Evaluation of the Agronomic Performance of Organic Processing Tomato as Affected by Different Cover Crop Residues Management
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Field and Treatments Description
2.2. Field Samplings and Measurements
2.3. Fruit Quality
2.4. Statistical Analyses
3. Results
3.1. Plant Biomass and N Uptake
3.2. Yield Components and Fruit Quality
3.3. Weed Biomass and Soil Characteristics
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Lernoud, J.; Willer, H. The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends 2019. Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, and IFOAM-Organics International, Bonn, 2019. Available online: https://shop.fibl.org/CHen/mwdownloads/download/link/id/1202/?ref=1 (accessed on 15 June 2019).
- Peigné, J.; Ball, B.C.; Roger-Estrade, J.; David, C. Is conservation tillage suitable for organic farming? A review. Soil Use Manag. 2007, 23, 129–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lal, R.; Reicosky, D.C.; Hanson, J.D. Evolution of the plow over 10,000 years and the rationale for no-till farming. Soil Till. Res. 2007, 93, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mazzoncini, M.; Antichi, D.; Di Bene, C.; Risaliti, R.; Petri, M.; Bonari, E. Soil carbon and nitrogen changes after 28 years of no-tillage management under Mediterranean conditions. Eur. J. Agron. 2016, 77, 156–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peigné, J.; Cannavaciuolo, M.; Gautronneau, Y.; Aveline, A.; Giteau, J.L.; Cluzeau, D. Earthworm populations under different tillage systems in organic farming. Soil Till. Res. 2009, 104, 207–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wittwer, R.A.; Dorn, B.; Jossi, W.; Van Der Heijden, M.G. Cover crops support ecological intensification of arable cropping systems. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 41911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Thorup-Kristensen, K.; Magid, J.; Jensen, L.S. Catch crops and green manures as biological tools in nitrogen management in temperate zones. Adv. Agron. 2003, 79, 227–302. [Google Scholar]
- Gadermaier, F.; Berner, A.; Fließbach, A.; Friedel, J.K.; Mäder, P. Impact of reduced tillage on soil organic carbon and nutrient budgets under organic farming. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2012, 27, 68–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jokela, D.; Nair, A. No tillage and strip tillage effects on plant performance, weed suppression, and profitability in transitional organic broccoli production. Hortscience 2016, 51, 1103–1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gruber, S.; Claupein, W. Effect of tillage intensity on weed infestation in organic farming. Soil Till. Res. 2009, 105, 104–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nichols, V.; Verhulst, N.; Cox, R.; Govaerts, B. Weed dynamics and conservation agriculture principles: A review. Field Crop. Res. 2015, 183, 56–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wells, M.S.; Reberg-Horton, S.C.; Smith, A.N.; Grossman, J.M. The reduction of plant-available nitrogen by cover crop mulches and subsequent effects on soybean performance and weed interference. Agron. J. 2013, 105, 539–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soane, B.D.; Ball, B.C.; Arvidsson, J.; Basch, G.; Moreno, F.; Roger-Estrade, J. No-till in northern, western and south-western Europe: A review of problems and opportunities for crop production and the environment. Soil Till. Res. 2012, 118, 66–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Berner, A.; Hildermann, I.; Fließbach, A.; Pfiffner, L.; Niggli, U.; Mäder, P. Crop yield and soil fertility response to reduced tillage under organic management. Soil Till. Res. 2008, 101, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- WPTC. The World Processing Tomato Council. Available online: https://www.wptc.to/pdf/releases/WPTC%20world%20production%20estimate%20as%20of%2012%20February%202019.pdf (accessed on 10 August 2019).
- Istat. Istituto Nazionale di Statistica. Available online: http://agri.istat.it/jsp/dawinci.jsp?q=plCPO0000010000013000&an=2018&ig=1&ct=418&id=15A|18A|28A (accessed on 10 August 2019).
- Frasconi, C.; Martelloni, L.; Antichi, D.; Raffaelli, M.; Fontanelli, M.; Peruzzi, A.; Benincasa, P.; Tosti, G. Combining roller crimpers and flaming for the termination of cover crops in herbicide-free no-till cropping systems. Plos ONE 2019, 14, e0211573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Frasconi, C.; Martelloni, L.; Raffaelli, M.; Fontanelli, M.; Abou Chehade, L.; Peruzzi, A.; Antichi, D. A field vegetable transplanter for the use in both tilled and no-till soils. Trans. ASABE 2019, 62, 593–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bremner, J.M.; Mulvaney, C.S. Nitrogen-Total. In Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 2nd ed.; Page, A.L., Miller, R.H., Keeney, D.R., Eds.; American Society of Agronomy, Soil Science Society of America: Madison, WI, USA, 1982; pp. 595–624. [Google Scholar]
- Eaton, A.D.; Clesceri, L.S.; Greenberg, A.E. Determination of Anions by Ion Chromatography, Part 4000 Inorganic Nonmetallic Constituents. In Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater; American Public Health Association: Washington, DC, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Zapata, S.; DuFour, J.P. Ascorbic, dehydroascorbic and isoascorbic acid simultaneous determinations by reverse phase ion interaction HPLC. J. Food Sci. 1992, 57, 506–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gil, M.I.; Ferreres, F.; Tomás-Barberán, F.A. Effect of postharvest storage and processing on the antioxidant constituents (flavonoids and vitamin C) of fresh-cut spinach. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1999, 47, 2213–2222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singleton, V.L.; Rossi, J.A. Colorimetry of total phenolics with phosphomolybdic-phosphotungstic acid reagents. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 1965, 16, 144–158. [Google Scholar]
- Brand-Williams, W.; Cuvelier, M.E.; Berset, C. Use of a free radical method to evaluate antioxidant activity. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 1995, 28, 25–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Held, M.T.; Anthon, G.E.; Barrett, D.M. The effects of bruising and temperature on enzyme activity and textural qualities of tomato juice. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2015, 95, 1598–1604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, G.; Weil, R.R.; Hill, R.L. Effects of compaction and cover crops on soil least limiting water range and air permeability. Soil Till. Res. 2014, 136, 61–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamza, M.A.; Anderson, W.K. Soil compaction in cropping systems. A review of the nature, causes and possible solutions. Soil Till. Res 2005, 82, 121–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lenzi, A.; Antichi, D.; Bigongiali, F.; Mazzoncini, M.; Migliorini, P.; Tesi, R. Effect of different cover crops on organic tomato production. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2009, 24, 92–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dufault, R.J.; Decoteau, D.R.; Garrett, J.T.; Batal, K.D.; Granberry, D.; Davis, J.M.; Hoyt, G.; Sanders, D. Influence of cover crops and inorganic nitrogen fertilization on tomato and snap bean production and soil nitrate distribution. J. Veg. Crop Prod. 2000, 6, 13–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sainju, U.M.; Singh, B.P.; Rahman, S.; Reddy, V.R. Soil nitrate-nitrogen under tomato following tillage, cover cropping, and nitrogen fertilization. J. Environ. Qual. 1999, 28, 1837–1844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teasdale, J.R.; Abdul-Baki, A.A. Soil temperature and tomato growth associated with black polyethylene and hairy vetch mulches. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 1995, 120, 848–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghosh, P.K.; Dayal, D.; Bandyopadhyay, K.K.; Mohanty, M. Evaluation of straw and polythene mulch for enhancing productivity of irrigated summer groundnut. Field Crop. Res. 2006, 99, 76–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hai, L.; Li, X.G.; Liu, X.E.; Jiang, X.J.; Guo, R.Y.; Jing, G.B.; Rengel, Z.; Li, F.M. Plastic mulch stimulates nitrogen mineralization in urea-amended soils in a semiarid environment. Agron. J. 2015, 107, 921–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delate, K.; Cwach, D.; Chase, C. Organic no-tillage system effects on soybean, corn and irrigated tomato production and economic performance in Iowa, USA. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2012, 27, 49–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campiglia, E.; Mancinelli, R.; Radicetti, E. Influence of no-tillage and organic mulching on tomato (Solanum Lycopersicum L.) production and nitrogen use in the mediterranean environment of central Italy. Sci. Hortic. 2011, 130, 588–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herrero, E.V.; Mitchell, J.P.; Lanini, W.T.; Temple, S.R.; Miyao, E.M.; Morse, R.D.; Campiglia, E. Use of cover crop mulches in a no-till furrow-irrigated processing tomato production system. Horttechnology 2001, 11, 43–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delate, K.; Cambardella, C.; McKern, A. Effects of organic fertilization and cover crops on an organic pepper system. Horttechnology 2008, 18, 215–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vollmer, E.R.; Creamer, N.; Reberg-Horton, C.; Hoyt, G. Evaluating cover crop mulches for no-till organic production of onions. Hortscience 2010, 45, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Canali, S.; Campanelli, G.; Ciaccia, C.; Leteo, F.; Testani, E.; Montemurro, F. Conservation tillage strategy based on the roller crimper technology for weed control in Mediterranean vegetable organic cropping systems. Eur. J. Agron. 2013, 50, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leavitt, M.J.; Sheaffer, C.C.; Wyse, D.L.; Allan, D.L. Rolled winter rye and hairy vetch cover crops lower weed density but reduce vegetable yields in no-tillage organic production. Hortscience 2011, 46, 387–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boydston, R.A.; Williams, M.M. No-till snap bean performance and weed response following rye and vetch cover crops. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2017, 32, 463–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tittarelli, F.; Campanelli, G.; Leteo, F.; Farina, R.; Napoli, R.; Ciaccia, C.; Canali, S.; Testani, E. Mulch Based No-Tillage and Compost Effects on Nitrogen Fertility in Organic Melon. Agron. J. 2018, 110, 1482–1491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooper, J.; Baranski, M.; Stewart, G.; Nobel-de Lange, M.; Bàrberi, P.; Fließbach, A.; Peigné, J.; Berner, A.; Brock, C.; Casagrande, M.; et al. Shallow non-inversion tillage in organic farming maintains crop yields and increases soil C stocks: A meta-analysis. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2016, 36, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radicetti, E.; Mancinelli, R.; Moscetti, R.; Campiglia, E. Management of winter cover crop residues under different tillage conditions affects nitrogen utilization efficiency and yield of eggplant (Solanum melanogena L.) in Mediterranean environment. Soil Tillage Res. 2016, 155, 329–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radicetti, E.; Campiglia, E.; Marucci, A.; Mancinelli, R. How winter cover crops and tillage intensities affect nitrogen availability in eggplant. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2017, 108, 177–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teasdale, J.R.; Mohler, C.L. The quantitative relationship between weed emergence and the physical properties of mulches. Weed Sci. 2000, 48, 385–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mosaddeghi, M.R.; Mahboubi, A.A.; Safadoust, A. Short-term effects of tillage and manure on some soil physical properties and maize root growth in a sandy loam soil in western Iran. Soil Tillage Res. 2009, 104, 173–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bulan, M.T.S.; Stoltenberg, D.E.; Posner, J.L. Buckwheat species as summer cover crops for weed suppression in no-tillage vegetable cropping systems. Weed Sci. 2015, 63, 690–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomas, R.; O’Sullivan, J.; Hamill, A.; Swanton, C.J. Conservation tillage systems for processing tomato production. Hortscience 2001, 36, 1264–1268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shrestha, A.; Mitchell, J.P.; Lanini, W.T. Subsurface drip irrigation as a weed management tool for conventional and conservation tillage tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) production in semi-arid agroecosystems. J. Sustain. Agric. 2007, 31, 91–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dumas, Y.; Dadomo, M.; Di Lucca, G.; Grolier, P. Effects of environmental factors and agricultural techniques on antioxidant content of tomatoes. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2003, 83, 369–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Characteristic | Measurement Unit | 2015–2016 | 2016–2017 |
---|---|---|---|
Clay | g 100 g−1 | 11.67 | 21.80 |
Silt | g 100 g−1 | 18.24 | 4.70 |
Sand | g 100 g−1 | 70.09 | 73.50 |
pH | 7.89 | 7.89 | |
EC | µS | 48.12 | 45.23 |
Total N | g kg−1 | 1.27 | 0.76 |
SOM | g 100 g−1 | 1.97 | 1.27 |
P available | μg 100 g−1 | 2.43 | 4.20 |
2015–2016 | 2016–2017 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Treatment | Fruits Dry Biomass (g m−2) | Shoots Dry Biomass (g m−2) | Roots Dry Biomass (g m−2) | Fruits Dry Biomass (g m−2) | Shoots Dry Biomass (g m−2) | Roots Dry Biomass (g m−2) |
CT-CC | 264.4 a | 181.8 a | 22.3 b | 354.2 b | 279.4 b | 28.4 c |
CT-CC-PM | 223.0 b | 183.2 a | 28.0 a | 436.6 a | 372.7 a | 36.8 a |
CT-NC | 257.4 a,b | 166.6 a | 22.6 b | 355.3 b | 250.1 c | 33.1 b |
CT-NC-PM | 240.2 a,b | 159.0 a | 16.9 c | 405.3 a,b | 293.4 b | 39.3 a |
NT-CC-SW | 48.4 c | 31.5 b | 4.6 d | 171.5 c | 137.5 d | 22.7 d |
NT-CC | 45.9 c | 26.0 b | 4.0 d | 129.8 d | 101.7 e | 15.1 e |
NT-NC | 30.5 c | 24.2 b | 3.9 d | 58.1 e | 53.5 f | 7.9 f |
SE | 12.9 | 10.0 | 1.3 | 12.9 | 9.4 | 1.3 |
2015–2016 | 2016–2017 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Treatment | Fruits N Uptake (kg ha−1) | Shoots N Uptake (kg ha−1) | Roots N Uptake (kg ha−1) | Total N Uptake (kg ha−1) | Fruits N Uptake (kg ha−1) | Shoots N Uptake (kg ha−1) | Roots N Uptake (kg ha−1) | Total N Uptake (kg ha−1) |
CT-CC | 57.1 a | 32.2 a,b | 2.2 b | 91.5 ab | 59.1 b | 44.7 b | 3.4 b | 107.2 c |
CT-CC-PM | 55.2 a | 36.6 a | 3.3 a | 95.1 a | 75.1 a | 75.1 a | 4.4 a | 154.6 a |
CT-NC | 52.3 a | 29.2 b | 3.1 a | 84.7 b | 56.3 b | 45.3 b | 3.7 a,b | 105.4 c |
CT-NC-PM | 54.2 a | 36.0 a | 2.1 b | 92.4 a,b | 71.7 a | 45.6 b | 4.3 a | 121.6 b |
NT-CC-SW | 10.8 b | 5.7 c | 0.5 c | 17.1 c | 27.1 c | 25.1 c | 2.3 c | 54.6 d |
NT-CC | 10.1 b | 4.4 c | 0.6 c | 15.1 c | 19.6 c | 18.3 d | 1.3 d | 39.2 e |
NT-NC | 7.5 b | 4.6 c | 0.5 c | 11.8 c | 7.6 d | 6.5 e | 0.7 d | 14.8 f |
SE | 3.3 | 1.8 | 0.3 | 3.2 | 3.3 | 2.5 | 0.3 | 4.7 |
2015–2016 | 2016–2017 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Treatment | Marketable Fruits (No m−2) | Unmarketable Fruits (No m−2) | Green Fruits (No m−2) | Total Fruits (No m−2) | Marketable Fruits (No m−2) | Unmarketable Fruits (No m−2) | Green Fruits (No m−2) | Total Fruits (No m−2) |
CT-CC | 19.0 ± 3.1 b | 61.3 ± 4.5 a | 1.6 ± 0.8 | 82.3 ± 5.2 a | 59.3 ± 4.4 b | 52.0 ± 4.2 b | 6.7 ± 1.5 a,b | 118.0 ± 6.3 c |
CT-CC-PM | 10.2 ± 2.1 c | 73.0 ± 5.0 a | 1.6 ± 0.8 | 85.0 ± 5.3 a | 97.7 ± 5.7 a | 78.0 ± 5.1 a | 8.3 ± 1.7 a | 184.0 ± 7.8 a |
CT-NC | 34.5 ± 4.8 a | 37.7 ± 3.6 b | 3.3 ± 1.1 | 76.0 ± 5.0 a | 48.7 ± 4.0 b | 41.3 ± 3.7 b,c | 3.7 ± 1.1 b,c | 93.7 ± 5.6 d |
CT-NC-PM | 15.4 ± 2.7 b,c | 62.6 ± 4.6 a | 3.0 ± 1.0 | 81.3 ± 5.2 a | 103.7 ± 5.9 a | 39.3 ± 3.6 c,d | 5.0 ± 1.3 a,b | 147.7 ± 7.0 b |
NT-CC-SW | 4.6 ± 1.3 d | 11.6 ± 2.0 c | 2.3 ± 0.9 | 18.7 ± 2.5 b | 38.0 ± 3.5 c | 42.7 ± 3.8 b,c | 1.3 ± 0.7 c | 82.0 ± 5.2 d |
NT-CC | 2.9 ± 1.0 d | 11.6 ± 2.0 c | 2.0 ± 0.8 | 16.7 ± 2.3 b | 33.3 ± 3.3 c | 30.3 ± 3.2 d | 1.3 ± 0.7 c | 65.0 ± 4.6 e |
NT-NC | 5.2 ± 1.4 d | 6.3 ± 1.4 c | 1.3 ± 0.7 | 13.0 ± 2.1 b | 12.3 ± 2.0 d | 6.3 ± 1.4 e | 1.3 ± 0.7 c | 20.0 ± 2.6 f |
2015–2016 | 2016–2017 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fresh Yield (kg m−2) | Total Yield (t ha−1) | Fresh Yield (kg m−2) | Total Yield (t ha−1) | |||||
Treatment | Marketable | Unmarketable | Green | Marketable | Unmarketable | Green | ||
CT-CC | 1.1 b,c | 3.3 a | 0.15 b | 46.7 a | 3.8 b | 1.2 b | 0.38 a | 53.7 c |
CT-CC-PM | 0.9 c | 2.9 a | 0.25 a | 39.7 b | 5.2 a | 1.4 a | 0.37 a | 69.9 a |
CT-NC | 2.5 a | 1.1 c | 0.12 b | 37.3 b | 4.0 b | 1.1 b | 0.22 b | 52.9 c |
CT-NC-PM | 1.3 b | 2.3 b | 0.30 a | 39.6 b | 4.9 a | 1.2 b | 0.18 b | 62.9 b |
NT-CC-SW | 0.3 d | 0.4 d | 0.13 b | 7.7 c | 1.9 c | 0.5 c | 0.06 c | 24.4 d |
NT-CC | 0.2 d | 0.4 d | 0.10 b,c | 6.8 c | 1.4 c | 0.4 d | 0.05 c | 18.3 e |
NT-NC | 0.2 d | 0.2 d | 0.06 c | 4.6 c | 0.5 d | 0.1 e | 0.03 c | 7.0 f |
SE | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.02 | 1.9 | 0.3 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 2.4 |
2015–2016 | 2016–2017 | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Treatment | Firmness (N) | pH | TSS (°Bx) | Firmness (N) | pH | TSS (°Bx) | Vitamin C (mg 100 g−1 FW) | Total Phenols (mg GAE 100 g−1 FW) | Antioxidant Activity (mg Trolox 100 g−1 FW) |
CT-CC | 31.3 | 4.23 | 4.4 | 8.5 a,b,c | 4.58 | 4.8 | 20.9 b | 56.0 | 65.7 |
CT-CC-PM | 26.5 | 4.29 | 4.4 | 8.2 b,c | 4.56 | 5.8 | 21.4 b | 67.2 | 93.2 |
CT-NC | 30.2 | 4.32 | 5.8 | 9.8 a | 4.54 | 5.2 | 23.3 b | 66.9 | 81.4 |
CT-NC-PM | 29.8 | 4.37 | 4.9 | 9.3 a,b | 4.54 | 4.7 | 21.2 b | 56.7 | 66.7 |
NT-CC-SW | 30.0 | 4.27 | 6.4 | 7.2 c | 4.67 | 5.7 | 26.6 a,b | 66.7 | 80.8 |
NT-CC | 27.9 | 4.19 | 5.9 | 6.3 c,d | 4.52 | 5.8 | 30.8 a | 61.1 | 79.9 |
NT-NC | 28.8 | 4.20 | 6.3 | 5.7 d | 4.52 | 5.3 | 32.8 a | 67.2 | 88.4 |
SE | 2.1 | 0.05 | 0.52 | 0.5 | 0.07 | 0.7 | 2.0 | 7.4 | 16.1 |
Weed Biomass (g DW m−2) | ||
---|---|---|
Treatment | 2015–2016 | 2016–2017 |
CT-CC | 67.0 a,b | 62.2 c |
CT-CC-PM * | 36.9 b | 28.8 c |
CT-NC | 44.5 b | 66.5 c |
CT-NC-PM * | 41.7 b | 30.3 c |
NT-CC-SW | 97.1 a | 192.7 b |
NT-CC | 110.7 a | 213.1 b |
NT-NC | 105.1 a | 343.2 a |
SE | ±16.7 | ±13.7 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Abou Chehade, L.; Antichi, D.; Martelloni, L.; Frasconi, C.; Sbrana, M.; Mazzoncini, M.; Peruzzi, A. Evaluation of the Agronomic Performance of Organic Processing Tomato as Affected by Different Cover Crop Residues Management. Agronomy 2019, 9, 504. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy9090504
Abou Chehade L, Antichi D, Martelloni L, Frasconi C, Sbrana M, Mazzoncini M, Peruzzi A. Evaluation of the Agronomic Performance of Organic Processing Tomato as Affected by Different Cover Crop Residues Management. Agronomy. 2019; 9(9):504. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy9090504
Chicago/Turabian StyleAbou Chehade, Lara, Daniele Antichi, Luisa Martelloni, Christian Frasconi, Massimo Sbrana, Marco Mazzoncini, and Andrea Peruzzi. 2019. "Evaluation of the Agronomic Performance of Organic Processing Tomato as Affected by Different Cover Crop Residues Management" Agronomy 9, no. 9: 504. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy9090504