Yield and Fruit Properties of Husk Tomato (Physalis Phyladelphica) Cultivars Grown in the Open Field in the South of West Siberia
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
horticulturae Article Yield and Fruit Properties of Husk Tomato (Physalis phyladelphica) Cultivars Grown in the Open Field in the South of West Siberia Natalia Naumova 1,* , Taisia Nechaeva 1, Oleg Savenkov 1 and Yury Fotev 2 1 Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia; [email protected] (T.N.); [email protected] (O.S.) 2 Central Siberian Botanical Garden SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 23 December 2018; Accepted: 7 February 2019; Published: 18 February 2019 Abstract: Husk tomato (Physalis philadelphica Lam.) a source of functional food and medicinal compounds, has attracted renewed interest for production in temperate zones. Field-grown husk tomato yield and fruit properties and their relationship with soil chemistry and temperature were studied in the south of West Siberia, Russia, at five experimental sites. At each site, a microplot experiment with two cultivars was conducted. Basic soil chemical properties and fruit pH and dry matter, total carbon, nitrogen, and ascorbic acid content were determined. Both cultivars grew and yielded very well, producing on average 70 fruits, or 1.46 kg, per plant, with 14 mg ascorbic acid per 100 g fresh weight, 9.0% dry matter, and juice pH of 4.1. Variation in environmental conditions among sites was the major factor determining production and fruit property variation, with cultivar biology accounting for 10%. The cultivars responded differently to some soil properties, but generally their yield and fruit quality depended on soil pH and labile phosphorous and potassium. Thus, husk tomato has remarkable capacity for vigorous yields in unprotected conditions in West Siberia, despite air and soil temperatures that are much lower than in its region of origin. Detailed studies are needed to elucidate its response to varying solar radiation and atmospheric precipitation. Keywords: husk tomato; Physalis philadelphica Lam.; soil chemical properties; fruit quality; ascorbic acid; open field experiment; West Siberia; North Asia 1. Introduction Husk tomato (Physalis philadelphica Lam. (synonymic Physalis ixocarpa Brot.)), also known as Mexican husk tomato, or tomatillo, is the most widely distributed species of Physalis. It is not only an interesting vegetable crop with a wide ecological niche for growing it [1], producing plenty of fruits, but it is also a medicinal plant with a long history of enthnomedicinal use [2,3]. Recently, husk tomato has been enjoying increasing attention in many countries, including Russia, due to new information on its chemical composition [4–6], health benefits, etc. [7–11]. Over the last few decades in Russia, the crop has been grown only by small farmers and individual gardeners; however, the last century saw quite a lot of attention paid to husk tomato. It was introduced into Russia in 1926, and was vigorously studied between 1920 and the 1950s [12], when field experiments were set up at experimental stations throughout the entire country [13]. Industrial production was started in the country in the Far East, where several thousands of hectares were occupied by husk tomato in the 1950s [14]. Currently such countries as the United States, Mexico, Canada, and Spain are the main players in the wholesale tomatillo market [15]. However, in Russia, there is no wide-scale production of husk tomato, and it only receives attention from small farmers and individual gardeners; so, the crop at present has little economic significance nationwide. Horticulturae 2019, 5, 19; doi:10.3390/horticulturae5010019 www.mdpi.com/journal/horticulturae Horticulturae 2019, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 13 husk tomato, and it only receives attention from small farmers and individual gardeners; so, the Horticulturae 2019, 5, 19 2 of 12 crop at present has little economic significance nationwide. Husk tomato as a crop for functional nutrition and novel medicinal use together with global warmingHusk have tomato resulted as a crop in increased for functional interest nutrition in crop and performance novel medicinal assessment use together in areas withpreviously global warmingnot involved have in resulted its cultivation in increased. In the interest south of in cropWest performanceSiberia (55–60° assessment N, 59–84° in E) areas, global previously climate notchange involved has been in itsshown cultivation. to manifest In theitself south in significant of West Siberiapositive (55–60 trends◦ inN, the 59–84 growing◦ E), globalseason climatelength. changeThe latter, has beentogether shown with to manifestincreased itself sums in significantof growing positive degree trendsdays inand the precipitation growing season [16] length., have Theresulted latter, in together a tendency with for increased increased sums producti of growingon across degree the dayssouth and of West precipitation Siberia in [16 the], have past resulted several indecades a tendency. The f forurther increased anticipated production increase across in regional the south plant of West productivity Siberia in [1 the6] actualize past severals studies decades. on Thethe growth, further anticipateddevelopment increase, and yields in regional of more plant warm productivity-climate-loving [16] actualizes vegetable studiescrops, including on the growth, husk development,tomato, in the andopen yields field ofin morethe region warm-climate-loving. vegetable crops, including husk tomato, in the openCultivars field in the may region. react differently to changed environmental conditions, and their yield potential can beCultivars modified may by react many differently factors, including to changed edaphic environmental ones. Currently conditions,, little and is theirknown yield about potential husk cantomato be modified production by manyand possible factors, includingcultivar differences edaphic ones. in the Currently, open field little in is West known Siberia. about huskIn addition tomato, productionthere are no and data possible about biological cultivar differences production in ( thei.e.,open biomass field of in major West Siberia.plant components In addition,, including there are nothose data that about are biologicalnon-consumable production by humans (i.e., biomass) of husk of tomato major plant. However, components, the recent including intensifica thosetion that of arestudies non-consumable on non-consumable by humans) above ofground husk tomato.and/or belowground However, the components recent intensification of various of crops studies have on non-consumableincreased the amount aboveground of attention and/or paid belowground to husk tomato components in this respect of various as well crops. have increased the amountThe of aim attention of th paidis work to husk was tomato to study in this husk respect tomato as well. yield and fruit properties and their relationshipThe aim with of this soil work chemistry was to studyand temperature husk tomato in yield open and field fruit production properties andin the their south relationship of West withSiberia, soil Russia, chemistry during and temperatureone growing in season open field at five production experimental in the southsites ofwith West varying Siberia, soil Russia, and duringenvironmental one growing conditions. season at five experimental sites with varying soil and environmental conditions. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1.2.1. Experimen Experimentaltal Sites To studystudy thethe quantity quantity and and quality quality of of husk husk tomato tomato biological biological production, production, as wellas well as fruit as fruit yield yield and properties,and properties, microplot microplot field experimentsfield experiments were carriedwere carried out at fiveout experimentalat five experimental stations duringstations the during 2016 growingthe 2016 growing season in season the forest-steppe in the forest zone-steppe in West zone Siberia in West (Figure Siberia1). (Figure 1). Figure 1. The locationlocation of the study sites. Horticulturae 2019, 5, 19 3 of 12 The climate of the region is classified as sharply continental, with the average (June, July, August) maximal temperature in summer ranging from 22 to 26 ◦C and the average precipitation ranging from 40 to 65 mm per month, with a 119-day frost-free period. At each experimental station, air (2 m above the soil surface) and soil (at a depth of 1, 10, and 20 cm) temperatures were registered by Thermochron DS1921G data loggers (iButtonLink, USA), and the respective temperature sums were calculated for the duration of the experiment (103 days) (Table1). Table 1. The geographical location of experimental sites and their temperature sums (◦C·day) over the growing period. Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 Northern 55◦15039.71” 54◦57055.31” 54◦58057.90” 54◦42021.10” 55◦00046.04” latitude Eastern 83◦31042.12” 83◦13009.92” 82◦22043.00” 83◦16002.60” 82◦57027.58” longitude Temperature sums Air 1403 1448 1485 1458 1570 Soil, 1544 1357 1403 1517 1404 1-cm depth Soil, 1387 1325 1338 1536 1381 10-cm depth Soil, 1458 1256 1257 1587 1314 20-cm depth Experiments were conducted on loamy agricultural soils, common to the region, classified as Luvic Greyzemic Phaeozems (Siltic, Aric) according to the World Reference Base for Soil Resources [17]. Overall, the experimental plots had rather high soil organic carbon content and slightly acidic pH, which are favourable for plant growth and development (Table2). Overall, the diversity of the soil properties at the experimental stations where the microplot field experiments were performed allows us to extend the conclusions over a wider gradient of soil and environmental conditions. Table 2. The soil chemical properties at different sites before the start of the microplot field experiments. Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 pHH2O 5.77 5.91 5.96 6.01 5.65 Soil organic carbon, % 6.7 12.3 11.4 3.2 4.0 N-NH4, mg/kg 1.5 3.0 2.2 2.8 2.3 N-NO3, mg/kg 11 12 56 12 29 P, mg/kg 2.0 11.2 2.7 4.6 18.7 Na, mg/kg 150 117 105 16 14 K, mg/kg 905 342 315 342 362 Mg, mg/kg 519 776 652 101 200 Ca, g/kg 4.2 6.0 5.0 2.9 1.5 2.2.