Introduction
Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) is one of the most important and widely cultivated vegetable crops, belonging to the family Solanaceae—commonly known as the nightshade family—which also includes economically significant crops such as potato, eggplant, chilli, and tobacco. Known colloquially as “Wolf Apple”, “Love Apple”, or “Vilayati Baingan”, tomato is not only valued for its culinary versatility but also for its rich nutritional profile.
Globally, tomato cultivation occupies a significant place in vegetable production. As of 2017–18, the estimated global production stood at approximately 127.92 million tonnes, covering an area of around 47.19 lakh hectares. China leads global production with 33.64 million tonnes, followed by the United States. In India, during 2018–19, tomato was cultivated over an area of about 7.78 lakh hectares, yielding approximately 19.39 million tonnes. Major tomato-producing states include Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Haryana, Punjab, and Bihar.
Tomato is often referred to as the “Poor Man’s Orange” due to its affordability and its high vitamin C content, making it accessible and beneficial across socio-economic groups. The fruit’s vibrant red color and pleasant taste make it a staple in both raw and cooked forms. It is consumed fresh in salads and sandwiches or processed into products such as ketchup, puree, sauces, pickles, and tomato powder. Nutritionally, tomatoes are rich in vitamins A and C, B-complex vitamins, essential amino acids, and minerals like calcium (48 mg/100g), sodium (12.9 mg), and copper (0.19 mg). They also contain beneficial organic acids such as citric, formic, and acetic acids. Notably, tomatoes are a primary source of lycopene, a powerful antioxidant associated with reduced risk of certain cancers and other chronic diseases [1], their nutritional and economic value, tomato cultivation in India is challenged by low productivity, declining farm profitability, and limited awareness among growers regarding improved agronomic practices and quality management [2]. Addressing these challenges is essential to enhance yield, nutritional quality, and the livelihoods of smallholder farmers.
The beneficial effects of farmyard manure (FYM) and vermicompost on crop yield and soil productivity are largely attributed to their role as reservoirs of essential plant nutrients [3]. These organic amendments enhance soil physical properties by improving aeration, promoting root development, and stimulating microbial and biological activity in the rhizosphere, which collectively contribute to better nutrient cycling and plant health.
Among essential nutrients, nitrogen (N) plays a pivotal role in plant metabolism, directly influencing vegetative growth, enzymatic activity, and protein synthesis. Nitrogen is often considered the most critical nutrient for improving both crop yield and produce quality, thus dominating the field of plant nutrition. Understanding nitrogen’s interaction with other nutrients is of fundamental importance, as increased nitrogen availability not only promotes growth but also elevates the demand for other macro- and micronutrients. Depending on their availability in the root zone, this heightened demand may lead to nutrient imbalances, either in the form of deficiencies or toxicities [4], nitrogen, phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) are well-recognized for their role in crop development. More recently, sulphur (S) has been acknowledged as the fourth major nutrient essential for optimal plant growth. Over the past two to three decades, sulphur deficiencies have become increasingly prevalent, adversely affecting crop productivity, nutrient balance, and overall soil health [5-6]. Sulphur is now considered a vital component of balanced fertilization strategies, particularly in sulphur-deficient regions. Sulphur contributes significantly to both yield enhancement and quality improvement. It improves nitrogen use efficiency, supports amino acid and protein synthesis, and plays a crucial role in the development of seed oils—especially in oilseed crops. Numerous studies across India and globally have demonstrated that sulphur supplementation leads to improved crop yields, enhanced nutrient uptake, and sustained soil fertility.
Material and Methods
Experimental site and location
The experiment was conducted during the Rabi season of 2019–20 at the Nursery Area Organic Farm, Karguwan Ji, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh. Geographically, Jhansi is located in the southern part of Uttar Pradesh, situated between the rivers Pahuj and Betwa, at an average elevation of 225 meters above mean sea level (MSL). The precise geographical coordinates of the site are 25°26′55″N latitude and 78°34′11″E longitude. The region falls under Agro-Climatic Zone VI (Central Plateau and Hills Region), characterized by semi-arid conditions, with variable rainfall and distinct seasonal variations, making it a representative location for studying sustainable agricultural practices in the Bundelkhand region. The meteorological data recorded during the experimentation periods (2019-2020) based on observations made at the metrological observation of the IGFRI, Jhansi are depicted in figure. During Experimental period, a total rainfall of 8.20mm was received. Maximum temperature being 31.60C was recorded in October. While the lowest temperature recorded in December was 4.20C. The mean relative humidity ranged from to 86% in 22 October to December, respectively.
Treatments consists ofT0: RDF 100:75:55 (Through chemical fertilizer), T1: 100% N from FYM, T2: 100% N from V.C., T3: 100% N from FYM+20kg/ha sulphur through gypsum, T4: 100% N from FYM+30kg/ha sulphur through gypsum, T5: 100% N From V.C+20 kg/ha sulphur through gypsum, T6: 100% N From V.C+30 kg/ha From sulphur through gypsum, T7: 50% N From FYM+50%N From VC+20kg/ha sulphur through gypsum, T8: 50% N From FYM+50% from VC+30 kg/ha sulphur through gypsum. The crop opted for the experiment was tomato with variety Uday and a spacing of 60 x 45 cm during Rabi 2019 – 2020. The experiment consists of nine treatments and three replications. The design used was Randomized Block Design (RBD).
Plant analysis
Plant samples were dried in oven at 500 C until constant dry weight obtained. The plant samples were grinded and used for following chemical analysis. Nitrogen content was determined by Micro-Kjeldahal method [3]. Phosphorus content in plant was determined by photo colorimetric method [4]. Potassium content plant was determined by flame-photometer method, using di-acid digestion system respectively by [5].The sulphur content, By Turbid Metric Methods.
Statistical Analysis
The data recorded during the course of investigation were subjected to analysis statistically using analysis of variance techniques (ANOVA) for randomized block design as prescribed by [6]. Standard error of mean in each case and the critical difference only for significant cases were computed at 5% levels of probability as under.
Results and Discussion
Nitrogen content in Tomato
Effect of organic sources of nitrogen and sulphur application on nutrient concentration in tomato fruit was significantly influence nitrogen content in tomato and the mean date is presented in (Table 1).The maximum values (2.63%) recorded in respect to nitrogen content under T8 followed by T1 and control and lowest value was recorded in T4 (1.20 %) treatment combination which was inferior to treatment combination, the incensement in nitrogen concentration may be due to organic sources fertilizers are enhanced the mineralization of nitrogen. Our findings are partially agreed with the results of [6-7]. Nitrogen and K accumulation was greater in fruit than leaves. The rate of tomato growth and N uptake peak during fruit setting and slow after fruit ripening begins, thus, N applications should coincide with peak requirements to prevent excessive application and leaching [8-10].
Phosphorus content by Tomato
Effect of organic source of fertilizers on phosphorous concentration in tomato fruit was significantly influence during the crop period and the mean date is presented in (Table 1). The maximum values (0.24%) recorded in respect to nitrogen content under T8 followed by T7 and T5. The lowest value was recorded in to (0.11 %). The organic fertilization increases the availability of phosphorous. Our finding is partially agreed with the result of [7] Mukta et al. (2015) phosphorus content in tomato plant increased significantly due to the application of integrated applications of vermicompost and chemical fertilizers. It has already been shown that phosphorus availability in andosols was improved with organic manure [9]. It is also known that the organic phosphorus from poultry manure strongly integrates the pool of the soil steady organic matter [10-11] and organic colloids prevent soluble phosphates from linking with soluble iron and aluminium in acidic soils. Improved phosphorus concentration tended to be higher with balanced mineral fertilization than with local farmers fertilization even if the amount of applied phosphorus is very similar in the two treatments.
Potassium content in tomato
Effect of organic source of fertilizers on potassium content in tomato fruit was significantly influence during the crop period and the mean date is presented in (Table 1). The maximum content in tomato crop (2.16%) recorded in T8 and T4 followed by T6 2.13 %, the lowest value was recorded in T3 (1.43%). The organic fertilization increases the mineralization of potassium, insoluble to soluble forms. Nitrogen and K accumulation was greater in fruit than leaves. According to [8-12], the rate of tomato growth and N uptake peak during fruit setting and slow after fruit ripening begins, thus, N applications should coincide with peak requirements to prevent excessive application and leaching.
Sulphur content in plant
The effect of nitrogen and sulphur application on nutrient content in tomato crop was significantly influence and mean data showed in Table 1. The mean values of sulphur content was found under different treatments i.e.T0 (0.22), T1 (0.22), T2 (0.18), T3 (0.18), T4 (0.23), T5 (0.23), T6 (0.21), T7 (0.21), T8 (0.23). The maximum values were recorded under T8 and lowest in T2 and T3.
Sulphur content in fruit
The effect of nitrogen and sulphur application on nutrient content in tomato fruit was significantly influence and mean data showed in (Fig. 2). The mean values of sulphur content was observed in treatments T0 (237.67), T1 (180), T2 (208), T3 (463), T4 (283), T5 (278), T6 (245), T7 (253), T8 (340). The maximum values recorded in respect to sulphur concentration and uptake from T3 and lowest content was recorded in T1 treatment combinations.
The effect of nitrogen and sulphur application on nitrogen uptake by tomato plants was significantly influence and mean data showed in (Table 2). The mean values of nitrogen content was observed in treatments from T0 (84.08 kg/ha), T1 (112.84 kg/ha), T2 (62.07 kg/ha), T3 (48.90 kg/ha), T4 (42.50 kg/ha), T5 (64.94 kg/ha), T6 (63.74 kg/ha), T7 (56.14 kg/ha), T8 (119.32 kg/ha). The maximum values recorded in respect to sulphur concentration and uptake from T8 and lowest content was recorded in T4 treatment combinations.
Phosphorus uptake by tomato
The effect of nitrogen and sulphur application on phosphorous uptake by tomato plants was significantly influence and mean data showed in (Table 2). The mean values of phosphorous content was observed in treatments from T0 (5.04 kg/ha), T1 (6.78 kg/ha), T2 (6.42 kg/ha), T3 (7.30 kg/ha), T4 (6.88 kg/ha), T5 (7.97 kg/ha), T6 (7.86 kg/ha), T7 (8.36 kg/ha), T8 (11.89 kg/ha). The maximum values recorded in respect to sulphur concentration and uptake from T8 and lowest content was recorded under control (TO).
Potassium uptake by tomato
The effect of nitrogen and sulphur application on potassium uptake by tomato plants was significantly influence and mean data showed in (Table 2). The mean values of potassium content was observed in treatments from T0 (82.33 kg/ha), T1(88.47 kg/ha), T2 (86.60 kg/ha), T3 (58.13 kg/ha), T4 (76.87 kg/ha), T5 (78.37 kg/ha), T6 (86.17 kg/ha), T7 (77.20 kg/ha), T8 (103.03 kg/ha). Earlier reported that the maximum uptake values of N, P and K were recorded with higher dose of nitrogen application [11-14].
Sulphur uptake by tomato plant:
The effect of nitrogen and sulphur application on sulphur uptake by tomato plants was significantly influence and mean data showed in (Table-3). The mean values of sulphur content was observed in treatments T0 (9.84), T1 (10.07), T2 (7.34), T3 (7.34), T4 (8.11), T5 (8.59), T6 (7.39), T7 (8.07), T8 (11.34). The maximum values recorded in respect to sulphur concentration and uptake from T8 and lowest content was recorded under treatments T2.
Sulphur uptake in tomato fruit
The effect of nitrogen and sulphur application on sulphur uptake by tomato fruits was significantly influence and mean data showed in (Table-3). The mean values of sulphur content in fruits was observed in treatments T0 (3.65), T1 (2.38), T2 (2.), T3 (6.37), T4 (3.70), T5 (3.23), T6 (3.25), T7 (2.83), T8 (4.06). The maximum values recorded in respect to sulphur concentration and uptake from T3 and lowest content was recorded under treatments T2.
Conclusion:
Organic fertilizers like Farm Yard manure, Vermicompost significantly improved the nutrient contents and uptakes. The highest contents (N, P, K, S) were reported in T8 (50 % V.C+50% FYM+30 kg/ha S) with value of (2.63 %, 0.24 %, 2.16 %, 0.23 %) and least was reported in T4 N (1.20 %), TO P (0.11 %), T3 K (1.43 %), T2 S (0.18 %). Highest uptakes (N, P, K, S) was reported in T8- (50 % V.C+50% FYM+30 kg/ha S) (119.32 kg/ha, 11.89 kg/ha, 103.03 kg/ha, 11.34 kg/ha) and least was reported in T4 N (42.50 kg/ha), TO P (5.04 kg/ha), T3 K (58.13 kg/ha), T2 S (7.02 kg/ha).
References:
- Agarwal, S., Rao, A.V. (2000). Tomato lycopene and its role in human health and chronic diseases. CMAJ. 163(6):739–44.
- Chattopadhyay, A., Dutta, S., Karmakar, K., Bhattacharya I. and Hazra P. (2007). “Technology for Vegetable Crop Production”, Directorate of Research, BCKV, Kalyani, Nadia, West Bengal pp. 1-226.
- Snell, F.D. and Snell, C.T. ( 1955). Calorimatric methods of analysis. 3rd Ed. Vol – 2, pp. 814-816.
- Jonson, C.M. and Ulrich, A. (1959). Analytical method used in plant analysis. Calif Agric. Exp. Sta.Bull., 766p.
- Jackson, M.L. (1967). Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice-Hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, p 498.
- Cocharan, W.G. and Cox., G.M. (1962) Experimental design (2nd Ed.) Asia Publishing House, New Delhi.
- Mukta, S., Rahman, M.M., Mortuza, M.G. (2015). Department of agricultural chemistry, Bangladesh Agricultural university Mymensingh, Department of biochemistry and moleculerbiology, Bangladesh Agricultural university Mymensingh. Yield and nutrient content of tomato as influenced by the application of vermicompost and chemical fertilizer. J. Envirorn. Sci. and Natural resourcese, 8(2): 115-122.
- Hartz, TK., Bottoms and TG. (2009). Nitrogen Requirements of drip-irrigated processing tomatoes Hort Science 44: 1988-1993.
- Odongo, N.E., Hyoung-Ho K., Choi Hee-chul, Van Straaten P., McBride B.W. and Romney D.L.(2006). Improving rock phosphate availability through feeding, mixing and processing with composting manure, Biores. Technol. 98 : 2911–2918.
- Chawla, R., Mondal, K., & Pankaj, M. S. (2022). Mechanisms of plant stress tolerance: Drought, salinity, and temperature extremes. Plant Science Archives, 4(08). DOI: https://doi.org/10.51470/PSA.2022.7.2.04
- Bodet, J.M., Hacala S., Aubert, C., Texier C. (2001). Fertiliser avec les engrais de ferme, Ed. Inst. Elév., ITAVI-ITCF-ITP, Paris, France, P 2001, 104
- Vidhya, C. S., Swamy, G. N., Das, A., Noopur, K., & Vedulla, M. (2023). Cyclic Lipopeptides from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens PPL: Antifungal Mechanisms and Their Role in Controlling Pepper and Tomato Diseases. Microbiology Archives, an International Journal. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51470/MA.2023.5.2.1
- Lal, Munna, Nataraja, K.C., Kherawat, B.S. Brajendra and Kumar, Arvind (2012). Effect of nitrogen and manganese on yield and uptake of nutrients by oats (Avena sativa L.). AsianJ. Soil Sci., 7(1): 127-130.
- Lenmem Yosung, G Narayana Swamy, G Ramesh, Swapnil Gupta, Majid Mohiuddin (2020). Integrating Water Management, Nutrient Inputs, and Plant Density: A Holistic Review on Optimizing Cotton Yield under Variable Agroecosystems. Plant Science Review. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51470/PSR.2020.01.01.01