Effect of Biostimulants on Yield and Quality of Cherry Tomatoes Grown in Fertile and Stressed Soils

Turan M., Yıldırım E., Ekinci M., Argin S.

HORTSCIENCE, cilt.56, sa.4, ss.414-423, 2021 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 56 Sayı: 4
  • Basım Tarihi: 2021
  • Doi Numarası: 10.21273/hortsci15568-20
  • Dergi Adı: HORTSCIENCE
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, Food Science & Technology Abstracts, Veterinary Science Database, Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.414-423
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: humic substance, mineral content, plant growth, Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme, PLANT-GROWTH, HUMIC-ACID, PROMOTING RHIZOBACTERIA, HORMONE CONTENT, ABIOTIC STRESS, NUTRIENT, FOLIAR, PRODUCTIVITY, SUBSTANCES, PHOSPHORUS
  • Atatürk Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Plant biostimulants are microorganisms (PGPR) and/or products obtained from different organic substances that positively affect plant growth and efficiency and reduce the negative effects of abiotic challenges. Effects of biostimulants on the plant growth, yield, mineral content, antioxidant enzyme activity, H2O2 , malondialdehyde (MDA), sucrose, and proline contents of cherry tomato (Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme L.) grown in soils with two different characteristics were investigated during a pot study under greenhouse conditions. Soil I was a fertile routinely vegetable-cultivated soil. Soil II had high salinity, high CaCO3 content, and low organic matter content. Commercial biostimulant products Powhumus (R) (PH), Huminbio Microsense Seed (R) (SC), Huminbio Microsense Bio (R) (RE), and Fulvagra (R) (FU) were used as seed coatings and/or drench solutions. All biostimulant treatments improved the plant growth and yield compared with the control in both soils. All biostimulant applications were more effective in soil II than in soil I. RE was the most effective application for mineral content in soil I, whereas FU was the most effective in soil II. Antioxidant activity, H2O2, MDA, and proline contents were decreased in both soils when biostimulants were used compared with the control. Peroxide (POD) activity was greater with SC1 in soil II. The RE treatment increased the sucrose content in soil II. In conclusion, single and combined use of high-purity fulvic acid and PGPR had positive effects on the growth of cherry tomato in fertile soil and under stressed conditions.