Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems

, Volume 47, Issue 3, pp 271–282 | Cite as

The effect of nitrogen source and crop rotation on the growth and yield of processing tomatoes

  • J. Cavero
  • R. E. Plant
  • C. Shennan
  • D. B. Friedman


Four crop rotation and management systems were studied in 1994 and 1995 in relation to growth and yield of irrigated processing tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). The four treatments were three four-year rotation systems [conventional (conv-4), low input and organic] and a two-year rotation system [conventional (conv-2)]. The four-year rotation was tomato-safflower-corn-wheat(or oats+vetch)/beans, and the two-year rotation was tomato-wheat. Purple vetch (Vicia sativa L.) was grown as a green manure cover crop preceeding tomatoes in the low input and organic systems. Nitrogen was supplied as fertilizer in the conventional systems, as vetch green manure plus fertilizer in the low input system and as vetch green manure plus turkey manure in the organic system. Tomato cv. Brigade was direct-seeded in the conventional systems and transplanted to the field in the low input and organic systems. In both years the winter cover crop was composed of a mixture of vetch and volunteer oats with N contents of 2.2% in 1994 and 2.7% (low input) or 1.8% (organic) in 1995. In 1994 yields were higher in conventionally grown tomatoes because a virus in the nursery infected the transplants used in the low input and organic systems. In 1995 tomatoes grown with the low input and conv-4 systems had similar yields, which were higher than those of tomatoes grown with the conv-2 and organic systems. N uptake by the crop was greater than 200 kg N ha−1 for high yield (> 75 t ha−1) and uptake rates of 3 to 6 kg N ha−1 day−1 during the period of maximum uptake were observed. The lower yield with the organic system in 1995 was caused by a N deficiency. The main effect of the N deficiency was a reduced leaf area index and not a reduction of net assimilation rate (NAR) or radiation use efficiency (RUE). Nitrogen deficiency was related to low concentration of inorganic N in the soil and slow release of N from the cover crop + manure. A high proportion of N from the green manure but only a low proportion of N from the manure was mineralized during the crop season. In the conventional systems, the estimated mineralized N from the soil organic matter during the crop season was around 85 kg ha−1. A hyperbolic relationship between N content and total dry weight of aboveground biomass was observed in procesing tomatoes with adequate N nutrition. Lower yields with the conv-2 than with the conv-4 system were due to higher incidence of diseases in the two year rotation which reduced the NAR and the RUE. Residual N in the soil in Oct. (two months after the incorporation of crop residues) ranged between 90 and 170 kg N ha−1 in the 0–90 cm profile.

Key words

conventional low input mineralization nitrogen cycling organic radiation use 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bar-Yosef B & Sagiv B (1982) Response of tomatoes to N and water applied via a trickle irrigation system. I. Nitrogen. Agronomy J 74: 633–637Google Scholar
  2. Barker A V (1989) Genotypic responses of vegetable crops to nitrogen nutrition. HortScience 24: 584–591Google Scholar
  3. Beauchamp EG & Paul JW (1989) A simple model to predict manure N availability to crops in field. In: Hansen JA & Henriksen K (ed) Nitrogen in organic wastes applied to soils, pp 140–149. Academic Press limited, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Bouldin DR, Klausner SD & Reid WS (1984) Use of nitrogen from manure. In: Hauck RD (ed) Nitrogen in crop production, pp 221–245. ASA,CSSA,SSSA, Madison, WIGoogle Scholar
  5. Broadbent FE, Tyler KB & May DM (1980) Tomatoes make efficient use of applied nitrogen. California Agriculture, Nov–Dec: 24–25Google Scholar
  6. Burns IG (1980) Influence of the spatial distribution of nitrate on the uptake of N by plants: a review and a model for rooting depth. J of Soil Science 31: 155–173Google Scholar
  7. California Certified Organic Farmers (1994) Handbook. Certified Organic Farmers, Inc., Santa Cruz, CAGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlson RM, Cabrera RI, Paul JL, Quick J & Evans RY (1990) Rapid direct measurement of ammonium and nitrate in soil and plant tissue extracts. Comm in Soil Sci and Plant Anal 21: 1519–1529Google Scholar
  9. Cavero J, Plant RE, Shennan C, Williams JR, Kiniry JR & Benson VW (1997) Application of EPIC model to nitrogen cycling in irrigated processing tomatoes under different management systems. (in press)Google Scholar
  10. Chae YM & Tabatabai MA (1986) Mineralization of nitrogen in soils amended with organic wastes. J Environ Qual 15: 193–198Google Scholar
  11. Chescheir GM, Westerman PW & Safley LM (1986) Laboratory methods for estimating available nitrogen in manures and sludges. Agricultural Wastes 18: 173–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Duffus JE, Liu HY & Wisler GC (1996) Tomato Infectious Chlorosis: a new clostero-like virus transmitted byTrialeurodes vaporiarorum. European J of Plant Pathology 102: 219–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dumas Y (1990) Tomatoes for processing in 90's: nutrition and crop fertilization. Acta Horticulturae 277: 155–166Google Scholar
  14. Franson MAH (1985) Standard methods for the examination of waste water, pp 265–297. American Public Health Association, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  15. Greenwood DJ, Neeteson JJ & Draycott A (1985) Response of potatoes to N fertilizer: quantitative relations for components of growth. Plant and Soil 85: 163–183Google Scholar
  16. Guenzi WD, Beard WE, Watanabe FS, Olsen SR & Porter LK (1978) Nitrification and denitrification in cattle manure-amended soil. J Environ Qual 7: 196–202Google Scholar
  17. Hills FJ, Broadbent FE & Lorenz OA (1983) Fertilizer nitrogen utilization by corn, tomato and sugarbeet. Agronomy J 75: 423–426Google Scholar
  18. Hoyt GD & Hargrove WL (1986) Legume cover crops for improving crop and soil management in the southern United States. HortScience 21: 397–402Google Scholar
  19. Hunt R (1982) Plant growth curves. The functional approach to plant growth analysis. University Park Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  20. Huntington TG, Grove JH & Frye WW (1985) Release and recovery of nitrogen from winter annual cover crops in no-till corn production. Comm in Soil Sci Plant Anal 16: 193–211Google Scholar
  21. Jackson LE & Bloom AJ (1990) Root distribution in relation to soil nitrogen availability in field-grown tomatoes. Plant and Soil 128: 115–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jackson LE, Schimel JP & Firestone MK (1989) Short-term partitioning of ammonium and nitrate between plants and microbes in an annual grassland. Soil Biol Biochem 21: 409–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kamprath EJ, Moll RH & Rodriguez N (1982) Effects of nitrogen fertilization and recurrent selection on performance of hybrid populations of corn. Agronomy J 72: 955–958Google Scholar
  24. Kiniry JR (1994) Radiation-use efficiency and grain yield of maize competing with johnsongrass. Agronomy J 86: 554–557Google Scholar
  25. Legg JO & Meisinger JJ (1982) Soil nitrogen budgets. In: Stevenson FJ (ed) Nitrogen in agricultural soils. Agronomy No 22. pp 503–566. ASA, Madison, WIGoogle Scholar
  26. Liebhardt WC, Andrews RW, Culik MN, Harwood RR, Janke RR, Radke JK & Rieger-Schwartz SL (1989) Crop production during conversion from conventional to low-input methods. Agronomy J 81: 150–159Google Scholar
  27. Magdoff F (1991) Understanding the Magdoff pre-sidedress nitrate test for corn. J Prod Agric 4: 297–305Google Scholar
  28. Meek DW, Hatfield JL, Howell TA, Idso SB & Reginato R J (1984) A generalized relationship between photosynthetically active radiation and solar radiation. Agronomy J 76: 939–945Google Scholar
  29. Miller RJ, Rolston DE, Rauschkolb RS & DW Wolfe (1981) Labeled nitrogen uptake by drip-irrigated tomatoes. Agronomy J 73: 265–270Google Scholar
  30. Muller MM & Sundman V (1988) The fate of nitrogen (15N) released from different plant materials during decomposition under field conditions. Plant and Soil 105: 133–139Google Scholar
  31. Neter J & Wasserman W (1985) Applied linear statistical models. Richard D. Irwin, Inc., Homewood, ILGoogle Scholar
  32. Nyabundi JO (1985) Water stress effects on biomass production and partitioning in processing tomatoes. Ph. D. Dissertation. University of California, Davis, USAGoogle Scholar
  33. Opperman MH, Cherrett CP, Wood M & Harris PJ (1989) Responses of soil micro-organisms to the addition of cattle slurry. In: Hansen J A & Henriksen K (ed) Nitrogen in organic wastes applied to soils, pp 47–58. Academic Press Limited, LondonGoogle Scholar
  34. Palevitch D, Kedar N, Koyumdjisky H & Hagin J (1965) The effect of manure and fertilizer treatments on the yields of winter tomatoes in the western Negev Israel J Agric Res 15: 65–73Google Scholar
  35. Portas CAM & Dordio JJFB (1980) Tomato root systems. A short review with references on tomatoes for processing. Acta Horticulturae 100: 113–124Google Scholar
  36. Power JF & Doran JW (1984) Nitrogen use in organic farming. In: Hauck RD (ed) Nitrogen in crop production, pp 585–598. ASA-CSSA-SSSA, Madison, WIGoogle Scholar
  37. Rendon-Poblete E (1980) Effect of soil water status on yield, quality and root development of several tomato genotypes. Ph. D. Dissertation. University of California, Davis, USAGoogle Scholar
  38. Rolston DE & Broadbent FE (1977) Field measurement of denitrification. USEPA Res. Report Ser. EPA-600/2-77-233, Ada, OKGoogle Scholar
  39. SAS (1988) SAS/STAT User's guide. Version 6.03. SAS Institute, Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  40. Smith JH & Peterson JR (1982) Recycling of nitrogen through land application of agricultural, food processing and municipal wastes. In: Stevenson FJ (ed) Nitrogen in agricultural soils, Agronomy No 22. pp 791–831 ASA, Madison, WIGoogle Scholar
  41. Smith MS, Frye WW & Varco JJ (1987) Legume winter cover crops. Advances in Soil Science 7: 95–139Google Scholar
  42. Stivers L J & Shennan C (1991) Meeting the nitrogen needs of processing tomatoes through winter cover cropping. J Prod Agric 4: 330–335Google Scholar
  43. Sweeney RA (1989) Generic combustion method for determination of crude protein in feeds: a collaborative study. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 72: 770–774PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Taylor HM, Huck MG, Klepper B & Lund ZF (1970) Measurement of soil-grown roots in a rhizotron. Agronomy J 62: 807–809Google Scholar
  45. Temple SR, Friedman DB, Somasco O, Ferris H, Scow K & K Klonsky (1994) An interdisciplinary, experiment station-based participatory comparison of alternative crop management systems for California's Sacramento Valley. Amer J Altern Agric 9: 64–71Google Scholar
  46. Tesi R & Giustiniani L (1987) Growth and nutrient uptake of two tomato cultivars for mechanical harvesting. Acta Horticulturae 220: 259–265Google Scholar
  47. Van Faassen HG & Van Dijk H (1987) Manure as a source of nitrogen and phosphorus in soils. In: Van de Meer et al. (ed) Animal manure on grassland and fodder crops. Fertilizer or waste? - Development in Plant and Soil Sciences, pp 27–45. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  48. Van Keulen H & Stol W (1991) Quantitative aspects of nitrogen nutrition in crops. Fertilizer Research 27: 151–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wagger MG (1989) Time of desiccation effects on plant composition and subsequent nitrogen release from several winter annual cover crops. Agronomy J 81: 236–241Google Scholar
  50. Wehrmann J, Scharpf HC & Kuhlmann H (1988) The NMin- Method. An aid to improve nitrogen efficiency in plant production. In: Jenkinson DS & Smith KA (ed) Nitrogen efficiency in agricultural soils, pp 38–45. Elsevier Applied Science, London and New YorkGoogle Scholar
  51. Widders IE & Lorenz OA (1979) Tomato root development as related to potassium nutrition. J Amer Soc Hort Sci 104: 216–220Google Scholar
  52. Williams JR, Jones CA & Dyke PT (1984) A modeling approach to determining the relationship between erosion and soil productivity. Transactions of the ASAE 27: 129–144Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Cavero
    • 1
  • R. E. Plant
    • 1
  • C. Shennan
    • 1
  • D. B. Friedman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Agronomy and Range ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaDavis

Personalised recommendations