dry matter contents found a direct relationship between carbohydrate contents and dry matter contents. The contents of various sugars found in cultivated tomatoes are mainly influenced by both genetic traits and the environmental factors under which they are grown. The titratable acidity in the fruits of cultivated cherry tomatoes varies significantly from inflorescence to inflorescence (P = 0.008).
The titratable acidity contents were high in inflorescence number 3 fruits (15.81%), followed by inflorescence numbers 6 and 5 fruits (15.64% and 15.63%, respectively).
A low titratable acidity value was observed in inflorescence number 1 (12.76%), followed by inflorescence numbers 10 and 7 (13.21% and 13.73%), respectively. One important measure of tomato quality is firmness, which has a considerable impact. The tomato fruit's maturity process has a direct impact on the content and hardness of its cell wall polysaccharides. The fruit firmness of each inflorescence's fruits was also significantly different in comparison to each other. Inflorescence number 9 fruits appeared with high fruit firmness (7.57 kg/cm), followed by inflorescence numbers 7 and 6 (7.21 kg/cm and 7.15 kg/cm, respectively). Inflorescence number 4 appeared with the lowest fruit firmness (5.40 kg/cm).
In view of their importance as a pollutant and a key biochemical element for human health and the environment, nitrate and nitrites are highly investigated food chemical components. Given their significance as environmental pollutants and essential biochemical elements for both human health and the ecosystem, nitrate and nitrite have been the subject of extensive scientific research in the field of food chemistry. The nitrate concentration in cherry tomatoes is a reliable source for finding the nutritional profile. In the present study, inflorescence number 6 fruits were found to be enriched with nitrate contents (8.85 mg/kg), followed by inflorescence numbers 5 and 3 (8.07 mg/kg and 8.03). Fruit nitrate contents were not significantly different among the inflorescences (P = 0.228).
Table 4. Fruit nutritional contents (mean values ± SD) in response to greenhouse conditions of winter grown cherry tomatoes.
Inflorescence number.
|
Brix (%)
|
Nitrate contents. (mg/kg)
|
Fruit acidity
|
Fruit Firmness
(kg /cm²)
|
Leaf Area
(cm²)
|
1
|
7.21±0.2536
|
136.67±5.77
|
12.76±0.399
|
6.43±0.38
|
7183±16
|
2
|
7.50±0.7708
|
125.00±5.00
|
14.12±0.51
|
5.68±0.86
|
7013±12
|
3
|
6.91±0.2143
|
135.00±8.66
|
15.81±0.59
|
5.93±0.50
|
10477±13
|
4
|
7.15±0.3585
|
131.67±7.63
|
13.77±1.50
|
5.40±0.28
|
8851±79
|
5
|
8.07±0.8730
|
133.33±5.77
|
15.63±0.60
|
5.76±0.66
|
7541±43
|
6
|
8.85±1.0671
|
145.00±5.00
|
15.64±0.81
|
7.15±0.55
|
9287±11
|
7
|
8.22±1.0607
|
124.00±5.29
|
13.73±0.40
|
7.21±0.16
|
6294±52
|
8
|
7.79±1.0829
|
125.00±5.00
|
14.73±2.54
|
6.62±0.14
|
9423±77
|
9
|
7.70±0.8812
|
133.33±5.77
|
15.19±1.09
|
7.57±0.26
|
8953±64
|
10
|
8.03±0.6467
|
150.67±5.03
|
13.21±1.49
|
6.23±0.30
|
7389±76
|
F
|
5.276
|
1.724
|
6.360
|
10.039
|
4.382
|
P
|
0.014
|
0.228
|
0.008
|
0.002
|
0.024
|
P < 0.05…*, 0.01…**, 0.001…*** ns = non-Significance level.