Impact of Magnetic Treatment of Irrigation Water on the Growth and Yield of Tomato

This study was carried out to determine whether magnetic treatment of the irrigation water may actually enhance vegetative growth and yield of tomato. Three magnetic flux densities of 124, 319 and 719 G (treatments T1, T2 and T3) were used to treat the water and a control experiment (Tc) which was i...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kamorudeen Olaniyi YUSUF, Ayodele Olanrewaju OGUNLELA
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine, Cluj-Napoca 2015-09-01
Series:Notulae Scientia Biologicae
Online Access:http://www.notulaebiologicae.ro/index.php/nsb/article/view/9532
Description
Summary:This study was carried out to determine whether magnetic treatment of the irrigation water may actually enhance vegetative growth and yield of tomato. Three magnetic flux densities of 124, 319 and 719 G (treatments T1, T2 and T3) were used to treat the water and a control experiment (Tc) which was irrigated with non-magnetically treated water was also set up. The magnetic field was produced by an electromagnet that had a variable voltage unit varying the voltage from 4 to 12 V. The tomato were planted in buckets, kept in a transparent garden shed for 130 days and irrigated with magnetically treated water and non-magnetically treated water. A completely randomized design experimental layout was used in this study and each of the three treatments was replicated seven times. The results indicated that tomato crop irrigated with magnetically treated water grew faster than that of the non-magnetically treated water and the stem diameters were bigger than those of control. The heights of tomato plants (T1, T2 T3 and Tc) after 47 days were 560.0, 556.4, 588.6 and 469.3 mm respectively. The total yield after 130 days of survey for T1, T2 T3 and Tc were 892.1, 1075.8, 1045.7 and 637.7 g respectively. The percentage increment in yield from the plants treated with magnetically treated water varied from 39.9 to 68.7% compared to the yield from untreated water.
ISSN:2067-3205
2067-3264