 |
Volume 13, Issue 4, 132443 (1-9)
International Journal of Recycling Organic Waste in Agriculture (IJROWA)
https://dx.doi.org/10.57647/ijrowa-hf9y-xc11
Vivian Ogechukwu Osadebe1
, Jennifer Chinyere Igwe1, Chinedu Felix Amuji1,∗ 
, Nathaniel Dauda1
, Amos Ejike Ede2
1Department Of Crop Science, University Of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.
2Department of Agricultural Education, Federal College Of Education, Eha-Amufu, Nigeria.
∗Corresponding author: [email protected]
Received:
25 May 2023
Revised:
07 November 2023 Accepted:
04 February 2024 Published online: 20 May 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
annual rainfall of about 1600 mm, with a bimodal distribution pattern that peaks in July and October. The mean minimum and maximum temperatures are 21 ◦C and 31 ◦C, respectively. The relative humidity varies yearly, often in the range of 55 − 90%. The treatment is comprised of organic animal wastes as manure types which include: 20 t/ha of poultry manure, 20 t/ha of Pig dung, zero manure application(control), and 5 weed
management practices: sawdust cover (17,000 tons/ha), rice husk mulch (23,000 tons/ha), black polyethylene mulch, hoe weeding, and weedy check. The treatment was laid out in a 3 × 5 factorial arrangement in a randomized complete block design with three replications.
Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) belongs to the Solanaceae family; it is one of the most important and pop- ular vegetable fruit crops in the world (Bashir et al., 2019; Gao et al., 2019). The crop is grown primarily because of its fruits which contain vitamins, essential minerals, antioxi- dants, bio-flavonoids, dietary fibres, and flavour compounds (Pramod et al., 2016). Tomato fruit consumption is known for avoiding many cancers and cardio-vascular diseases (Fr- usciante et al., 2007). Most plant’s growth and yield largely
depend on the quality and quantity of fertilizers.
Fertilizers are classified into two broad groups which are in- organic and organic fertilizers. A fertilizer is termed organic if it is obtained from plant and animal wastes or minerals. Organic fertilizers are environmentally friendly due to their quality of being renewable and soluble in nature (Christians et al., 2016). Edmeades (2003) reported that organic fer- tilizers such as sheep, cattle manure, and poultry litter and green fertilizers improved organic matter accumulation and soil N, P, K, Ca, and Mg contents.
As a weak competitor against weeds, tomato plants have initial slow growth and are grown in wide rows which favour heavy weed competition (Olubanjo and Alade, 2018) causing a high loss in fruit yield (Mennan et al., 2020). Weed management is an important and expensive practice in tomato cultivation (Ghafory et al., 2018). Most weeds and tomatoes are similar in their demand for carbon dioxide and nitrogen from the atmosphere, water, and minerals from the soil, and light from the sun for growth and development (Oerke, 2006). When weeds utilize these components, the growth of tomato plants is restricted and yield is reduced. The quality and market value of tomato fruit yield are often reduced by weeds (Brown et al., 2019). Row spacing affects light interception and also influences the space available for weeds to grow. Row spacing can also affect the plant canopy (tomato) shape and branching, thereby influencing flowering and fruiting as well as crop competitiveness with weeds. Row spacing is often determined by the type of planting and harvesting equipment available, and will result in different crop yields and can influence overall economic return. Mulches protect tomato crops against the negative effects of long droughts that are caused by climate change phenomena and can result in significant crop losses (Wab- woba and Mutoro, 2019). Hence, this study was designed to understand the effect of organic waste as fertilizer and weed management on the growth and fruit yield of tomatoes in order to recommend the best organic fertilizer and weed management practices for the production of this crop in a derived savannah agro-ecology zone of Nigeria.
The experiment was conducted in the Department of Crop Science Research Farm, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. The experimental site is located at latitude 06◦ 51◦N and longitude 07◦ 29◦E and an elevation of 445 m above sea level. The climate of the area is char-
acterized by mean annual rainfall of about 1600 mm, with a bimodal distribution pattern showing peaks in July and October. The mean minimum and maximum temperatures
are 21 ◦C and 31 ◦C, respectively. The relative humidity varies yearly, often in the range of 55 − 90% (Uguru et al., 2011). This area can be best described as a derived savannah
agro-ecology zone of tropical environment. The experiment was conducted in the rainy seasons from April to July when
The seeds were raised on beds with a mixture of topsoil and poultry manure. The seeds were sown by drilling to a depth of about 2 − 3 cm between rows on a bed. The seedlings were watered morning and evening every day for weeks before transplanting into the field.
The experimental plots were manually cleared and mapped using measuring tape and peg to give an area of 30 m × 5 m (150 m2) as length and width, respectively. The cleared site was divided into 3 blocks (representing three replications).
Each replication contained fifteen (15) plots which gave a total of 45 plots in the experiment. Each plot measured 1 m × 1 m. The distance between plots was 0.5 m and a distance of 1 m separated one block from the other. Organic manure was applied once at the rate of 20 tons/ha before
planting. Mulching materials such as black polyethylene film, sawdust, and rice husk were applied on the surface of the plot receiving the treatments respectively.
Weeding was carried out manually using a hoe at regular intervals except the weedy check plot which was abounding with weeds throughout the experiment. For hoe weeded plots, it was weeded at 2 weekly intervals.
Weed data were collected using a 0.5 m2 quadrat. This was done to check the level of occurrence and reoccurrence of weeds on each plot. An assessment was made per plot. The quadrat was randomly thrown within a plot and weeds within the quadrat were identified, counted, and clipped from the base. The clipped weed species were identified and classified. The weed parameter was collected three times at 2, 4, and 6 weeks after planting, respectively. The collected fresh samples of weeds from each plot were weighed and
dried in the oven for 48 hours at a temperature of 80 ◦C and the dry weight was taken and recorded. Weed control
efficiency (%) was calculated on a dry weight basis. This denotes the magnitude of weed reduction due to weed con- trol treatments. It is worked out using the formula suggested by Mani et al. (1976) as expressed in percentages.
Dry weight of un-weeded control-dry weight of treated plots
both rainfall and relative humidity are always in their peak range of 21− 31 ◦C and 75 to 90%, respectively.
WCE(%) =
Dry weight of un-weeded weeds in un-weeded control
× 100
The experimental plots were laid out in a randomized com- plete block design (RCBD) with three replications. The experiment is a 3 × 5 factorial arrangement. The treatment is comprised of three manure types which include: 20 t/ha of poultry manure, 20 t/ha of Pig dung, zero manure applica-
tion (control), and 5 weed management practices: sawdust cover (17,000 tons/ha), rice husk mulch (23,000 tons/ha), black polyethylene mulch, weedy check, and hoe weeding (at 2 weekly intervals) which were combined in a factorial arrangement and gave fifteen treatment combinations.
The growth and yield parameters taken on the tomato plants were:
Plant height (cm): The plant height is the distance from the shoot/root system junction to the shoot apex. It was measured with a meter or tape rule.
Stem girth (G): The stem diameter was measured using Vernier callipers at 5 cm height above ground level and converted to girth by the following formula:
7
Stem girth (G) = Diameter (D) × π ( 22 )
Number of leaves: The number of leaves per plant was counted.
Number of branches: This was arrived by counting the number of branches per plant.
The yield data parameters taken were: Number of fruits, Weight of fruits, and yield estimated in tonnes per hectare.
The data collected were subjected to a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) using the software GenStat Discovery Edition 12. The significant treatment effects and mean sep- aration were done by Fisher’s least significance difference (F-LSD) procedure at a 5% level of probability (p < 0.05).
As shown in Table 1, the dominant weed species of the ex- perimental sites were more broadleaved leaves and sedges. Ageratum conizoides and Mimosa pudica were the most dominant species in broad leaves weeds while among the sedges, Cyperus iria and Cyperus rotundus dominated the most. At 2 weeks after transplanting (WAT), most of the morphological parameters were not significantly affected by the weed management practices except for plant height where hoe weeded plot recorded a significantly (p < 0.05) higher value (31.06 cm) when compared to other weed man- agement practices while sawdust cover plot recorded the least significant value (16.80 cm) (Table 2). Morphological parameters were significantly affected by manure type at 2 WAT. Pig dung plots consistently recorded significantly (p < 0.05) higher values for plant height (29.95 cm), num- ber of branches (6.04), number of leaves (38.7), and stem girth (0.30 cm) while significantly lesser values (p < 0.05) were recorded in control plots where plant height is (23.41 cm), number of branches is (3.60), number of leaves is (17.7) and stem girth is (0.14 cm) (Table 3). Furthermore, at 4 WAT, all the morphological parameters measured were significant (p < 0.05) (Table 3). Pig dung plots recorded sig- nificantly higher values for plant height (45.50 cm), number of branches (9.42), number of leaves (75.50), and stem girth (0.59 cm) when compared to other manure types. At 4 WAT, weed management practices did not show any significant effect on the morphological parameters. Also at 6 WAT, the morphological parameters were significantly affected by manure types (Table 4). Pig dung plots recorded signifi- cantly (p < 0.05) higher values in plant height (61.3 cm), number of branches (15.04) and stem girth (0.51 cm) when compared to other manure types. This was statistically similar to that of poultry manure that recorded a signifi- cantly higher value of (55.4 cm) for plant height, number of branches (14.51), and stem girth (0.40 cm). At 8 WAT, all the morphological parameters recorded were significant (p
< 0.05) in the plots with manure (Table 5). Pig dung still consistently recorded significantly (p < 0.05) higher values in plant height (68.90 cm), number of branches (15.09), number of leaves (150.90), and stem girth (0.58 cm). Most of the morphological parameters were not significantly af- fected by the weed management practices except for stem girth where sawdust cover recorded significantly (p < 0.05)
a higher value (0.71 cm) when compared to other weed management practices. However, it was statistically similar to that of rice husk mulch (0.47 cm) and hoe-weeded plots (0.44 cm).
A significant difference (p < 0.05) was observed in weed
dry weight where the hoe-weeded plot recorded a higher value (0.61 g) and also exhibited significantly different weed control efficiency where black polyethylene recorded (76%) at 2 WAT (Table 6). At the 4 WAT, weedy check plots recorded significantly(p < 0.05) higher values for number of broad leaves (3.75/0.5 m2) and weed fresh weight (64.0 g), while rice husk and sawdust covered plots recorded sig- nificantly (p < 0.05) higher weed dry weight (1.84 g) and weed control efficiency (92%). The least significant (p < 0.05) value was recorded in saw dust plots for the number of broad leaves (1.36/0.5 m2), weed fresh weight (4.50 g), and weed dry weight (0.50 g) (Table 6). At 6 WAT, the weedy check plots recorded significantly (p < 0.05) higher number of broad leaves (2.28/0.5 m2), weed fresh weight (71.2 g), weed dry weight (9.41 g), while sawdust cover plots recorded significant (p < 0.05) higher weed control efficiency (81%). The least significant (p < 0.05) value on the number of broad leaves was recorded in rice husk plots (1.28/0.5 m2), while weed fresh weight (11.1 g) and weed dry weight (1.45 g) was recorded in black polyethylene mulch plots. The effect of manure types on weed data at 2 WAT showed no significant difference (p < 0.05) of manure types on weed data collected on the various weed popula- tions which include broad leaves, grasses, and sedges but showed a significant difference (p < 0.05) on weed control efficiency where poultry manure plots recorded (52.00%). The least significant (p < 0.05) value on the number of broad leaves was recorded in control plots (31%). Similarly, at the 6 WAT, control plots recorded a significantly (p < 0.05) higher number of broad leaves (1.76/0.5 m2), while the least significant (p < 0.05) value was recorded in pig dung plots (0.71/0.5 m2) (Table 7).
Table 8 shows the main effect of weed management prac-
tices and manure types on the yield of tomatoes. Rice husk plots consistently recorded higher significant values (p < 0.05) in the weight of fruits per plant (0.26 kg), weight of fruit per plot (3.42 kg), total number of fruit per plant (17.78), total number of fruit per plot (82.30), and yield per hectare (34222.00 tons/ha), while weedy check plot recorded consistently the least significant values (p < 0.05) on the weight of fruits per plant (0.10 kg), weight of fruit per plot (0.91 kg), total number of fruit per plot (25.0), to- tal number of fruit per plant (5.00), and yield per hectare (9111.00 tons/ha) in all the yield parameters. There was a significant effect of manure types on the yield of tomatoes, where pig dung plot recorded significantly (p < 0.05) higher values on the total weight of fruit per plot (2.33 kg), total number of fruit per plot (54.50), and gave the highest yield per hectare (23267.00 tons/ha), while control plot recorded the least significant values (p < 0.05) on the weight per plot (1.55), total number of fruit per plot (37.5), and yield per hectare (15533.00 tons/ha).
In this study, among the organic fertilizers, pig dung plots
consistently showed significantly (p < 0.05) higher values
common name | scientific name | family | occurrence |
broad leaves sensitive weed | Mimosa pudica | Leguminosae | *** |
wild green | Amaranthus spinosis | Amaranthaceae | ** |
goat weed | Ageratum conizoides | Asteraceae | *** |
tropical girdlepod | Mitracarpus villosus | Rubiaceae | ** |
grasses Bermuda/Bahama grass | Cynodon dactylon | Graminaceae | *** |
goose grass | Eleucine indica | Graminaceae | ** |
spurge | Euphorbia heterophylla Linn | Euphorbiaceae | * |
sedges papyrus /umbrella | Cyperus iria | Cyperaceae | *** |
rice weed | Fuirena cilaris | Cyperaceae | * |
purple nutsedges | Cyperus rotundus | Cyperaceae | *** |
Note: *= Low weed occurrence, **=moderate weed occurrence, ***=high weed occurrence.
Table 2. Effect of manure type and weed management practices on morphological parameters of S. Lycopersicum at 2 weeks after transplanting.
manure type | plant height (cm) | number of branches | number of leaves | stem girth (cm) |
poultry | 20.69 | 4.71 | 28.00 | 0.26 |
pig dung | 29.95 | 6.04 | 38.70 | 0.30 |
control | 23.41 | 3.60 | 17.70 | 0.14 |
F-LSD(0.05) | 3.68 | 0.78 | 7.14 | 0.05 |
weed management practices sawdust cover | 16.80 | 4.44 | 22.40 | 0.26 |
BPM | 22.83 | 4.07 | 23.80 | 0.21 |
rice husk | 27.08 | 5.07 | 29.90 | 0.21 |
hoe weeding | 31.06 | 5.30 | 34.90 | 0.23 |
weedy check | 25.65 | 5.04 | 29.60 | 0.19 |
F-LSD(0.05) | 4.746 | ns | ns | ns |
ns = not significant, BPM= Black polyethylene mulch.
Table 3. Effect of manure type and weed management practices on morphological parameters of S. Lycopersicum at 4 weeks after transplanting.
manure type | plant height (cm) | number of branches | number of leaves | stem girth (cm) |
poultry | 37.40 | 8.24 | 60.40 | 0.38 |
pig dung | 45.50 | 9.42 | 75.50 | 0.59 |
control | 28.50 | 8.82 | 38.40 | 0.22 |
F-LSD(0.05) | 7.50 | 1.66 | 15.44 | 0.21 |
weed management practices sawdust cover | 33.50 | 7.70 | 68.10 | 0.50 |
black polyethylene mulch | 34.30 | 6.81 | 56.40 | 0.43 |
rice husk mulch | 38.60 | 7.70 | 58.10 | 0.37 |
hoe weeding | 39.10 | 7.81 | 49.30 | 0.29 |
weedy check | 40.10 | 7.30 | 58.60 | 0.39 |
F-LSD(0.05) | ns | ns | ns | ns |
ns = not significant.
Table 4. Effect of manure type and weed management practices on morphological parameters of S. lycopersicum at 6 weeks after transplanting.
manure type | plant height(cm) | number of branches | number of leaves | stem girth (cm) |
poultry | 55.40 | 14.51 | 127.30 | 0.40 |
pig dung | 61.30 | 15.04 | 139.00 | 0.51 |
control | 34.40 | 6.60 | 71.80 | 0.26 |
F-LSD(0.05) | 9.40 | 3.79 | ns | 0.08 |
weed management practices sawdust cover | 54.10 | 13.04 | 128.30 | 0.57 |
black polyethylene mulch | 47.30 | 13.52 | 118.60 | 0.31 |
rice husk mulch | 51.20 | 13.81 | 114.60 | 0.45 |
hoe weeding | 45.50 | 9.15 | 90.40 | 0.31 |
weedy check | 53.90 | 10.74 | 111.50 | 0.29 |
F-LSD(0.05) | ns | ns | ns | 0.10 |
ns = not significant.
Table 5. Effect of manure type and weed management practices on morphological parameters of S. lycopersicum at 8 weeks after transplanting.
manure type | plant height (cm) | number of branches | number of leaves | stem girth (cm) |
poultry | 62.3 | 15.18 | 146.50 | 0.50 |
pig dung | 68.9 | 15.09 | 150.90 | 0.58 |
control | 40.4 | 6.76 | 75.50 | 0.31 |
F-LSD(0.05) | 10.6 | 3.55 | 45.67 | 0.08 |
weed management practices sawdust cover | 61.20 | 13.19 | 128.10 | 0.71 |
BPM | 53.50 | 13.44 | 127.20 | 0.36 |
rice husk mulch | 57.80 | 14.22 | 133.20 | 0.47 |
hoe weeding | 52.8 | 9.48 | 104.2 | 0.44 |
weedy check | 60.7 | 11.37 | 128.7 | 0.34 |
F-LSD(0.05) | ns | ns | ns | 0.11 |
ns= not significant, BPM= black polyethylene mulch.
for plant height, number of branches, number of leaves, and stem girth. Pig dung plots were also remarkable with yield (23267.00 per hectare) compared to other manure types. However, several authors (Abd-Allah et al., 2001; Aly, 2002; Bayoumi, 2005; Ehaliotis et al., 2005; Zhou et al., 2022) indicated that the application of organic fer- tilizer increased crop yields compared to using chemical fertilizers. Worthington (2001) concluded that organic crops contained more vitamin C, iron, magnesium, and phospho- rus and significantly less nitrates than conventional crops. Similarly, Vinha et al. (2014) reported that organic toma- toes were healthier than those produced by conventional practices. There are profound positive effects of organic fer- tilizers on plants such as tomatoes (Gao et al., 2023; Mayele and Abu, 2023). These effects may also be attributed to the top stimulating activities of bacteria which promote the released and availability of N, P, and the other nutrients in the soil and enhance nutrients absorption by tomato roots (Pokluda et al., 2021). Kandil and Gad (2009) pointed out that organic manure enhances nutrient absorption, root, and translocation to upper parts of broccoli plants. These re- sults are similar to those of Gianquinto and Borin (1990) and Wu et al. (2022), who found that the contribution of
manure is very favourable to the high yield of industrial tomatoes. This beneficial effect of animal manures allows for keeping soil fertility while improving soil structure and the availability of mineral elements. In fact, the increase in soil organic matter to optimum levels is a key aspect of any organic production system (Gurmu, 2019). Shuaib (2001) reported that the period between 15 to 30 days after trans- planting was the critical period of crop-weed competition in tomatoes. Weed is the major constraint that limits crop production and has the most deleterious effect ultimately causing the yield reduction of tomato by 53 to 67% (Sanok et al., 1979). Mulching significantly influenced the intensity of weeds in the tomato field. Among the different mulching materials evaluated, rice husk mulch plots were the best weed suppressor with a higher effect on the tomato crop. In an experiment to study the effect of types of soil cover yield and growth characteristics of tomatoes in Ghana, Nkansah et al. (2003) reported that rice straw, rice husks, grass straw, and sawdust mulch reduced fresh weed weight significantly. Research has shown that covering the soil with organic mat- ter in both dry and rainy seasons significantly suppresses the growth of weeds. In a related study, Eneji et al. (2003) found that organic mulching cuts down weed intensity and
weed management practices | broadleaves/0.5m2 | grasses/0.5m2 | sedges/0.5m2 | WFW | WDW | WCE (%) |
2 WAT | ||||||
sawdust cover | 2.04 | 0.77 | 1.41 | 10.80 | 1.10 | 45.20 |
BPM | 2.38 | 0.71 | 0.77 | 0.90 | 0.12 | 76.00 |
rice husk | 1.65 | 0.99 | 1.25 | 3.70 | 0.31 | 55.8 |
hoe weeding | 2.28 | 0.80 | 1.30 | 3.9 | 0.61 | 45.10 |
weedy check | 2.61 | 1.16 | 1.42 | 7.9 | 1.15 | 0.00 |
mean | 5.53 | 0.44 | 1.20 | 5.9 | 0.66 | 44.4 |
F-LSD(0.05) | ns | ns | ns | ns | 0.76 | 20.08 |
4 WAT | ||||||
sawdust cover | 1.36 | 0.71 | 1.01 | 4.50 | 0.50 | 92.70 |
BPM | 1.94 | 0.71 | 0.86 | 5.30 | 0.54 | 82.00 |
rice husk | 1.56 | 1.02 | 0.99 | 10.20 | 1.84 | 73.90 |
hoe weeding | 1.71 | 0.82 | 1.15 | 5.80 | 0.78 | 85.20 |
weedy check | 3.75 | 0.98 | 1.62 | 64.00 | 0.54 | 0.00 |
mean | 5.07 | 0.31 | 1.36 | 17.9 | 2.40 | 66.8 |
F-LSD(0.05) | 2.77 | ns | ns | 23.66 | 2.24 | 16.51 |
6 WAT | ||||||
sawdust cover | 1.52 | 0.71 | 0.82 | 37.50 | 2.18 | 81.20 |
BPM | 1.85 | 0.77 | 0.77 | 11.10 | 1.45 | 76.00 |
rice husk | 1.28 | 0.71 | 0.86 | 28.10 | 1.71 | 73.7 |
hoe weeding | 1.49 | 0.82 | 0.94 | 18.80 | 3.35 | 58.10 |
weedy check | 2.28 | 0.92 | 0.81 | 71.20 | 9.41 | 0.00 |
mean | 2.80 | 0.16 | 0.27 | 33.4 | 3.62 | 57.80 |
F-LSD(0.05) | 1.94 | ns | ns | 33.53 | 3.28 | 21.29 |
ns= not significant, BPM= black polyethylene mulch, WFW= weed fresh weight, WDW= weed dry weight, WCE= weed control efficiency.
manure types | broadleaves/0.5m2 | grasses/0.5m2 | sedges/0.5m2 | WFW | WDW | WCE (%) |
2 WAT | ||||||
poultry | 2.26 | 0.83 | 1.27 | 5.60 | 0.70 | 52.00 |
pig dung | 2.38 | 1.02 | 1.03 | 7.80 | 0.88 | 50.10 |
control | 1.93 | 0.80 | 1.25 | 2.80 | 0.40 | 31.20 |
F-LSD(0.05) | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | 15.56 |
4 WAT | ||||||
poultry | 2.19 | 0.89 | 1.26 | 23.90 | 2.83 | 72.5 |
pig dung | 1.99 | 0.87 | 1.01 | 16.60 | 2.66 | 71.60 |
control | 2.02 | 0.78 | 1.10 | 13.30 | 1.70 | 56.20 |
F-LSD(0.05) | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | 12.79 |
6 WAT | ||||||
poultry | 1.58 | 0.80 | 0.87 | 26.60 | 4.01 | 67.80 |
pig dung | 1.71 | 0.78 | 0.90 | 33.60 | 2.66 | 54.70 |
control | 1.76 | 0.78 | 0.74 | 39.90 | 4.20 | 50.80 |
F-LSD(0.05) | 1.504 | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
ns= not significant, WFW= weed fresh weight, WDW= weed dry weight, WCE= weed control efficiency.
promotes crop-plant health as well as the ultimate yield. The increase in crop output can be attributed to the effect of reduced tomato to weed competition for nutrients and other factors of plant growth, as a result of weed smothering (Gan- gawar et al., 2000; Oliveira et al., 2023). Tomato plants in the mulched plots were generally tall and had thicker stem girth, especially in sawdust cover plots. The highest fresh and dry weight of weed occurred on weedy check plots while the black polyethylene mulch recorded the least. Conversely, clear mulches have been observed to have a neg-
ligible effect on weed growth (Waterer, 2000) although they promote soil warming, whereas coloured polythene such as black or brown effectively prevent emerging weeds (Nor- man et al., 2011; Gordon et al., 2010; Ngouajio and Ernest, 2004; Ossom, 2001; Brault et al., 2002; Bond and Grundy, 2001) and earlier crop maturity (Ibarra et al., 2001).
Weed control efficiency (%) was highest in the black polyethylene mulch of the experiment at all durations while it was least in the case of weedy check. Gandhi and Bains (2006) reported that black plastic mulch resulted in 100 per-
weed management | total number of fruit / plant / plot | total number of fruit / plot | weight of fruit / plant (kg) | weight of fruit / plot(kg) | yield per hectare |
sawdust cover | 13.44 | 44.90 | 0.25 | 2.18 | 21778.00 |
BPM | 11.56 | 39.70 | 0.18 | 1.70 | 17000.00 |
hoe weeding | 5.00 | 33.00 | 0.11 | 1.32 | 13222.00 |
rice husk | 17.78 | 82.30 | 0.26 | 3.42 | 34222.00 |
weedy check | 5.00 | 25.00 | 0.10 | 0.91 | 9111.00 |
F-LSD(0.05) | 5.32 | 17.21 | 0.11 | 0.61 | 6114.1 |
manure type pig dung | 10.33 | 54.50 | 0.21 | 2.33 | 23267.00 |
poultry | 11.33 | 42.90 | 0.18 | 1.84 | 18400.00 |
control | 10.00 | 37.50 | 0.14 | 1.55 | 15533.00 |
F-LSD(0.05) | ns | 13.38 | ns | 0.47 | 4735.9 |
ns= not significant, BPM= black polyethylene mulch.
Osadebe, Jennifer Chinyere Igwe, Felix Amuji, Nathaniel Dauda, Amos Ejike Ede); Execution of field/lab experiments and data collection (Vivian Ogechukwu Osadebe, Jennifer Chinyere Igwe, Felix Amuji, Nathaniel Dauda); Analysis of data and interpreta-tion (Vivian Ogechukwu Osadebe, Felix Amuji); Preparation of the manuscript (Vivian Ogechukwu Osadebe, Jennifer Chinyere Igwe, Felix Amuji, Nathaniel Dauda, Amos Ejike Ede).
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
The authors declare that they have no known com- peting financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
cent control of all weeds in tomatoes, whereas silver-lustred thin film resulted in 92 percent control of graminaceous weeds. Black and silver-lustred film mulch resulted in in- creased tomato yield percent when compared to transparent film. Several Olericulture studies have shown that the first six weeks after transplanting is the most critical window of weed competition. A number of studies have been pub- lished in tropical and sub-tropical countries to evaluate crop residues used as mulch. These include research by Shashid- har et al. (2008), and Akhtar et al. (2019) who have shown that soil cover positively influences soil health and replen- ishes plant nutrients by increasing organic matter.
Finally, this study revealed that the use of organic fertilizer and weed management practices affected the growth and yield of tomatoes. Pig dung improved growth and produced more yield compared to other manure types. Also, covering the soil with rice husk enhanced growth, suppressed weeds, and produced more yield of tomatoes compared to other weed management practices and control. The interaction of manure type and weed management practices on weight of fruit per plant, weight of fruit per plot, total number of fruit per plant per plot, total number of fruit per plot, and highest yield was not significant but the highest yield number were obtained in the pig dung and rice husk mulch due to less weed interference. It is recommended that the use of pig dung should be adopted by farmers in the area as well as the use of rice husk mulch on the soil surface as weed management practices to improve the growth performance and yield of tomatoes.
Conceptualization of research (Vivian Ogechukwu Osadebe, Jennifer Chinyere Igwe, Felix Amuji); Designing of the experiments (Vivian Ogechukwu Osadebe, Jennifer Chinyere Igwe, Felix Amuji, Nathaniel Dauda, Amos Ejike Ede); Contribution of experimental materials (Vivian Ogechukwu
Abd-Allah AM, Safia MA, Abou-Hadid AF (2001) Re- sponse of some tomato hybrids to the organic fertilizer under newly reclaimed soil conditions. Egy J Hort 28:341–353.
Akhtar K, Wang W, Khan A, Ren G, Afridi MZ, Feng Y, Yang G (2019) Wheat straw mulching offset soil moisture deficient for improving physiological and growth performance of summer sown soybean. Agric Wat Mgt 211:16–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat. 2018.09.031
Aly HH (2002) Studies on keeping quality and storage abil- ity of cucumber fruits under organic farming system in greenhouses. M.Sc. dissertation. Faculty of Agriculture, Cairo University, Egypt
Bashir MA, Alvi AM, Rehmani MIA, Qasirani TB, Mah- para S, Tariq M (2019) Pollinators diversity for toma- toes crop under agroforest ecosystem of Dera Ghazi Khan Punjab Pakistan. Pure Appl Biol 8:1487–1493. https://doi.org/10.19045/bspab.2019.80088
Bayoumi YA (2005) Studies on organic production of tomato crop. Ph.D. Thesis. Faculty of Agriculture, Kafr El-Sheikh, Tanta University, Egypt
Bond W, Grundy AC (2001) Non-chemical weed manage- ment in organic farming systems. Weed Res 41:383–
405. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3180.2001.00246. x
Brault D, Stewart KA, Jenni S (2002) Optical properties of paper and polyethylene mulches used for weed control in lettuce. Hort Sci 37:87–91. https://doi.org/10.21273/ HORTSCI.37.1.87
Brown B, Hoshide AK, Gallandt ER (2019) An economic comparison of weed management systems used in small-scale organic vegetable production. Org Agric 9:53–63. https://doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-11-00222.1
Christians NE, Patton AJ, Law QD, Eds (2016) Fundamen- tals of turfgrass management. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hoboken, NJ, USA 5th ed (1-22)
Edmeades DC (2003) The long-term effects of manures and fertilisers on soil productivity and quality: A review. Nut Cycl Agro Ecosys 66:165–180. https://doi.org/10. 1023/A:1023999816690
Ehaliotis C, Zervakis GI, Karavitis P (2005) Residues and bye products of olive oil mills for root-zone heating and plant nutrition in organic vegetable production. Sci Hort 106:293–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.
Eneji AA, Honna T, Yamamoto S, Masuda T (2003) Influ- ence of composting conditions on plant nutrient con- centrations in manure compost. J Plant Nut 26:1595– 1604. https://doi.org/10.1081/PLN-120022369
Frusciante L, Carli P, Maria R, Ercolano S, Pernice R, Matteo AD, Fogliano V, Pellegrini N (2007) Antioxi- dant nutritional quality of tomato. Mol Nutr Food Res 51:609–617. https://doi.org/10.1002/mnfr.200600158
Gandhi N, Bains GS (2006) Effect of mulching and date of transplanting on yield contributing characters of tomato. J Res 43:6–9. https://doi.org/10.5958/2249- 5258.2019.00028.9
Gangawar SK, Sinha PS, Singh BD, Ramnagina JJ, Griya GUP (2000) Maximization of leaf yield of mulberry (Morus alba L.) and economic return per unit area of land from sericulture through mulching. Serico (France) 40:491–497.
Gao F, Li H, Mu X, Gao H, Zhang Y, Li R, Cao K, Ye L (2023) Effects of organic fertilizer application on tomato yield and quality: A meta-analysis. Appl Sci 13:2184. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13042184
Gao L, Gonda IH, Sun Q (2019) The tomato pangenome uncovers new genes and a rare allele regulating fruit flavor. Nat Genet 51:e10441051. https://doi.org/10. 21273/HORTTECH.20.1.224
Ghafory O, Foster RE, Weller CS, McNamara KT (2018) Effect of weed management systems on tomato yield in Herat province Afghanistan. Asian J Sci Tech 9:8216–8218.
Gianquinto G, Borin M (1990) Effect of organic and min- eral fertilizer application and soil type on the growth and yield of processing tomatoes (Lycopersicon escu- lentum Mill.). Riv Agron 24:339–348. https://doi.org/ 10.5555/19910306048
Gordon GG, Foshee GW, Reed ST, Brown JE, Vinson EL (2010) The Effects of colored plastic mulches and row covers on the growth and yield of okra. Horticul Technol 20 (1): 224–233. https://doi.org/10.21273/ HORTTECH.20.1.224
Gurmu G (2019) Soil organic matter and its role in soil health and crop productivity improvement. Forest Ecol Manag 7 (7): 475–483. https://doi.org/10.14662/ ARJASR2019.147
Ibarra L, Flores D, Pe´rez JC (2001) Growth and yield of muskmelon in response to plastic mulch and row cov- ers. Sci Hort 87:139–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0304-4238(00)00172-2
Kandil H, Gad N (2009) Effects of inorganic and organic fertilizers on growth and production of brocoli (Bras- sica oleracea L.). Factori Si Procese Pedogenetice din Zona Temp 8:61–69.
Mayele JM, Abu FR (2023) Determining the effects of selected organic fertilizer on growth and yields of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum: Var. Rio Grande Tomatoes) in Mundri West County, Western Equatoria State, South Sudan. Agricultural Sci 14:1343–1374. https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2023.149089
Mennan H, Jabran K, Zandstra BH, Pala F (2020) Non- chemical weed management in vegetables by using cover crops: A review. Agro 10:257–260. https://doi. org/10.3390/agronomy10020257
Ngouajio M, Ernest J (2004) Light transmission through colored polythene mulches affected weed population. Hort Sci 39:1302–1304. https://doi.org/10.21273/ HORTSCI.39.6.1302
Nkansah GO, Owusu EO, Bonsu KO, Dennis EA (2003) Ef- fect of mulch type on the growth, yield and fruit quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill). Ghana J Hort 2:55–64.
Norman JC, Opata J, Ofori E (2011) Growth and yield of okra and hot pepper as affected by mulching. Ghana J Hort 9:35–42. https://doi.org/10.5555/20113407597
Oerke EC (2006) Crop losses to pests. J Agric Sci 144:31–43. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1017 / S0021859605005708
Oliveira TR de, Serafim AD, Breland B, Miller A, Beneton K, Singh V, Segbefia W, Argenta JC, Broderick SR, Tseng TM (2023) An integrated weed management approach in tomato using soil steaming, mulching, and winter cover crops. Front Agron 5:1075726. https://doi. org/10.3389/fagro.2023.1075726
Olubanjo OO, Alade AE (2018) Growth and yield response of tomato plants grown under different substrates cul- ture. J Sustain Tech 9:110–123.
Ossom EPP (2001) Effect of mulch on weed infestation, soil temperature, nutrient concentration, and tuber yield in Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam. in Papua New Guinea. Trop Agric 78:144–151.
Pokluda R, Ragasova´ L, Jurica M, Kalisz A, Komorowska M, Niemiec M, Sekara A (2021) Effects of growth promoting microorganisms on tomato seedlings grow- ing in different media conditions. PloS One 16 (11): 0259380. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1371 / journal . pone . 0259380
Pramod KR, Nidhi A, Mitu S (2016) Edible coating of fruits and vegetables: A review. Int J Sci Res Mo Edu 1:188– 197.
Sanok WJ, Shelleck GW, Greighton JF (1979) Weed problems and phytotoxicity with herbicides in five tomato varieties. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting- Northeast Weed Science Society (USA), 332–335. https:
Shashidhar KR, Bhaskar RN, Priyadharshini P, Chandraku- mar HL (2008) Effect of different organic mulches on pH, organic carbon content and microbial status of soil and its influence on leaf yield of M-5 mulberry (Morus indica L.) under rainfed condition. Cu Biotica 2:405–412. https://doi.org/10.5555/20103023987
Shuaib OSB (2001) Critical period for weed competition in tomatoes (Lycopersicum esculentum Milli.). University of Aden Journal of Nat and App Sci 5:11–18. https:
Uguru MI, Baiyeri KP, Aba SC (2011) Indicators of climate change in the derived savannah niche of Nsukka, South- Eastern Nigeria. Agro Sci 10:1–10. https://doi.org/10. 4314/as.v10i1.68718
Vinha AF, Barreira SVP, Costa ASG, Alves RC, Oliveira MBPP (2014) Organic versus conventional tomatoes: Influence on physicochemical parameters, bioactive compounds and sensorial attributes. Int J Brit Ind Bio Res Ass 67:139–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct. 2014.02.018
Wabwoba MS, Mutoro K (2019) Promoting Mucuna beans production for soil rehabilitation, incomes, food and nutrition security in Kenya. Global J Nut Fo Sci 2:1–6. https://doi.org/10.33552/GJNFS.2019.02.000543
Waterer DR (2000) Effect of soil mulches and herbicides on production economics of warm season vegetable crops in a cool climate. Hort Technol 10:154–159. https :
//doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH.10.1.154
Worthington V (2001) CNutritional quality of organic ver- sus conventional fruits, vegetables, and grains. J Alter Comp Med 7:161–173. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1089 / 107555301750164244
Wu W, Lin Z, Zhu X, Li G, Zhang W, Chen Y, Ren L, et al. (2022) Improved tomato yield and quality by al- tering soil physicochemical properties and nitrification processes in the combined use of organic-inorganic fertilizers. Euro J Soil Bio 109:103384. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2022.103384
Zhou Z, Zhang S, Jiang N, Xiu W, Zhao J, Yang D (2022) Effects of organic fertilizer incorporation practices on crops yield, soil quality, and soil fauna feeding activity in the wheat-maize rotation system. Front Environ Sci 10:1058071.