Next Article in Journal
Portfolios of Climate Smart Agriculture Practices in Smallholder Rice-Wheat System of Eastern Indo-Gangetic Plains—Crop Productivity, Resource Use Efficiency and Environmental Foot Prints
Next Article in Special Issue
Parameters of Drainage Waters Collected during Soilless Tomato Cultivation in Mineral and Organic Substrates
Previous Article in Journal
Integrated Management of Weeds in Direct-Seeded Rice in Cambodia
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Growth, Yield and Quality of Sweet Pepper Fruits Fertilized with Polyphosphates in Hydroponic Cultivation with LED Lighting

by
Anna Sobczak
1,
Katarzyna Kowalczyk
1,*,
Janina Gajc-Wolska
1,
Waldemar Kowalczyk
2 and
Monika Niedzińska
1
1
Department of Vegetable and Medicinal Plants, Institute of Horticultural Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences WULS—SGGW, Nowoursynowska 166, 02-787 Warszawa, Poland
2
Laboratory of Chemical Analysis, Research Institute of Horticulture, Konstytucji 3 Maja 1/3, 96-100 Skierniewice, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2020, 10(10), 1560; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10101560
Submission received: 29 September 2020 / Revised: 9 October 2020 / Accepted: 9 October 2020 / Published: 13 October 2020

Abstract

:
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of phosphorus application in the form of polyphosphates on the yield and quality of sweet pepper fruits grown with LED (light-emitting diodes) assimilation lighting. Phosphorus is absorbed by the root system of plants mainly in the form of orthophosphates ions. The availability of phosphorus depends, among other things, on the pH of the substrate and the temperature. Two cultivars of sweet pepper with red fruits were tested in hydroponic cultivation on a mineral wool substrate. The plants were fertilized with one of three schedules, each of the same concentration of components, but differing only in the form of the applied phosphorus: polyphosphates (PP) and orthophosphates (OP). In the experiment, stem length extensions and number of leaves, chlorophyll concentration in leaves and fluorescence of the chlorophyll in a leaf were measured. The number and weight of fruits in total as well as marketable and non-commercial fruits with symptoms of dry rot (BER—blossom end rot) were studied. The concentration of dry matter and selected chemical components in fruits were examined and the sensory quality of fruits was evaluated using the QDA (Quantitative Description Analysis) method. The nutrient status of the pepper plants was also examined. Polyphosphates used in the medium increase the activity of photosynthetic apparatus of leaves and have a positive effect on the share of marketable yield of the total yield in the cultivar susceptible to BER. Fertigation in hydroponic cultivation with medium containing 30% phosphorus in the form of polyphosphates increased the uptake of calcium in pepper plants growing with LED lighting. The pepper cultivars tested differ in, among other things, the susceptibility to BER and the quality attributes of the fruit.

1. Introduction

Sweet pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) is a plant with a long growing period and requires good quality soil or substrate and adequate light, temperature and water [1,2]. The pepper fruit is highly valued for its taste and health-promoting qualities. Sweet pepper fruit provides vitamin C and vitamin A, flavonoids and antioxidants as well [3,4,5]. The demand for the fruit is high all year round. Growing plants in year-round greenhouses requires effective assimilation lighting.
Light is an important environmental factor with a significant role in plant life processes [6]. Plants use light as a source of energy for photosynthesis as well as for growth and development processes. There is a strong correlation between light availability and plant productivity. Insufficient light supplied to the plants can reduce the size and quality of the yield [7]. In practice, in the northern part of the globe, year-round greenhouse cultivation under natural light is only possible in latitudes below the 40th parallel. In moderate-climate countries, in latitudes above the 50th north parallel, in the autumn–winter period and early spring, due to the low solar radiation and shortage of natural sunlight, it is necessary to use assimilation lighting in plant production. At this time, HPS (High-Pressure Sodium) lamps are traditionally used most for supplementary lighting of plants, while solid-state light sources (LED) are being increasingly used [8]. LED technology allows to optimize the light spectrum to the requirements of individual plant species, provides a more energy-efficient way of lighting than HPS and improves yield and quality [9,10,11]. Environmental factors in pepper cultivation, such as light, temperature, humidity and fertilization, influence water and nutrient uptake, yield and fruit quality [12].
One of the most important macroelements in nucleic acids, high-energy compounds cell membranes, which participates in the process of photosynthesis and respiration, influences gene expression and activates or causes inhibition of enzymes by phosphorylation, is phosphorus [13,14].
The world’s main source of phosphorus is phosphate rock. Global demand for phosphorus is expected to increase but it is a non-renewable resource [15]. The use of the traditional form of orthophosphates forces the application of higher doses of fertilizer than is normal for the plant, due to the tendency to make it unavailable to plants at both high- and low-substrate pH. Phosphorus application in the form of polyphosphates makes it more efficient and requires smaller doses of fertilizer, mainly in soil. This makes it possible to reduce phosphorus consumption in mineral form when fertilizing plants and thus slow down the exploitation of its resources. In addition, hydroponic crops provide the opportunity to control and optimize plant fertilization, contributing to the reduction of phosphorus fertilizer consumption.
The deficiency of phosphorus available to plants causes inhibition of shoot and root growth, reduction of leaf blade area and reduction of plant weight [16]. Plants absorb phosphorus in the form of H 2   PO 4 and HPO 4 2 ions, the so-called orthophosphates [17]. However, a popular form is several combined water-soluble phosphorus molecules identified as polyphosphates (PP). Polyphosphates are an anionic linear polymer of orthophosphate residues joined by hydrogen phosphate bonds similar to those found in ATP. They can affect the transcription and translation of specific genes, modulate several stress responses, provide an alternative source of energy and act as a metabolic regulator [18,19]. The presence of polyphosphates in plant systems has been known for a long time but their role in cellular processes has only begun to be studied relatively recently [20,21].
The use of polyphosphates in the nutrient solution has a significant effect on strong root system development, plant growth and earlier flowering [22]. The use of PP in plant production does not cause the formation of sludge in irrigation systems, which often results in irregular substrate moisture in hydroponic crops [23,24]. Reduced nutrient solution flow in the drip system, especially in the period of high temperature under covers, may be the cause of increased share of fruit with dry BER rot in such vegetables as tomato or pepper [25].
The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of polyphosphates on the growth, yield and quality of pepper fruits in the cultivation with LED assimilation lighting.

2. Materials and Methods

The study was carried out in the greenhouse of the Department of Vegetable and Medicinal Plants at the Warsaw University of Life Sciences WULS—SGGW (longitude 21° E, latitude 51°15′ N) in the winter cycle of 2018. Two cultivars of sweet peppers with red fruits were taken into consideration: ‘Aifos’—block type by Seminis (Bayer) and ‘Palermo’—longer type by Rijk Zwaan. The transplants were produced in rockwool cubes, day/night temperature 22 °C/20 °C, air humidity RH (relative humidity) 60–70%, and average C O 2   concentration 800 ppm. Sweet pepper transplants were grown under 16 h a day photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) at 170 µmol m−2 s−1 provided by HPS lamps.
Sweet pepper was planted on mineral wool slabs type Grotop Master 100 × 20 × 10 cm (2 plants on each slab) on 6 December 2018 and the production was completed in July 2019. In the experimental chamber, with a useful area of about 40 m2, the plants were grown on three beds. The plant density was about 2.5 per m2 (the plants were pruned to have two main stems and staked individually in the shape of a “V.”). Plants growing in each of the beds were fertilized with a nutrient solution differing in the form of applied phosphorus. Polyphosphates were applied using Antibloc Mineral (Yara). Fertilizer combinations: (1) P-15, where the nutrient solution contained 15% phosphorus in the form of polyphosphates and 85% phosphorus in the form of orthophosphates, (2) P-30, the nutrient solution containing 30% phosphorus in the form of polyphosphates and 70% phosphorus in the form of orthophosphates and (3) C, the nutrient solution in control containing 100% phosphorus in the form of orthophosphates. Nutrient concentration in the solution, EC (electro-conductivity) and pH were continuously controlled and kept at uniform levels for all experimental objects. The average pH and EC were respectively about 5.5–5.8 and 2.8–3.3 dS m−1 of drop solution. The concentration of nutrients (in mg.dm−3) was in each combination as follows: N NO 3 —195, P—57, K—273, Mg—47, Ca—187, Fe—2, Mn—0.6, B—0.3, Cu—0.15, Zn—0.3, Mo—0.05. The experiment was established with the randomized blocks method in three replications, with 4 plants in each. In the experiment, top lighting with Green Power LED (Philips) top lighting units (DR/W–LB, 195 W) and inter-row 1-line of LEDs (module 2.5 m HO DR/B 100 W) (Philips) were applied. A daily light exposure equaled 16 h. The top lighting units switched off automatically when the solar radiation was higher than 250 W m−2. Light conditions in terms of PAR (Photosynthetically Active Radiation) were closest to ~185 μmol·m−2 s−1 (PPFD). Light intensity was measured with a Li-Cor Light meter LI-250A, quantum sensor LI-190. Microclimate parameters were controlled by the Synopta Climate Computer and were as follows: temperature was 22–25 °C/18–20 °C during day/night respectively, C O 2 was supplied up to 800 ppm level and RH was approximately 75%. In each combination, weekly increments in stem length were measured by determining the total plant height and number of leaves. Twice during the vegetation period of the plants (8 and 16 weeks after planting: term 1 and term 2), in fully mature leaves, located on three levels of the plant: upper leaf, middle leaf and bottom leaf, a relative concentration of chlorophyll a + b was measured with Minolta SPAD-502 apparatus. Relative SPAD meter values are proportional to the amount of chlorophyll present in the leaf [26]. The result was averaged from five unit measurements made on each examined leaf. Chlorophyll fluorescence was measured in the same leaves of pepper plants with the use of the FMS-2 Field Portable Pulse Modulated Chlorophyll Fluorescence Monitoring System (Hansatech Instruments Ltd., King’s Lynn, Norfolk, England) and the following parameters were measured: Fs—steady-state fluorescence yield, Fm’—light-adapted fluorescence maximum and φPSII (Fv’/Fm’)—quantum efficiency of photosystem II (PSII). The Pocket PEA fluorescence meter (Hansatech Instruments Ltd., King’s Lynn, Norfolk, England) was used to measure direct fluorescence, obtaining a measurement of the maximum efficiency of the plant’s photosynthetic camera after an earlier 30 min of adapting the leaves to darkness (using special clips). The following parameters were analyzed: maximum efficiency of PS II photosystem in the dark (Fv/Fm) and PI—PS II vitality index.
The nutrient status of the pepper plants fertilized with three kinds of medium, differing in the form of the applied phosphorus, was determined by leaf sample analysis. The samples were gathered in term 1 and term 2 where the analysis was performed for fully mature leaves, as above. The samples were dried at the temperature of 60 °C, in a forced-air oven, then ground in a Wiley stainless-steel mill. The samples were microwave digested in HNO3, using closed Teflon vessels. The elements (P, K, Mg, Na, Ca, Fe, Mn, Cu, Zn, B) were determined by an inductively-coupled plasma spectrometer (ICP, Model OPTIMA 2000DV, PerkinElmer, Boston, USA). For total N determining, the plant material was mineralized after drying in concentrated sulfuric acid in the presence of copper-potassium catalyst. The N content was determined using the Kjeldahl apparatus (Vapodest, Königswinter, Germany). After distillation of nitrogen in the form of NH3, the N content was determined by titration methods [27].
The fruit was harvested in the full color phase. The number and weight of fruit in the total, as well as marketable and non-marketable fruit with symptoms of dry rot (BER—blossom end rot), were determined. The quality of pepper fruit was tested twice (term 1 and term 2). For this purpose, fully colored fruit were randomly collected from each combination, in which, in one part, in three repetitions, the dry matter was determined by drying method at 105 °C, the concentration of ascorbic acid (AA) was determined using the Tillmans’ method (Polish Standard PN-A-04019) [28] and total soluble solids (TSS) concentration (in °Brix) with digital refractometer (Atago CO.,LTD.) and total sugars (TS) were analyzed according to the Luff-Schoorl method (Polish Standard PN-90/A-75101/07) [29]. Nitrate (NO3) concentration was determined spectrophotometrically, with the FIAstar device (Foss Tecator AB, Sweden), using the wavelength of 440 nm, and the concentration of P was determined with the colorimetric test. The concentration of K and Ca was determined with the flame method. Other parts of fruits served for sensory analysis. The sensory quality of fruits was evaluated using the QDA (Quantitative Description Analysis) method. This was achieved by a team of 20 trained panelists in two duplicates. The odor, texture and taste quality attributes were evaluated. Each panelist marked his evaluation of the investigated sample on a scale—a segment of a straight line with border marks. The marked notes were converted to numerical values in the stipulated units from 0 to 10. Also, overall sensory quality impression was taken into account as a separate descriptor. Overall quality is a general sensory quality impression and anchoring points from low quality to high quality (from 0 to 10). A semi-consumer test of pepper cultivars liking was also performed alongside the QDA procedure. For this evaluation, a non-structural scale was also used, with anchoring points: ‘I do not like it’—‘I like it very much’.
Statistical analysis was performed using two-way analysis of variance, ANOVA (Statistica, Version 13, Warsaw, Poland). Detailed comparison of means was performed by the Tukey’s test at the significance level of α = 0.05.

3. Results

The results of biometric measurements showed no effect of polyphosphates used in the nutrient solution for pepper fertigation in hydroponic cultivation with LED lighting on plant height, weekly shoot growth on the length and number of leaves in both studied pepper cultivars. Plant height depended on the cultivar. Plants of ‘Palermo’ were taller than ‘Aifos’, achieving an average height of 92.77 cm, and plants of ‘Aifos’—64.45 cm (Table 1).
Pulse amplitude modulation (PAM) measurement of chlorophyll fluorescence allows to measure fluorescence under current light intensity conditions. One of the parameters measured by this technique is Fs, or stationary fluorescence. The influence of the use of polyphosphates in pepper hydroponic cultivation on Fs was observed. Fs value was the highest in peppers fed with P-15 medium in relation to control, regardless of the cultivar. For ‘Aifos’ cultivar, the fluorescence parameter such as Fs in P-30 combination was also higher than in the control (Table 2). Fm’ maximum fluorescence of chlorophyll a in the leaves adapted to light, which is lower than the maximum fluorescence of chlorophyll achieved after adaptation to darkness (Fm), was also the highest in the P-15 combination (Table 2). However, no effect of polyphosphates’ application on the current quantum yield of PSII, φPSII (Fv’/Fm’), was found in the examined pepper cultivars (Table 2). The maximum photochemical yield of PSII (Fv/Fm) determines the photochemical activity of the plant’s photosynthetic apparatus. It is determined for plants adapted to darkness. The analysis of the obtained results showed lower maximum photochemical yield of PSII in ‘Palermo’ fed with P-15 medium, and lower vitality of PSII (PI inst.) in ‘Palermo’ than ‘Aifos’, whereas no positive effect of polyphosphates on the maximum yield of pepper photosynthetic apparatus was found (Table 2). The value of PI inst. was significantly lower in ‘Palermo’ than ‘Aifos’, although in the P-15 combination, PI inst. for cultivars did not differ significantly (Table 2). A significant dependence of the leaf chlorophyll index on the sweet pepper cultivar was found. The cultivar ‘Aifos’ had higher SPAD index in leaves than cultivar ‘Palermo’. Whereas, no significant effect of polyphosphates application in the medium on chlorophyll concentration in pepper leaves was found (Figure 1).
The highest total yield was obtained in combination P-15, on average from cultivars of 2.74 kg per one stem, that is 5.48 kg per one plant (pepper plants were cultivated with 2 stems), and in control and combination P-30, 2.37 kg and 2.26 kg per one stem, that is 4.74 kg and 4.52 kg per plant, respectively. A similar trend was found in the marketable yield for both pepper cultivars (Figure 2). The share of marketable yield in the total yield depended on the pepper cultivar and phosphorus source. ‘Aifos’ had from 13% to 16% lower marketable yield than total yield regardless of the phosphorus source used. On the other hand, the cultivar ‘Palermo’ which is more susceptible to BER had in the control combination as much as 42% lower marketable yield than the total one, mainly due to BER, but in combinations with polyphosphate use in concentrations P-15 and P-30, it had 28% and 29%, respectively. Differences in yielding were found between the examined pepper cultivars. ‘Palermo’ obtained a low share of marketable yield in the total yield, which was not observed in ‘Aifos’ (Figure 2). The reason was the higher susceptibility of ‘Palermo’ to BER (Figure 2 and Figure 3). In this cultivar, the use of polyphosphates decreased the share of fruits with BER symptoms as compared to the control combination (Figure 3). In both investigated cultivars, the average weight of marketable fruit in combination with phosphorus in the form of polyphosphates was higher than in the control, although the differences were not statistically significant (Figure 4).
Calcium concentration in the drip nutrient solution for plant fertigation, on average for the growing period of pepper, was about 187 mg dm−3 for each combination (See Section 2). In the case of pepper fertilization with PP medium in the substrate, a lower accumulation of Ca was found in P-30 than in the P-15 combination and in the control (Figure 5). Probably in the combination P-30, the pepper plants taken up more calcium than when fertilized with medium at P-15 and with the nutrient solution containing 100% phosphorus in the form of orthophosphates.
The concentration of mineral components in pepper leaves, on average of the two measurement dates and combinations, was the following for macronutrients in % of dry matter: N—4.80, P—0.24, K—6.60, Ca—3.42, Mg—0.62, S—0.57, and for micronutrients in mg kg−1 of dry matter: Fe—171.0, Mn—194.9, Cu—4.6, Zn—151.1, B—43.0. There were no significant differences between the cultivars in the mineral content of leaves. In comparison to the control, the content of especially P as well as K, Zn, S and Ca in pepper leaves, was higher when PP was applied in nutrient solution at a concentration of 15%, and when PP was applied at a concentration of 30%, the content of Ca and Mg in leaves was higher than in the control plants (Figure 6).
The analysis of chosen quality features of pepper fruits did not show any influence of polyphosphates on the concentration of such components in pepper fruits as dry matter, TSS (total soluble solids), ascorbic acid, TS, P, NO 3 , K and Ca (Table 3). The concentration of these components in the fruit depended mainly on the cultivar. The ‘Palermo’ fruit contained more dry matter, TSS and total sugars (TS). The fruits of the ‘Palermo’ had a higher TSS content in combination P-15 and a higher TS content in combination P-30 than in the control. Nitrates contained the most fruits fertilized with PP in the P-15 combination and potassium contained the most fruits from the P-30 combination. In the control combination, without applied polyphosphates in the nutrient solution, there was less calcium in ‘Palermo’ than in ‘Aifos’ (Table 3). In this combination, ‘Palermo’ was found to yield the most fruit with BER (Figure 3). Sensory analysis of pepper fruits did not show the influence of polyphosphates on attributes concerning odor, texture and flavor of pepper fruits (Table 4). On the other hand, the fruits between the cultivars differed significantly in terms of, among others, sweet taste, which correlates with sugar concentration. ‘Palermo’ fruits were assessed significantly higher in terms of sweet taste and ‘Aifos’ fruits were found to have higher flesh texture, crispier flesh and tougher skin than the other one (Figure 7). The overall sensory quality for pepper fruits did not depend on the PP applied in fertilization. The cultivar ‘Palermo’ obtained a higher score than the ‘Aifos’ (Figure 8).

4. Discussion

Phosphorus (P) is an essential macronutrient for plant growth and development [30]. P affects the light use efficiency of PSII and deficiency of phosphorus could cause detectable fluctuations of the kinetic parameters of photosynthetic fluorescence [31,32,33,34,35].
According to Kalaji [36], a decrease in chlorophyll fluorescence parameters may result from macro- and micro-elements’ deficiency. The results obtained from our experiment suggest better nutrient availability in PP compared to control. Significant effects of P-15 and P-30 on Fs and of P-15 on Fm’ could be due to the differences in phosphorus availability during cultivation.
Torres-Dorante et al. [22] reported that the P availability was dependent on the source of P and soil properties. Efficiency of fertilization was significantly higher for PP treatments in the silty-loam soil where the plants have produced longer roots. However, no differences were observed in the sandy soil, between OP and PP treatments [34]. Although, according to Dicklowa [35], the effectiveness of a unit amount of P taken up by ryegrass and corn plants in increasing the dry matter yield was similar among the polyphosphates and the conventional P fertilizer, orthophosphate. However, these studies concern traditional crops in different soils.
According to Flexas et al. [33], measurements of Fs—steady-state fluorescence yield is a promising tool for remote water shortage diagnosis. Effectively, it shows the effect of many reactions resulting from consequences that follow stomatal closure in response to water stress. The relationship between Fs and g (stomatal conductance) provides a new method for detection of water stress, which can cause BER in pepper fruits. Our results showed that higher values of pepper leaves’ chlorophyll a fluorescence parameters in plants fertilized with polyphosphates indicate an increased yield of pepper photosynthetic apparatus in the case of pepper cultivar more susceptible to BER. In hydroponic crops, the problem of water and nutrient uptake and partitioning, and transport to particular plant parts, is more frequent than their availability in the substrate. Li and Erel [34] report that PP can function as a chelate for micronutrients and Ca. Moreover, in hydroponic crops, PP can improve the nutrient solution flow in the drip system by reducing the accumulation of insoluble salts.
Fm’ maximum fluorescence of chlorophyll a in the leaves adapted to light was also the highest in the P-30 combination, with the acceptors of photosystem II (PSII) partially reduced in this case [37]. According to Borawska-Jarmułowicz et al. [38], it is temperature stress that is the key factor in any Fm’ decrease. The Fv/Fm index presents the maximum quantum yield of photosystem II [39]. Graham and McDonald [40] observed a decrease in the Fv/Fm due to high temperature, a decrease in this parameter may indicate active sun protection of the plant [41]. Baker and Rosenqvist [26] concluded in their studies that a decrease in Fv/Fm may inhibit the rate of photosynthesis and also affect plant growth and development. The PI PSII vitality index, on the other hand, shows the ability of plants to adapt to stress conditions [42].
The use of polyphosphates to fertilize pepper grown in rockwool influenced the activity of the photosynthetic apparatus. A large share of BER fruits in the control is a reaction to environmental stress conditions during the growing period. Possible reasons are a short-term increase in temperature or substrate EC (electrical conductivity), a decrease in substrate moisture or the increase in fruit load on the plant.
Differences in yield, fruit quality and susceptibility to BER were found between pepper cultivars. Plants fertilized with phosphorus in the form of polyphosphates were less susceptible to common disorders that have been associated with fruit calcium deficiency (BER), especially the cultivar which was more susceptible to BER. Many authors report [43,44] that proper nutrition of plants with calcium has a significant impact on reducing the occurrence of BER. According to Michałojć and Horodko [45], the share of fruits with BER symptoms in the total yield is lower when plants are properly supplied with calcium.
According to Selahle et al. [46], the taste of sweet peppers is determined by the sugar and organic acid concentrations. Pepper flavor is a complex trait, influenced by environmental factors during growth [47,48]. However, polyphosphates used in the nutrient solution for fertigation in hydroponic cultivation of pepper with LED lighting do not significantly change the sensory quality of pepper fruits.

5. Conclusions

The following conclusions can be drawn from the study.
The use of polyphosphates for fertigation in hydroponic cultivation increase the activity of photosynthetic apparatus of pepper leaves and has a positive effect on the share of marketable yield of the total yield in the cultivar susceptible to BER.
Pepper plants fertilized with polyphosphates are characterized by increased values of such fluorescence of chlorophyll parameters as Fs—steady-state fluorescence yield, and Fm’—maximum fluorescence of chlorophyll a.
Fertigation in hydroponic cultivation with medium containing 30% phosphorus in the form of polyphosphates increased the uptake of calcium in pepper plants growing with LED lighting.
The polyphosphates used in the nutrient solution do not significantly change the quality of pepper fruits.
The pepper cultivars tested differ in the yield and the susceptibility to BER and such features as the height of the plants, the dry matter and sugar concentration of the fruit, and the sensory quality characteristics of the fruit, such as sweet taste, consistency of the flesh, crispness of the flesh and hardness of skin.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.K., J.G.-W. and A.S.; methodology, K.K., J.G.-W., M.N. and A.S.; validation, K.K., J.G.-W., M.N. and A.S.; formal analysis, K.K., J.G.-W., M.N., A.S. and W.K.; investigation, A.S., K.K. and J.G.-W.; resources, J.G.-W., K.K. and A.S.; data curation, A.S. and W.K.; writing—original draft preparation, A.S. and K.K.; writing—review and editing, A.S.; visualization, A.S.; supervision, K.K. and J.G.-W.; project administration, J.G.-W.; funding acquisition, J.G.-W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kuczuk, A. The productive-economic results of paprika cultivation in organic farming conditions. J. Res. App. Agric. Eng. 2011, 56, 243–249. [Google Scholar]
  2. Jakubas, A.; Sękara, A.; Cebula, S.; Kalisz, A. Ocena wzrostu i plonowania polskich odmian papryki słodkiej (Capsicium annuum L) w uprawie polowej. Episteme 2013, 20, 341–356. [Google Scholar]
  3. Howard, L.R.; Talcott, S.T.; Brenes, C.H.; Villalon, B. Changes in phytochemical and antioxidant activity of selected pepper cultivars (Capsicum Species) as influenced by maturity. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2000, 48, 1713–1720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Lee, S.; Kader, A. Preharvest and postharvest factors influencing vitamin C content of horticultural crops. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2000, 20, 207–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Zhuang, Y.; Chen, L.; Sun, L.; Cao, J. Bioactive characteristics and antioxidant activities of nine peppers. J. Funct. Foods. 2012, 4, 331–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Liu, X.Y.; Chang, T.T.; Guo, S.R.; Xu, Z.G.; Li, J. Effect of different light quality of LED on growth and photosynthetic character in cherry tomato seedling. Acta Horticulturae 2011, 907, 325–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Massa, G.D.; Kim, H.-H.; Wheeler, R.M.; Mitchell, C.A. Plant productivity in response to LED lighting. HortScience 2008, 43, 1951–1956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Puternicki, A. Zastosowanie półprzewodnikowych źródeł światła do wspomagania wzrostu roślin. Prace Instytutu Elektrotechniki 2010, 245, 69–86. [Google Scholar]
  9. Mitchell, C.A.; Both, A.J.; Bourget, M.C.; Burr, J.F.; Kubota, C.; Lopez, R.G.; Morrow, R.C.; Runkle, E.S. LEDs: The future of greenhouse lighting! Chronica Horticulturae 2012, 52, 6–12. [Google Scholar]
  10. Bian, Z.H.; Yang, Q.C.; Liu, W.K. Effects of light quality on the accumulation of phytochemicals in vegetables produced in controlled environments: A review. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2015, 95, 869–887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kalaitzoglou, P.; van Ieperen, W.; Harbinson, J.; van der Meer, M.; Martinakos, S.; Weerheim, K.; Nicole, C.C.S.; Marcelis, L.F.M. Effects of continuous or end-of-day far-red light on tomato plant growth, morphology, light absorption and fruit production. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Amalfitano, C.; Del Vacchio, L.; Somma, S.; Cuciniello, A.; Caruso, G. Effects of cultural cycle and nutrient solution electrical conductivity on plant growth, yield and fruit quality of ‘Friariello’ pepper grown in hydroponics. Hort. Sci. 2017, 44, 91–98. [Google Scholar]
  13. Ciereczko, I. Kontrola metabolizmu sacharozy u roślin w odpowiedzi na zmienne warunki środowiska. Kosmos 2006, 55, 229–241. [Google Scholar]
  14. Richardson, A.E. Regulating the phosphorus nutrition of plants: Molecular biology meeting agronomic needs. Plant Soil. 2009, 322, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Schröder, J.J.; Cordell, D.; Smit, A.L.; Rosemarin, A. Sustainable Use of Phosphorus; Technical Report 357 for Plant Research International; Wageningen University and Research Centre: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  16. Rychter, A.M.; Rao, I.M. Role of phosphorus in photosynthetic carbon metabolism. In Handbook of Photosynthesis, 2nd ed.; Pessarakli, M., Ed.; Marcel Dekker, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2005; pp. 123–148. [Google Scholar]
  17. Schachtman, D.P.; Shin, R. Nutrient sensing and signaling: NPKS. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2007, 58, 47–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Zhu, J.; Loubery, S.; Broger, L.; Lorenzo-Orts, L.; Utz-Pugin, A.; Chang, Y.-T.; Hothorn, M. A genetically validated approach to detect inorganic polyphosphates in plants. BioRxiv 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Laha, D.; Parvin, N.; Dynowski, M.; Johnen, P.; Mao, H.; Bitters, S.T.; Zheng, N.; Schaaf, G. Inositol polyphosphate binding specificity of the jasmonate receptor complex. Plant Physiol. 2016, 171, 2364–2370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Seufferheld, M.; Curzi, M.J. Recent discoveries on the roles of polyphosphates in plants. Plant Mol. Biol. Rep. 2010, 28, 549–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lorenzo-Orts, L.; Couto, D.; Hothorn, M. Tansley review. Identity and functions of inorganic and inositol polyphosphates in plants. New Phytol. 2019, 225, 637–652. [Google Scholar]
  22. Torres-Dorante, L.O.; Claasse, N.; Steingrobe, B.; Olfs, H.W. Fertilizer-use efficiency of different inorganic polyphosphate sources: Effects on soil P availability and plant P acquisition during early growth of corn. J. Plant. Nutr. Soil Sci. 2006, 169, 509–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ma, C.; Xiao, Y.; Puig-Bargés, J.; Shukla, M.K.; Tang, X.; Hou, P.; Li, Y. Using phosphate fertilizer to reduce emitter clogging of drip fertigation systems with high salinity water. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. McBeath, T. Chemical Reactions of Polyphosphate Fertilisers in Soils and Solutions. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia, 2006; p. 29. [Google Scholar]
  25. Saure, M.C. Why calcium deficiency is not the cause of blossom-end rot in tomato and pepper fruit—A reappraisal. Sciencia Horticulturae 2014, 174, 151–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Baker, N.R.; Rosenqvist, E. Applications of chlorophyll fluorescence can improve crop production strategies: An examination of future possibilities. J. Exp. Bot. 2004, 55, 1607–1621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Latimer, G., Jr. Official Methods of Analysis, 19th ed.; AOAC International: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  28. Polish Standard PN-A-04019. Determine of Vitamin C Content Using the Tillman Method; Polish Committee for Standardization: Warsaw, Poland, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  29. Polish Standard PN-90/A-75101/07. Determine the Content of Total Sugars as well as Sacharose and Monosaccharides Using the Luff-Schoorl Method; Polish Committee for Standardization: Warsaw, Poland, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  30. Marschner, P. Marschner’s Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants, 3rd ed.; Academic Press: London, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  31. Conroy, J.P.; Smillie, R.M.; Kuppers, M.; Bevege, D.I.; Barlow, E.W. Chlorophyll a fluorescence and photosynthetic and growth responses of Pinus radiate to phosphorus deficiency, drought stress, and high CO2. Plant Physiol. 1986, 81, 423–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Carstensen, A.; Herdean, A.; Schmidt, S.B.; Sharma, A.; Spetea, C.; Pribil, M.; Husted, S. The impacts of phosphorus deficiency on the photosynthetic electron transport chain. Plant Physiol. 2018, 177, 271–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  33. Flexas, J.; Briantais, J.-M.; Cerovic, Z.; Medrano, H.; Moya, I. Steady-state and maximum chlorophyll fluorescence responses to water stress in grapevine leaves: A new remote sensing system. RSE 2000, 73, 283–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Li, Q.; Erel, R. Availability of Polyphosphate Versus Orthophosphate on Alkaline Soil to Lettuce Plants. From Molecular Scale to Ecosystems. In Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Phosphorus in Soils and Plants (PSPS), Leuven, Belgium, 10–13 September 2018. [Google Scholar]
  35. Dick, R.P. Hydrolysis and availability to plants of polyphosphates added to soils. Paper 12054. Ph.D. Thesis, Iowa State University Capstones, Ames, IA, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kalaji, M.H. Influence of abiotic stress factors on chlorophyll fluorescence in selected varieties of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) plants. In Treatises and Monographs; Warsaw University of Life Sciences WULS—SGGW: Warsaw, Poland, 2011; pp. 1–176. [Google Scholar]
  37. Kalaji, M.; Łoboda, T. Fluorescencja Chlorofilu w Badaniach Stanu Fizjologicznego Roślin, 2nd ed.; Warsaw University of Life Sciences Press: Warsaw, Poland, 2010; pp. 19–21. [Google Scholar]
  38. Borawska-Jarmułowicz, B.; Mastalerczuk, G.; Pietkiewicz, S.; Kalaji, M.H. Low temperature and hardening effects on photosynthetic apparatus efficiency and survival of forage grass varieties. PSE 2014, 60, 177–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Björkman, O.; Demming, B. Photon yield of O2 evolution and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics at 77K among vascular plants of diverse origins. Planta 1987, 170, 489–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Graham, A.W.; McDonald, G.K. Effect of zinc on photosynthesis and yield of wheat under heat stress. In Proceedings of the 10th Australian Agronomy Conference, Hobart, Tasmania, 29 January–1 February 2001. [Google Scholar]
  41. Horton, P.; Ruban, A.V.; Walters, R.G. Regulation of light harvesting in green plants. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1996, 47, 655–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Prost, L.; Jeuffroy, M.H. Replacing the nitrogen nutrition index by the chlorophyll meter to assess wheat N status. ASD 2007, 27, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Errecart, P.M.; Agnusdei, M.G.; Lattanzi, F.A.; Marino, M.A. Leaf nitrogen concentration and chlorophyll meter readings as predictors of tall fescue nitrogen nutrition status. Field Crops Res. 2012, 129, 46–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Giletto, C.M.; Echeverría, H.E. Chlorophyll meter for the evaluation of potato N status. Am. J. Potato Res. 2013, 90, 313–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Michałojć, Z.M.; Horodko, K. Wpływ dokarmiania pozakorzeniowego wapniem na plonowanie i skład chemiczny papryki słodkiej [EN. Effect of calcium foliar nutrition on yield end chemical composition of sweet pepper]. Acta Agrophysica 2006, 7, 671–679. [Google Scholar]
  46. Selahle, K.M.; Sivakumar, D.; Jifon, J.; Soundy, P. Postharvest responses of red and yellow sweet peppers grown under photo-selective nets. Food Chem. 2015, 173, 951–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Eggink, P.M.; Maliepaard, C.; Tikunov, Y.; Haanstra, J.P.W.; Bovy, A.G.; Visser, R.G.F. A taste of sweet pepper: Volatile and non-volatile chemical composition of fresh sweet pepper (Capsicum annuum) in relation to sensory evaluation of taste. Food Chem. 2012, 132, 301–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Eggink, P.M.; Maliepaard, C.; Tikunov, Y.; Haanstra, J.P.W.; Pohu-Flament, L.M.M.; de WitMaljaars, S.C.; Willeboordse-Vos, F.; Bos, S.; Benning-de Waard, C.; de Grauw-van Leeuwen, P.J.; et al. Prediction of sweet pepper (Capsicum annuum) flavor over different harvests. Euphytica 2012, 187, 117–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation and cultivar of pepper on the chlorophyll index in pepper leaves (average of two terms). * The mean values marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Figure 1. Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation and cultivar of pepper on the chlorophyll index in pepper leaves (average of two terms). * The mean values marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Agronomy 10 01560 g001
Figure 2. (A, B) Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the total (A) and marketable (B) yield depending on the sweet pepper cultivar (kg plant−1). * The bars marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Figure 2. (A, B) Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the total (A) and marketable (B) yield depending on the sweet pepper cultivar (kg plant−1). * The bars marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Agronomy 10 01560 g002
Figure 3. Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the number of BER (blossom end rot) fruit depending on the sweet pepper cultivar. * The bars marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Figure 3. Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the number of BER (blossom end rot) fruit depending on the sweet pepper cultivar. * The bars marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Agronomy 10 01560 g003
Figure 4. Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the average weight of marketable fruit depending on the sweet pepper cultivar. * The bars marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Figure 4. Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the average weight of marketable fruit depending on the sweet pepper cultivar. * The bars marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Agronomy 10 01560 g004
Figure 5. Calcium concentration in the substrate depending on the level of PP (polyphosphates) applied in the drip nutrient solution, on average for the growing period of pepper. * The bars marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Figure 5. Calcium concentration in the substrate depending on the level of PP (polyphosphates) applied in the drip nutrient solution, on average for the growing period of pepper. * The bars marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Agronomy 10 01560 g005
Figure 6. The concentration of mineral components in pepper leaves normalized to the values in control content as radar plots under different PP combinations (average of two terms).
Figure 6. The concentration of mineral components in pepper leaves normalized to the values in control content as radar plots under different PP combinations (average of two terms).
Agronomy 10 01560 g006
Figure 7. The results of sensory analysis concerning odor, texture and taste and overall quality for pepper fruits normalized to the values of ‘Aifos’ cultivar as radar plots compared to the ‘Palermo’ cultivar (average of two terms).
Figure 7. The results of sensory analysis concerning odor, texture and taste and overall quality for pepper fruits normalized to the values of ‘Aifos’ cultivar as radar plots compared to the ‘Palermo’ cultivar (average of two terms).
Agronomy 10 01560 g007
Figure 8. Overall sensory preference for pepper fruits as affected by cultivar and fertilized with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation (average of two terms). * The bars marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Figure 8. Overall sensory preference for pepper fruits as affected by cultivar and fertilized with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation (average of two terms). * The bars marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05.
Agronomy 10 01560 g008
Table 1. Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the height of pepper plant, number of leaves on the plant and weekly growth of stem depending on cultivar (average of two terms).
Table 1. Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the height of pepper plant, number of leaves on the plant and weekly growth of stem depending on cultivar (average of two terms).
CultivarTreatment
ControlP-15P-30
Weekly growth of stem (cm)‘Aifos’5.23 a5.03 a4.57 a
‘Palermo’5.97 a4.63 a6.70 a
Plant height (cm)‘Aifos’63.40 b *66.07 b63.87 b
‘Palermo’89.10 a90.70 a98.50 a
Number of leaves (No.)‘Aifos’24.90 a29.47 a25.97 a
‘Palermo’28.87 a29.90 a33.03 a
* The mean values marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD (honestly significant difference) test at α = 0.05.
Table 2. Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the photosynthetic activity of pepper leaves depending on the cultivar (average of two terms).
Table 2. Effect of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the photosynthetic activity of pepper leaves depending on the cultivar (average of two terms).
Chlorophyll Fluorescence ParametersCultivarControlP-15P-30
Fs‘Aifos’305 d *385 ab374 abc
‘Palermo’312 cd401 a326 bcd
Average301 C393 A350 B
Fm’‘Aifos’1289 b1608 a1468 ab
‘Palermo’1276 b1596 a1289 b
Average1283 B1602 A1379 B
φPSII‘Aifos’0.76 a0.75 a0.74 a
‘Palermo’0.75 a0.75 a0.74 a
Average0.75 A0.75 A0.74 AB
Fv/Fm‘Aifos’0.81 a0.81 a0.81 a
‘Palermo’0.80 a0.79 b0.81 a
Average0.81 A0.80 A0.79 B
PI inst.‘Aifos’11.72 a10.86 ab10.65 abc
‘Palermo’8.81 cd9.53 bcd8.20 d
Average10.27 A10.20 A9.43 A
* The mean values marked with the same letters do not differ significantly according to the Tukey HSD test at α = 0.05. The small letters indicate the differences in the interaction of cultivar x treatment, the capital letters indicate the differences in the treatment.
Table 3. Effects of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the concentration of dry weight and chosen chemical components in pepper fruit depending on the cultivar (average of two terms).
Table 3. Effects of fertilizer with polyphosphates in hydroponic cultivation on the concentration of dry weight and chosen chemical components in pepper fruit depending on the cultivar (average of two terms).
ComponentCultivarControlP-15P-30
Dry weight
(%)
‘Aifos’8.01 b *8.08 b8.05 b
‘Palermo’10.14 a10.60 a10.34 a
Average9.07 A9.19 A9.34 A
TSS
(oBrix)
‘Aifos’7.57 c7.42 c7.27 c
‘Palermo’9.45 b10.15 a9.47 b
Average8.50 A8.78 A8.37 A
Ascorbic Acid
(mg.100 g−1 FW)
‘Aifos’26.54 a22.33 b22.07 b
‘Palermo’19.56 b21.00 b21.73 b
Average23.04 A21.66 A21.89 A
TS
(g.100 g−1 FW)
‘Aifos’4.56 c3.75 d3.94 d
‘Palermo’6.01 b6.30 ab6.45 a
Average5.28 A5.03 A5.20 A
P
(mg.kg−1 FW)
‘Aifos’249.95 a249.00 a248.35 a
‘Palermo’247.65 a272.5 a250.15 a
Average248.8 A260.75 A249.25 A
NO 3
(mg.kg−1 FW)
‘Aifos’56.27 ab58.04 a56.04 abc
‘Palermo’50.95 c56.48 ab52.06 bc
Average53.61 B57.26 A54.05 B
K
(mg.kg−1 FW)
‘Aifos’2335.85 abc2325.4 bc2148.45 c
‘Palermo’2384.63 ab2523.2 a2335.85 abc
Average2360.24 A2424.3 A2242.2 B
Ca
(mg.kg−1 FW)
‘Aifos’26.5 a22.65 a20.00 a
‘Palermo’19.9 a22.00 a22.65 a
Average23.2 A22.33 A21.33 A
* See Table 2.
Table 4. The results of sensory analysis concerning odor, texture and taste for pepper fruits as affected by cultivar and PP treatment, scale 0–10 (average of two terms).
Table 4. The results of sensory analysis concerning odor, texture and taste for pepper fruits as affected by cultivar and PP treatment, scale 0–10 (average of two terms).
Attributes of Odor, Texture and TasteCultivarControlP-15P-30
Odor of fresh pepper‘Aifos’5.77 a *6.02 a5.25 a
‘Palermo’5.33 a5.16 a5.36 a
Average5.53 A5.60 A5.31 A
Skin hardness‘Aifos’5.39 ab5.72 a5.38 ab
‘Palermo’4.27 b4.72 ab4.54 ab
Average4.81 A5.24 A4.94 A
Flesh fibrousness‘Aifos’6.27 ab6.48 ab6.98 a
‘Palermo’5.88 ab5.47 b6.10 ab
Average6.07 A5.99 A6.52 A
Flesh juiciness‘Aifos’5.77 a6.04 a5.81 a
‘Palermo’5.98 a5.37 a5.86 a
Average5.88 A5.72 A5.83 A
Flesh firmness ‘Aifos’6.81 a7.04 a6.50 a
‘Palermo’4.31 a3.77 b4.58 a
Average5.51 A5.48 A5.51 A
Typical pepper taste‘Aifos’5.99 ab6.01 ab5.41 b
‘Palermo’6.51 ab6.29 ab6.98 a
Average6.27 A6.15 A6.23 A
Sour taste‘Aifos’1.82 a1.59 a1.74 a
‘Palermo’1.70 a1.74 a1.78 a
Average1.75 A1.66 A1.76 A
Sweet taste‘Aifos’3.16 c3.74 bc3.07 c
‘Palermo’5.13 ab5.32 a5.69 a
Average4.19 A4.49 A4.43 A
Bitter taste‘Aifos’1.69 a0.78 ab1.24 ab
‘Palermo’0.62 b0.76 ab0.64 b
Average1.13 A0.77 A0.93 A
Pungent flavor‘Aifos’0.93 a0.70 a0.98 a
‘Palermo’0.76 a0.99 a0.85 a
Average0.84 A0.84 A0.91 A
Off-flavor‘Aifos’0.28 a0.21 a0.23 a
‘Palermo’0.28 a0.26 a0.28 a
Average0.15 A0.11 A0.11 A
Overall quality‘Aifos’6.38 a6.69 a6.58 a
‘Palermo’7.07 a6.74 a7.15 a
Average6.73 A6.86 A6.87 A
* See Table 2.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sobczak, A.; Kowalczyk, K.; Gajc-Wolska, J.; Kowalczyk, W.; Niedzińska, M. Growth, Yield and Quality of Sweet Pepper Fruits Fertilized with Polyphosphates in Hydroponic Cultivation with LED Lighting. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1560. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10101560

AMA Style

Sobczak A, Kowalczyk K, Gajc-Wolska J, Kowalczyk W, Niedzińska M. Growth, Yield and Quality of Sweet Pepper Fruits Fertilized with Polyphosphates in Hydroponic Cultivation with LED Lighting. Agronomy. 2020; 10(10):1560. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10101560

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sobczak, Anna, Katarzyna Kowalczyk, Janina Gajc-Wolska, Waldemar Kowalczyk, and Monika Niedzińska. 2020. "Growth, Yield and Quality of Sweet Pepper Fruits Fertilized with Polyphosphates in Hydroponic Cultivation with LED Lighting" Agronomy 10, no. 10: 1560. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10101560

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop