Not Available

Not AvailableA field experiment was conducted for two years (2013–15) to evaluate the response of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) to deficit irrigation (DI) with drippers. The options tried were either the regulated DI on the basis of climatological approach i.e. irrigation water equalling 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0 times the evapotranspiration (ET) or DI (0.6xET) at phenological stages (vegetative, flowering, fruiting, vegetative-cum-flowering, vegetative-cum-fruiting and flowering-cum-fruiting stages) and disrupting irrigation(15 days) at either of vegetative, flowering and fruiting stage. Compared with the full irrigation (FI;78.0 Mg ha−1) the regulated deficit irrigation though did not affect the marketable fruit yield (MFY)at RDI0.8,there was loss of about one-fourth MFY with RDI0.6.Nevertheless the water productivity(19.2 kg m−3) was the maximum under RDI0.8.When the deficit irrigation was applied at different growthstages, MFY was rather improved by 4% with DI0.6(VS)while DI0.6(FL)showed little effect and a decline of7% was monitored with DI0.6(FT).The DI applied at either of two stages (DI0.6(VS + FL); DI0.6(FL + FT); DI0.6(VS + FT))resulted in 14–18% decline in MFY. The crop was able to tolerate interruptions of irrigation for 15 days atthe above phenological stages i.e. simulating canal closures and the decline in yield was only 3–7%, the highest being at fruiting stages (IIFT). The major advantage of DI was improvement in quality in terms of total soluble solid, ascorbic acid, acidity and colour index (lycopene) though the fruit size was affected.It was concluded that benefits of deficit irrigation in terms of improved quality and water productivity while sustaining fruit yield could be achieved with regulated DI at 0.8xET and DI at 0.6xET during vegetative stage followed by flowering.Not Availabl