Growth and nutrient absorption of Cape Gooseberry (Physalis Peruviana L.) in soilless culture

"This is an Author's Accepted Manuscript of an article published in [include the complete citation information for the final version of the article as published in the Journal of Plant Nutrition 2015 March, available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/01904167.2014.934474."Cape gooseberry (Physalis peruviana L.) is a solanaceous plant. The growth and time-course of nutrient accumulation of the plant and its partitioning between roots, stems, leaves, and fruits were examined. The study was conducted analyzing two nutrient solutions in soilless culture under greenhouse conditions during two consecutive seasons. The macronutrient contents were analyzed. On average, the yield was 8.9 t.ha(-1). Growth of the plant until 90 d after transplanting obeys an exponential function of time and the relative growth rate for this period was determined. Nitrogen (N) was the element that showed the highest concentration, corresponding to leaves (4.67%), followed by potassium (K) in stems (4.46%). The highest accumulations of N, phosphorous (P), calcium (Ca), and magnesium (Mg) were found in leaves and of K in the stems. Potassium showed the highest nutrient accumulation (29 g.plant(-1)) and the highest specific uptake rate.Torres Rubio, JF.; Pascual Seva, N.; San Bautista Primo, A.; Pascual España, B.; López Galarza, SV.; Alagarda Pardo, J.; Maroto Borrego, JV. (2015). Growth and nutrient absorption of Cape Gooseberry (Physalis Peruviana L.) in soilless culture. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 38(4):485-496. doi:10.1080/01904167.2014.934474S485496384Bellaloui, N., & Brown, P. H. (1998). Plant and Soil, 198(2), 153-158. doi:10.1023/a:1004343031242Bennett, J. P., Oshima, R. J., & Lippert, L. F. (1979). Effects of ozone on injury and dry matter partitioning in pepper plants. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 19(1), 33-39. doi:10.1016/0098-8472(79)90022-4CAUSTON, D. R. (1991). Plant Growth Analysis: The Variability of Relative Growth Rate Within a Sample. Annals of Botany, 67(2), 137-144. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a088112Convenio MAG-IICA (Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería. Institución Interamericana de Cooperación para la Agricultura). 2001. The cape gooseberry (Physalis peruvianaL.Physalis edulis). Subprograma de Cooperación Técnica, Ecuador. Available at: http://www.sica.gov.ec/agronegocios/Biblioteca/Convenio%20MAG%20IICA/productos/uvilla_mag.pdf (Accessed July 2007, in Spanish).El-Tohamy, W. A., El-Abagy, H. M., Abou-Hussein, S. D., & Gruda, N. (2009). Response of Cape gooseberry (Physalis peruviana L.) to nitrogen application under sandy soil conditions. Gesunde Pflanzen, 61(3-4), 123-127. doi:10.1007/s10343-009-0211-0Fresquet, J., Pascual, B., López-Galarza, S., Bautista, S., Baixauli, C., Gisbert, J. M., & Maroto, J. V. (2001). Nutrient uptake of pepino plants in soilless cultivation. The Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology, 76(3), 338-343. doi:10.1080/14620316.2001.11511373Heuvelink, E., Bakker, M. J., Elings, A., Kaarsemaker, R. C., & Marcelis, L. F. M. (2005). EFFECT OF LEAF AREA ON TOMATO YIELD. Acta Horticulturae, (691), 43-50. doi:10.17660/actahortic.2005.691.2Leskovar, D. I., & Cantliffe, D. J. (1993). Comparison of Plant Establishment Method, Transplant, or Direct Seeding on Growth and Yield of Bell Pepper. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 118(1), 17-22. doi:10.21273/jashs.118.1.17Marcelis, L. F. M. (1993). Fruit growth and biomass allocation to the fruits in cucumber. 1. Effect of fruit load and temperature. Scientia Horticulturae, 54(2), 107-121. doi:10.1016/0304-4238(93)90059-yPuente, L. A., Pinto-Muñoz, C. A., Castro, E. S., & Cortés, M. (2011). Physalis peruviana Linnaeus, the multiple properties of a highly functional fruit: A review. Food Research International, 44(7), 1733-1740. doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2010.09.034Radford, P. J. (1967). Growth Analysis Formulae - Their Use and Abuse1. Crop Science, 7(3), 171. doi:10.2135/cropsci1967.0011183x000700030001xRamadan, M. F., & Moersel, J. T. (2007). Impact of enzymatic treatment on chemical composition, physicochemical properties and radical scavenging activity of goldenberry (Physalis peruviana L.) juice. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 87(3), 452-460. doi:10.1002/jsfa.2728Ramadan, M. F., & Moersel, J.-T. (2009). Oil extractability from enzymatically treated goldenberry (Physalis peruvianaL.) pomace: range of operational variables. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 44(3), 435-444. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.2006.01511.xSalazar, M. R., Jones, J. W., Chaves, B., & Cooman, A. (2008). A model for the potential production and dry matter distribution of Cape gooseberry (Physalis peruviana L.). Scientia Horticulturae, 115(2), 142-148. doi:10.1016/j.scienta.2007.08.015Scholberg, J., McNeal, B. L., Jones, J. W., Boote, K. J., Stanley, C. D., & Obreza, T. A. (2000). Growth and Canopy Characteristics of Field-Grown Tomato. Agronomy Journal, 92(1), 152. doi:10.2134/agronj2000.921152xTrinchero, G. D., Sozzi, G. O., Cerri, A. M., Vilella, F., & Fraschina, A. A. (1999). Ripening-related changes in ethylene production, respiration rate and cell-wall enzyme activity in goldenberry (Physalis peruviana L.), a solanaceous species. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 16(2), 139-145. doi:10.1016/s0925-5214(99)00011-3Turner, A. (1994). Dry Matter Assimilation and Partitioning in Pepper Cultivars Differing in Susceptibility to Stress-induced Bud and Flower Abscission. Annals of Botany, 73(6), 617-622. doi:10.1006/anbo.1994.1077WILLIAMS, R. F. (1946). The Physiology of Plant Growth with Special Reference to the Concept of Net Assimilation Rate. Annals of Botany, 10(1), 41-72. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a083119Zapata, J.L., A. Saldarriaga, M. Londoño, and C. Díaz. 2002. Cape gooseberry Management in Colombia. Antioquia, Colombia: Rionegro, Programa Nacional de Transferencia de Tecnología Agropecuaria - Corpoica Regional Cuatro (in Spanish).Zerihun, A. (2000). Compensatory Roles of Nitrogen Uptake and Photosynthetic N-use Efficiency in Determining Plant Growth Response to Elevated CO2: Evaluation Using a Functional Balance Model. Annals of Botany, 86(4), 723-730. doi:10.1006/anbo.2000.123

Ground penetrating radar for underground sensing in agriculture: a review

Belowground properties strongly affect agricultural productivity. Traditional methods for quantifying below- ground properties are destructive, labor-intensive and point-based. Ground penetrating radar can provide non-invasive, areal, and repeatable underground measurements. This article reviews the application of ground penetrating radar for soil and root measurements and discusses potential approaches to overcome challenges facing ground penetrating radar-based sensing in agriculture, especially for soil physical characteristics and crop root measurements. Though advanced data-analysis has been developed for ground penetrating radar-based sensing of soil moisture and soil clay content in civil engineering and geosciences, it has not been used widely in agricultural research. Also, past studies using ground penetrating radar in root research have been focused mainly on coarse root measurement. Currently, it is difficult to measure individual crop roots directly using ground penetrating radar, but it is possible to sense root cohorts within a soil volume grid as a functional constituent modifying bulk soil dielectric permittivity. Alternatively, ground penetrating radar-based sensing of soil water content, soil nutrition and texture can be utilized to inversely estimate root development by coupling soil water flow modeling with the seasonality of plant root growth patterns. Further benefits of ground penetrating radar applications in agriculture rely on the knowledge, discovery, and integration among differing disciplines adapted to research in agricultural management