Plant and Soil

, Volume 93, Issue 1, pp 87–93 | Cite as

Nitrogen fertigation of greenhouse-grown cucumber

  • I. Papadopoulos


This greenhouse study investigated the response of trickle-irrigated cucumber (Cucumis sativa cv. ‘Petita’) to three N levels applied with every irrigation via the irrigation stream. The plants were grown in pots filled with 12 kg of soil. Water containing 5.8, 11.8, or 17.8 mmol N/l, and uniformly supplied with 2.0 and 3.9 mmol/l of P and K, respectively, was applied two to three times daily. In all treatments of 0.3 leaching fraction was allowed.

The resulting total N applications were 15.7, 31., and 47.2 g N/plant. The total amount of water applied was 1851/plant. Total N and NO3-N, in lajinae and petioles, increased with increasing N level whereas P and K in generated decreased. Although different NO3/NH4 ratios in the treatments may have influeced the response to N, it could be concluded that the highest yield was obtained with 11.8 mmol N/1 due to increased number of fruit. In the root volume of this treatment the NO3-N concentration in the soil solution was aroun 7 mmol/1 for most of the growing season. The dry matter concentration of fruits was not affected by the N levels.

It was concluded that 11.8 mmol N/1 applied with every irrigation via the irrigation stream is adequate to cover the needs of greenhous-grown cucumber for higher yield (9.42 kg/plant over a harvesting period of 93 days).

Key words

Cucumber Fertigation N nutrition Soil salinity Trickle irrigation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bar-Yosef B and Sagiv B 1982 Response of tomatoes to N and water applied via a irrigation system. I. Nitrogen. Agron. J. 74, 633–637.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bar-Yosef B and Sheikholslami M R 1976 Distribution of water and ions in soils irrigated and fertilized from a strickle source. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 40, 575–582.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Epstein E 1972 Mineral nutrition of plants; Principles and Perspectives. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fiskell J G A and Locascio S J 1983 Changes in available N for drip-irrigated tomatoes from preplant and fertigation N sources. Soil and Crop Sci. Soc. Fla. Proc. 42, 180–184.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ganmore-Neumann R and Kafkafi U 1980 Root temperature and percentage\(NO_3^ - /NH_4^ + \) effect on tomato plant development. I. Morphology and growth. Agron. J. 72, 758–761.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ganmore-Neumann R and Kafkafi U 1983 The effect of root temperature and\(NO_3^ - /NH_4^ + \) ratio on srawberry plants. I. Growth, flowering, and root development. Agron. J. 75, 941–947.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goldberg D, Gornat B and Bar-Yosef B 1971 Distribution of roots, water, and minerals as a result of trickle irrigation. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 96, 645–648.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goldberg D, Gornat B and Rimon D 1976 Drip irrigation: Principles, design and agricultural practices. Drip Irrig. Scientific Publ. Kfar. Shumaryahu, Israel.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gustafson C D 1974 Drip irrigation in the U.S.A. Tech. Conf., Sprinkle Irrig. Assoc. Denver, Colo. pp 111–115.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ikeda M and Yamada Y 1984 Palliative effect of nitrate supply on ammonium injury of tomato plants: Growth and chemical composition. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 30, 485–493.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kafkafi U and Bar-Yosef B 1980 Trickle irrigation and fertilization of tomatoes in highly calcareous soils. Agron. J. 72, 893–897.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Locascio S J and Myers J M 1974 Tomato response to plug-mix, mulch and irrigation method. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 87, 126–130.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maas E V and Hoffman G J 1977 Crop salt tolerance-current assessment. ASCE J. Irrig. Drainage Div. 103, 115–134.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Miller R J, Rolston D E, Rauchkolb R S and Wolfe D E 1981 Labeled nitrogen uptake by drip-irrigatied tomatoes. Agron. J. 73, 265–270.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Papadopoulos I 1985 Constant feeding field grown tomatoes irrigiated with sulphate water. Plant and Soil 88: 231–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Phene C J and Sanders D C 1976 Influence of combined row spacing and high-frequency trickle irrigation on production and quality of potatoes. Agron. J. 68, 602–607.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Phene C J and Bealev D W 1976 High-frequency irrigation for water nutrient management in humid regions. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 40, 430–436.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Phene C J, Fouss J L and Sanders D C 1979 Water-nutrient-herbicide management of potatoes with trickle irrigation. Am Potato J. 56, 51–59.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Roorda van Eysinga J P N L 1984 Nitrate and glashouse vegetables. Fert. Res. 5, 149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Singh S D and Singh Panjab 1978 Value of drip irrigation compared with conventional irrigation for vegetable production i a hot acid climate. Agron. J. 70, 945–947.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stark J C, Jarrell W M, Letey J and Valoras N 1983 Nitrogen use efficiency of trickle-irrigated tomatoes receiving continuous injection of N. Agron. J. 75, 672–676.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. Papadopoulos
    • 1
  1. 1.Agricultural Research InstituteNicosiCyprus

Personalised recommendations