4.4 Article

Ebb-and-flow Subirrigation Strategies Increase Biomass and Nutrient Contents and Reduce Nitrate Levels in Lettuce

Journal

HORTSCIENCE
Volume 53, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

AMER SOC HORTICULTURAL SCIENCE
DOI: 10.21273/HORTSCI13065-18

Keywords

Lactuca sativa; ebb-and-flow subirrigation system; irrigation frequency; immersion time; nutritional quality

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61233006]
  2. National High-Tech Research and Development Program of China (863 Program) [2013AA103006]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Overhead irrigation is widely used to water lettuce during commercial production in China but exerts potential water wastage and pollution. Subirrigation is thought as a water-saving, high-efficiency fertigation strategy. However, few studies have compared the nutritional value and nitrate content of lettuce grown using subirrigation with plants cultivated with overhead irrigation. Therefore, this study explored the ability of ebb-and-flow subirrigation strategies to produce high yields of a leafy lettuce (cultivar Biscia Rossa) with high nutritional value and low nitrate content. Lettuce plants were cultivated in an ebb-and-flow subirrigation system with different irrigation frequencies (every 2 or 3 days) and immersion times (5, 10 or 15 minutes); overhead irrigation was used as control. Ebb-and-flow subirrigation significantly enhanced several lettuce growth parameters, significantly increased the level of vitamin C, and significantly decreased the nitrate content of lettuce leaves compared with overhead irrigation. The optimal subirrigation strategy for lettuce production was irrigation every 3 days with 15 minutes immersion; this ebb-and-flow subirrigation protocol could potentially be used to save water and resources, improve yield and nutrient contents and reduce nitrate content in commercial greenhouse lettuce production.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available