Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth and yield attributes of Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) under Chhattisgarh plains

Introduction

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L., 2𝑛 = 24) is one of the most widely cultivated vegetable crops globally and holds a pivotal role in India's horticultural economy. Rich in essential minerals (K, Ca, Mg, P, Fe), organic acids (citric, malic), vitamins (A, B, C), and antioxidants like lycopene, tomatoes contribute significantly to human nutrition and income generation for smallholder farmers. In India, tomato is grown across approximately 854 thousand hectares with an annual production of 21.32 million tonnes. In the state of Chhattisgarh, tomato cultivation spans 60.34 thousand hectares with a total production of 1208.70 thousand tonnes. (Anonymous, 2024-25). Despite high production potentials, the continuous and exclusive reliance on synthetic chemical fertilizers has led to adverse ecological consequences, including soil structure degradation, secondary nutrient deficiencies, reduced fertilizer-use efficiency, and ecological imbalances. Conversely, exclusive organic farming often fails to meet the immediate nutrient demands of high-yielding crop varieties. Integrated Nutrient Management (INM) addresses these limitations by optimizing the combined application of mineral fertilizers, organic manures (such as FYM and vermicompost), and biological/bio-stimulant inputs. This balanced approach maintains soil physical, chemical, and biological properties, enhances microbial nutrient cycling, and provides steady nutrient release throughout the crop cycle. (Purkayastha et al., 1998;Kumar et al., 2001). While several studies have explored INM strategies across various agro-ecological zones, location-specific calibration is critical for regions like the Chhattisgarh plains, characterized by Vertisols ("Kanhar" soils) with neutral pH and distinct nutrient balances. This investigation evaluates the interactive effects of reduced inorganic fertilizer doses paired with vermicompost, farmyard manure, and seaweed biostimulants on tomato vegetative growth, phenological development, fruit yield, post-harvest quality, and economic efficiency.

Materials and methods

Experimental site and agro-climate

Experimental design and treatment allocations

The experiment was laid out in a Randomized Block Design (RBD) with 9 treatments and 3 replications using the high-yielding tomato variety Arka Samrat. Net plot size was 3.0m × 3.0m (9.0m 2) with a spacing of 60cm × 45cm.

Result and discussion

The highest fruit set percentage (79.52%) was recorded in treatment T 5 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water), which was found to be significantly superior to all other treatments. In contrast, the lowest fruit set percentage (59.91%) was observed under treatment T 9 (FYM 10 t/ha + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water).

The highest fruit weight per plant (kg) (2.61) was obtained in the treatment T 5 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water). The minimum fruit weight (1.70) per plant was observed under the treatment T 9 (FYM 10 t/ha + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water). The maximum fruit yield per hectare (40.84 t/ha) was recorded under treatment T 5 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water), which was significantly superior to all other treatments. The minimum fruit yield (32.42 t/ha) was recorded in treatment T 9 (FYM 10 t/ha + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water). The highest fruit length (9.44 cm) was recorded in treatment T 5 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water), which was found to be significantly superior to all other treatments. On the other hand, the lowest fruit length (5.71 cm) was observed under T 9 (FYM 10 t/ha + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water). T 5 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water) recorded the highest total number of fruits per plant (41.45), which was found to be significantly superior to all other treatments. In contrast, the lowest total number of fruits per plant (26.46) was recorded under T 9 (FYM 10 t/ha + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water).

The maximum average fruit weight (88.30 g) was recorded in treatment T 5 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water). The minimum fruit weight (60.25) was observed in treatment T 9 (FYM 10 t/ha + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water). The treatments, T 5 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water) recorded the highest marketable yield (62.92 kg plot -1 ), which was found to be significantly superior to all other treatments. In contrast, the lowest marketable yield (40.85 kg plot -1 ) was observed under treatment T 9 (FYM 10 t/ha + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water).

Conclusion

The highest gross returns (Rs. 612600 Rs. /ha) and net return (446435.5 Rs/ha) was recorded under treatment T 5 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water) followed by T 4 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha) which were approximately similar trend in gross and net return. The minimum gross return (Rs. 486300 Rs/ha) and lowest net return (Rs.229143 Rs/ha) was recorded under treatment T 9 (FYM 10 t/ha + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water). On the basis of above findings, treatment T 5 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water) stand first in position and T 4 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha) stand in second order of preference. Therefore, it may be concluded that treatment T 5 (75% RDF + Vermicompost 4 t/ha + Seaweed Extract (D) @ 3.0 ml/litre of water) may be prefer for integrated nutrient management in tomato. Farmers recommended to adopt T 5 under similar agro-climatic conditions for obtaining better yield from tomato cultivation.

References

1. Acharya P, Sharma L, Subedi S. Growth, yield and economics of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) as influenced by integrated nutrient management practices. Journal of Horticultural Sciences. 2025;20(1):45-52.
2. Chaurasiya PC, Kumar V. Growth and yield attributes of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) under integrated nutrient management in Chhattisgarh plains. Journal of Plant Development Sciences. 2023;15(4):185-191.
3. Chopra S, Singh R, Kumar A. Effect of agro-residue vermicompost and mineral fertilizers on soil health and crop productivity of tomato cv. Arka Rakshak. International Journal of Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture. 2017;6(3):201-209.
4. Chumyani T, Kanaujia SP, Singh VB. Integrated nutrient management in tomato cv. Punjab Chhuhara under Nagaland foot-hill conditions. Journal of Crop and Weed. 2012;8(2):145-147.
5. Gourkhede PH, Patil VD, Shinde SE. Long-term impact of organic nutrient sources on tomato fruit yield and chemical properties of soil. Journal of Organic Agriculture. 2026;18(1):55-63.
6. Khan A, Mohammad W, Shah SM. Integrated application of compost and mineral NPK for enhancing tomato productivity and soil fertility. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 2017;17(4):980-992.
7. Kumar R, Verma SK, Sharma P. Sustainable tomato production through integrated nutrient management under central plain zone of India. Indian Journal of Horticulture. 2017;74(3):381-386.
8. Mengistu T, Gebrekidan H, Kibret K. Comparative evaluation of vermicompost and inorganic fertilizers on tomato growth, yield, and nitrogen use efficiency. Agronomy Journal. 2017;109(5):2134-2143.
9. Murmu K, Swain DK, Ghosh BC. Yield and quality performance of tomato under organic and conventional nutrient management in acid lateritic soil. International Journal of Vegetable Science. 2012;18(3):241-254.
10. Prativa KC, Bhattarai BP. Effect of integrated nutrient management on the growth and yield of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). Nepal Journal of Science and Technology. 2012;13(2):1-8.
11. Saini P, Kumar S, Singh R. Productivity and economics of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) under integrated nutrient management practices. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 2022;11(2):312-316.
12. Singh B, Kumar A, Sharma S. Productivity of winter tomato under high-dose organic manures vs mineral fertilization. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2020;90(4):741-745.