Conference PaperPDF Available

Effect of shade on the growth and yield of tomato plants

Authors:

Abstract

Tomato seedlings (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) cv. Prigade were transplanted in July, 1994 in a well N fertilized soil which was fertiled with P and K. Shade screen was suspended at 1.5 m above the plants 10 days after transplanting to provide 30% shade. North and south sides were left open to provide good ventilation while the east and west sides were completely covered with the screens. Results showed that shade has a significant effect on main stem length and leaf area but not on leaf number or intercepted Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR). Shade also reduced total dry matter production significantly. Air and leaf temperatures under shade conditions were lower than that of the open field during day time and average 2°C, while it was higher under shade conditions than that of the open field during the night. Data show that applying 30% shade to tomato plants didn't affect fruit yield under the experiment conditions. The results of this work and other works showed that shade didn't affect tomato fruit yield consistently and its use is not justified. Meanwhile, Shade can be used to improve fruit quality such as reducing sun burn.
EFFECT OF SHADE ON THE GROWTH AND YIELD OF TOMATO PLANTS
A.M.R. Abdel-Mawgoudl , S.O. EI-Abd
l,
S.M. Singer
l,
A.F. Abou-Hadid+ , T.e. Hsiao-
IHorticulture Res. Dept., National Res. Cent, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt
2Horticulture Dept., Fac. Agric., Ain Shams Univ., Cairo, Egypt
3LAWR Dept., Univ. of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA
Abstract
Tomato seedlings (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) cv. Prigade were transplanted in July,
1994 in a well N fertilized soil which was fertiled with P and K. Shade screen was
suspended at 1.5 m above the plants 10 days after transplanting to provide 30% shade.
North and south sides were left open to provide good ventilation while the east and west
sides were completely covered with the screens. Results showed that shade has a
significant effect on main stem length and leaf area but not on leaf number or intercepted
Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR). Shade also reduced total dry matter
production significantly. Air and leaf temperatures under shade conditions were lower
than that of the open field during day time and average 2°C, while it was higher under
shade conditions than that of the open field during the night. Data show that applying
30% shade to tomato plants didn't affect fruit yield under the experiment conditions. The
results of this work and other works showed that shade didn't affect tomato fruit yield
consistently and its use is not justified. Meanwhile, Shade can be used to improve fruit
quality such as reducing sun burn.
1. Introduction
Temperature plays an important role in plant growth and productivity. Tomato plant
productivity is limited to a large degree because of high temperatures in many regions in
the world. Studies have showed different effects of high temperature on growth and
productivity of tomato plants. High day and night temperature resulted in faster stem
growth giving thin stems and many trusses with weak flowers (Abdalla and Verkerk,
1968). Smith (1932) reported that high temperature is a significant factor contributing to
tomato blossom drop which may have been caused by reduction in viability and
effectiveness of the pollen produced at high temperature. Reduction in fruit set by
disturbing the process of gametogensis and efficiency of the fertilization is another effect
of high temperatures on tomato, (Iwahori and Takahashi.I 964; Smith and Cochran 1935;
Johnson and Hall 1953; Iwahori 1965, 1966
&
1967). Although many studies concluded
that night temperature is the major factor that affect fruit set, it was found that high day
temperature also reduced fruit set (Howlett 1962).
Shading was often suggested as a solution to overcome the effects of high
temperature. El-Gizawy et al., (1992) mentioned that increasing shade resulted in
increasing tomato fruit yield with best results when applying 35% shade. Rylski (1986)
found that applying 25% shade to pepper plants resulted in yield increase. However,
Russo (1993) reported that shade didn't increase tomato fruit yield consistently and its
use is not justified.
The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of shading on the growth of tomato
plants growing in the summer season to asses the benefits of shade in terms of improved
crop yield.
Strategies for Mark. Orient. Greenhouse Production
Eds. A.F. Abou-Hadid. R.A. Jones
Acta HOM. 434, ISHS 1996
313
2. Materials and methods
Tomato seedlings (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill) cv. Prigade were transplanted in
July, 1994 in a spacing 35 ern between plants and 75 cm between rows. Two trails with
two weeks interval was carried out. The soil was yolo clay loam, fertile with P and K,
fertilized before transplanting with 150 N /h. The area was divided into two treatments
with three replicates. The treatments were normal light and 30 % shade provided by
using black polyethylene nets. The nets were suspended at 1.5 m height using metal bars
and wires. The nets also covered both east and west sides while north and south sides
were left open to provide good ventilation. Irrigation was carried out on a regular basis
(approximately 14 days) so the plants would not be exposed to any degree of water
stress. Leaf water potential was measured using a pressure chamber. Light interception
was measured at mid day using a l-m long photosynthetically active radiation (PAR)
sensor ( Li-191, LICOR Inc., Lincoln, NE, U.S.A.). Leaf temperature was measured
using fine (0.03 mm diameter) constant and copper thermocouples (three thermocouples
for each replicate) glued to the lower side of the leaf. Air temperature in the open field
and under shade was measured using the same kind of thermocouples. All
thermocouples were calibrated in a constant temperature water bath for 9 sets of
temperature ranging from 5-45
D
C and a regression was made for each before attachment
to the leaves. The Millivolt data from all thermocouples were read and recorded by a
portable data logger (polycorder, OMNIDATA, Logan, Utah, USA) which scanned 10
channels every 10 seconds and averaged every 10 minutes. Other measurements such as
plant height, leaf number, leaf area and dry matter were taken in 10-day intervals. Dry
matter samples consisted of plants in 1.5 m length of raw. One plant was left between
each two consecutive sample area and all sampled rows were boarded by unsampled
rows. Two samples were taken for each replicate (6 samples for each treatment) each
time. Total fresh yield and dry matter content were recorded.
3. Results
20 30
40
50 60
Figure I shows that length of the main stem increased under shade conditions
compared to normal light treatment. This difference was significant starting from the
second sample (20 days after applying shade). Difference in leaf number between shaded
and unshaded plants showed in Figure 2 was not significant. In contrast, EI-Gizawy et
al.,
(1992) reported that shade significantly reduced leaf number. Late in the season, the
older leaf began to seriescence. Yellow leaf number was higher in unshaded plants
compared to that in shaded plants as given in Figure 2.
I
Fig. (1): Effect of shade on length of the main stem of tomato plants.
E
100
~ 80
60
40
20
o
10
..
-
-
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
04
-
-
".
..
".
~I""-Normal light
- •• Shade
•..
.:::
Cl
'a;
s:
•..
c
CIS
ii:
Days after applying shade
L...-___________ _---,
---1
314
Difference in leaf size illustrated by Figure 3 was not significant at the beginning of
the season, but starting from the fourth sample (40 days after applying shade) the
average area / leaf was significantly higher under shade compared to unshade treatment.
Similar results were reported by El-Gizawy et aI., (1992); Cockshull et al., (1992) and
Ryliski (1986).
PAR interception showed in Figure 4 was slightly higher under shade for some
sampling dates than in open. However this difference in PAR intercepted wasn't
statistically significant.
Fig. (2) : Effect of shade on the number of green (G.L.) and yellow (Y.L.) leaves of
tomato plants.
'C
C
ns
c
t/)
Q) ~
~ :ll
Ol_
e ~
•..0
Q)=
.Q
Q)
E
>-
:::J
Z
80
60
40~~-r--~~~~~
~Normal(
20
G.L.)
- ~ Shade (G.L.)
o
+-----~--~--~----~--~_T~----~----~
10 20 30 40 50 60
70
Days after applying shade
I
Fig. (3) : Effect of shade on the average area/leaf ( sq. cm ) for tomato plants.
_N
300
••
••
Q)
E
...-...-.
••
••
.!!!
0
200
,,-
•••
Q);:-
----
••
••
Ol
ns
~Normal
•••
ns
Q) 100
-.J
~
•..
-
Q) -
-
~
Shade
>
ns
« ~
0
ns
10 20 30 40 50 60
Days after applying shade
Fig. (4): Effect of shade on midday light interception pecentage (or ground cover %) of
tomato plants
100
80
~60
0
0
40
C)
20
05
-
-
-
15 20 30 43
Days after applying shade
315
Leaf and air temperature in day time given in Figure 5 rose faster in the morning in the
open field. The difference between air temperature in the open field and under shade
continued to increase throughout the day. This difference averaged about 1"C. Leaf
temperature showed the same trend as that of air temperature. Leaf temperature was
higher in the open field than that under shade for the morning early afternoon. The
difference became more clear starting from 10 A.M. In the evening approached, leaf
temperature of unshaded plants started to decline faster than that of shaded plants. Leaf
and air temperatures under shade became higher than that in the open field.
I
Fig. (5) : Air and leaf temperatures of tomato plants as affected by using shade.
- •• Tc (sun)
Tc (shade)
-0
Air (sun)
-- Air (shade)
0
<:>
..•
••
w
,..
'"
en
...•
co
II>
..•
..• ..•
..•
..•
..• ..•
..•
..• ..•
••
~
N N N
<:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:>
..•
N
W
,..
'"
en
...•
co
II> <:>
N
w
,..
<:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:>
<:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:>
Time (hours) (PST)
Total dry matter production (gm/sq.m), showed in Figure 6 was higher in the
unshaded plants compared to shaded plants except for the fourth and last samples where
the difference was not significant.
Total fresh fruit yield, as shown in Figure 7 was not significantly different between the
two treatments. Similarly, difference in dry matter content (gmlkg fresh yield) was not
significant between the two treatments as presented in Figure 8.
I
Fig. (6) : Effect of shade on the total dry matter production of tomato plants.
E
800
C'
~7 00
§
600
c:
5 00
0
"E
4 0 0
"
'0
300 ~Norm a I
e
0..
2 0 0
i; I 00
S had e
t:
ee
0
E
z-
O
20 4 0 60 8 0
0
D A P
316
I
Fig. (7): Effect of shade on the fruit yield (kg!sq.m) of tomato plants.
Treatments
5
4
3
2
Yield
(kg/m')
o!..---
I
Fig. (8): Effect of shade on the dry matter content in the tomato fruit (gm! kg fruit).
There was a slight difference in light use efficiency CLUE ) between the two
treatments as represented by the slope of the curve of cumulative intercepted PAR
against cumulative biomass given in Figure 9.
1000
I
Fig. (9): Light use efficiency of tomato plants as affected by applying shade.
Linear
(Shade)
--Linear
CI (Sun)
0~--~----~--~~--~----4~--~~1
o
1/1
1/1
CII
E
o
in ~
600
CII
E
~S
400
..!!!
::J
E
::J
o
800
200
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Cumulative
PAR
intercepted (mole/rn")
• Shade
o
Sun
317
4. Discussion
The results of vegetative parameters (plant height, leaf area and leaf number) explain
the difference in intercepted PAR where shaded plants tried to increase intercepted light
by increasing interception area. Jones (1992) indicated that shade resulted in increasing
water content in shaded plants which increased the ability of leaves in absorbing
radiation and decreasing reflection. Using screens for shading probably redistribute light
on the canopy in a qualitatively way depending on the properties of the screen material
(color, thickness and material). The reduction in total dry matter production during the
season resulted from the reduction in light intercepted by the plants, this also was
reported by Cockshull et al., (1992) where they mentioned that a 1% light loss led to a
1% yield loss at least in the first period of harvesting of greenhouse tomatoes. Although
chlorophyll content was not measured, other studies on the effect of shade on plants
reported that shade decreased chlorophyll content (El-Gizawy, 1992). This factor could
also be considered as a factor in reducing dry matter production.
The difference in air and leaf temperatures can be explained as a result of difference in
ventilation between the two treatments and because of the radiation exchange process
between plants of the two treatments and the surrounded objects.
In
the day time, leaf
and air temperatures under shade were lower as a result of reducing intercepted
radiation. At night, For unshaded plants, plants started to exchange radiation with the
facing surface (sky its temperature below zero) while shaded plants exchanged radiation
with the facing surface (screen) which had a temperature much higher than the sky
(radiation is proportionally related to the fourth power of the body's absolute
temperature). Because harvesting was done on two dates, there was some ripe fruit
remain for a while on the plants which continued in consuming dry matter in respiration
process and this was higher in un shaded plants. This probably is the reason that reduced
the dry matter in the last biomass sample in the unshaded plants and according to this
possibility the slope of cumulative PAR against cumulative biomass would higher and
probably identical to that of shaded plants.
5. Conclusion
Results obtained show that under the experiment conditions, applying 30% shade does
not have a significant effect on the final yield of tomato crop. Although many studies
have reported that shade reduced the effect of high temperature on tomato plants, our
data show that for 30% shading this reduction in temperature averaged about 20C at
noon. This reduction in temperature does not seem enough to affect the productivity of
the plants in terms of fruit yield. However, using shade may have effect on reducing the
extremes of temperature and this may have effect on plant productivity under certain
climates. The reduction in the total dry matter production was mainly due to the
reduction in light intensity. This also support the idea that shade as a solution for
improving tomato crop yield is questionable in the same conditions of this experiment
and looking in other directions for improving crop yield is required. One of these
directions is improving the harvest index of the crop. Meanwhile, shade can be used to
improve fruit quality. However, Another factor should be considered before recommend
shading, the cost of shading relate to improved quality or yield.
Abdalla A.A., Verkerk K. (1968) Growth, flowering and fruit-set of tomato at high
temperature. Neth J Agric Sci 16: 71-76
Cockshull K.E., Graves c.J., Cave C.R.J. (1992) The influence of shading on yield of
glasshous tomatoes. J Hort Sci 67(1): 11-24
References
318
EI-Gizawy A.M., Gomaa H.M., EI-Habbasha K.M., Mohamed S.S. (1992) Effect of
deferent shading levels on tomato plants. 1. Growth, flowering and chemical
compassion. Acta Hort 323: 341-347
Howlett F.S. (1962) Introductry Remarks. Proc Plant Sci Symp Cambpell Soup Co., 59-
64
Iwahori S. (1965) High temperature injuries in tomato. IV development of normal flower
buds and morphological abnormalist of flower buds treated with high temperature. J
Jap Soc Hort Sci 34: 33-41
Iwahori S. (1966) High temperature injuries in tomato. V. Fertilization and development
of embryo with special reference to the abnormalisit caused by high temperature. J Jap
Soc Hort Sci 35: 379-386
Iwahori S. (1967) Auxin of tomato fruit at different stages of its development with
special reference to high temperature injuries. PI Cell Physiol8: 15-22
Iwahori S., Takhashi K. (1964) High temperature injuries in tomato. III Effects of high
temperature on flower bud and flowers of different stages of development. J Jap Soc
Hort Sci 33: 67-74
Johnson S.P., Hall W.e. (1953) Vegetative and fruting responses of tomatoes to high
temperature and light intensity. Bot Gaz 144: 449-460
Jones H.G. (1992) Plants and Microclimate. Cambridge Univ Press 2nd edition
Russo V.M. (1993) Shading of tomato plants inconsistently affects fruit yield.
Hortscince 28(1): 113
Ryliski I. (1986) Improvement of pepper fruit quality and timing of harvest by shading
under high solar radiation conditions. Acta Hort 191: 221-228
Smith O. (1932) Relation of temperature to anthesis and blossom drop in tomato
together a histological study of the pistils. J Agric Res 44: 183-190
Smith
0.,
Cochran H.L. (1935) Effect of temperature on pollen germination and tube
growth in the tomato. Cornell Univ Agric Exp St Mem 175
319
... The option of un-whitened cover was not considered because 100% of commercial greenhouses naturally ventilated in Almería use whitening [19]. Furthermore, an un-whitened greenhouse at the beginning of the crop cycle could risk the viability of the tomato crop as a consequence of plant photoinhibition [29][30][31] or physiological disorders [34][35][36][37][38] produced by excessive radiation and extreme temperatures. Application of the different doses consisted of increasing the concentration of the mass of CaCO 3 (kg) diluted in a volume of water (L). ...
... Cockshull et al. [17] also observed an increase of total plant length with the use of slight fixed shading treatments (beneath 23.4%), but without significant differences. At moderate shading level (30% shading), Abdel-Mawgoud et al. [38] observed an increase in plant length and leaf area, but not on the number of leaves. In the autumn-winter cycle, the length of the lowest internode and the stem diameter were statistically greater in the east sector with the greatest whitening concentration (Table 5). ...
... Although the total yield can be reduced linearly with the augmentation of shading [17,79], positive effects can be produced in the yield of marketable fruit. Shading can diminish the incidence of blossom-end rot (BER) in tomatoes [38] and, as a consequence, reduce the non-marketable yield [51]. The main drawback of cover whitening against other passive or active cooling methods (i.e., external/internal net shading, fog) is that it may negatively affect the photosynthetic rate, crop growth, and production, as it reduces light in hours when it is not in excess. ...
Article
Full-text available
This work analyzes the influence of whitening a greenhouse roof on the microclimate and yield of a tomato crop. In the west sectors of two multi-span greenhouses, a whitening concentration of 0.250 kg L−1 was used as a control. In an autumn–winter cycle, a lower (0.125 kg L−1) and an increased (0.500 kg L−1) concentration were used in the east sectors of greenhouses 1 and 2. In a spring–summer cycle, the whitening concentrations in the east were varied depending on outside temperature. The effect of whitening on photosynthetic activity, production, plants’ morphological parameters, and the quality of the fruits were also analyzed. To evaluate the effect on microclimate, solar and photosynthetically active (PAR) radiations, air and soil temperatures, and heat flux in the soil were measured in greenhouse 1. Results show that excessive whitening leads to reductions of inside PAR radiation that decreases photosynthesis and crop yield. A whitening concentration of 0.500 kg L−1 is proposed at the beginning of the autumn–winter crop cycle, washing the cover when inside temperature drops to 35 °C. At the end of the spring–summer cycle, a concentration of 0.125 kg L−1 is recommended when inside temperature increases to 35 °C.
... When radiation is reduced, the temperature and relative humidity inside the greenhouse are reduced, which decreases the cost of cooling, water consumption and electricity (Willits and Peet, 2000;Al-Helal and Al-Musalam, 2003;Ahemd et al., 2016). In addition, shading reduces the incidence of blossom-end rot in tomatoes (Abdel-Mawgoud et al., 1996). For example, Gent (2007) found the total yield decreased linearly with the increase in shading by 15, 30 and 50%, but this difference disappeared when the yield of marketable fruit was considered. ...
... For example, Gent (2007) found the total yield decreased linearly with the increase in shading by 15, 30 and 50%, but this difference disappeared when the yield of marketable fruit was considered. Additionally, Abdel-Mawgoud et al. (1996) found that applying 30% shading to tomato plants does not affect the fruit yield. Loik et al. (2017) stated that shading caused by selective photovoltaic systems caused a small decrease in water use, whereas minimal effects were observed on the number of fruits and fresh weight for several marketable tomato species. ...
... The plants reach higher values of length and leaf area and a lower number of leaves under high shading conditions (Bénard et al., 2015). Abdel-Mawgoud et al. (1996) showed that 30% shading increases the main stem length and leaf area but not the number of leaves. ...
Article
Flexible photovoltaic panels are an option to generate renewable energy that could be compatible with the production of greenhouse crops, especially in warm sunny countries. The aim of this study was to evaluate, during two growing seasons, the effect of shading caused by flexible photovoltaic panels mounted on the greenhouse roof on tomato plant morphology and fruit yield and quality. This study was conducted during two growing seasons in a commercial greenhouse for tomato production. Two photovoltaic panel arrays placed on the greenhouse roof were analysed. Both occupied 9.8% of the cover. The parameters studied were PAR, plant morphology, crop yield and fruit quality. The results show that the small reduction in PAR caused by flexible photovoltaic panels on the roof did not affect the total and marketable yield; plant morphology; number of flowers per branch; and fruit colour, firmness and pH. However, the fruit diameter decreased, without affecting the yield (kg·m⁻²). Both flexible photovoltaic panel arrays on the greenhouse roof produced a similar effect on plant morphology, crop yield and fruit quality.
... Location Observations Cockshull et al. (1992) [5] United Kingdom Shading nets and whitewashing on tomato Abdel-Mawgoud et al. (1996) [8] Egypt Effects of shading Papadopoulos y Pararajasingham (1997) [9] Canada Plant spacing Klaring (1998) [10] Germany Shading on broccoli Kittas et al. (1999) [11] Greece Shading on the spectral distribution of light Araki et al. (1999) [12] Belgium Shading nets on spinach Abreu y Meneses (2000) [13] Portugal Effects of whitewashing on tomato Kittas et al. (2003a) [14] Greece Aluminized thermal shading screen on roses ...
... Location Observations Cockshull et al. (1992) [5] United Kingdom Shading nets and whitewashing on tomato Abdel-Mawgoud et al. (1996) [8] Egypt Effects of shading Papadopoulos y Pararajasingham (1997) [9] Canada Plant spacing Klaring (1998) [10] Germany Shading on broccoli Kittas et al. (1999) [11] Greece Shading on the spectral distribution of light Araki et al. (1999) [12] Belgium Shading nets on spinach Abreu y Meneses (2000) [13] Portugal Effects of whitewashing on tomato Kittas et al. (2003a) [14] Greece Aluminized thermal shading screen on roses [15] Greece Aluminized thermal shading screen on roses Sandri et al. (2003) [16] Brazil Effects of shading screen on tomato Medrano et al. (2004) [17] Spain Mobile shading on tomato Bartzanas y Kittas (2005) [18] Greece Shading and evaporative cooling system Lorenzo et al. (2006) [19] Spain Mobile shading on tomato Rosales et al. (2006) [20] Spain Temperature and solar radiation Gent (2007) [21] United States ...
... Abdel-Mawgoud et al. [8] found that, in tomatoes with 30% shade, the yield was not reduced, although the total dry matter did decrease; the shade can serve to improve the commercial quality of the fruit by reducing burns. ...
Article
Full-text available
The use of alternative energy in agricultural production is desired by many researchers, especially for protected crops that are grown in greenhouses with photovoltaic panels on the roofs. These panels allow for the passage of varying levels of sunlight according to the needs of each type of crop. In this way, sustainable and more economic energy can be generated than that offered by fossil fuels. The objective of this work is to review the literature regarding the applications of selective shading systems with crops, highlighting the use of photovoltaic panels. In this work, shading systems have been classified as bleaching, mesh, screens, and photovoltaic modules. The search was conducted using Web of Science Core Collection and Scopus until February 2018. In total, 113 articles from scientific journals and related conferences were selected. The most important authors of this topic are “Yano A” and “Abdel-Ghany AM”, and regarding the number of documents cited, the most important journal is Biosystems Engineering. The year 2017 had the most publications, with a total of 20, followed by 2015 with 14. The use of shading systems, especially of photovoltaic panels, requires more crop-specific research to determine the optimum percentage of panels that does not reduce agricultural production.
... Greenhouses covered with screen nets or shade nets are frequently used in Egypt, especially during hot summer days, to reduce the radiation intensity in the greenhouse. Additionally, shading screens used inside the glasshouses caused the reduction of photosynthetically active radiation leading to the better quality of agricultural production [6][7][8][9]. A screen shade net can be placed outside on top of the greenhouse (using proper construction) and would be effective in minimising heat load from crops grown in the greenhouse [10,11]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Water shortage, human population increase, and lack of food resources have directed societies towards sustainable energy and water resources, especially for agriculture. While open agriculture requires a massive amount of water and energy, the requirements of horticultural systems can be controlled to provide standard conditions for the plants to grow, with significant decrease in water consumption. A greenhouse is a transparent indoor environment used for horticulture, as it allows for reasonable control of the microclimate conditions (e.g., temperature, air velocity, rate of ventilation, and humidity). While such systems create a controlled environment for the plants, the greenhouses need ventilation to provide fresh air. In order to have a sustainable venting mechanism, a novel solution has been proposed in this study providing a naturally ventilating system required for the plants, while at the same time reducing the energy requirements for cooling or other forced ventilation techniques. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) was used to analyse the ventilation requirements for different vent opening scenarios, showing the importance of inlet locations for the proposed sustainable greenhouse system.
... Several studies have mentioned that Tomato is one of the most suitable crops that is suited to AVSs. According to [74], the number of fruits per square meter did not significantly change in shaded tomato plantation (with 52% shade) when compared with those that were unshaded [75]. The tomato yield was not reduced despite low total dry matter. ...
Article
Full-text available
The demand for food and energy is increasing at a fast rate and their security has become the prime issue in especially developing countries like Sri Lanka. Conventional fossil fuel-based electricity generation has become a challenging task for the economy as well as for the environment. Therefore, moving to renewable energy has currently grown in the world than ever before as a result of the Paris agreement launched in 2015 and in line with Sustainable Development Goal 7. Photovoltaic based electricity generation is one of the best options for the country as it blessed with an ample amount of solar radiation. Rooftops of houses, buildings, and other suitable infrastructures would be the best places to establish the PV panels. Nevertheless, it needs to expand up to a considerable area of land of photo-voltaic panels to cater to the increasing demand for energy which is available to feed the ever-increasing population. Agri-voltaic system has been proposed as a mixed system, combining photovoltaic with agriculture at the same time on the same land to capture solar energy, for both energy generation and food production while maximizing the solar efficiency on the land. The main eco-physiological constraint for the crop production under the Photovoltaic is the light reduction. Since the inadequate information about most of the crops under the shade conditions, it is extremely difficult to recommend some crop species for their ability to shade tolerance. The use of shading (PV panels) requires more crop-specific research to determine the optimum percentage of panels and their arrangement that do not reduce agricultural production. Crop yield variation with panel shading and practicalities to maximize the system need to be studied extensively. This paper reviews the potential of the Agri-voltaic system and identifies the research gaps in selecting suitable crops under the PV panels.
... Light limitation or lower-red-far-red wavelength ratio (R-to-FR ratio) are environmental promoters of the stem growth, leading to the allocation of relatively more biomass into these organs (Poorter et al. 2012;Cagnola et al. 2012), presumably driving the resources away from agriculturally important organs such as leaves and fruits. In tomato, negative impacts of shading upon fruit yield depend upon the levels of light limitation (Abdel-Mawgoud et al. 1996;Sandri et al. 2003). As for the light quality, low R-to-FR ratios increased the accumulation of biomass into the stems at the expense of leaves. ...
Article
Phytochromes (PHYs) have long been associated with classic photomorphogenic responses and recently implied with the regulation of plant productivity. We aimed to characterize these links in an important agronomic crop such as tomato (cv. Moneymaker) by evaluating biomass partitioning and morphophysiological parameters related to productivity under distinct light conditions in phyA, phyB1 and phyB2 tomato mutants. Under sun, PHY mutants presented lower leaf biomass during the vegetative phase the same way as the wild type (WT) under shading treatment. However, no difference regarding fruit biomass ratio (harvest index) was registered between WT and PHY mutants. phyA was the shortest genotype with lesser lateral branches and smaller xylem vessels and alongside phyB1, presented lesser leaf area. Net photosynthesis rate and photosystem II maximum potential quantum efficiency were not affected by phytochrome loss under sun condition. Nevertheless, PHY mutants showed lesser chlorophyll a content and stomata conductance and transpiration rates. Together, our data reveal that despite some morphophysiological and developmental impairments and the differences in biomass accumulation associated with the distinct PHYs under distinct light conditions, the plant harvest index is not affected by individual PHY losses under sun condition.
Technical Report
Full-text available
In the ongoing energy transition in India, photovoltaic (PV) plays a crucial role which becomes evident when looking at both governmental PV targets and recent developments. While land-neutral roof-top PV accounts for 40% of Indian’s 2022 development goals, with 60% the largest share of all PV technologies is designated for utility-scale ground-mounted PV (GM-PV). Despite cost-effectiveness speaking in favour of GM-PV, generally, a major drawback of GM-PV is the high land usage with approximately 1.2-1.7 hectare per installed MWp for recently installed systems (Shiva and Sudhakar 2015). This seems particularly relevant in the context of Indian’s high population density and – in several regions – its respective fierce scarcity of land. Recently, these conflicting interests of land use became apparent at a site in Paras, Akola district in Maharashtra, Western India, where the major power generating company in the state, the Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd. (Mahagenco), considered installing a GM-PV system on more than 100 hectare (ha) of fertile agricultural land which today serves as the livelihood of more than 100 farmers and their families. To seize opportunities of reconciling agricultural activities and PV power generation at the same area of land, Mahagenco and its project investor, the German development bank Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW), requested the Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE (Fraunhofer ISE) to assess the feasibility of a dual land use to which in the following we refer as Horticulture PV.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
In the ongoing energy transition in India, ground mounted photovoltaic (GM-PV) plays a crucial role which becomes evident when looking at both governmental PV targets and recent developments. Despite cost-effectiveness speaking in favor of GM-PV, generally, a major drawback of GM-PV is the high land usage. One possibility to overcome conflicting interests of land use is agrivoltaics – a combined land-use for food and electricity production. This paper summarizes the findings of a feasibility study on a 50 MWp agrivoltaic project in Maharashtra conducted by Fraunhofer ISE in 2018/2019 focusing on social impact and economic viability. The analyses indicate that an agrivoltaic system appears economically feasible with expected levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of INR 2.02 (EUR 0.0243) already including cost on water management, rainwater harvesting, water storage, and irrigation. Depending on the institutional arrangement between the farming community and the investor, the social impact is expected to vary from high benefits to risk of severe poverty among affected farmers. Further findings indicate that the use of bifacial glass-glass PV modules raises electrical yield by 6.4% compared to mono facial modules. Regarding land use, the study suggests that the analyzed agrivoltaic system is likely to almost double average land use efficiency measured by the combined output of electricity and agriculture per unit of land (+94%).
Article
Fireball, Hot Set and Porter were compared at 35 degrees C. day and 25 degrees C. night temperatures and at 22 degrees C. day and 18 degrees C. night temperatures. In the high-temperature conditions, Porter gave the highest yield of fruit. At the lower, more normal temperature for tomato growing, Fireball had the highest fruit yield and Porter the lowest. (Abstract retrieved from CAB Abstracts by CABI’s permission)
Article
1. A study, involving the effects of high temperatures on the fruiting response of two types of tomatoes, Marglobe (a commercial variety) and three summer-setting selections (designated S-1112B, S-1114C, and S-1119N), was conducted in four phases. In phase 4 an additional commercial variety, V617 Pearson was also used. 2. In phase 1 the effect of increasing temperatures on the fruitfulness of Marglobe was observed when flowers were cluster sprayed with 10 p.p.m. parachlorophenoxyacetic acid (CPA). With the onset of high temperatures in mid-July the Marglobe plants became unresponsive to CPA or any other type of treatment, and fruiting ceased entirely. 3. Phase 2 was conducted in the green-house to determine the interrelation of sucrose-urea and CPA sprays under different light intensities. Marglobe plants under high light intensities came to a standstill vegetatively and reproductively and failed to respond to any treatment. In the shaded section of the green-house Marglobe set fruit in response to CPA sp...
Article
The investigations were conducted (i) to study the normal development of both macro- and microspores of tomato plants grown at 20°C during the experiment, considering the relation between their developmental stage and the duration expressed as the days before anthesis, and (ii) to observe the morphological abnormalities of tomato flower buds treated with high temperature of 40°C for three hours each in two days at the stages of ten to one days before anthesis. Tomato plants (cv. Fukuju No. 2), sown on March, grown in greenhouse in Tokyo, and treated with high temperature on May 9 and 10, were used as materials.The development of normal flower buds was as follows.Development of microspore: Nine days before anthesis, meiosis, pollen tetrads. Seven days before, pollen tetrads separated into pollen grains. Four days before, two-nucleate pollen has germinating pores. Three days before, pollen matured.Development of macrospore: Eight days before anthesis, meiosis. Seven days before, functioning macrospore (three macrospores degenerated). Six to three days before, macrospore one, two, four, and eight nuclei. Two to one days before, antipodal cells degenerated, synergids pear-shaped, polar nuclei fused into central nucleus.Both macro- and microspore mother cells in meiosis stages (nine to eight days before anthesis) were easily affected by the high temperature treatment. Pollen tetrads became degenerated, and were deeply stained, but in the samples fixed five days after the treatment, it was observed that their contents became empty and poorly stained. The macrospore mother cells were also degenerated and their developmental stages were delayed.The injuries of high temperature to both macro- and microspores decreased with the advance of the stage of flower buds. In three to one days before anthesis no morphological disturbance by the treatment was observed in pollen or ovules.High temperature might not cause any morphological abnormalities to the flower buds younger than meiosis stages.
Article
Acidic auxin in tomato fruit at various developmental stages was examined by paper chromatography and Avena curvature test. Auxin activity of the fruit extracts was detected only in the same R f zone as that of authentic IAA with four solvent systems, i.e., isopropanol-ammonium hydroxide-water 10:1:1 v/v, n -butanol-ammonium hydroxide-water 25:1:5 v/v, ethanol-water 7:3 v/v and n -butanol-acetic acid-water 4:1:1 v/v. Auxin content of fruit was the highest on the seventh day after anthesis, when the two-celled proembryo began to grow rapidly and the endosperm consisted of multi-cells. The second peak of auxin activity occurred on the 30th day, when the embryo, which consisted of the cotyledons, hypocotyl, and radicle, finished its most rapid growth. No auxin activity was detected in the ripe fruit. Auxin contents in fruit on the fifth, seventh, and tenth days after anthesis were lowered by a 4 hr high temperature treatment at 40� given 0–3 days after anthesis. The nature of tomato auxin and its possible role in the fruit development were discussed.
Plants and Microclimate. Cambridge Univ Press 2nd edition Russo V.M. (1993) Shading of tomato plants inconsistently affects fruit yield
  • H G Jones
Jones H.G. (1992) Plants and Microclimate. Cambridge Univ Press 2nd edition Russo V.M. (1993) Shading of tomato plants inconsistently affects fruit yield.