S. K. Biswas
Scientific Officer
IWM Division, BARI, Gazipur
M. A. Razzaque Akanda
Senior Scientific Officer
IWM Division, BARI, Gazipur
M. S. Rahman
Scientific Officer
IWM Division, BARI, Gazipur
M. A. Rashid
Principal Scientific Officer
HRC, BARI, Gazipur
Drip irrigation at an alternate (control), three and four days intervals with and without mulch were tested on tomato (CV: BARI Tomato-3) during three consecutive rabi seasons from 2004-2005 to 2006-2007 at the central research station, BARI, Gazipur. The yield and yield contributing characters varied significantly under paddy straw and polythene mulch for all levels of irrigations over the control treatment (without mulch). In the first year, the highest tomato yield (83.72 t/ha) was obtained from the treatment mulched with paddy straw with drip irrigation at 4 days interval but in the second and third years, the highest marketable fruit yields were recorded in polythene mulch treatment with the same irrigation interval. Considering three years average, polythene mulch with irrigation at 4 days interval produced higher yield than that of straw mulch. The highest water use efficiency (474.69 kg/ha/mm) was also obtained in this treatment with an average irrigation of only 149.33 mm which saved 45.56% water over the control. The lowest fruit yields were obtained from un-mulched treatment, irrigated at 4 days interval. The highest incremental BCR (6.51) was found from straw mulch and 3.38 from polythene mulch.
Drip irrigation, mulch, tomato, economic return, fruit yield
IWM Research field, BARI, Gazipur
Crop-Soil-Water Management
The experiment was undertaken in view of increasing the interval of drip irrigation by using different types of mulch in tomato and to see its effect on yield and economic return.
A field experiment on tomato (cv: BARI Tomato-3) was conducted at the IWM Research field, BARI, Gazipur during the rabi seasons of 2004-2005, 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. The soil was silty clay loam with PH 6.44, field capacity 28.5 percent, wilting point 14.3 percent (weight basis) and bulk density 1.50 g/ce.
The experiment was conducted with the following treatment combinations;
T1 = Drip irrigation at an alternate day meeting 100% ET crop
T2 = Drip irrigation at three days interval meeting 65% ET crop
T3 = Drip irrigation at four days interval without mulch meeting 50% ET crop
T4 = Drip irrigation at an alternate day with polythene mulch meeting 100% ET crop
T5 = Drip irrigation at 3 days interval with polythene mulch meeting 65% ET crop
T6 = Drip irrigation at 4 days interval with polythene mulch with 50% ET crop
T7 = Drip irrigation at an alternate day with straw mulch meeting 100% ET crop
T8 = Drip irrigation at 3 days interval with straw mulch meeting 65% ET crop
T9 = Drip irrigation at 4 days interval with straw mulch meeting 50% ET crop
The experiment was conducted in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) and each treatment was replicated thrice. The unit plot size was 4.0 m × 2.4 m with recommended plant spacing of 60 cm × 40 cm. The average dripper discharge was 4.60 litres/hr at optimum dripping condition. Irrigation was applied through drip system as per treatments to meet the crop evapotranspiration (ET crop). Tomatoes were harvested from 22 February to 29 March 2005 in the first year, from 20 February to 26 March 2006 in the second year and in the third year it was from 20 February to 25 March 2007.
Annual Research Report 2006-2007, IWM, BARI
From three years’ result, it may be concluded that use of mulch with drip irrigation was an appropriate option not only for water saving but also for increased yield. It enhanced yield and reduced the number of weeding and irrigation thereby saving production cost. Though polythene mulch performed better in terms of yield, straw mulch gave the higher economic return. But both polythene and straw mulch performed better than non mulched treatment. Considering the profitability and soil health, straw mulch can be suggested for tomato cultivation.
Report/Proceedings