Post on 03-Feb-2020
DEVELOPMENT OF HYDROPONIC SYSTEM FOR
GREENHOUSE TOMATO
Thesis
Submitted to the Punjab Agricultural University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY in
SOIL AND WATER ENGINEERING (Minor Subject: Civil Engineering)
By
Harmanpreet Kaur
(L-2014-AE-184-M)
Department of Soil and Water Engineering College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology
© PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
LUDHIANA-141004
2016
CERTIFICATE-I
This is to certify that the thesis entitled, “Development of hydroponic system for
greenhouse tomato” submitted for the degree of M. Tech., in the subject of Soil and Water
Engineering (Minor subject: Civil Engineering) of the Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana, is a bonafide research work carried out by Harmanpreet Kaur (L-2014-AE-184-M)
under my supervision and no part of this thesis has been submitted for any other degree.
The assistance and help received during the course of investigations have been fully
acknowledged.
______________________
Dr. Rakesh Sharda
(Major Advisor) Senior Extension Specialist
Dept. Soil and Water Engineering,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana-141004.
CERTIFICATE-II
This is to certify that the thesis entitled, “Development of hydroponic system for
greenhouse tomato” submitted by Harmanpreet Kaur (L-2014-AE-184-M) to the Punjab
Agricultural University, Ludhiana in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
M. Tech, in the subject of Soil and Water Engineering (Minor subject: Civil Engineering)
has been approved by the Student‟s Advisory Committee along with Head of the Department
after an oral examination on the same.
______________________ ____________________
(Dr Rakesh Sharda) (Er A K Singh)
Major Advisor Principal Investigator, PFDC
SKRAU, Agriculture Research
Station, Beechwal, Bikaner-334002
_____________________
(Dr K G Singh)
Head of the Department
______________________
(Dr Neelam Grewal)
Dean, Postgraduate Studies
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I take this opportunity with much pleasure to thank all the people who have helped
me through the course of my journey towards producing this thesis. I sincerely thank my
advisor Dr. Rakesh Sharda, Senior Extension Specialist, Department of Soil and Water
Engineering, whose encouragement, introspective guidance, constructive suggestions, co-
operation and support from the initial to the final level enabled me, to develop an
understanding of the research work.
I lack words to express my cordial thanks to my Advisory Committee Dr. Sunil Garg,
Senior Research Engineer, Department of Soil and Water Engineering, Punjab Agricultural
University, Ludhiana, Dr. Arun Kaushal, Professor, Department of Soil and Water
Engineering and Dr. N.K. Khullar, Head cum Professor, Department. of Civil Engineering
,for their useful comments and constructive suggestions during all the phases of present
research.
I am very thankful to Dr. Rajan Aggarwal, Senior Research Engineer cum Head,
Department of Soil and Water Engineering, for providing encouragements and necessary
facilities in carrying out the research work. I am also thankful to Dean PGS, PAU, Ludhiana.
I express my deep sense of gratitude to Dr. K.G. Singh, Senior Research Engineer,
Department of Soil and Water Engineering, Ludhiana for his guidance.
I am highly thankful to Dr. O.P Chaudhary, Senior Soil Chemist, Department of Soil
Science and Dr. Neena Chawla, Senior biochemist Department of vegetable science.
I acknowledge the wonderful support and work of my friends Pankaj Sharma,
Balkaran Singh, Rohit Narang, Sandeep Kaur, Kulwant Singh and Sagar Chawla thank for
their help and guidance.
I express my respect, love and gratitude for parents. I owe so much to them and
acknowledge the gift of their guidance, kindness and support. Please know that I recognize
how much they both have done for me.
Lastly, I offer my regards and blessings to all of those who supported me in any
respect during the completion of the thesis.
(Harmanpreet Kaur)
Title of the Thesis : Development of hydroponic system for greenhouse
tomato
Name of the student and
Admission number
: Harmanpreet Kaur
(L-2014-AE-184-M)
Major Subject : Soil and Water Engineering
Minor Subject Civil Engineering
Name and Designation of
Major Advisor
: Dr. Rakesh Sharda
Senior Extension Specialist
Degree to be awarded : Master of Technology
Year of award of Degree : 2016
Total Pages in Thesis : 55+Vita
Name of University : Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141004,
Punjab, India.
ABSTRACT
The field experiment was conducted in the year 2016 to study the development of hydroponic
system for greenhouse tomato in the Demonstration Farm of Department of Soil and Water
Engineering, PAU, Ludhiana. The experiment was laid out in completely randomized design
keeping three treatments (100%), (75%) and (50%) of Hoagland solution. The crop was
grown in PVC pipes under controlled conditions. In the greenhouse, the temperature and
relative humidity were maintained between 24 0C to 32
0C and 40 % to 65 % range
respectively. The pH and EC of the Hoagland solution were maintained in the range of 5.5 to
6.5 and 1.5 to 2.5 dS/m respectively in the tank. The yield was best in T1 (100%) i.e 72.57
ton / ha which was comparable with T2 (75%) i.e, 69.28 ton / ha. With respect to quality
parameters, there was non significant difference in moisture content, firmness and lycopene
and there was significant difference in titrable acidity and TSS. The maximum value of
titrable acidity and TSS were 0.16 and 7.37 respectively recorded for T1.
Keywords: Tomato, hydroponic system, greenhouse, plant, yield and quality parameters
________________________ _____________________
Signature of Major Advisor Signature of the Student
Koj gRMQ dw isrlyK : gRInhwaUs tmwtr leI hweIfRoPoink pRxwlI dw inrmwx
ividAwrQI dw nwm Aqy pRvyS nM.
: hrmnpRIq kOr (AYl-2014-ey eI-184-AYm)
pRmuK ivSw : BUmI Aqy jl ieMjIinAirMg
sihXogI ivSw : isvl ieMjIinAirMg
mu`K slwhkwr dw nwm Aqy Ahudw
: fw. rwkyS Swrdw au`c pswr mwihr
ifgrI : AYm.tY~k
ifgrI nwl snmwinq krn dw swl : 2016
Koj p`qr iv`c kul pMny : 55+vItw
XUnIvristI dw nwm : pMjwb KyqIbwVI XUnIvristI, luiDAwxw – 141004, pMjwb, Bwrq
swr-AMS
gRInhwaUs tmwtr leI hweIfRoPoink pRxwlI dw inrmwx krn leI sMn 2016 dOrwn pMjwb KyqIbwVI XUnIvristI, luiDAwxw dy BUmI Aqy jl ieMjnIAirMg ivBwv dy prdrSnI Pwrm ivKy Kyq qzrbw kIqw igAw[ ieh qzrbw rYNfm blwk fIzweIn ivDI qihq hoAYglYNf Gol dy iqMn aupcwrW 100%, 75% Aqy 50% nwl kIqw igAw[ pI.vI.sI. pweIpW iv`c inrMqrq hlwqW ADIn &sl augweI geI[ gRInhwaUs iv`c, qwpmwn Aqy nmI dI imkdwr nUM kRmvwr 240
C qoN 320C Aqy 40% qoN 65%
q`k r`iKAw igAw[ tYNk iv`c hoAYglYNf Gol dI pI.AYc. Aqy eI.sI. nUM kRmvwr 5.5 qoN 6.5 Aqy 1.5 qoN 2.5 dS/m q`k r`iKAw igAw[ tI1 (100%) aupcwr qihq sB qoN vDIAw JwV Bwv 72.57 tn/ hYktyAr pRwpq hoieAw joik tI2 (75%) aupcwr dy JwV Bwv 69.28 tn/hYktyAr dy qulnwqmk sI[ guxvqw mwpdMfW dy ilhwz nwl, nmI dI imkdwr, Tosqw Aqy lweIkopIn iv`c gYr-ArQpUrn Aqy Ktws Aqy tI.AYs.AYs. dI imkdwr iv`c ArQpUrn iviBMnqw pweI geI[ Ktws Aqy tI.AYs.AYs. dI sB qoN vDyry imkdwr kRmvwr 0.16 Aqy 7.37 sI joik aupcwr tI1 leI drj kIqI geI[
muK Sbd: tmwtr, hweIfRoPoink pRxwlI, gRInhwaUs, pOdw, JwV Aqy guxvqw mwpdMf
_________________ ________________ mu`K slwhkwr dy dsqKq ividAwrQI dy dsqKq
CONTENTS
CHAPTER TOPIC PAGE
NO.
I INTRODUCTION 1-3
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 4-21
2.1 Types of hydroponic system 4
2.2 Crops grown hydroponically in India and abroad 4
2.2.1 Nutrient solution 5-13
2.2.2 Nutrient film technique 13-16
2.2.3 Crops grown hydroponically in greenhouse 16-19
2.2.4 Growing media 19-20
2.2.5 Quality of fruits in greenhouse 20-21
III MATERIAL AND METHODS 22-38
3.1 Description of the study area 22
3.1.1 Location 22
3.2 Climate 22
3.3 Design and fabrication of Hydroponic system 22-29
3.3.1 Components of greenhouse 24
3.3.2 Components of Nutrient Film Technique 25
3.3.3 Design for size of pump 25-27
3.3.4 Preparation of Hoagland solution 27-29
3.4 Raising of crop 29-30
3.5 Crop parameters 31-37
3.5.1 Plant height 31
3.5.2 Stem diameter 31
3.5.3 Yield of tomato 32
3.5.4 Quality parameters 33-37
3.6 Statistical design 38
IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 39-48
4.1 Effect of nutrient solution on growth of tomato in
different treatments
39
4.1.1 Diameter of stem 39-40
4.1.2 Height of plants 40-41
4.2 pH and EC of nutrient solution 41-45
4.2.1 pH of Hoagland solution before and after the
consumption of nutrients from solution for
treatment 1, treatment 2 and treatment 3
41-43
4.2.2 EC of Hoagland solution before and after the
consumption of nutrients from solution for
treatment 1, treatment 2 and treatment 3
43-45
4.3 Interval of changing of Hoagland solution after
transplanting 45-46
4.4 Quality parameters 46-48
4.4.1 Moisture content 46
4.4.2 Titrable acidity 46
4.4.3 Lycopene 47
4.4.4 Firmness 47
4.4.5 Total soluble solids 47
4.5 Yield of tomato 48
V SUMMARY 49-50
REFERENCES 51-55
VITA
LIST OF TABLES
Table
No.
Title Page
No.
3.1 Power for pump 27
3.2 List of nutrients of Hoagland solution 28
3.3 Composition of nutrients of Hoagland solution in 1 L 29
4.1 Effect of Hoagland solution on diameter of stem of plants 15 DAT 39
4.2 Effect of Hoagland solution on diameter of stem of plants 30 DAT 39
4.3 Effect of Hoagland solution on diameter of stem of plants 45 DAT 40
4.4 Effect of Hoagland solution on height of plants 20 DAT 40
4.5 Effect of Hoagland solution on height of plants 30 DAT 40
4.6 Effect of Hoagland solution on height of plants 46 DAT 41
4.7 Effect of Hoagland solution on height of plants 76 DAT 41
4.8 pH of Hoagland solution before and after the changing nutrients solution
for T1, T2 and T3
42
4.9 EC of Hoagland solution before and after changing the nutrients solution
for T1, T2 and T3
44
4.10 The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the moisture content 46
4.11 The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the titrable acidity 47
4.12 The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the lycopene 47
4.13 The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the firmness 47
4.14 The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the total soluble
solids
48
4.15 The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the yield of tomato 48
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
No.
Title Page
No.
3.1 Transplanting of plants into net pots(80 mm × 70 mm) in mixture of
cocopeat, perlite and vermiculite in 3:1:1
23
3.2 PVC pipesof 4 inch diameter with 6 m length each was placed on 27
Iron angle rods
23
3.3 Transplanting of plants in PVC pipes 24
3.4 Cross sectional area of PVC pipe 25
3.5 Layout of hydroponic system 30
3.6 Plants were tied with threads and clips 30
3.7 Plants height after 46 days of transplanting 31
3.8 Plant diameter of stem after 30 days of transplanting 32
3.9 Plants with fruits 32
3.10 Digital refractometer 33
3.11 Spectrophotometer 34
3.12 Texture analyser 35
3.13 Juice extracted from different treatment of tomato 35
3.14 Determination of titrable acidity 36
3.15 Weighing of tomato 37
3.16 Drying of tomato at 60 °C 37
4.1 Variation of consumption of pH before and after changing the
nutrient solution in T1, T2 and T3 concentration
43
4.2 Variation of consumption of EC before and after changing the
nutrient solution in T1, T2 and T3 concentration
45
4.3 Interval during the process of changing the nutrient solution 46
ABBREVIATION AND SYMBOLS
M
%
0 C
T1
T2
T3
R1
R2
R3
NFT
DAT
PVC
CRD
C D
PAU
Meter
Percentage
Degree centigrade
Treatment 1
Treatment 2
Treatment 3
Replication 1
Replication 2
Replication 3
Nutrient film technique
Days after transplanting
Poly vinyl chloride
Completely randomised designs
Critical difference
Punjab Agric. Univ.
Mm3
Million cubic meter
Ha
ton
ton/ha
TSS
Hectare
Tonne
Tonne/hectare
Total soluble solids
sq. km Square kilometer
dS/m Deci Siemens per meter
EC Electrical Conductivity
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Soil cultivation is practiced since centuries as it contains nutrients formed during
natural decay of organic matter and also has sufficient porosity needed for oxygen supply to
the roots. However, soil tend to compact naturally over time, which is not good for proper
plant growth, as plants may have difficulty in growing and accessing nutrients. To achieve
year-round production of plants, plant production factories use series of plant growth facilities
through artificial regulation of indoor environment, such as lighting, temperature, CO2,
nutrient solution, etc (Li and Cheng 2014).Soil cultivation also includes adding soil nutrients
to the soil with the goal of improving the fertility level for many crop cycles. Other soil
amendments can include sand, for plants which like sandy soil, straw or moss to help the soil
hold moisture and fertilizers. It may take several years of building soil up with soil
amendments to obtain the desired texture and composition. It is important to make sure that
soil is aerated throughout the growing season and additives such as mulch can be used to
protect the soil while crops are growing, in addition to providing protection to the roots of
crops. Fertilizers may also be periodically added to the soil during the growing season at key
crop stages.
To enhance the productivity as compared to conventional soil cultivation, protected
cultivation was introduced during 1980 onwards. It includes greenhouse farming, greenhouse
farming means farming inside an enclosed space which produces greenhouse effect. The main
use of it is to protect the plants from extreme weather conditions during winter as well as
summer. It is also incorporated with various technologies like drip irrigation system,
automatic temperature control using evaporative cooling, light controlling systems etc to form
a complete artificial farming area which is isolated from outside climate (Castillo et al 2012).
Recently, in western countries, a new technique called soil-less culture commonly
referred to as „hydroponics‟ has been developed to further improve the crop productivity in
lesser space and time by controlling the supply of water and nutrient. The term hydroponic
was derived from the Greek words „hydro‟ means water and „ponos‟ means labour (Beibel
1960). Hydroponic is being used in developed countries in a view to see advancement in
technology. Researchers discovered that plants absorb essential mineral nutrients as inorganic
ions in water. In natural conditions, soil acts as a mineral nutrient reservoir but the soil itself
is not essential to plant growth. When the mineral nutrients in soil dissolve in water, plant
roots are able to absorb them. When the required mineral nutrients are introduced into a plants
through water supply artificially, soil is no longer required for the plants to grow. Almost any
terrestrial plant can be grown with hydroponic. This has added advantages also. In the case of
hydroponic there are no weeds as well as relief from soil borne diseases. This helps in
2
reduction of production costs as compared to soil cultivation which is host to number of insect
pests and plant parasites. The hydroponic also helps in saving of water as the same water can
be recycled again. The pH of the root zone affects the availability of nutrients taken up by
plants (Dysko et al 2008). The other advantages that hydroponic offer is low labour
requirement, highly productive, conserve land, protects the environment and complete control
over nutrient balance. The only disadvantage of this system is higher initial setup costs. But
this can be offset by the high returns from the crops grown under poly house.
There are number of hydroponic techniques which are being used such as Ebb and
Flow System, Drip System, Wick System, Deep Water Culture System and Nutrient Film
Technique (NFT). Nutrient Film Technique is a hydroponic technique wherein a very shallow
stream of water containing all the dissolved nutrients required for plant growth is re-circulated
past the bare roots of plants in a watertight gully known as channels (Brun 2001). In an ideal
system, the depth of the re-circulating stream should be very shallow, little more than a film
of water hence the name „nutrient film‟.
Hydroponic and NFT culture involves no use of soil. Both the culture require
sufficient supply of nutrients and suitable conditions like high oxygen levels for root uptake
and optimum pH levels for increased nutrient and water uptake and also high grade nutrient
solutions ( Ghazvini et al 2007). In this system, it is possible to control the pH and electrical
conductivity (EC) of the nutrient solution.
Hydroponically, tomatoes were commercially grown in Southern Florida and on some
Carribean island, however these ventures didn‟t succeed financially and disappeared.
Hydroponic began to be used for production of tomatoes and for other crops also in enclosed
green house and shelters (Rodriguez et al 2001). The objective was to produce tomatoes in off
season when the field grown fruit was unavailable. The initial hydroponic greenhouses
devoted to the production of off-season tomatoes were in the Netherlands, followed by similar
types of greenhouses in England. Today, hydroponic tomato greenhouses are in many
countries, the largest number in Canada, the United States, Mexico and Spain.
In the mid-1970s, Allan Cooper introduced his nutrient film technique (NFT) that
substantially changed the basic concept of hydroponic growing. The system is relatively
inexpensive to install, maintain and is quite precise in its control of the nutrient-root environment
(Jones 1999b). The placement of water and or a nutrient solution at the base of the tomato plant on
a regulated basis became possible. With this type of nutrient solution delivery system, rockwool
slabs and perlite in either bags or buckets as the rooting media has come into wide use.
All the commonly used hydroponic techniques have flaws that have to be dealt with.
The “ideal” hydroponic growing system has yet to be developed, although initially the NFT
method was thought to be the one that would come closest to being ”ideal”.
3
Keeping in view of above the hydroponic system for growing vegetables was
developed, tested and evaluated for growing tomatoes.
Objectives
i. To develop and standardize hydroponic system
ii. To evaluate the developed hydroponic system for growing tomato
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
A substantial amount of literature at national and international level. The present
methods used for the hydroponic system are described below.
2.1 Types of hydroponic system: Hydroponic system not used by farmers at commercial
level. Farmers are not using Hydroponic system because of expensive installation of
hydroponic system, skilled labour is required to controlled the conditions inside the
Greenhouse. There are ways by which one can use this system.
a) Ebb and Flow system
b) Wick system
c) Nutrient Film Technique (NFT)
a) Ebb and flow system
The ebb and flow system consists of water-tight growing bed and tank of nutrient
solution. The growing bed consists of either gravel or gravel and sand both. The nutrient
solution present in the tank is pumped for fixed interval of time into the growing bed for a
short duration (5 -10 min). The tank of nutrient solution is placed below the growing bed so
that nutrient solution can easily re-circulate in the system. This system was widely used by
U.S. Army during the World War 2nd
to produce vegetables specially tomato and lettuce.
The nutrient solution used in this system need to be replace within fixed interval of time
otherwise the repeated use of this nutrient solution lead to disease and nutrient element
imbalances (Anon 2016).
b) Wick system
In this system, nutrient solution was absorbed by the medium from the reservoir with
the help of a wick. The wick system consists of a rectangular iron frame plastic pot, soil-less
growing medium i.e. cocopeat: perlite: vermiculture, cotton wicks, reservoir (Anon 2016).
c)Nutrient Film Technique (NFT)
Nutrient Film Technique is a hydroponic technique wherein a very shallow stream of
water containing all the dissolved nutrients required for plant growth is re-circulated past the
bare roots of plants in a watertight gully knowns as channels. In an ideal system, the depth of
the re-circulating stream should be very shallow, little more than a film of water hence the
name „nutrient film‟(Anon 2016).
2.2Crops grown hydroponically in India and abroad
Tomatoes, lettuce, capsicum, endive, chinese cabbage, cucumbers, zucchini and
courgettes, beans, sweet peppers, sweet potato, egg plants, chillies, parsley and other herbs,
silver beet, strawberries.
5
The relevant literature related to the research topic has been discussed under the
following heads:
The hydroponics is growing of plants without soil in any organic media or in direct
contact with water i.e. Nutrient Film Technique. Soil-less culture means growing of plants in
proper media mixture strictly without soil. This method utilizes a limited supply of water
efficiently. Soilless culture offers earlier growth and higher yield as in this culture attack of
insect-pest decreases. The pot along with the media mixture should be light in weight as to
hold it easily. The author conducted certain additional investigations and prepared a
manuscript for a popular circular on the general subject of growing plants in nutrient
solutuions.
2.2.1 Nutrient solution
Hoagland and Arnon (1950) investigated the problems with the use of water-culture
technique for growing plants without soil as one important method of experimentation. The
objective was to gain a better understanding of fundamental factors which govern plant
growth in order to deal more effectively with the many complex questions of soil and plant
interrelations arising in the field. The purpose of the experiment was to available such
technical information about the water-culture method. They prepared nutrient solution which
was later named as Hoagland solution helps in providing nutrients to the plants so that the
plants could be grown without soil.
Gallegly et al (1949) studied about the bonny best tomato plants were grown in
constant – drip sand cultures with concentration 0.1. 0.5, 1, 2 and 8 times that of basal salt
solution (Hoagland and Snyder) in cultures with the basal solution low and high in nitrogen,
phosphorus and potassium respectively and in cultures with the low phosphorus solution
adjusted to low, medium and high pH. The plants were inoculated after approximately 25
days growth by dipping the washed roots in a concentrated suspension of the bacterial wilt
organism (Pseudomonas solanacearum E. F. Sm.). During summer months disease
development in nutrient concentrations was greatest at 0.1H and decreased with an increase in
salt concentration, during early spring and late autumn disease development increased with an
increase in salt concentration up to 0.5H and 1H but decreased sharply with further increase in
nutrient concentration. During summer the winter-type results were reproduced when day
length was maintained at 12 hr. while the summer-type results were reproduced at an 18-hr.
day length. Variation in light intensity and sand culture temperature failed to alter the long-
day disease curve. The two sand temperatures had no effect on disease development in the
low K solution. At low light intensity disease development was reduced in the low K solution.
Controlled 12-hr. and 18-hr. No correlation was found between plant growth or bacterial
growth in unbalanced solutions and disease development. There were indications that low pH
salt solution reduced disease development.
6
Macfarlane (1958) studied about the primary infections were obtained by growing
cabbage seedlings in a modified Hoagland‟s solution in which resting spores Plasmodiophora
brassicae Woron. were suspended. Seeds were germinated on filter paper wet with tap water
and after 2 days the plants were transferred to small glass tubes bent in the form of a shallow
U or to small vials containing solution and spores. Zoosporangia were formed after several
days growth at 250 in the dark. They were stained in aceto-car-mine. A roughly linear
relationship was found between the logarithm of number of infections/root and the logarithm
of spore concentration in the medium. Numbers of infections were usually greater at 1/5 or
1/25 dilution of the culture solution than at the standard concentration, but were very much
fewer or none in more dilute l/125 or more concentrated (x5) solutions. The concentration
which permitted maximal infection tended to vary from one experiment to another. Infection
was not affected by changing from pH 5 to 6 but was greatly decreased at pH 8.
Park et al (1995) determined the most suitable nutrient solution among Cooper‟s,
Hoagland and Arnon and Yamazaki‟s solution. Six kinds of cultivars from Italy were used.
Characteristics of cultivars grown in solutions were differently. The yield, root weight and
mineral content were best in the plot of Yamazaki‟s solution. In order to investigate the ionic
strength of suitable level of chicory, second experiment was conducted with Yamazaki‟s
solution which was treated to EC of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 mS/cm. High yield and mineral
contents were found in 1.5 mS/cm treatment. In different ionic strength, changes in vitamin C
and mineral content were determined.
Paiva et al (1998a) conducted the experiment in greenhouse under hydroponic
conditions using a modified Hoagland solution containing different Ca concentrations (0.2,
2.5, 5.0, 10.0, 15.0, and 20.0 mm L-1
) which represented the different treatments. The
experiments was conducted in a fully randomized design with three replications. More Ca
accumulation was observed in fruits submitted to low RH with this accumulation occurring at
all Ca levels in the solution. Results showed that fruit kept at low RH had higher Ca
accumulation although the excessive water loss from tissues may lead to blossom-end rot
when low Ca doses were supplied to the plants.
Paiva et al (1998 b) conducted the experiment in a greenhouse hydroponically using a
modified Hoagland solution containing different Ca concentrations (0.2, 2.5, 5.0, 10.0, 15.0,
and 20.0 mmol L-1
). The experiment was conducted in a fully randomized design with three
replications. The fruits of the second and third replications were picked after full ripening and
analyzed for their Ca, magnesium (Mg), potassium (K), lycopene, and total carotene levels.
The total lycopene and carotene levels decreased with increasing Ca concentration in the
nutrient solution, possibly due to the reduction in K absorption with minimum levels of 21.50
μg g-1 at the Ca concentration of 13.66 mmol L-1 in the nutrient solution.
7
Teragishi et al (2000) studied the effects of foliar application of choline chloride on
the quality of winter-cropped Masui-Dauphine were imbedded into rockwool cube on
May30 and rooted in Hoagland II solution of EC 2.4 dS·m-1
.The rooted cuttings were
transplanted onto a non-circulating closed hydro-culture system in the greenhouse on July 13.
The trees formed the first fruit at the 11th nodeon August 11 and bore 16 fruits per plant.
Trees were sprayed with 1500ppmcholine chloride solution or water (control) on October 9,
November 6and 27. Offruits harvested from October 27 to December 27, the sprayed fruits
were heavier than those of control until November 16, but subsequently, no difference in fresh
weight was detected between the treatment and the control fruits. The total fruit weights per
tree were 910g and 790 g in the sprayed and control respectively. The photosynthetic rate
decreased with the decline in photosynthetic photon flux density; it was temporarily increased
with choline chloride treatment on October 9 and November 6.
Brun et al (2001) reported that recycling of drainage in rose grown in soilless culture
enables saving of inputs, flower yield while quality was not affected by recycling. Losses
were about 44% for leachate solution and 56% for nutrients. Savings by recycling were about
42% for leachate solution and 55% for nutrients. There was good relationships between EC
and ions concentrations for supplied solutions and leachate solutions recycled and not
recycled. Drainage recycling was efficient by using a management based on EC.
Maia et al (2001) studied about the production and quality of Menthaarvensis L.
essential oil grown in pots irrigated with eleven nutrient solutions were evaluated. The
objective of this work was to determined the components of a nutrient solution for
commercial use which would allow maximum oil yield and high menthol content. An
automatic solution dispenser system was specially developed. The system consisted of a
group of reservoirs equipped with individual pumps and electric buoys. A modified Hoagland
1 solution was the starting point for the formulation of testing solutions and was also used as
control. Ten solutions were prepared from the basic solution. Double and half strength
solutions for N, P, K, Ca and Mg were prepared in such a way that the plants were grown in
solutions containing three concentrations of each nutrient focused in this study. Growth,
nutrient content and essential oil of the plants were evaluated. High levels of N promoted
increase in leaves weight, but less oil content (0,97%) with low menthol content. Higher
levels of Ca and Mg, and low level of P enhanced the leaves oil content (1,37; 1,52 and 1,41
respectively), without significant alterations in quality. N and Mg important interactions were
observed, affecting menthol content in the oil. As the N levels rise, the menthol response to
Mg contents in the solution was positive. In solutions with low concentrations of N, the
menthol content in the essential oil increased as the Mg concentration decreased.
Karimaei et al (2004) reported the application of Massantini solution was applied in
two concentrations (complete 100 % and half 50 % strength). Plants were harvested before
8
heading and their growth characters. N, P and K concentrations with their ratios were
determined. Hoagland nutrient solution had the strongest effect, followed by Massantini 50%.
N and P concentrations in lettuce plants grown on Hoagland solution, were closer to DRIS
(Diagnosis Recommendation Integrated System) norms of lettuce. Growth rate, most of
growth characters and N, P and K concentrations were negatively correlated with the solution
pH in most cultivars. Solutions EC showed negative correlation with some growth characters
such as leaf number, leaf dry weight and K concentration. pH and EC of Hoagland solution
were closer to those which have been suggested for soilless culture of lettuce. The black
seeded cultivar had more leaf number than the others on all nutrient solutions, especially in
Massantini 50%. The highest total dry weight of leaves referred to the black seeded cultivar
on Massantini 50% solution but there was no significant difference between this treatment
and Olimpo cultivar on Hoagland nutrient solution.
Silva et al (2005) evaluated the effect of nutrient solutions with or without Tris-HCl
buffer, on sporulation of AMF. The experiment was carried out in a greenhouse using a
substrate with sand and vermiculite (1:1 v/v). Fifty spores of Gigaspora margarita,
Scutellospora heterogama, and Glomusetunicatum were inoculated in Sorghum vulgare
(sorghum) or Panicummiliaceum (fodder millet). The substrate received the following
nutrient solutions: Hoagland with 3 μM P (S1); Long Ashton II with 15.9 μM P (S2) and
Hoagland with 20 μM P (S3), with or without 50 mM of Tris-HCl buffer (pH 6.5); the control
treatment, consisting of a soil + sand + vermiculite (2:1:1 v/v) substrate was irrigated with
deionized water. Ten weeks after the beginning of the experiment sporulation did not differ in
treatments with sorghum. Panicummiliaceum promoted higher sporulation of the AMF than
sorghum, and differences among treatments with nutrient solutions were observed. Production
of spores of G. margarita and S. heterogama increased significantly after addition of buffer in
S1 and S2, while that of G. etunicatum was improved when the substrate was irrigated with
S1 + buffer and S3 solutions. Solution S1 + buffer benefited sporulation of the three fungi.
However, as observed, each AMF, host, and substrate system may be studied separately for
establishment of the most favorable conditions for inoculum production.
Orsini and Pascale (2007) studied the effects of cultivar, nutrient solution strength
and light intensity on daily variation of nitrate content in basil (Ocimum basilicum
L.) leaves. A glasshouse experiment was carried out in Naples (Portici, Italy) from the 26th of
May to the 5th of July 2005.Plants of two basil cultivars („Napoletano‟ and „Genovese‟) were
cultivated on floating system with aerated nutrient solution replaced every week. Two
nutrient solutions were compared: single strength Hoagland (H) and double strength
Hoagland (2H). Thirty days after transplanting (DAT), the plants grown in the 2Hsolution
were divided into two different shading treatments: 0% (control) and50% shading obtained by
using a 50% cut-off screen. On 29th of June (34 DAT), leaf nitrate content was measured five
9
times during the day (at 6:30am, 10:30am, 1:00pm, 4:00pm and 6:30pm) on „Genovese‟ and
„Napoletano‟ plants grown in H and 2H solution. On the 5th of July (40DAT), the leaf nitrate
content was measured on plants grown at full sun light and 50%shading, only in 2H solution.
Nutrient solution strength affected leaf nitrate content, which was higher in leaves of plants
grown in the 2H solution. Plants at 50% shading showed higher leaf nitrate content compared
to the control. Leaf nitrate content decreased during the day in response to light intensity.
Plants of the cultivar „Napoletano‟ showed the largest leaf area and the lowest leaf dry matter
percentage, nevertheless no significant differences were observed in terms of nitrate contents
between the two cultivars.
Hochmuth and Hochmuth (2008) formulated the nutrient solution for hydroponic
tomatoes. Plants require 16 elements for growth, which they get from air, water and
fertilizers. Author focused on all nutrients without C,H and O as these nutrients are available
in desired quantity from air and water. Different level of nutrients are required at different
stages of tomatoes. In the starting small amount was required after that need for nutrition
increases. Due to excessive amount of N bullish growth distorts the leaves and stems causing
cracks and groves from where decay causing organisms can enter. Higher amount of K don‟t
allow Ca and Mg to be absorbed by plant so accurate and controlled nutrition level was
required for the proper growth and yield of tomato plant. The first step was to analyze the
well water which was having pH of 6.5. Ca and small amount of Mg was also present which
was helpful for plants. The formulation was done by two methods 1) The premixed products,
2) Grower formulated solution. Premixed products were fairly close to provide the nutrients
but some products were having high amount of K and N which restricts the absorption of Ca
so either high Ca must be used but it was better if less K and N was used. In the second
method 4 different formulas were formulated in which different chemicals were used to
provide different nutrients to the tomatoes.
Natarajan et al (2008) investigated the effects of plant density and nutrient levels
onarsenic (As) removal by the As-hyper accumulator Pterisvittata L. (Chinese brake fern). All
ferns were grown in plastic tanks containing 30 L of As-contaminated groundwater
(130μg·L−1
As) collected from South Florida. The treatments consisted of four plant densities
(zero, one, two, or four plants per 30 L), two nitrogen (N) concentrations (50% or 100% of0.25-
strength Hoagland solution [HS]), and two phosphorous (P) concentrations (15% and 30% of
0.25 strength HS). At 15% P, it took 3 week for the ferns at a plant density of four to reduce As
to less than 10 μg L−1
(USEPA and WHO standard), whereas it took 4–6 week at plant densities
of one or two. For reused ferns, established plants with more extensive roots than “first-time”
ferns, a low plant density of one plant/30 L was more effective, reducing As in water to less
than 10 μg L−1 in 8 h. This translated to an As removal rate of 400 μgh−1plant−1, which was the
highest rate reported to date. Arsenic-concentration in tanks with no plants as a control remained
10
high throughout the experiment. Using more established ferns supplemented with dilute nutrients
(0.25 HS with 25% N and 15% P) with optimized plant density (one plant per 30 L) reduced
interplant competition and secondary contamination from nutrients, and could be recommended
for phyto filtration of As-contaminated ground water. They demonstrated that P. vittata was
effective in remediating As-contaminated groundwater to meet recommended standards.
Ashari and Gholami (2009) studied the effect of the chloride ion in nutrient solution
on yield and fruit quality of two strawberry cultivars: „Selva‟ and „Camarosa‟ grown in
hydroponic culture. Three kinds of nutrient solutions were used: 1) Hoagland-Arnon solution
as control; 2) Hoagland-Arnon in which potassium nitrate was replaced with potassium
chloride and ammonium nitrate was added as a nitrogen source and 3) the previous medium
supplemented with 1.5 mmol l-1 magnesium chloride. In second solution, Plant growth, total
fruit yield, fruit firmness and leaf chlorophyll content were higher than the others two
solution. There was no significant difference between three solutions in case of single fruit
weight, soluble solids content and fruit dry weight. The results showed that adding the
chloride ion to the nutrient solution had no negative effects on fruit quality and leaf
chlorophyll content.
Avalhaes et al (2009) evaluated the effect of emission of macronutrients in the
growth and the nutritional state of elephant-grass plants in Brazil. The design was randomized
blocks with seven treatments in which the solution was proposed by Hoagland and Arnon.
The individual omission of N, P, K, Ca, Mg and S from those solution in three repetitions. the
height of the plants, the leaf number, apex diameter and number of tillers were evaluated as
well as plant nutritional state. The omission of N, P, K, Ca, Mg and S limited the production
of dry weight of shoot of the elephant grass, compared to the full treatment.
Roosta and Hamidpur (2011) studied the effect of foliar application of nutrients in
aquaponic and hydroponic system. The systems were compared in aquaponic system nutrients
which were excreted directly by the fish by the microbial breakdown of organic wastes were
absorbed by plants cultured hydroponically. Common carp, grass carp and silver carp were
stocked in the rearing tanks at 15, 20 and 15 fish m-3
. This water was circulated and was
source of nutrients for aquaponic system in addition to that Fe was also added due to
deficiency of Fe .Tap water was used for compensating water loses. Fishes were given pallet
diet, having 46% protein. Foliar application started after 30 days containing K2SO4,
MgSO4·7H2O, FeEDDHA, MnSO4·H2O, H3BO3, ZnCl2 and CuSO4.5H2O. Biomass gains of
tomatoes were higher in hydroponics as compared to aquaponic. Foliar application of K, Mg,
Fe, Mn and B increased vegetative growth of plants in the aquaponic. In the hydroponic, only
Fe and B had positive effects on plant growth. The foliar application was significant on both
the systems except by element Cu. The effect of different elements was in order of K > Fe
>Mn> Zn > Mg > B.
11
Shah et al (2011) studied the effect of different nutrient solutions for growing
tomatoes in non circulating hydroponic system. „Rio-Grande‟ variety of tomatoes was grown
in 13 litre plastic trash bin using cooper‟s 1988 and Imai‟s 1987 solutions in greenhouse. Half
and full strength of these solutions was also analyzed. Cooper‟s nutrient solution at full
strength consisted of (mg L-1
) N-236, P 60, K 300, Ca 185, Mg 50, S 68, FE (EDTA) 12, Mn
2.0, Zn 0.1 , Cu 0.1 , B 0.3, Mo 0.2. At half strength Cooper‟s solution consisted of (mg L-1
)
N 118, P 30, K 150, Ca 92.5, Mg 25, S 34, Fe 6, Mn 1.0, Zn 0.1 , Cu 0.1 , B 0.15, Mo 0.2.
Imai‟s solution at full strength consisted of (mg L-1
) NO3-N 140.0, P 35.05, K 360.22, Ca
160.16, Mg 48.60, Fe (EDTA) 3.0, Mn 0.5, Cu 0.02, Zn 0.05, B 0.5, Mo 0.01. The ½ strength
solution consisted of (mg L-1
) NO3-N 70.0, P 17.52, K 180.06, Ca 80.08, Mg 24.1 8, Fe
(EDTA) 3.0, Mn 0.5, Cu 0.02, Zn 0.05, B 0.5 and Mo 0.01.Data of Number of days to first
flowering, number of days to first harvest fruit weight (g), fruit diameter (cm), fruit yield,
plant height /stem length (m), number of leaves, amount of nutrients solution consumed
(Liters), Crop revenues obtained (Rs), Cost-benefit-ratio (in Rs) was collected and analyzed.
The tomato grown in Cooper‟s 1988 recipe Half and full strength solutions produced flowers
earlier, fruits also harvested earlier, plants developed more flower clusters, more fruits, The
average fruit weight was higher, the fruit diameter was also more and excessive yield than
those grown in Imai‟s solution. The cost benefit ratio (CBR) values on total cost container
basis were also better but on solution chemical cost basis it was not good.
Bamsey et al (2012) reported development of a potassium-selective optode for
hydroponic nutrient solution monitoring. The developed sensors had been shown to exhibit a
potassium activity measuring range from 0.134 to 117 mM at pH 6.0. These bulk optodes
showed full scale response on the order of several minutes. They showed minimal
interference to other cations and meet worst-case selectivity requirements for potassium
monitoring in the considered half strength Hoagland solution. When continuously immersed
in nutrient solution, these sensors demonstrated predicable lifetimes on the order of 50 hour.
The low-cost and technology transfer potential suggested that it could provide terrestrial
growers a new and reliable mechanism to obtain ion-selective knowledge of their nutrient
solution, improving yields, reducing costs and aiding in compliance to continually more
stringent environmental regulation.
Matsuda et al (2012) suggested that using greenhouse tomato as a model system to
produce pharmaceutical proteins, electrical conductivity (EC) of hydroponic nutrient solution
was examined as a possible factor that effects the protein concentration in fruit. Transgenic
tomato plants, expressing F1-V protein, a plant-made candidate subunit vaccine against
plague (Yersinia pestis), were grown hydroponically at high (5.4 dS·m−1
) or conventional EC
[2.7 dS·m−1(control)] with a high-wire system in a temperature-controlled greenhouse. There
was no significant difference in plant growth and development including final shoot dry
12
weight (DW), leaf area, stem elongation rate, or leaf development rate between high EC and
control. Net photosynthetic rate, transpiration rate, and stomatal conductance (gS) of leaves
were also not significantly different between EC treatments. For both EC treatments,
immature green fruit accumulated DW at a similar rate, but dynamics observed in fruit total
soluble protein (TSP) and F1-V during the fruit growth were different between the two ECs.
Fruit TSP concentration per unit DW decreased while TSP content per whole fruit increased
as fruit grew, regardless of EC. However, TSPs were significantly lower in high EC than in
control. Fruit F1-V concentration per unit DW and F1-V content per whole fruit were also
lower in high EC than in control. They found in their results that increasing EC of nutrient
solution decreased TSP including the vaccine protein in fruit, suggesting that adjusting
nutrient solution EC at an appropriate level is necessary to avoid salinity stress in this
transgenic tomato.
Johnson et al (2013) developed a method that was consistent and effective, and
demonstrates dramatic differences among formulations. It involved peach (Prunuspersica
„Nemaguard‟) seedlings grown in washed sand and fertilized with 10% Hoagland solution
minus zinc. Once the seedlings were about 30 to 40 cm in height, began to show typical zinc
deficiency symptoms of narrow, pointed, chlorotic leaves at the shoot tip. Plants were then
sprayed with different zinc formulations and fertilizer strength was increased to 40%
Hoagland solution to help promote vigorous growth and stimulate lateral shoots. There was
also an increase in individual leaf area on the primary shoot and in zinc concentration of the
new growth. By completion of the fourth and last experiment it was concluded that
effectiveness of zinc formulations was related to solubility and size of the accompanying
anion.
Pezzarossa et al (2013) studied the effects of selenium on tomato plants grown in
hydroponics. Se added to the nutrient solution was absorbed by roots and accumulated both in
the leaves and fruits. The rate of adding Sodium selenate in nutrient solution was 0 mg Se L-1
and 1 mg Se L-1
. It was reported that addition of Se did not influence the cumulative yield of
tomato plants. However the harvesting of control plants began earlier than Se treated plants.
Addition of Se affects the carotene content which was lower in red ripe fruit. Lower amount
of carotene content in fruit would lead to delay in ripening of fruit. Ripening - related
process, such as the degradation of chlorophyll and the synthesis of carotenoids were affected
by Se. 100 g of tomato hydroponically grown with a nutrient solution supplemented with Se
provide a total of 58 µg Se. Daily consumption of 100g enriched tomato does not have
toxicity rather it had nutritive advantage to the human.
Li and Cheng (2014) showed that Light-emitting diode (LED), as an efficient, energy-
saving light source, had been widely used in artificial light plant production systems. It was
confirmed that the combination of red and blue LED lights shows good performance on plant
13
growth and development. Based on the hydroponic culture system in plant production factory,
selection of a suitable nutrient solution for specific crop would be very important. In this
study, it was reported that the four different widely used nutrient solutions (Hoagland,
Garden-style, Yamasaki, and SCAU) were used and were tested in perlite culture cucumber
seedlings during 40-day growth under 2:1 ratio of LED lights with 12 h photoperiod at 100 ±
5 μmol m−2
s−1
irradiance. The plant growth, morphology, pigments, biomass, photosynthetic
characteristics, and nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) content were measured.
Cucumber seedlings treated with formula SCAU showed weak appearance, less biomass, and
reduced photosynthetic activity compared with those supplied with Hoagland. However, the
differences between formulae Garden-style and Yamasaki were not obvious, but both of them
showed significantly higher plant height, leaf area, total leaf number, and shoot N content
compared to SCAU. It was concluded that formula Hoagland showed better performance
regarding cucumber seedling growth under LED light.
Niu et al (2015)conducted a study to evaluated the feasibility of producing eucalyptus
seedlings hydroponically, and investigate if the seedling growth and morphology could be
manipulated through regulated hydroponic nutrient supply in Georgia. The study focused on
phosphorus nutrition since it was one of the commonly growth limiting plant nutrient
element. Two important eucalypts species Eucalyptus dunnii and Corymbiacitriodora were
grown hydroponically in a greenhouse at six P concentrations (0, 0.01, 0.1, 0.5, 1 and 2 mM)
for two months with 1/4 strength modified (different P concentrations) Hoagland solution in a
glass greenhouse. Phosphorus nutrition significantly affected seedlings‟ leaf area, height, stem
diameter and biomass (p < 0.0001). Seedlings of both species had optimal growth between 0.1
mM and 1 mM P concentrations, while the lowest (0 and 0.01 mM P) and highest (2 mM P) P
concentrations resulted in stunted seedlings. The reduction in growth at the highest P
concentration (2mM) was possibly caused by inorganic phosphorus (Pi) toxicity,
micronutrient unavailability and uptake antagonism due to excessive P. There was a close
relationship between the Hoagland solution P concentration, plant tissue P and nitrogen (N)
concentration. Phosphorus use efficiency (PUE) was highest at lower (0.01 mM) P
concentrations (13 g mM−1 for C. citriodora and 19 g mM−1 for E. dunniii). Low P
concentration (0.1 mM) was sufficient to produce good quality seedlings in both species. The
studied confirmed that hydroponic system could be used successfully to produce high vigor
woody plants seedlings.
2.2.2 Nutrient Film Technique
Sherif et al (1995) studied the use of Nutrient film technique (NFT) and deep water
culture (DWC) hydroponic systems in a split-root to study the effect of four treatments on
sweet potato yield, the translocation of assimilates, deionized water and a modified half-
Hoagland (MHH) solution. After 30 days, the plants were removed and the roots of each were
14
cleaned and split evenly between two sides of a channel, four plants per channel. Replicated
treatments were: MHH/MHH; MHH/Air, MHH/deoinized water (DIW); and
monovalent/divalent anions and cations (Mono/Dival). The entire experiment was repeated.
Plants were harvested after growing for 120 days in a glasshouse. Storage roots, when
produced were similar in nutritive components. However, no storage roots were produced in
air or mono channels and only a few in DIW suggesting inhibition of assimilate translocation.
Fresh and dry weights for storage roots and foliage were highest in MHH/MHH in both NFT
and DWC in both experiments. Solution samples were collected at 14-day intervals for
microbial population profiling. Microbial counts were highest in Dival channels. The counts
indicated that solution composition influenced population size and they were relatively high
in both systems.
Mortley et al (1996) evaluated Nutrient film technique (NFT) under controlled
environment conditions. Growth chamber conditions included photosynthesis photon flux
(PPF) of 600 µmol m-2
s-1
, 14/10 light/dark period and 70%+5% RH. Plants were grown using
a modified half- Hoagland nutrient solution with a pH range of 5.5-6.0 and an electrical
conductivity of 0.12 Sm-1
. Gas exchange measurements were made using infrared gas
analysis, an open-flow gas exchange system, and a controlled-climate cuvette. Photosynthetic
measurements were made at CO2 ranges of 50 to 1000 µmol mol-1
. Storage root dry
yield/plant increased with CO2 up to 750 but declined at 1000 µmol mol-1
. Storage root dry
matter and foliage dry weight increased with increasing CO2. Harvest index for both cultivars
was highest at 750 µmol mol-1
. The PPF vs Pn curves were typical for C3 plants with
saturation occurring at 600µmol m-2
s-1
. CO2 concentration did not significantly influence net
Pn, transpiration, water-use efficiency (WUE) and stomatal conductance. As measurement
CO2 concentration increased, net Pn and WUE increased while transpiration and stomatal
conductance decreased.
Mortley et al (1998) determined whether growth and subsequent yield would be
affected by intercropping. Treatments were sweet potato monoculture (SP), peanut
monoculture (PN) and sweet potato and peanut grown in separate NFT channels but sharing a
common nutrient solution (SP- PN). Greenhouse conditions ranged from 24 to 330
C, 60% to
90% relative humidity and photosynthesis photon flux of 200-1700µmol m-2
s-1
. Sweet potato
cuttings and 14 day old seedlings of peanuts were planted into growth channels. Plants were
spaced 25 cm apart within and 25 cm apart between growing channels. A modified half -
Hoagland solution with a 1N : 2,4 K ratio was used. Solution pH was maintained between 5.5
and 6.0 for treatments involving SP and 6.4 and 6.7 for PN. Electrical conductivity (EC)
ranged between 1100 and 1200 µScm-1
. The number of storage roots per sweet potato plant
was similar for both SP and SP-PN. Storage root fresh and dry mass were 29% and 36%
greater, respectively for plants in the storage roots were similar for SP and SP-PN sweet
15
potato plants. Likewise, foliage fresh and dry mass and harvest index were not significantly
influenced by treatment. Total dry mass was 37 % greater for PN than for SP-PN peanut
plants, and pod dry mass was 82% higher. Mature and total seed dry mass and fibrous root
dry mass were significantly greater for PN than for SP-PN plants. Harvest index was similar
for both treatments. Root length tended to be lower for seedlings grown in the nutrient
solution from the SP-PN treatment.
Jones (1999a) studied a new hydroponic growing system i.e. aqua nutrient growing
system. The system was based on the concept that constant supply of water and a low
constant supply of nutrients were sufficient to sustain plant growth. In the aqua nutrient
growing system, plants were grown in a confined vessel with the constant maintenance of a
Hoagland based nutrient solution at the bottom of the growing vessel. The container restricted
root growth which may had contributed to increase top growth and fruit yield.
Bharathy et al (2003) studied to find a suitable media for rooting of carnation cuttings
under poly house conditions. The media used were sand, cocopeat, vermicompost, perlite,
sand + cocopeat, sand + vermicompost, perlite + cocopeat and perlite + vermicompost.
Cuttings set in vermicompost rooted earliest (9.78 days) followed by perlite + cocopeat and
sand + vermicompost. The percentage of root number, rooted cuttings, mean root length, dry
and fresh weight of roots was highest in vermicompost followed by perlite + cocopeat.
Cuttings rooted in perlite + cocopeat sprouted earliest (30.3 days).
Bugbee (2004) studied the nutrient management in recirculating hydroponic culture.
To recirculate and reuse of nutrient solutions in order to reduce environmental and economic
costs. The weakest points in hydroponic was the lack of information on managing the nutrient
solution. Many growers and research scientists dump out nutrient solutions and refill at
weekly intervals. Other authors had recommended measuring the concentrations of individual
nutrients in solution as a key to nutrient control and maintenance. Dumping and replacing
solution was unnecessary. Monitoring ions in solution was not always necessary. The rapid
depletion of some nutrients often causes people to add toxic amounts of nutrients to the
solution. Monitoring ions in solution was interesting, but it was not the key to effective
maintenance.
Signore et al (2008) reported that in closed soilless systems, the nutrient solutions
must have a high electric conductivity (EC). Comparison was done by two different ways of
increasing EC for tomatoes grown by nutrient film technique (NFT) The initial EC of the
nutrient solution was increased by doubling the concentration of macro nutrients or adding
NaCl in order to maintain EC above 3.5 dS m -1
.It was concluded that the addition of NaCl
allowed a meaningful reduction in the quantities of nutrients utilized with inclusive savings of
11 % for S and 20 % for P without any meaning decrease in marketable yield.
16
Parks et al (2009) reported use of composted pine bark and coir as substrate in soilless
growing of cucumber and tomatoes in Australia. There was a great potential to improve water
and nutrient use efficiencies. The greenhouses had low-cost simple structures, commonly
covered with polyethylene plastic. Design of the structure for hydroponics depend upon the
system like soilless culture or Nutrient Film Technique and the substrate must be carefully
chosen.
Smolen et al (2013) studied the possibility of simultaneous bio-fortification of crop
lettuce with iodine and selenium through the nutrient medium in the hydroponic system of
nutrient film technique (NFT). It was observed that there was high efficiency of iodine and
selenium bio-fortification of lattuce plants after foliar application than through its introduction
into the nutrient medium. Studies were conducted according to a two- factor experiment with
greenhouse cultivation of lettuce in which five sub –blocks (units) with the introduction of
selenium and iodine into the nutrient medium were distinguished: (1) control, (2) 0.5 mg Se
dm-3
, (3) 1 mg I dm-3
, (4) 0.5 mg Se dm-3
+ 1 mg I dm-3
, (5) 1.5 mg Se dm-3
+ 1mg I dm-3
the
respective molar concentration were as (2) 6.33µM Se, (3)7.88 µM I, (4) 6.33 µM Se +
7.88µM I, (5) 19µM Se + 7.88µM I. Each sub-block included four combinations with five –
time foliar treatment with: (A) distilled water, (B) 0.005% Se (0.633 mM Se), (C) 0.05% I
(3.94mM I), (D) 0.005% Se + 0.05% (0.633mM Se + 3.94mM I). Iodine and selenium were
applied in the form of KIO3 and Na2SeO4 respectively. It was concluded that the foliar
spaying with IO3-
and SeO42was not having affect on root uptake of iodine and selenium
present in the nutrient medium. Foliar application of iodine together with selenium improved
SeO42absorption by leaves when compared to plant sprayed only with Se.
Asker (2015) studied the potential of nutrient film technique (NFT) hydroponic
system for flowers and bulbs production of the Asiatic hybrid lily cv. “Blackout” using
rainwater and nutrient solutions (Hoagland No. 2 Basal Salt Mixture, Murashige and Skoog
Basal Salt Mixture and White‟s Basal Salt) with rock wool cubes as medium with or without
removal of flower buds and mother bulb scales in university of Baghdad. The NFT
hydroponic system was an excellent method to produce lily flowers in 55 days. The rainwater
contained some amounts of macro and micro elements in forms that plants can absorb. The
rainwater had a pH value 6.20 which was suitable for plant growth. The NFT hydroponic
system was shown to be the most effective for bulblets and daughters production, but
different solutions showed different results and the Hoagland solution and Murashige and
Skoog solution gave the best results related to the production of these propagated storage
organs.
2.2.3 Crops grown hydroponically in greenhouse
Bradley and Marulanda (2000) reported the use of simplified hydroponic technology
which reduces the land requirement for crops by 75% or more and water used by 90%.
17
Residual effect of chemicals to the environment was negligible. No residual salts were
released to environment as nutrients were recycled in the system.
Moraru et al (2004) identified the most appropriate cultivar for direct consumption
and processing for NASA‟s Advanced Life Support (ALS) program. Ten hydroponically
grown processing tomatoes cultivars were grown under semi-controlled environment
conditions at a Rugers University greenhouse. Evaluation of cultivars on the basis of
performance using growth and yield indicators, physical / chemical indexes and sensory
testing. The values of indexes remained in the typical ranges for processing tomatoes but most
quality indexes showed significant difference between cultivars. SUN 6177 was the best
cultivar in growth, yield and physical / chemical characteristics. They had compared the
hydroponically grown fresh consumption, processing tomatoes and as well as for evaluating
the effects of hydroponic growth on processing tomatoes on the basis of data generated.
Carmassi et al (2005) concluded that tomato crop in closed hydroponics systems can
help in reducing the pollution of water resources, because of reduction in water and fertilizer
consumption in this type of system.
Millan et al (2008) studied the effects of Cd in tomato that was grown in controlled
environment in hydroponics. Cd concentration of 10 and 100µM were used in this
experiment. Cd treatment led to major effects in shoots and roots of tomato. Plant growth was
reduced in both treatments. Leaves showed chlorosis symptoms when grown at 10µM Cd and
necrotic spots when grown at 100 µM Cd but roots browning was observed in both
treatments. Cd excess caused several alterations on photosynthetic rates, photosynthetic
pigments and chlorophyll fluorescence as well as in nutrient homeostasis. Cd helps in
increases in the activities of several enzymes from the krebs cycle were measured in roots
extracts of tomato plants grown. In leaf extracts, significant increases in citrate synthase,
isocitrate dehydrogenase and malate dehydrogenase activities were also found in 100µM Cd
whereas fumarase activity decreased. In this, author observed that low Cd supply (10µM)
tomato plants accumulated Cd in roots and this mechanism may be associated to an increased
activity in the PEPC-MDH-CS metabolic pathway involved in citric acid synthesis in roots.
At low Cd supply author observed moderate Fe deficiency whereas high Cd supply (100μM)
effects the growth caused by excess Cd.
Steidle et al (2009) reported that automatic control system provided irrigation and
nutrients without affecting crop production and conventional control system. It applied excess
irrigation, mainly during the initial crop development period and during cloudy conditions
throughout the crop cycle. The amount of irrigation requirement and nutrient requirement was
increased from optimal level in conventional control system.
Varlagas et al (2010) investigated to simulated the uptake concentrations of Na+ and Cl-
in hydroponic tomato crops in the root zone. Three experiments were conducted in which one
18
was carried out to calibrate the model using irrigation water with NaCl concentration ranging
from 0- 14.7 mol m-3
and other two were conducted to validate the model within either low 0.5–
2 mol m-3
or high 1.2- 12 mol m-3
concentration range. Uptake concentration of Na+ was predict
easily but of Cl-
not less than 10 mol m-3
.The Na+
concentration in the root environment
increased due to the efficient exclusion of Na+
by tomato although Na+
concentration in the
irrigation was low. The results indicated that tomato genotypes characterized by high salt-
exclusion efficiency, to maintain Na+
at levels lower than 19 mol m3 in the root zone of the
tomato hybrid.
Meric et al (2011) studied the effects of nutrition systems and irrigation programs on
soilless grown tomato plants under polyethylene covered unheated greenhouse conditions.
Two nutrition systems one open and other one closed were taken and also three irrigation
programs (i) high, (ii) medium, (iii) low based on integrated indoor solar radiations triggering
thresholds (1 MJm-2
[0.4mm], 2 MJm-2
[0.8mm] and 4 MJm-2
[1.6mm]) in both nutrition
systems were been tested. In this they have calculated water use efficiency, evapo-
transpiration, applied and discharged nutrient solution and total marketable yield. Result
showed, the highest total yield had been obtained from the open system with 11 % and 7.2%
increase in autumn and spring season. Water use efficiency (WUE) of treatment varied
between 33-55kg/m3 in autumn and 26-35 kg/m
3 spring. They noticed the highest WUE
values in 4 MJ m-2
and in the closed system in both growing season. It was concluded that the
closed system and infrequent irrigations increased water use efficiency while decrease in yield
and discharged nutrient solution.
Castillo et al (2014) reported the water use efficiency and nutrients as well as the
yield in growing tomato in open and closed hydroponic systems. The experimental design
was randomized blocks with five replications and five treatments. 1) beds without
recirculation of drainage (open bed); 2) beds with recirculation of drainage (closed bed); 3)
bags without recirculation of drainage (open bag); 4) bags with recirculation of drains (closed
bag), 5) deep hydroponics. With the data an ANOVA was performed and means were
compared using the Tukey test (p≤0.05). Morphological traits, yield, water use and fertilizers
were measured. The highest yields were obtained with deep hydroponics (16.7 kg m-2
) and
with closed bags (15.3 kg m-2
) in a crop cycle of four months. The fertilizer savings (K, Ca,
N and P) in recirculation systems with substrate was 41 % and 35 % of water in relation to the
systems without recirculation.
Galvez et al (2014) studied the impact of reclaimed and surface water on the
microbiological safety of hydroponic tomatoes. Tomatoes were grown in greenhouse on two
hydroponic substrates i.e. coconut fiber and rock wool and they were irrigated with reclaimed
and surface water. Water samples were taken from irrigation water with or without the
addition of fertilizers and drainage water and hydroponic tomatoes. In irrigation water,
19
generic E.coli counts were higher in reclaimed than in surface water whereas Listeria spp.
Numbers increased after adding the fertilizers in both water sources. In drainage water, no
clear differences in E.coli and Listeria numbers were observed between reclaimed and surface
water. Presumptive positives for salmonella spp. were found in 7.7% of the water samples and
62.5% of these samples were reclaimed water. Concentration of E.coli was high when it was
associated with Salmonella presumptive positive samples. Tomato samples were negative for
bacterial pathogens, while generic E. coli and Listeria spp. counts were below the detection
limit. They concluded that the absence of pathogens on greenhouse hydroponic tomatoes
indicates good agricultural practices in which the microbial contamination were avoided.
Rosberg et al (2014) studied the closed hydroponic growing systems that has been
commonly used for greenhouse production of vegetables. One of the main problems
associated with these systems was the potential spread of plant root pathogens. The purpose
of this study was to investigate whether Community Level Physiological Profiling (CLPP)
could be used as a method to monitor changes in the rhizosphere microbial communities
inflicted by a pathogen. It was studied the microbial communities of the roots from three
different physiological stages of Pythiumultimum inoculated and non-inoculated tomato
plants, with culture-dependent (CLPP and viable counts) and culture-independent methods
(PCR–DGGE). The results showed that the presence of P. ultimum changed the utilization of
carbon sources by the root microbiota, and significant differences were found between
inoculated and non-inoculated plants. However, the differences in utilization patterns were
larger between plant physiological stages than between treatments. Also with the results from
PCR–DGGE it was confirmed that plant age was a stronger driver of the community structure
than the introduction of a pathogen. CLPP was hence a good method for examining changes
in microbial communities related to plant development, but regarding changes caused by the
presence of a pathogen the method shows less potential.
2.2.4 Growing media
Tsakaldimi (2006) studied the aeration and water retention of cocopeat varying from
11-53 and 50-81 percent respectively. Incorporation of coarser materials into cocopeat
resulted in improved aeration status of the media. Materials such as burnt rice husk, FYM,
CSS, LM and perlite could be used to improve the air –water relationship of cocopeat. Rice
hull obtained after shelling of rice had been reported to have low WHC and high pore space.
Raw rice hull had been used as a substitute for organic or inorganic components to replace
vermiculite and perlite and was reported to be effective in improving drainage or aeration of
growing media.
Ghazvini et al (2007) reported that in soilless media where perlite and zeolite was
used, plants grow up to two times faster with higher yields than with conventional soil
farming methods due to high oxygen levels to the root system, optimum pH levels for
20
increased nutrient and water uptake and optimum balanced and high grade nutrient solutions.
It was suggested to add zeolite if perlite is not available or if cost efficiency is taken into
account.
Clematis et al (2008) reported the occurrence of suppressiveness to Fusarium
oxysporum f. sp. Radicislycoperisici (FORL) on recycled perlite and perlite-peatmix from
closed and open soilless systems. They took nine soilless samples from three different areas in
Northern and Southern Italy. They considered different parameters like sampling site,
growing period before sampling, electric conductivity of the nutrient solution, tomato
cultivator and irrigation system. They found significant drop in disease for an average decline
in 44.4% - 61.9% in new perlite to 2.5%- 36.3% in recycle one. In new perlite peat mix the
decreased disease average ranging from 35.9% - 75.2% to 0.4%-26.4% in recycled perlite
peat mix.
Pardossi et al (2009) reported that in tomato plants grown in closed-loop substrate
(rockwool) culture using irrigation water with a NaCl concentration of approx. 9.5 mmol L -1
there was no important effects of the fertigation strategies on crop water uptake, total and
commercial yield and the quality of marketable fruits. The management strategy which aims
to maintain a constant nutrient concentration in the root zone is option I and a parallel
depletion of nutrients, if the nutrient replenishment was based on a feedback control of EC
was option II. The frequency of flushing was similar in all semi-closed systems and there
were no important differences in water drainage and use.
Joseph and Muthuchamy (2014) observed that there was a need for low cost, readily
available, simple, attractive technologies which could utilize space and water efficiently to
increase the productivity in agriculture. The experiment was laid out in a factorial randomized
block design replicated thrice. Three different hydroponic systems, i.e., tray, trough & pot and
three different media combinations, i.e., cocopeat + gravel + silex stone, cocopeat + pebble +
silex stone and cocopeat + perlite + silex stone, constituted the factors of the treatments. The
maximum yield (4.9 kg/plant) was observed for the treatment trough with cocopeat + gravel +
silex stone followed by trough with cocopeat + perlite + silex stone and trough with cocopeat
+ pebble + silex stone with values 4.2 and 3.9 kg/ plant respectively. The treatment T2 (tray
with cocopeat + pebble + silex stone) yielded least (2.8kg/plant) with a productivity of 138.3
t/ha. Regarding productivity, quality and economics, the treatment T4 trough with cocopeat +
gravel + silex stone (in the ratio 2:1:1v / v) performed best and could be adopted for
commercial production of tomato.
2.2.5 Quality of fruits in greenhouse
Jovicich et al (2007) reported that in greenhouse cucumber crop required one third of
the amount of water, 28% less nitrogen and 23% less potassium per kilogram of fruit
21
compared to field grown cucumber crop. In greenhouse there was greater fruit yield, fruit
quality and more crop water and nutrient used efficiency than open field
Nadica et al (2007) reported the internal quality parameters of tomato like dry matter
and soluble dry matter (°Bx), total acidity (% citric acid), pH, % NaCl and L-ascorbic acid of
the hydroponically grown tomatoes in rock wool slabs . The dry matter content was 4.29 % to
6.21 % , and content of soluble dry matter was 3.0% to 4.5% . Total acidity amounted from
0.19% to 0.45% , and pH values ranged from 4.20 to 4.68 . Salt content ranged from 0.08%
to 0.13% , and L-ascorbic acid content ranged from 260.40 to 458.30 mg/dry matter
accounted for satisfactory fruit quality.
Maboko et al (2011) studied the effect of plant population, fruit and stem pruning on
quality and yield of hydroponically grown tomato by using an open bag hydroponic system
containing sawdust as a growing medium. Results showed that fruit pruning was not
necessary for tomatoes grown hydroponically in a shade net structure, while allowing plants
to had two stems at a plant population of 3 plants per m2 which resulted in increased quality
and yield of tomatoes.
Ehret et al (2013) reported that oxygen radical absorbance capacity, lutein, β-
carotene, lycopene, and vitamin C concentrations increased with EC. β-Carotene, lycopene,
lutein, and vitamin C concentration have no effect of light but there concentration changes
with the change in temperature. Antioxidants responded more strongly to light and
temperature than to EC.
The above review of literature reveals that sufficient research work on the
development of hydroponic system for greenhouse for tomato including its plant parameters,
yield parameters and quality parameters had not been undertaken in Punjab, India. So the
present study on the development of hydroponic system for greenhouse tomato has been
planned.
CHAPTER III
MATERIAL AND METHODS
To meet the objectives experiment was carried out at Demonstration Farm of
Department of Soil and Water Engineering, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. The
chapter is divided into following sections:
3.1 Description of study area
3.2 Climate
3.3 Design and fabrication of hydroponic system
3.3.1 Components of greenhouse
3.3.2 Components of Nutrient Film Technique (NFT)
3.3.3 Design for size of pump
3.3.4 Preparation of Hoagland solution
3.4 Raising of crop
3.5 Observations
3.5.1 Yield parameters
3.5.2 Quality parameters
3.6 Statistical design
3.1 Description of study area
3.1.1 Location
Ludhiana district is situated in the central part of Punjab state and come under Malwa
region. It is located between 30 55‟ N and 75 54‟ E and elevation is 247 m above the sea
level.
3.2 Climate
The climatic zone of Ludhiana being subtropical experiences a very extreme type of
climate which is very hot in the summer (April to June) followed by a hot and humid
monsoon period (July-September) and very cold during winter (December-January).The
average rainfall of this area is 726 mm.
3.3 Design and fabrication of Hydroponic system
The hydroponic system using NFT (Nutrient Film Technique) was established under
the fan pad cooled poly house to study the effect of different concentrations of nutrient
solution on yield parameters and quality parameters. The treatments comprised of three
different nutrient solution concentrations. The soil less media mixture of cocopeat, perlite and
vermiculite (3:1:1) was used for the nursery establishment in the net pot. The seedlings of
tomato (PAU 211) were transplanted in the net pots as shown in Fig. 3.1 and thereafter placed
in the hydroponic system in the last week of March 2016. The indigenous hydroponic system
23
was designed and developed. The system was made up of PVC pipes of 4 inch diameter
placed on angle iron frame. The angle iron frame is at 75cm height from the ground surface.
The holes were drilled in the pipe of the size of net pots at spacing of 30cm as shown in Fig
3.2. The plants were transplanted in hydroponic system as shown in Fig 3.3.
Fig. 3.1 Transplanting of plants into net pots (80 mm × 70 mm) in mixture of cocopeat,
perlite and vermiculite in 3:1:1
Fig. 3.2 PVC pipes of 4 inch diameter with 6 m length each
was placed on 27 Iron angle rods
24
Fig.3.3 Transplantation of plants in PVC pipe
3.3.1 Components of greenhouse
1) Polythene: The greenhouse was made in 1008 square meter area. The greenhouse is
covered with UV stabilized poly film of 200 micron thickness.
2) Cooling pads: Cooling pads of thickness 6” were used for cooling the whole
greenhouse through which air passes and causes cooling effect. It also help in
maintaining the humidity and temperature of the greenhouse.
3) Fans: There were 8 fans in the greenhouse each size 53” 53” which help
maintaining optimum temperature and humidity inside the greenhouse.
4) Foggers: The foggers break the water into droplets of the size 90 micron and the
water is sprayed in the air in the form of fog, this also helps in maintaining the
temperature and humidity inside the greenhouse.
5) Electrical motors: There were two motors of 2 hp and 1.5 KW each. One motor was
used for wetting of cooling pads so that water could circulate in cooling pads and
another motor was used for operating foggers.
6) Thermal net: Thermal net or aluminum net is used instead of normal PVC shade net
as it helps in better maintain ace of the temperature inside the green house.
25
3.3.2Components of Nutrient Film Technique (NFT)
1. Angle Iron: A stand was prepared for supporting PVC pipe with upper V shaped
structure. Length of each stand was 6.2 m. There were 27 stand in the greenhouse.
2. PVC pipe: PVC pipe of 6 m length and 110 mm diameter were taken. Number of
pipes were 27 for in hydroponic system. 20 holes were made with the help of drill
machine on each pipe. Plant to plant spacing was 30 cm and row to row spacing was
90 cm.
3. Plant holder (Net Pots):The size of net pot was 80 mm × 70 mm.
4. Tank: The 9 tanks of capacity 100 L each were used in the system in which nutrient
solution was put. One tank for one treatment was used. The nutrient solution was re-
circulated in the same tank with the help of blind pipes of the size 16mm.
5. Pump: A low capacity submersible pump was placed in each tank to supply nutrient
solution. There were 9 submersible for the experiment. Each pump was of 20 W.
6. End caps for closing both the ends of PVC pipes: To prevent the leakage from
PVC pipes end caps were fixed on both the ends of PVC pipe.
3.3.3 Design for size of pump
The design of the pump is based on the requirement that 4mm depth of nutrient solution has
to be maintained in the 110 mm PVC pipe.
Depth of nutrient film technique, y = 4mm = 0.004 m
Internal diameter of PVC pipe, D = 0.11
Radius of pipe , r = 0.055 m
Length of PVC pipe = 6 m
Vertical distance between PVC pipe and Iron angle = 0.049m
Slope at which PVC pipes were installed 0.00816m
m0.049
Fig. 3.4 Cross sectional
area of PVC pipe
Cross section area of the pipe = 4
πd
4
π 2 (0.11)
2 = 9.5033 × 10
- 3 m
2 = 95.033 cm
2
1. =2 cos-1
d
y21
= The angle in the radians subtended by the water surface at the centre
y = depth of nutrient film technique
D = diameter of pipe
= 2 cos-1
11.0
004.021
= 2 (21.98)
= 43.970
26
2. Required cross section area of pipe, A =( ) ( – sin )
=( ) ( – sin (43.97) )
A = 1.106 × 10-4
m2
Volume required = A × length of pipe
Volume required for 1 pipe, V = 1.106 × 10-4
× 6 = 6.636 × 10-4
m3
Volume required for 3 pipes, V = 6.636 × 10-4
× 3 =1.990 × 10-3
m3
3. Wetted perimeter, P = r
= 0.055 × 43.97 × = 0.0422 m
4. Hydraulic radius, R =
= = 0.0026 m
5. Velocity, V =
Mannings coefficient, n = 0.11
slope of pipe = 24/6000 = 0.004
V =
= 0.1082 m3/s
6. Discharge, Q = ( ) A
Q = V A
Q = 0.1082 × 1.106 × 10(-4)
Discharge from 1 PVC pipe = 0.1082 × 1.106 × 10-4
= 1.196 × 10-5
m3/s = 0.0119 l/s
Discharge from 3 PVC pipe = 1.196 × 10(-5)
× 3 = 3.588 × 10-5
m3/s = 0.0358 l/s
7. Time for replacement of nutrient solution from pipe = = = 55.74 seconds
8. Discharge for given pump was 700 l/hr = 0.7 m3/hr = 1.944 × 10
-4 m
3/s = 0.194 l/s
Pressure head loss
1. Horizontal head loss
2. Vertical head loss
BC = length of pipe = 6 m
AB = Vertical height between PVC pipe from pump = 0.46 m
Total Head loss (H) = horizontal head loss (hh) + vertical head loss (hv)
1. Horizontal head loss
v1 = v2 and Z1 = Z2
Head loss (hh) = f.
f = friction losses
l = length of PVC pipe (m)
vc = critical velocity (m /s)
d = diameter of PVC pipe (m)
27
g = acceleration due to gravity (m /s2)
f = function of reynolds number
Re = for smooth pipe, Re = 2320
f = = = = 0.045
f = 0.045
g = 9.81 m/s2
hh = f. = (0.045) = 1.33 × 10-3
m
Horizontal head loss = 3.43 × 10-3
m
2. Vertical head loss
v1 = v2 and Z2> Z1
Head loss (hv) = (Z2 – Z1) + f. Z1 = 0 , Z2 = 0.46 (from datum)
hv = 0.46 + (0.045) = 0.46 + 1.33 × 10-3
= 0.461 m
Total Head loss (H) = horizontal head loss (hh) + vertical head loss (hv)
= 1.33 × 10-3
+ 0.461 = 0.462 m
Power requirement to drive the pump (P) = = =4.420 ×10-7
hp
Power requirement to drive the pump = 3.30 × 10-4
W
Table 3.1 Power of Pump
Diameter (m) 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
Length (m) 6 18 28 50 100 150 200
Power 10-4
(W) 3.30 3.34 3.37 3.44 3.60 3.76 3.92
As the length of pipe increases, power of pump also increases if the diameter of the
PVC pipe remains constant as shown in Table 3.1.
3.3.4 Preparation of Hoagland solution
The standard composition of Hoagland solution is shown in Table. 3.2. The Hoagland
nutrient solution was prepared in laboratory. Hoagland solution consists of calcium nitrate
tetra hydrate, potassium nitrate, mono potassium phosphate, magnesium sulphate hepta
hydrate, trace elements and iron chelates. To make 1 L solution of calcium nitrate tetra
hydrate, potassium nitrate, mono potassium phosphate and magnesium sulphate hepta hydrate
28
of quantity 236.1 g, 101.1 g, 136.1g and 246.5 g respectively were mixed with distilled water
in the four beaker separately then finally each nutrient was poured in the 1 L of flask. To
make 1 L solution of trace elements, boric acid, manganese chloride tetra hydrate, zinc
sulphate hepta hydrate, copper sulphate penta hydrate and sodium molibdate of quantity 2.8
g, 1.8 g, 0.2 g, 0.1 g and 0.025 g respectively were mixed with distilled water. To make 1 L of
iron chelate, firstly 56.1 g of potassium hydroxide were taken then mixed with distilled water
to make volume of 900 ml and pH of potassium hydroxide was adjusted to 5.5 using sulphuric
acid(H2SO4). Then ethylene dia amine tetra acetic acid and iron sulphate hepta hydrate were
added in the solution of potassium hydroxide. Standard composition to make 1L Hoagland
solution consisting of quantity 7 ml , 5 ml, 2 ml, 2 ml, 1 ml, and 1 ml of calcium nitrate tetra
hydrate, potassium nitrate, mono potassium phosphate, magnesium sulphate hepta hydrate,
trace elements and iron chelates were used and mixed with distilled water as listed in Table
3.3. To make 100 L of Hoagland solution, composition of various nutrients is listed in Table
3.4.The nutrient solutions were changed after 15 days of interval in the starting age of crop
after transplanting in NFT system. The pH of the nutrient solutions were maintained in the
range of 5.5 - 6.5 for optimum growth of plants. The EC of the nutrient solutions were
maintained in the range of 1.5 – 2.5 dS/m. The time interval for changing nutrient solution
was changed according to the days after transplanting of plants. The time interval of changing
the nutrient solution is discussed in chapter 4.
Table 3.2 List of nutrients in Hoagland solution
1. Calcium nitrate tetra hydrate (Ca(NO3)2.4H2O) 236.1 g/l
2. Potassium nitrate (KNO3) 101.1 g/l
3. Mono potassium phosphate (KH2PO4) 136.1 g/l
4. Magnesium sulphate hepta hydrate (MgSO4.7H2O) 246.5 g/l
5. Trace elements (made up to 1 L)
(a) Boric acid (H3BO3) 2.8 g
(b) Manganese chloride tetra hydrate (MnCl2.4H2O) 1.8g
(c) Zinc sulphate hepta hydrate (ZnSO4.7H2O) 0.2 g
(d) Copper sulphate penta hydrate (CuSO4.5H2O) 0.1 g
(e) Sodium molibdate (NaMoO4) 0.025 g
6. Iron Chelate (FeEDTA)
(a) Ethylene dia amine tetra acetic acid (EDTA. 2Na) 10.4 g
(b) Iron sulphate hepta hydrate(FeSO4.7H2O) 7.8 g
(c) Potassium hydroxide (KOH) 56.1 g
29
Table 3.3 Composition of nutrients of Hoagland solution in 1L
1. Ca(NO3)2.4H2O 7 ml
2. KNO3 5 ml
3. KH2PO4 2 ml
4 MgSO4.7H2O 2ml
5. Trace elements 1 ml
6. FeEDTA 1 ml
Table 3.4 Concentration of Hoagland nutrients in 100L of tank
Name of nutrients 100 % 75 % 50 %
Ca(NO3)2.4H2O 700 ml 525 ml 350 ml
KNO3 500 ml 375 ml 250 ml
KH2PO4 200 ml 150ml 100 ml
MgSO4.7H2O 200 ml 150 ml 100 ml
Trace elements 100 ml 75 ml 50 ml
FeEDTA 100 ml 75 ml 50 ml
3.4 Raising of crop
The layout of the experiment is as shown in the Fig 3.5. The tomato crop was raised
on the installed hydroponics system. The trellising system was established to support the
plants. The plant were tied to trellising system with the help of threads as shown in Fig. 3.6.
The crop pruning was carried out as per the established procedures. The standard package of
practices were followed for raising the crop as per recommendations of the Punjab
Agricultural University. In the Nutrient film technique the system was run throughout the day
without any break. 4 mm depth of nutrient solution was maintained. The ripened tomatoes
were harvested and yield was recorded time to time.
30
Fig 3.5 Layout of hydroponic system
Fig 3.6 Plants were tied with threads and clips
31
3.5 Crop parameters
3.5.1 Plant height
Five plants were selected at random from each treatment to measure their height 20
days after transplanting, 30 days after transplanting, 46 days after transplanting and 76 days
after transplanting. It was measured from the base of plant to the tip of the plant point with the
help of measuring tape. Plants height after 46 days of transplanting is shown in Fig 3.7.
Fig 3.7 Plants height after 46 days of transplanting
3.5.2 Stem diameter
Stem diameter was measured with Vernier calipers at 15, 30 and 45 days after
transplanting. Diameter of stem of plants after 30 days of transplanting is shown in Fig 3.8.
32
Fig 3.8 Plant diameter of stem after 30 days of transplanting
3.5.3 Yield of tomato
Tomato was harvested as per the standard harvest indices and the yield was recorded
on the treatment basis and then converted into tons/acre. Plants showing the fruits after
changing the color of fruits in Fig 3.9
Fig 3.9 Plants with fruits
33
3.5.4 Quality parameters
After picking, we checked the quality of fruit. Following are the quality parameters
which were measured during experiment.
1. Total soluble solids (TSS)
2. Lycopene content
3. Firmness
4. Titrable acidity
5. Moisture content
1. Total soluble solids (TSS)
TSS of tomato fruit was measured using a digital refractometer as shown in Fig 3.10.
The units of TSS is 0brix. The range of instrument was 0-85
0brix. The juice (>2 drops) of
tomato fruit of every treatment was poured in space provided in the instrument one by one.
The reading was recorded.
Fig 3.10 Digital refractometer
2. Lycopene content
Lycopene is a pigment responsible for the colour of the tomato. It was determined
and quantified using the procedure proposed by Nagata and Yamashita (1992). A known
weight of tomato was crushed in pestle and mortar and the pigment i.e. lycopene were
extracted using 10ml of acetone and n-hexane (4:6). The homogenized solution was allowed
to settle down. Then, 1 mL of the supernatant was taken and was diluted with 9 mL of acetone
and n-hexane (4:6). The resulting solution was analyzed spectro-photometrically with the help
of an UV 2601 spectrophotometer Fig. 3.11. The extract was covered with aluminium foil to
34
prevent photo-bleaching. Lycopene content was estimated by taking absorbance at 663, 645,
505 and 453 nm using acetone and n-hexane (4:6) as a blank.
Lycopene (%)= -0.0458 A663 + 0.204 A645 + 0.372 A505 – 0.0806 A453
Where,
A663 , A645, A505, A453 are the absorbances at 663, 645, 505 and 453 nm respectively.
Fig 3.11 Spectrophotometer
3. Firmness
The textural characteristics of tomato were studied using texture analyser (Make:
Stable Micro Systems, Model: TA.TXT. Plus). This texture analyser consist of basic two
components namely hardware (load cell of 250 kg with platform to hold the sample and
moving head for holding probe) and software (texture expert) for recording and calculating
the results of the text.
Before performing the tests, the machine was calibrated for load and distance. The
load calibration was done to check whether the load cell was accurately sensing the forces
imposed over the sample of fruit. Calibrated weight of 250 kg was suspended on the cross
head and the desired option was selected under TA settings. Similarly, the movement of the
cross head was calibrated to ensure the compliance of the set deformation (5mm) of the
sample. This was done by allowing the selected problem (P75 Compression plane in case of
compression and P/2N needle in case of puncture test) to move downwards towards the empty
platform and then upwards to a preselected distance. After calibrating the texture analyser, a
sample of fruit was placed on the platform and run a test commandenergized. The probe
compressed, punctured or ruptured the sample as per settings to generate the force-distance
curve. The textural measuring puncture test conducted as shown in Fig 3.12.
35
Fig 3.12 Texture analyser
4. Titratable acidity
A representative sample of 3 tomatoes from each sample was taken and juice
extracted as shown in Fig 3.13. About 2 ml of this juice was taken and titrated against N/10
NaOH solution with phenolphthalein as indicator and pink color as end point as given by
Rangana (1986) as shown in Fig 3.14. The volume of NaOH used was recorded and acidity
was computed as follows:
Total Acid =
Fig 3.13 Juice extracted from different treatments of tomato
36
Fig 3.14 Detrermination of titrable acidity
5. Moisture content (%)
The moisture content was determined by standard oven method (AOAC 2000).The
weight of tomato and petri dishes were taken individually as shown in Fig 3.15. Sample was
weighed and dried at 60°C for 4 days in uncovered pre-weighted Petri dishes in forced air
oven as shown in Fig 3.16.The moisture content was calculated on wet basis, using the
relationship:
1 2
1
W -WM.C.(% wb)= x100
W
Where,
W1 = initial weight of the sample (g)
W2 = final weight of the sample after drying (g)
37
Fig 3.15 Weighing of tomato
Fig 3.16 Drying of tomato at 600C
Oven was used for the drying of tomato for finding the presence of moisture content
in the tomato. The temperature of the oven was set at 600C. The sample from each
treatments were kept in the oven for drying for 4 days after taking the initial weight of the
tomato from each sample. The oven was working 24 × 7. After four days, final weight was
measured. By using the formula given above, moisture content found out. This whole
process was repeat after every picking of the fruits to find out the quality parameters of the
tomato.
38
3.6 Statistical Analysis
The data collected from the present field experiment were subjected to the statistical
analysis using completely randomised designs (CRD) and using analysis CPCS1, software
developed by Department of Mathematics and Statistics, PAU, Ludhiana. Data was
statistically analysed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) techniques. The significance of
differences was tested at 5 per cent level.
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The results obtained from the experimental set up in greenhouse entitled „Development of
hydroponic system for greenhouse Tomato‟ are discussed below:
4.1Effect of nutrient solution on growth of tomato in different treatments
4.1.1 Diameter of stem
The result obtained from Table 4.1 shows the variation in stem of different plants
according to the treatments. These values were taken on 14th May 2016 after 15 days of
transplanting (15 DAT) with the help of vernier caliper. The T2 shows more diameter of stem
of plants i.e. 9.40 mm followed by T1 and T3 showing 9.25 mm and 8.76 mm respectively.
The variation was due to light effect. The Table 4.2 shows the variation in stem of different
plants according to the t reatments. These values were taken on 31st May 2016 i.e. 30 DAT with
the help of vernier caliper. The T2 shows more diameter of stem of plant i.e. 11.65 mm followed
by T1and T3 showing 11.32 mm and 10.99 mm respectively. This Variation was due to light
effect. The treatments showing the more diameter of stem were more expose to sunlight. The
Table 4.3 shows the variation in stem of different plants according to the treatments. These values
were taken on14th June 2016 i.e. 45 DAT with the help of vernier caliper. The T2 shows more
diameter of stem of plant i.e. 13.34 mm followed by T1and T3 showing 12.69 mm and 12.55 mm
respectively. This variation was due to light effect. The treatments showing the more diameter of
stem were more exposed to sunlight.
Statistical analysis for different treatments are given in Table 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 revealed
that there was non significant effect of Hoagland solution on diameter of stem up to 45 DAT.
Table 4.1 Effect of Hoagland solution on diameter of stem of plants 15 DAT
Treatments T1 (100%) T2 (75%) T3 (50%)
Diameter of plants (mm) 9.25 9.40 8.76
CD = NS
Table 4.2 Effect of Hoagland solution on diameter of stem of plants 30 DAT
Treatments T1 (100%) T2 (75%) T3 (50%)
Diameter of plants (mm) 11.32 11.65 10.99
CD = NS
Table 4.3 Effect of Hoagland solution on diameter of stem of plants 45 DAT
Treatments T1 (100%) T2 (75%) T3 (50%)
Diameter of plants (mm) 12.69 13.34 12.55
CD = NS
40
4.1.2 Height of plants
The results obtained for plant height under different treatments are presented
discussed in Table 4.4, 4.5, 4.6 and 4.7 where the height of plants after 20 days of
transplanting (DAT), 30 DAT, 46 DAT, 72 DAT respectively is discussed.
Plant height was recorded after 20 days of transplanting as shown in Table 4.4. The
average height of plant in T1 was more i.e. 56.02 cm than other two treatments T2 and T3
showing 52.17 cm and 49.91 cm respectively. Position of the treatments effect the height of the
plants. Plants height was recorded after 30 days of transplanting as shown in Table 4.5. The
average height of plants in T1 was more i.e. 76.42 cm than other two treatments T2 and T3
showing 74.01 cm and 73.35 respectively. Position of the treatments effect the height of the
plants. Plants height was recorded after 46 days of transplanting as shown in Table 4.6. The
average height of plants in T1 was more i.e. 134.15cm than other two treatments T2 and T3
showing 121.59 cm and 105.19 cm respectively. The variation was due to the concentration of
nutrient solution. Plants height was recorded after 72 days of transplanting as shown in Table
4.7. The average height of plants in T1 was more i.e. 185.98 cm than other two treatments T2
and T3 showing 170.50 cm and 166.53 cm respectively. The variation was due to the
concentration of nutrient solution.
Statistical analysis for different treatments are given in Table 4.4, 4.5, 4.6 and 4.7
revealed that there was non significant effect of Hoagland solution on plant height up to 30 DAT.
The effect of Hoagland solution from 46 DAT to and 72 DAT was found to be significant.
Table 4.4 Effect of Hoagland solution on height of plants 20 DAT
Treatments T1 (100%) T2 (75%) T3 (50%)
Height after 20 days(cm) 56.02 52.17 49.91
CD = NS
Table 4.5 Effect of Hoagland solution on height of plants 30 DAT
Treatments T1 (100%) T2 (75%) T3 (50%)
Height after 30 days (cm) 76.42 74.01 73.35
CD = NS
Table 4.6 Effect of Hoagland solution on height of plants 46 DAT
Treatments T1 (100%) T2 (75%) T3 (50%)
Height after 46 days
(cm)
134.15 121.59 105.19
CD = 11.05 at 5 %
41
Table 4.7 Effect of Hoagland solution on height of plants 76 DAT
Treatments T1 (100%) T2 (75%) T3 (50%)
Height after 76 days
(cm)
185.98 170.50 166.53
CD = 12.03 at 5 %
4.2 pH and EC of nutrient solution
The pH and EC of Hoagland solution in the hydroponic system was to be maintained
for the growth of crop. The optimum nutrient solution pH ranges between 5.5 to 6.5, a range
in which the maximum number of elements are at their highest availability for plants (Taiz
and Zeiger 2002). The pH value of nutrient solution must not increase above 6.5 because iron,
copper, zinc, boron and manganese are unavailable above 6.5. When pH rises above 6.5 some
of the nutrients and micro-nutrients begin to precipitate out of the solution and can stick to the
walls of the reservoir and growing chambers. But if it increased then nutrient solution i.e.
Hoagland solution have to be changed.
EC is an index of salt concentration that indicates the total amount of salts in a
solution. EC of the nutrient solution is a good indicator of the amount of nutrients to the
plants in the root zone (Nemali and Van 2004). EC range from 1.5 dS/m to 2.5 dS/m to obtain
proper results (Greenway and Munns 1980). The EC of nutrient solution must not decrease
but if decreases then nutrient solution have to be changed. The EC of nutrient solution
decreases due to consumption of nutrients from the nutrient solution. In general, EC>2.5
dS/m may lead to salinity problems while EC<1.5 dS/m may lead to nutrient deficiencies. In
greenhouse, the high input of fertilizers is the main cause of the salinity problems (Li 2000).
Higher EC reduces the nutrient uptake by increasing osmotic pressure, whereas the lower EC
may affect the plant health and yield (Samarakoon et al 2006).
4.2.1 pH of Hoagland solution before and after the consumption of nutrients from
solution for treatment 1, treatment 2 and treatment 3
The result obtained by noting the value pH of Hoagland solution before and after the
consumption of nutrients by the plants as shown in Table 4.8 after a interval of days for
treatment 1 (100%), treatment 2 (75 %) and treatment 3 (50 %). The Table 4.8 shows suitable
range of pH of the nutrient solution. At this range of pH i.e. 5.5-6.5, the plants easily absorbed
nutrients from the nutrient solution. The interval of changing of nutrient solution depends
upon pH range and the age of crop after transplanting. pH will increase because some of the
nutrients and micro-nutrients began to precipitate out of the solution and can stick to the walls
of the tank (reservoir) and pipes (growing chambers).The variation of consumption of pH
before and after changing the nutrient solution in T1, T2 and T3 concentration is shown is
Fig. 4.1. This variation is due to the precipitation of nutrients and micro-nutrients in the tank.
42
Table 4.8 pH of Hoagland solution before and after changing the nutrient solution for
T1, T2 and T3
S.No Intervals in days in
(2016)
Treatment 1 Treatment 2 Treatment 3
pH
before
pH
after
pH
before
pH
after
pH
before
pH
after
1. 31 March -12 April 6.47 6.94 6.47 6.8 6.50 6.86
2. 12April- 26 April 6.11 6.96 6.17 6.79 6.22 6.85
3. 26 April - 5 May 6.36 6.97 6.27 6.75 6.21 6.81
4. 5 May – 13 May 5.57 6.78 5.91 6.54 5.58 6.53
5. 13 May – 18 May 5.91 6.89 6.18 6.84 6.35 6.80
6. 18 May – 23 May 6.40 6.94 6.15 6.85 6.21 6.77
7. 23 May – 28 May 6.38 6.90 6.18 6.87 6.08 6.74
8. 28 May – 1 June 6.40 6.97 6.15 6.86 6.40 6.79
9. 1 June – 6 June 6.32 6.93 6.27 6.77 6.04 6.73
10. 6 June – 11 June 6.34 6.93 6.25 6.84 6.04 6.69
11. 11 June – 16 June 6.47 6.96 6.18 6.85 6.00 6.66
12. 16 June – 19 June 6.34 6.98 6.29 6.84 6.09 6.73
13. 19 June – 22 June 6.43 6.93 6.24 6.88 6.03 6.72
14. 22 June – 27 June 6.32 6.92 6.18 6.84 5.94 6.64
15. 27 June – 30 June 6.31 6.95 6.26 6.83 6.02 6.7
16. 30 June – 4 July 6.36 7.00 6.12 6.88 6.12 6.75
17. 4 July – 9 July 6.28 6.94 6.24 6.83 6.07 6.66
18. 9 July – 13 July 6.41 6.97 6.29 6.8 6.01 6.76
19. 13 July – 16 July 6.44 7.05 6.35 6.89 6.12 6.83
20. 16 July – 19 July 6.45 6.99 6.28 6.91 6.10 6.75
21. 19 July – 23 July 6.39 6.85 6.3 6.84 6.14 6.7
22. 23 July – 27 July 6.42 6.94 6.32 6.77 6.07 6.65
23. 27 July – 2 August 6.35 6.90 6.28 6.84 6.15 6.73
24. 2 August – 6 August 6.34 6.86 6.24 6.74 6.05 6.61
43
Fig 4.1 Variation of consumption of pH before and after changing the nutrient
solution inT1, T2 and T3 concentration
4.2.2 EC of Hoagland solution before and after the consumption of nutrients from
solution for treatment 1, treatment 2 and treatment 3
The result obtained by noting the value EC of Hoagland solution before and after
the consumption of nutrients by the plants is shown Table 4.9 after a interval of days of
treatment 1 (100 %), treatment 2 (75 %) and treatment 3 (50 %). The Table 4.9 shows
suitable range of EC of the nutrient solution. The interval of changing of nutrient solution
depends upon EC range and the age of crop after transplanting The EC will decrease due to
consumption of nutrients from the solution. The variation of consumption of pH before and
after changing the nutrient solution inT1, T2 and T3 concentration is shown in Fig 4.2. The
EC in all the three treatments is decrease due the consumption of nutrients by the plants in
the given treatment. The decrease in all the three treatments is comparable with each other
as shown in Fig. 4.2.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
31 M
arch
-12 A
pri
l
12 A
pri
l -
26 A
pri
l
26 A
pri
l -
5 M
ay
5 M
ay –
13 M
ay
13 M
ay –
18 M
ay
18 M
ay –
23 M
ay
23 M
ay –
28 M
ay
28 M
ay –
1 J
une
1 J
une
–6
June
6 J
une
–11
June
11 J
une
–16
June
16 J
une
–19
June
19 J
une
–22
June
22 J
une
–27
June
27 J
une
–30
June
30 J
une
–4 J
uly
4 J
uly
–9 J
uly
9 J
uly
–13 J
uly
13 J
uly
–16 J
uly
16 J
uly
–19 J
uly
19 J
uly
–23 J
uly
23 J
uly
–27 J
uly
27 J
uly
–2 A
ugust
2 A
ugust
–6 A
ugust
pH
ran
ge
for
nu
trei
nt
solu
tion
Interval for changing nutrient solution (days)
T 1 pH before T 1 pH after T 2 pH before
T 2 pH after T 3 pH before T 3 pH after
44
Table 4.9 EC of Hoagland solution before and after changing the nutrient solution for
T1, T2 and T3
S.
No
Intervals in days in
(2016)
Treatment 1 Treatment 2 Treatment 3
EC
before
EC
after
EC
before
EC
after
EC
before
EC after
1. 31 March -12 April 2.18 0.92 2.07 0.66 1.85 0.53
2. 12 April - 26 April 2.18 0.91 2.07 0.89 1.85 0.45
3. 26 April - 5 May 2.16 0.87 1.91 0.72 1.76 0.46
4. 5 May – 13 May 2.09 0.86 1.87 0.61 1.76 0.51
5. 13 May – 18 May 2.18 0.91 1.96 0.64 1.76 0.48
6. 18 May – 23 May 2.14 0.96 1.92 0.66 1.76 0.49
7. 23 May – 28 May 2.17 0.88 1.93 0.71 1.77 0.51
8. 28 May – 1 June 2.15 0.86 1.98 0.73 1.77 0.47
9. 1 June – 6 June 2.17 0.88 1.97 0.64 1.78 0.47
10. 6 June – 11 June 2.21 0.85 1.92 0.68 1.77 0.47
11. 11 June – 16 June 2.17 0.83 1.91 0.64 1.76 0.46
12. 16 June – 19 June 2.14 0.85 1.92 0.64 1.77 0.49
13. 19 June – 22 June 2.13 0.83 1.68 0.56 1.78 0.39
14. 22 June – 27 June 2.15 0.79 1.9 0.59 1.75 0.36
15. 27 June – 30 June 2.16 0.87 1.91 0.65 1.72 0.49
16. 30 June – 4 July 2.36 0.92 1.85 0.66 1.61 0.48
17. 4 July – 9 July 2.18 0.84 1.94 0.63 1.72 0.39
18. 9 July – 13 July 2.18 0.87 1.53 0.76 1.77 0.54
19. 13 July – 16 July 2.19 0.87 1.97 0.63 1.73 0.55
20. 16 July – 19 July 2.19 0.84 1.96 0.66 1.79 0.51
21. 19 July – 23 July 2.14 0.88 1.94 0.66 1.67 0.48
22. 23 July – 27 July 2.18 0.84 1.94 0.72 1.76 0.46
23. 27 July – 2 August 2.17 0.85 1.92 0.66 1.78 0.47
24. 2 August – 6 August 2.13 0.88 1.95 0.65 1.78 0.5
45
Fig 4.2 Variation of consumption of EC before and after changing the nutrient
solution in T1 (100 %) concentration
4.3 Interval of changing of Hoagland solution after transplanting
The result obtained by changing the nutrient solution after interval of time was
shown in Fig 4.3. The solution was changed 24 times during the whole experiment as
shown in Fig 4.3.The solution was changed for 5 months. The consumption of nutrient
solution depends upon the age of tomato crop. That is why with the increase in number of
days of plants in PVC pipes, there is increase in the consumption of nutrient solution.
Firstly, after 15 days, the nutrient solution was changed but with passing of days the
consumption of tomato crop increases. Solution had been changed after 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 10
days depending on the age of crop. The increase in height of plants leads to increase in the
consumption of nutrient solution. As the consumption rate of plants increases, the quantity
of nutrient solution in the tank decreases so there was a need to change the nutrient
solution. The main reason of changing of nutrient solution was increase in pH value and
decrease in EC value. The value of pH should not increase 6.5 and value of EC should not
decrease to 1.5dS/m.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
31 M
arch
-12 A
pri
l
12 A
pri
l -
26 A
pri
l
26
Ap
ril
-5 M
ay
5 M
ay –
13 M
ay
13 M
ay –
18 M
ay
18 M
ay –
23 M
ay
23 M
ay –
28 M
ay
28 M
ay –
1 J
une
1 J
une
–6 J
une
6 J
une
–11 J
une
11 J
une
–16 J
une
16 J
une
–19 J
une
19 J
une
–22 J
une
22 J
une
–27 J
une
27 J
une
–30 J
une
30
June
–4 J
uly
4 J
uly
–9 J
uly
9 J
uly
–13 J
uly
13
July
–16 J
uly
16
July
–19 J
uly
19
July
–23 J
uly
23 J
uly
–27 J
uly
27 J
uly
–2 A
ugust
2 A
ugust
–6 A
ugustE
C ra
nge
for
nu
trie
nt
solu
tion
Interval for changing nutrient solution (days)
T 1 EC before T 1 EC after T 2 EC before
T 2 EC after T 3 EC before T 3 EC after
46
Fig. 4.3 Interval during the process of changing the nutrient solution
4.4 Quality parameters
The various quality parameters were evaluated during experimentation was moisture
content, titrable acidity, lycopene, firmness and total soluble solids are described below.
4.4.1 Moisture content
The result obtained for moisture content under different treatments are presented in
Table 4.10. It can be seen from the data that the maximum moisture was found in treatment 1
followed by treatment 2 and treatment 3 as shown in Table 4.10. Statistical analysis for different
treatments is given in Table 4.10 and revealed that there was no significant effect between
T1,T2 and T3 concentration of Hoagland concentration on moisture content of tomato.
Table 4.10 The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the moisture content
Treatments T1 (100%) T2(75%) T3(50%)
Moiture content(%) 59.220 56.757 50.990
CD at 5% = NS
4.4.2 Titrable acidity
The result obtained for titrable acidity under different treatments are presented in
Table 4.11. It can be seen from the data that the maximum titrable acidity was found in
treatment 1 and treatment 2 followed by treatment 3 as in Table 4.11. The TSS in tomato
decreases with decrease in concentration of Hoagland solution. Statistical analysis for
different treatments is given in Table 4.11 and revealed that there was significant effect
between T1 and T3 and T2 and T3 at 5% level on titrable acidity of tomato.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
31/3
/2016
12/4
/2016
26/4
/2016
5/5
/2016
13/5
/2016
18/5
/2016
23/5
/2016
28/5
/2016
1/6
/2016
6/6
/2016
11/6
/2016
16/6
/2016
19/6
/2016
22/6
/2016
27/6
/2016
30/6
/2016
4/7
/2016
9/7
/2016
13/7
/2016
16/7
/2016
19/7
/2016
23/7
/2016
27/7
/2016
2/8
/2016
Inte
rvals
(d
ays)
Days after transplanting
Duration
47
Table 4.11The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the titrable acidity
Treatments T1 (100%) T2(75%) T3(50%)
Titrableacidity(%) 0.16 0.16 0.10
CD at 5% = 0.01
4.4.3 Lycopene
The result obtained for lycopene under different treatments are presented in Table
4.12. It can be seen from the data that the maximum lycopene content was found in treatment
1 followed by treatment 2 and treatment 3 as shown in Table 4.12. Statistical analysis for
different treatments is given in Table 4.12 and revealed that there was no significant effect
between T1 and T2 concentration of Hoagland concentration on lycopene of tomato.
Table 4.12 The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the lycopene
Treatments T1 (100%) T2(75%) T3(50%)
Lycopene (%) 3.0 2.98 2.75
CD at 5% = NS
4.4.4 Firmness
The result obtained for firmness under different treatments are presented in Table
4.13. It can be seen from the data that the maximum firmness was found in treatment 1
followed by treatment 2 and treatment 3 as shown in Table 4.13. Statistical analysis for
different treatments is given in Table 4.13 and revealed that there was no significant effect
between T1,T2 and concentration of Hoagland concentration on firmness of tomato.
Table 4.13 The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the firmness
Treatments T1 (100%) T2(75%) T3(50%)
Firmness (KgF) 0.643 0.573 0.557
CD at 5% = NS
4.4.5 Total soluble solids (TSS)
The result obtained for TSS under different treatments are presented in Table 4.14. It
can be seen from the data that the maximum TSS was found in treatment 1 followed by
treatment 2 and treatment 3 as in Table 4.14. The TSS in tomato decreases with decrease in
concentration of Hoagland solution. Statistical analysis for different treatments is given in
Table 4.14 and revealed that there was significant effect between T1 and T3 at 5% level on
TSS of tomato.
48
Table 4.14 The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the total soluble solids
Treatments T1 (100%) T2(75%) T3(50%)
TSS (0brix) 7.37 6.60 5.20
CD at 5% = 1.17
4.5 Yield of tomato
The Total yield of tomato was higher in T1 (100%) as compared with T3 (50%)
treatments as shown in Table 4.16. It can be seen from the data that the maximum yield was
found withT1 (100%) followed by T2 (75%) and T3 (50%). Higher yield was due to 100%
concentration of Hoagland solution. This may be attributed to higher concentration of
nutrients or better availability of nutrients which enhances the cell metabolisms resulting in
better yield.
Statistical analysis for different treatments is given in table 4.15 and revealed that
there was a significant effect of concentrations of Hoagland solution on tomato.
Table 4.15 The effect of concentration of Hoagland solution on the yield of tomato
Treatments T1 (100%) T2(75%) T3(50%)
Yield ton/ha 72.57 69.28 50.76
CD at 5% = 5.75
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY
Field experiment was conducted at the Demonstration Farm of the Department of Soil
and Water Engineering, PAU, Ludhiana for study on the development of hydroponic system
for greenhouse tomato. Hydroponic seems to be a promising technique to grow ornamentals
using soil-less growing media to avoid soil-borne pests and diseases as well as scarcity of
space. The different components of the hydroponic system were designed for the nutrient film
technique (NFT). In NFT the basic principal is the maintenance of the thin film of nutrient
around the roots. The depth of water is not more than 4mm. To maintain this depth of water
there is a need to calculate the size of the pump required. The nutrient solution is circulated 24
x 7 schedule. This was designed based upon the volume of the water in the given length of the
pipe. After optimizing the different design components, the system was installed in the fan
pad cooled greenhouse of the size 1008 m2.
The experiment was laid out completely randomized designs keeping three treatments
as T1 (100%), T2 (75%) and T3 (50%) of Hoagland solution. The tomato crop was raised in the
said hydroponics system. Studies on the effect of different concentrations of the Hoagland
solution on the tomato crop for crop and quality parameters was carried out.
Plant height, diameter of stem of plants, Total soluble solids (TSS), Lycopene content,
Firmness, Titrable acidity, Moisture content, Total soluble solids were observed and analysed.
The statistical analysis was carried out by using CPCS1 software. Data was statistically
analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) techniques. The significance of differences
was tested at 5 per cent level.
The following conclusions are drawn from the present study:
1. The hydroponics system was designed and installed in the demonstration farm of the
Department of Soil and Water Engineering, and performed satisfactorily.
2. The stem diameter of the tomato does not show any significant difference between
the treatments.
3. The plant height of the tomato crop does not show any significant difference for the
initial days but after 46 days there was significant difference in the height of the
plants. Higher concentration (100%) gave significantly better results as compared to
lower concentration.
4. The average variation in pH of nutrient solution in T1 was 6.54 to7.05, in T2 was
6.27 to 6.86 and in T3 was 5.99 to 6.70.
5. The average variation in EC of nutrient solution in T1 was 2.15 dS/m, in T2 was 1.90
dS/m and in T3 1.77dS/m.
50
6. The range of temperature and relative humidity maintained in the greenhouse for T1,
T2 and T3 was 250C to 32
0C and 45% to 60% respectively.
7. It was found that quality of fruits of treatment 1 (100%) was better than other two
treatments i.e. treatment 2 (75%) and treatment 3 (50%). The TSS, firmness, titrable
acidity, moisture content and lycopene were better in treatment 1 (100%) than other
two treatments i.e. treatment 2 (75%) and treatment 3 (50%).
8. It was observed that there was no significant difference in yield levels at
concentration of 100% of Hoagland solution and 75% level. But it differed
significantly as compared to yield at 50% concentration of the Hoagland solution.
9. Based on the above it can be summarized that hydroponic system can be effectively
used commercially for raising tomato crops and is feasible under Indian conditions.
RFERENCES
AOAC (2000) Official methods of analysis. Association of official analytical chemists.
Washington DC,USA.
Anonymous (2016) http://www.growtomatoes.com/hydroponic-tomato-growing/Date of
access (22-05-2016)
Ashari M E and Gholami M (2009) The effect of increased chloride content in nutrient
solution on yield and quality of strawberry fruits. J Fru Orna Plant Res 18:37-44.
Asker H S (2015) Hydroponic technology for lily flowers and bulbs production using
rainwaterandsome common nutrient solutions. Afr J Biotechnol 14:2307-13.
Avalhaes C C, Prado R M, Rozane D E, Romualdo L M and Correia M R (2009)
Macronutrients omission and the growth and nutritional status of elephant grass (cv.
Mott) growing in nutrient solution. Sci Agrar 10:215-22.
Bamsey M, Berinstain A and Dixon M (2012) Development of a potassium-selective optode
for hydroponic nutrient solution monitoring. Anal Chem Acta 737:72-82.
Beibel, J P (1960) Hydroponics -The Science of Growing Crops Without Soil. Florida
Department of Agric. Bull. Pp180.
Bharathy P V, Sonawane P C and Sasnur A (2003) Effect of different planting media on
rooting of cutting in carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus L). J Maharashtra Agri Uni
28:343-44.
Bradley P and Marulanda C (2000) Simplified hydroponics to reduce global hunger. Acta
Hort 554:289-95.
Brun R, Settembrino A, Couve C (2001) Recycling of nutrient solutions for rose (Rosa
hybrida) in soilless culture. Acta Hort 554:183–91.
Bugbee, B (2004) Nutrient management in recirculating hydroponic culture. Acta Hort 648:
99–112.
Carmassi G, Incrocci L, Maggini R, Malorgio F, Tognoni F and Pardossi A (2005) Modeling
salinity build-up in recirculating nutrient solution culture. J Plant Nutr 28:431-45.
Castillo F S, Perez E C and Magaa E C (2012) Development of alternative crop systems for
production of vegetables in hydroponics. Acta Hort 947:399- 408.
Castillo F S, Perez E C, Pineda P J, Osuna J M, Perez J R and Encino T O (2014) Hydroponic
tomato production with and without recirculation of nutrient solution. Agrociencia
48:185-97.
Clematis F, Minuto A, Gullino M L and Garibaldi A (2008) Suppressive to
fusariumoxysporumf. sp. Radicislycopersici in re-used perlite and perlite-peat
substrates in soilless tomatoes. Biol Cont 48:108-14.
52
Dysko J, Kaniszewski S and Kowalczyk W (2008) The effect of nutrient solution pH on
phosphorus availability in soilless culture of tomato. J Elementol 13:189-196.
Ehret D L, Usher K, Helmer T, Block G, Steinke D, Frey B, KuangT, and DiarraM (2013)
Tomato fruit antioxidants in relation to salinity and greenhouse climate. J Agric Food
Chem 61:1138- 45.
Gallergly M E, Jr and Walker J C (1949) Plant nutrition in relation to disease development V.
bacterial wilt of tomato. Am J Bot 8: 613-23.
Galvez F L, Allende , Salcedo F P, Alarcon J J and Gil M I(2014) Safety assessment of
greenhouse hydroponic tomatoes irrigated with reclaimed and surface water. Int J
Food Microbiol 191:97-102.
Ghazvini R F, Payvast G and Azarian H (2007) Effect of clinoptilolitic-zeolite and
perlitemixtures on the yield and quality of strawberry in soil-less culture. Int J
Agric Biol 9:885-88.
Greenway H and Munns R (1980) Mechanisms of salt tolerance in non halophytes. Annu Rev
Plant Physio and Plant Molecu Biol 31:149-90.
Hoagland D R and Arnon D I (1950) The water-culture method for growing plants without
soil. Vol 347, pp 1-32. University of California, Berkeley.
Hochmuth G J and Hochmuth R C (2008) Nutrient solution formulation for hydroponic
(NFT) tomatoes in Florida – Hort Sci Depart University of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida 796-806.
Johnson R S, Saa S and Brown (2013) Testing the effectiveness of zinc formulations using
peach seedling. Acta Hort 884:1087-96.
Jones J B (1999a) Advantages gained by controlling root growth in a newly- developed
hydroponic growing system. Acta Hort 481:221-30.
Jones J B (1999b) Tomato plant culture in the field, greenhouse and home garden. Pp. 105.
CRC Press Boca Raton Florida.
Joseph A and Muthuchamy I (2014) Productivity, quality and economics of tomato
(Lycopersicon sculentum Mill.) cultivation in aggregate hydroponics. Indian J Sci
Technol 7:1078–86.
Jovicich E, Cantliffe D J, Simonne E H and Stoffela P J (2007) Comparative water and
fertilizeruse efficiencies of two production systems for cucumbers. I: Mc Conchie R
and Rogers G (ed) Proc 3rdActa Hort Vol 731, pp235-41, University of Florida, USA.
Karimaei M S, Massiha S and Mogaddam M (2004) Comparison of two nutrient solutions
effect on growth and nutrient levels of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) cultivars. Acta Hort
644:69-76.
Li H and Cheng Z (2014) Hoagland nutrient solution promotes the growth of cucumber
seedlings under light-emitting diode light. Acta Agri Scandina 65:74-82.
53
Li Y L (2000) Analysis of greenhouse tomato production in relation to salinity and shoot
environment. PhD dissertation. Wageningen University, The Netherlands.
Maboko M M, Plooy C D and Chiloane S (2011) Effect of plant population, fruit and stem
pruning on yield and quality of hydroponically grown tomato. J Agric Res 6:5144-48.
Macfarlane I (1958) A solution-culture technique for obtaining root hair or primary, infection
by Plasmodiophora brassicae. J Gen Microbiol 18: 720-32.
Maia N B, Bovi O A, Marques M M and Granja N P (2001) Essential oil production and
quality of menthaarvensis L. grown in nutrient solutions. Acta Hort 58:181-87.
Matsuda R, Kubota C, Alvarez M L and Cardineau G A (2012) Effect of high electrical
conductivity of hydroponic nutrient solution on vaccine protein content in transgenic
tomato. Hort Technol 22:362-67.
Meric M K, Tuzel I H, Tuzel Y and Oztekin G B (2011) Effects of nutrition systems and
irrigation programs on tomatoes in soilless culture. Agric Water Manage 99:19-25.
Millan A F, Sagaroy R, Solanas M, Abadia A and Abadia J (2008) Cadmium toxicity in
tomato plants grown in hydroponics. Environ Exp Bot 65:376-85.
Moraru C, Logendra L, Lee T C and Janes H (2004) Characteristics of 10 processing tomato
cultivars grown hydroponically for the NASA Advanced Life Support (ALS)
program. J Food Comp Anal 17:141-54.
Mortley D G, Loretan P A , Hill W A, Bonsi C K, Morris C E, Hall R and Sullen D (1998)
Biocompatibility of sweet potato and peanut in a hydroponic System. Hort Sci 7:1147-49.
Mortley D, Hill J, Loretan P, Bonsi C and Hill W (1996) Elevated carbondoixide influences
yield and photosynthetic responses of hydroponically-glown sweet potato. Acta Hort
440:31-36.
Nadica D, Sandra V, Bozidar B and Stjepan P (2007) The quality of fresh tomato fruit
produced by hydroponic. Agric Cons Sci 72:351-55.
Nagata M and Yamashita I (1992) Simple method for simultaneous deteination of chlorophyll
and carotenoid in tomato fruits. J Jap Food Sci Technol 39:925-28.
Natarajan S, Stamps R H, Saha U K and Ma L Q (2008) Effect of plant density and nitrogen
and phosphorus levels. Int J Phytoremediat 10:222-35.
Nemali K S and Van I W (2004) Light intensity and fertilizer concentration: i. estimating
optimal fertilizer concentration from water-use efficiency of wax begonia. Hort Sci
39:1287-92.
Niu F, Zhang D, Li Z, Iersel M V and Alem P (2015) Morphological response of eucalypts
seedlings to phosphorus supply through hydroponic system. Sci Hort 194: 295-303.
Orsini F and Pascale S D (2007) Daily variation in leaf nitrate content of two cultivars
of hydroponically grown basil. Acta Hort 74:1023-29.
54
Paiva E S, Martinez H P, Casali V D and Padilha L (1998a) Occurrence of blossom-endrot
intomato as a function of calcium dose in the nutrient solution and air relative
humidity. J Plant Nutr 21: 2663-70.
Paiva E S, Sampaio R A and Martinez H M (1998b) Composition and quality of tomato fruit
cultivated in nutrient solution containing different calcium concentration. J Plant
Nutr21:2653-61.
Pardossi A, Incrocci L, Massa D, Carmassi G and Maggini R (2009) The influence of
fertigation strategies on water and nutrient efficiency of tomato grown in closed
soilless culture with saline water. Acta Hort 807:445–50.
Park K W, Won J H and Chiang M H(1995) Effects of nutrient solution and ionic strength on
the growth in some chicory. Acta Hort 396:187-94.
Park S E, Worrall R J, Low C T and Jarvis J A (2009) Initial efforts to improve the
management of substrates in greenhouse vegetable production in Australia. Acta Hort
819:331-36.
Pezzarossa B, Rosellini I, Borghesi E, Tonutti P and Malorgio F (2013) Effect of Se-
enrichment on yield, fruit composition and ripening of tomato plants grown in
hydroponics. Sci Hort 165:106-10.
Rangana S (1986) Handbook of analysis and quality control of fruits and vegetable products
2nd
Ed. Tata McGraw Hill Publication New Delhi.
Rodriguez J C, Cantliffe D J and Shaw N (2001) Performance of greenhouse tomato cultivars
grown in soilless culture in north central florida. Proc Fla State Hort Soc 114:303-06.
Roosta H R and Hamidpour M (2011) Effects of foliar application of some macro and
micronutrients on tomato plants in aquaponic and hydroponic systems. Sci Hort
129:396-402.
Rosberg A K, Gruyer N, Hultberg M, Wohanka W and Alsanius B W (2014) Monitoring
rhizosphere microbial communities in healthy and pythiumultimum inoculated tomato
plants in soilless growing systems. Sci Hort 173:106–13.
Samarakon U C, Weeransinghe P A and Weerakkody A P (2006) Effect of electrical
conductivity (EC) of the nutrient solution on nutrient uptake, growth and yield of leaf
lettuce in stationary culture. Trop Agric Res 18:13-21.
Shah A H, Munir S L, Amin N L and Shah S H (2011) Evaluation of two nutrient solution for
growing tomatoes in a non- circulating hydroponics system. Sarhad J Agric 27:557-
67.
Sherif M A, Loretan P A, Trotman A A, Mortley D G, Lu J Y and Garner L C (1995) Split-
root nutrition of sweet potato in hydroponic systems. Acta Hort 401:121-30.
Signore A, Santamaria P, Serio F (2008) Influence of salinity source on production, quality
and environment impact of tomato grown in a soilless closed system. J Food Agric
Environ 6:357-61.
55
Silva F B, Melo A Y, Brandao J C and Maia L C (2005) Sporulation of arbus
cularmycorrhizal fungi using tris-HCl buffer in addition to nutrient solutions. J
Microl 36:327-32.
Smolen S, Kowalska I and Sady W (2013) Assessment of biofortification with iodine and
selenium of lettuce cultivated in the NFT hydroponic system. Sci Hort 166:9-16.
Steidle N J, Zolnier S, Marouelli W A, Martinez H P (2009) Performance evaluation of an
automatic system for tomato fertigation control in substrate. Engen Agri 29:380-89.
Taiz L and Zeiger E (2002) Plant Physiology (3rd.ed.) Sinauer Associates, ISBN :
0878938230, Massachusetts, USA.
Teragishi A, Kanbara Y and Ono H (2000) Effects of foliar application of choline chloride on
the quality of winter-cropped Fig cv. Masui-Dauphine grown in hydroponics. Hort
Sci 69:390-95.
Tsakaldimi M (2006) Core and Rice hulls as components of container media for growing
Pinushalepensis M. seedlings. Bio Res Technol 97:1631-39.
Varlagas H, Savvas D, Mouzakis G, Liotsos C, Karapanos I and Sigrimis N (2010) Modelling
uptake of Na+ and Cl
- by tomato in closed-cycle cultivation systems as influenced by
irrigation water salinity. Agric Water Manage 97:1242-50.
VITA
Name of the student Ms. Harmanpreet Kaur
Father’s name Mr. Harpreet Singh
Mother’s name Mrs. Kamaljeet Kaur
Nationality Indian
Date of Birth 22-8-1991
Permanent address Preet medicals near new bus stand Mudki, distt.
Ferozepur
EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION
Bachelor’s Degree B. Tech. (Agricultural Engineering)
University and Year of award Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana
2014
OCPA 6.50
Master’s Degree M. Tech. (Soil and Water Engineering)
University and Year of award Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana
2016
OCPA 7.35
Title of the Master Thesis Development of hydroponic system for
greenhouse tomato