Optimizing Tomato Yield and Quality in Greenhouse Cultivation Through Fertilization and Soil Management

Abstract

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) production in greenhouse systems increasingly relies on integrated fertilization and soil management strategies to enhance yield, fruit quality, and resilience to biotic stressors. This study evaluated the combined effects of five fertilization regimes and two contrasting soil tillage systems—rotary tillage (RT) and conventional plowing (P)—on the performance of greenhouse-grown ‘Bacuni’ tomatoes. Experimental assessments encompassed biometric traits, photosynthetic pigments (chlorophyll and anthocyanins), carotenoid concentrations (carotenes and lycopene), soluble solids, and total dry matter contents, as well as agronomic variables including fruit weight, fruit number, and total yield. Incidence of key pests and diseases, alongside soil compaction levels, were also quantified. Fertilization with Nutriplant 20:20:20, as well as the application of Albit both resulted in a marked stimulation of vegetative growth, while the highest yields were recorded in P × Orgevit + Kerafol (6962.65 g plant⁻¹; +44.6% vs. control) and RT × Albit + Turboroot (6208.22 g plant⁻¹; +16.2% vs. control). Rotary tillage consistently improved nutrient uptake efficiency and yield relative to plowing, highlighting the role of soil structure in modulating plant performance. Treatments with Albit and Turboroot also enhanced resistance to Tetranychus urticae and Xanthomonas campestris, indicating a dual benefit for productivity and phytosanitary status. The results underscore the importance of harmonizing fertilization strategies with soil management practices to optimize greenhouse tomato production. Integrative approaches that combine biostimulants, organic amendments, and soil structural optimization offer a viable pathway toward high-yield, high-quality, and disease-resilient crops in controlled environment agriculture.

1. Introduction

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) ranks among the most extensively cultivated horticultural crops worldwide, esteemed for its nutritional profile, organoleptic properties, and versatile applications in human diets [1,2]. The escalating global demand for high-quality tomatoes necessitates the adoption of cultivation strategies that optimize both yield and fruit quality [3,4]. Controlled environment agriculture, particularly greenhouse cultivation, provides unique advantages by allowing precise regulation of climatic factors, targeted pest and disease management, and efficient resource utilization [5]. Within this context, the strategic deployment of fertilization regimes and soil management practices is increasingly recognized as a pivotal determinant of productivity in greenhouse-grown tomato systems [6,7].

Soil health and structural integrity are fundamental drivers of plant physiological and biochemical processes, directly influencing nutrient uptake, root architecture, and overall plant performance [8,9]. Soil tillage practices represent a critical modulatory factor, affecting soil porosity, aeration, nutrient bioavailability, and root penetration [10,11]. Tillage depth enhances nutrient uptake, thereby exerting a direct effect on plant growth and yield performance [12]. Conventional plowing and rotary tillage embody distinct management paradigms, each imparting unique effects on soil physicochemical properties and plant growth responses. While traditional plowing has been historically favored for enhancing soil structure and water retention [13], emerging evidence suggests that rotary tillage may offer comparable or even superior benefits under controlled conditions by optimizing nutrient dynamics and soil microbial activity [14]. Despite these insights, the differential impacts of tillage systems on tomato productivity and fruit quality remain incompletely characterized, particularly under integrated fertilization strategies, highlighting a critical knowledge gap.

Fertilization represents a central component of modern agronomic management, wherein the type, timing, and application method of nutrient inputs substantially influence vegetative growth, reproductive performance, and fruit quality attributes [15]. Both organic amendments and synthetic nutrient solutions have been shown to modulate key growth parameters and bioactive compound accumulation, including pigments, antioxidants, and secondary metabolites [16,17,18,19]. Plant pigments, such as chlorophylls and anthocyanins, are integral to photosynthetic efficiency and stress resilience [20,21,22], whereas carotenoids, including β-carotene and lycopene, substantially enhance the nutritional and functional value of tomato fruits [23,24]. However, the combined effects of soil tillage and fertilization strategies on these biochemical and physiological traits remain insufficiently investigated, constituting a notable gap in the existing literature. Addressing these interactions is essential for advancing yield optimization and improving fruit quality [25,26,27].

Moreover, biotic stressors such as pests and pathogens pose ongoing threats to tomato productivity, with documented implications for yield and fruit quality [28]. Specific fertilization approaches have demonstrated the potential to bolster plant resistance against common pests and pathogens, including Tetranychus urticae and Xanthomonas campestris, yet comprehensive evaluations of these effects in conjunction with soil management practices remain scarce [29,30]. This paucity of integrated assessments limits the capacity to formulate evidence-based recommendations for sustainable and high-efficiency greenhouse tomato production.

In response to these research gaps, the present study systematically investigates the effects of diverse fertilization protocols under distinct soil tillage regimes on tomato yield, fruit quality, and physiological characteristics. By quantitatively evaluating biometric traits, pigment composition, dry matter content, and other key agronomic parameters, this research aims to elucidate mechanistic relationships between management practices and crop performance. The findings are expected to advance scientific understanding of optimized cultivation strategies, providing actionable insights for enhancing tomato productivity, nutritional quality, and resilience within controlled environments, thereby contributing to sustainable horticultural intensification and resource-efficient greenhouse agriculture.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Site and Growth Conditions

The investigation was carried out during the 2023 and 2024 growing seasons at the Vegetable Research and Development Station, Bacău, Romania (46°34′ N, 26°55′ E; 165 m a.s.l.). The experimental site experiences a temperate continental climate, characterized by a long-term mean annual temperature of 9.8 °C and total precipitation ranging between 550 and 600 mm. Experiments were conducted within an Almería-type greenhouse equipped with UV-stabilized polyethylene film. Within this controlled environment, day/night temperatures were maintained at 25–30 °C and 18–20 °C, respectively, relative humidity ranged from 60 to 75%, and the photoperiod under natural light was supplemented to ensure a minimum of 14 h of daily illumination. Environmental parameters were continuously monitored throughout all phenological stages to ensure consistency and reproducibility of growth conditions. The key tomato cultivar employed in this study was the mid-early Bacuni variety, characterized by determined growth; experimental plots were established in the first decade of May. The experimental site comprised randomized block designs with three replications per variant, each replication containing ten plants. The experiment was arranged in a mirrored design, once on soil worked with a plow at a depth of 30 cm, and once on soil prepared with a rotary tiller at a depth of 25 cm (Figure 1). Plant spacing within rows was set at 35 cm, with 130 and 70 cm between rows, resulting in a planting density of 31.400 plants per hectare. Black plastic mulch was applied between rows to enhance weed control.

The total irrigation volume applied during the entire growing season was calculated based on the number of irrigation events, the planting density, and the average water volume supplied per plant at each event, according to the following equation:

Total seasonal volume (L) = No. plants × V per plant/event × No. events,

where No. plants represent the total number of plants in the experimental plot (150 plants), V per plant/event—the average water supplied per plant per irrigation event (2 L, as per standard greenhouse drip irrigation norms), and No. events—the total number of irrigation events during the season. Irrigation frequency averaged 2.5 applications per week over a 20-week growing period, resulting in No. events 50. Substituting into the formula yields: Total seasonal volume (L) = 150 × 2 L × 50 = 15,000 L, equivalent to 15.0 m³ for the entire experimental plot. Water was supplied via a drip irrigation system under controlled conditions, ensuring precise and uniform application throughout the vegetation cycle.

2.2. Preparation of Biological Material

Seedling and Transplanting Process: Tomato seeds were sown on the second decade of March, in 70-cell plug trays filled with Rekyva Remix 1 horticultural peat, characterized by a pH of 5.5–6.5, electrical conductivity (EC) of 0.5–1 mS/cm, and an NPK 14:16:18 (chlorine-free) concentration ≤1 kg/m³. Seedlings were transplanted on last decade of March, using Rekyva Remix 2 peat substrate with a pH of 5.5–6.5, EC of 1–2 mS/cm, and an NPK 14:16:18, concentration ≤2 kg/m³.

2.3. Fertilization Protocol

The experiment included five fertilization treatments and an untreated control variant, applied as follows:

• Variant 1: Albit (0.01%) + Turboroot (0.5%)
• Variant 2: Biochar (10 g/plant) + Wood Vinegar (0.5%) + Cropmax (0.25%)
• Variant 3: Nutriplant 20:20:20 (0.015%) + Resid (2 g/plant)
• Variant 4: Orgevit (10 g/plant) + Kerafol (0.25%)
• Variant 5: Control (untreated)

A detailed description of the commercial products with fertilizing and/or biostimulant roles used in the experiment is presented in

Table 1. Profile of the Commercial Products Used in the Experiment.

Variant	Composition Profile	Manufacturer/Origin Details
(P;RT)1	Albit—a poly-beta-hydroxybutyric acid (natural biopolymer derived from beneficial soil bacteria: Bacillus megaterium and Pseudomonas aureofaciens—0.62%), along with the following nutrients: total N2—7.5%; P2O5—6%; K2O—4.5%; MgO—0.6%; SO42−—2.7%; Turboroot—a comprehensive rooting and growth stimulator, containing: total humic extract—7.2% w/w; humic acids—5.76% (w/w), fulvic acids—1.44% (w/w), free L-alpha amino acids—3.54%, total N2—2.8 (w/w), P2O5—3.05% (w/w), K2O—4.46% (w/w) and chelated micronutrients: EDDHA (Fe)—0.017% (w/w); EDTA (Mn)—0.10% (w/w); EDTA (Zn)—0.05% (w/w); water-soluble Mo—0.05% (w/w); pH range of the chelated fraction—4–9.	Vitana/Albit—Russian Federation Ecoplant/Trade Corporation International—Spain
(P;RT)2	Biochar—Apparent density < 3 mm—276 kg/m3; specific surface area (BET)—557.76 m2/g; ash content (at 550 degrees)—4.1% (w/w); organic carbon (C)—91.3% (w/w); total N2—0.66% (w/w); K—0.25% (w/w); Na—0.02% (w/w); Ca—1.1% (w/w); Fe—0.09% (w/w); Mg—0.05% (w/w); Mn—0.04% (w/w); S—0.03% (w/w); water retention capacity—162.5%; moisture content—6%; pH value—8.76 (CaCl2); EPA-PAH (below LOQ)—6 mg/kg. Wood Vinegar—A byproduct of biomass carbonization through pyrolysis, containing acetic acid and pyroligneous acid. It exhibits the following characteristics: organic carbon (C)—14 g/L; Kjeldahl nitrogen—3.37 mg/dm3; K—<20 mg/dm3; B—<2 mg/dm3; Cu—<0.4 mg/dm3; Fe—533 mg/dm3; P—<0.4 mg/dm3; Mg—0.809 mg/dm3; Mn—3.42 mg/dm3; pH value—4.24; NO2−—<5 mg/dm3; NO3−—<5 mg/dm3. Cropmax—A concentrated foliar fertilizer with the following characteristics: pH level of 7; N—0.2%; P2O5—0.4%; K2O—0.02%; Fe—220 mg/L; Mg—550 mg/L and Ca—10 mg/L.	Gekka Biochar/Explocom GK SRL—Romania Gekka Biochar/Explocom GK SRL—Romania Holland Farming B.V.—The Netherlands
(P;RT)3	Nutriplant—A solid foliar fertilizer containing primary macronutrients and micronutrients: N2—20%; P2O5—20%; K2O—20%; B—0.02%; Cu—0.05%; Fe—0.01%; Mn—0.01%; Mo—0.02%; Zn—0.1%. Resid—Mycorrhizal fungus Glomus iranicum var. tenuihypharum var. nov.—1.2 × 104	Green Has Group—Italy Symbor Business Development S.L—Spain
(P;RT)4	Orgevit—An excellent source of nutrients and humus, presented in granular form, is entirely derived from natural origins, specifically avian sources; it contains all the essential micro and macronutrients, including: N2—4%; P2O5—2.5%; K2O—2.3%; Ca—9.3%; MgO—1.1% and organic substances—65%. Kerafol—A foliar fertilizer enriched with essential amino acids and a complex of hydrolyzed proteins and activators that enhance plant growth. Total amino acids: 28.00%; N2—4.30%; K2O—3.10%; organic carbon (C)—14.00%	MeMon B.V.—The Netherlands Altinco SL—Spain
(P;RT)5	-

(P—plowed soil; RT—soil incorporated with rotary tiller; w/w—weight/weight).

.

Each treatment variant was evaluated under two soil tillage methods: plowing to 30 cm (labeled P group) and rotary tillage incorporation to 20 cm (labeled RT group). A number of three fertilizations were scheduled for the third decade of May, second decade of June, and first decade of July (Figure 2).

2.4. Biometric and Yield Assessments

Biometric Measurements: Plant height, number of secondary stems, stem diameter at the collar, flower count per plant, and fruit count per plant were measured in order to assess the impact of treatment on plant morphology and development.

Chlorophyll and anthocyanin levels were assessed non-destructively using portable chlorophyll meters (CCM-200 Plus and ACM-200 Plus; Opti-Sciences, Hudson, NH, USA). Measurements were taken on the adaxial surface of fully expanded leaves, avoiding the midrib, under stable conditions (~25 °C, clear sky) and at a fixed diurnal interval to reduce circadian bias. The chlorophyll concentration index (CCI) and anthocyanin content index (ACI), derived from dual-wavelength absorbance, served as dimensionless proxies of in vivo pigment concentrations.

Yield Indicators: Yield was quantified based on fruit count, fruit weight, fruit width, and height per plant (Figure 3).

2.5. Quality Analysis of Tomato Fruit

2.5.1. Fruit Material

Three replicates, each comprising five fruits, were subjected to analysis. Prior to evaluation, the harvested tomatoes were stored under controlled cooling conditions at a temperature of 4 ± 1 °C and a relative humidity of 85 ± 5%.

Sample preparation for analysis entailed the formation of randomly mixed samples from the harvested tomatoes for each distinct variant (Figure 4), with analyses performed in three replicates. Determinations of antioxidant components were conducted on the day of harvest, with particular emphasis on compounds prone to oxidation. The replicated samples were packaged under aerobic conditions in white biodegradable open paper bags, protected from visible light, and maintained under refrigerated conditions from the time of harvest until analysis, approximately 3 h later.

2.5.2. Carotenoid and Lycopene Content

Pigments represented by β-carotene and lycopene from tomato fruits harvested across all experimental variants were extracted from 1 g of fruit using petroleum ether in a 1:50 ratio (Figure 5). The quantitative analysis of these components was conducted via spectrophotometry using the S-20 Spetrophotometer - Boeco (Hamburg, Germany), with petroleum ether serving as the blank reference. Measurements were taken at 452 nm for β-carotene and 472 nm for lycopene. To determine the total fractions of β-carotene, absorbance values were multiplied by 19.96, and for lycopene by 17.6. All carotenoid determinations were performed in triplicate, with results expressed as mg·100 g⁻¹ fresh weight (F.W.) [1]

2.5.3. Total Dry Matter Content (TDM %)

The dry matter content of fresh tomato fruits was assessed by drying approximately 5 g of raw, seedless, and homogenized fruit in a forced air-drying oven (Biobase^®, Jinan, China) at 105 °C for 24 h. The weight differences before and after drying were calculated dependable to the initial sample weight. The results were expressed as water loss, represented as a percentage of dry matter.

2.5.4. Total Soluble Solids (TSS)

The total soluble solids content was determined using a high-precision handheld refractometer, employing homogenized juice extracted from fresh tomato fruits. The results are reported in degrees Brix, in accordance with the methodology outlined in AOAC method 932.12 [31]. Two measurements were conducted for each of the three replicates.

2.6. Pest and Disease Management

The level of infestation by various diseases and pests was quantitatively assessed through the calculation of the attack degree (G.A.), which provides an estimate of the overall impact of these biotic stressors on the plant population. The formula used is as follows:

G.A. (%) = (F% × I%)/100

In this equation, F% represents the frequency of attack, reflecting the proportion of infested plants within the examined sample. It is computed using the formula:

F (%) = (n × 100)/Nt

where

• n denotes the total number of analyzed plants exhibiting signs of infestation, and
• Nt indicates the overall count of all plants subjected to examination.

In addition to frequency, the intensity of infestation (I%) is also calculated, which provides insight into the severity of the damage inflicted on the affected plants. The intensity is quantified as follows:

I (%) = Σ(i × f)/n

Here:

• i denotes the assigned score representing the percentage of the plant surface area affected by the infestation, categorized as follows:

  o

  Score 0: 0% affected surface;

  o

  Score 1: 1–3% affected surface;

  o

  Score 2: 4–10% affected surface;

  o

  Score 3: 11–25% affected surface;

  o

  Score 4: 26–50% affected surface;

  o

  Score 5: 51–75% affected surface;

  o

  Score 6: 76–100% affected surface.

• f is the total number of plants evaluated within each specific score category, and
• n is again the total number of analyzed plants that show signs of infestation.

By integrating both frequency and intensity, the attack degree (G.A.) offers a comprehensive metric that reflects not only how widespread the infestation is among the plant population but also the severity of damage caused by the pathogens or pests. This dual approach facilitates targeted management strategies, as it allows researchers and growers to identify both the prevalence of infestations and their potential impact on crop health and yield. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for the development of effective pest and disease management programs that aim to mitigate losses and enhance overall plant productivity.

2.7. Soil Compaction Assessment

Soil compaction was assessed through the Visual Evaluation of Soil Structure (VESS) method (Figure 6), which scores soil structure on a scale of 1 to 5 to represent increasing compaction levels. The VESS method involves evaluating key indicators such as soil texture, porosity, and the presence of aggregates, which contribute to understanding the overall health of the soil ecosystem. This comprehensive assessment aids in identifying potential issues related to soil management practices and informs strategies for enhancing soil structure and fertility.

2.8. Statistical Analysis

The experimental data were subjected to statistical evaluation through analysis of variance (ANOVA). t-test for equality of means was applied in order to assess the influence of the two soil management systems employed in the experiment. Furthermore, where applicable, post hoc comparisons were performed using Duncan’s multiple range test. Statistical significance was established at a threshold of p < 0.05 to assess the effects of various fertilization management strategies on tomato plant growth, yield, and quality parameters. All analyses were executed using SPSS software, version 21 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Determination of Biometric Indicators

The findings demonstrate that soil management and fertilization treatments differentially influenced tomato growth parameters (

Table 2. Sequential Influence of Soil Management and Fertilization Scheme on Some Biometric Indicators.

Variant	Plant Height (cm)	Number of Secondary Stems per Plant	Collar Stem Diameter (mm)	Number of Flowers per Plant
P	50.55 ± 6.55	8.98 ± 1.36	11.88 ± 0.72	13.35 ± 2.75
RT	51.19 ± 5.96	8.15 ± 0.97	10.88 ± 1.20	12.23 ± 1.42
	ns	ns	**	ns
A×T	54.60 ± 7.43 a	8.45 ± 1.00 a	11.53 ± 1.29 a	12.22 ± 1.77 a
B×W×C	43.72 ± 4.83 b	8.06 ± 1.39 a	11.05 ± 0.71 a	11.68 ± 1.41 a
N×R	53.10 ± 5.32 a	9.50 ± 1.36 a	11.28 ± 0.87 a	14.33 ± 3.25 a
O×K	50.10 ± 4.19 a	8.62 ± 0.85 a	11.53 ± 1.22 a	12.73 ± 1.68 a
U	52.83 ± 2.61 a	8.22 ± 1.07 a	11.50 ± 1.55 a	13.00 ± 2.35 a

P—plowed soil; RT—soil incorporated with rotary tiller; t-Test for Equality of Means: ns—not significant; **—statistical significance at the 0.01 level; A×T—Albit×Turboroot; B×W×C—Biochar×Woodvinegar×Cropmax; N×R—Nutriplant×Resid; O×K—Orgevit×Kerafol; U-untreated. Within each column and within each experimental factor, different letters mean fertilization treatments differ significantly according to Duncan’s test at p ≤ 0.05.

). While soil management alone had limited impact on most traits, fertilization significantly affected plant height, with the BWC treatment showing notably reduced growth. These results underscore the nuanced role of nutrient strategies in modulating vegetative development, while suggesting that intrinsic soil properties or environmental factors may buffer responses in some parameters.

3.1.1. Plant Height

Plant height serves as a key indicator of vegetative vigor. Under plowed soil conditions, the tallest plants were observed in variant P3 (55.44 ± 7.5 cm), treated with Nutriplant 20:20:20 and Resid, likely reflecting the balanced NPK composition of Nutriplant. Variant P1 (50.67 ± 9.25 cm), receiving Albit and Turboroot, also exhibited substantial growth, highlighting the positive influence of biostimulants on aerial development. The untreated control (P5, 53.33 ± 4.92 cm) performed comparably, suggesting inherently favorable soil fertility. In contrast, P2 (43.22 ± 5.56 cm), treated with Biochar and Wood Vinegar, displayed reduced height, potentially due to transient nutrient immobilization. Under rotary tiller management, RT1 (58.56 ± 4.1 cm) achieved the highest growth, whereas RT2 (44.22 ± 6.3 cm) mirrored the lower performance of P2, indicating that soil preparation modulates the response to fertilization. Collectively, Nutriplant and Albit consistently promoted vegetative growth, contingent on the soil management strategy employed (

Table 3. Determination of The Combined Effect of Soil Management and Fertilization Scheme on Some Biometric Indicators of ‘Bacuni’ Tomato Crop.

Variant	Plant Height (cm)	Number of Secondary Stems per Plant	Collar Stem Diameter (mm)	Number of Flowers per Plant
P1	50.67 ± 9.25 abc	9.11 ± 1.36 ab	12.66 ± 1.07 a	12.53 ± 3.54 b
P2	43.22 ± 5.56 c	8.22 ± 2.28 b	11.38 ± 1.36 ab	11.56 ± 3.43 b
P3	55.44 ± 7.5 a	10.44 ± 1.51 a	11.9 ± 0.84 ab	16.44 ± 4.77 a
P4	50.11 ± 6.05 abc	9 ± 1.41 ab	11.71 ± 1.21 ab	13.89 ± 2.89 ab
P5	53.33 ± 4.92 ab	8.11 ± 2.26 b	11.8 ± 1.21 ab	12.33 ± 4.09 b
RT1	58.56 ± 4.1 a	7.78 ± 1.39 b	10.41 ± 1.63 b	11.89 ± 2.47 b
RT2	44.22 ± 6.3 bc	7.89 ± 1.76 b	10.73 ± 1.1 ab	11.78 ± 2.64 b
RT3	50.78 ± 6.08 abc	8.56 ± 1.74 ab	10.61 ± 1.36 ab	12.23 ± 1.92 b
RT4	50.11 ± 7.37 abc	8.22 ± 2.05 b	11.35 ± 1.88 ab	11.56 ± 1.94 b
RT5	52.33 ± 4.47 abc	8.33 ± 1.66 b	11.26 ± 2.36 ab	13.67 ± 1.96 ab

P1—Plowed soil × Albit + Turboroot; P2—Plowed soil × Biochar + Woodvinegar + Cropmax; P3—Plowed soil × Nutriplant + Resid; P4—Plowed soil × Orgevit + Kerafol; P5—Plowed soil × Untreated; RT1—Rotary tilled soil × Albit + Turboroot; RT2—Rotary tilled soil × Biochar + Woodvinegar + Cropmax; RT3—Rotary tilled soil × Nutriplant + Resid; RT4—Rotary tilled soil × Orgevit + Kerafol; RT5—Rotary tilled soil × Untreated. Within each column and within each experimental factor, different letters mean soil management and fertilization treatments differ significantly according to Duncan’s test at p ≤ 0.05.

).

3.1.2. Lateral Shoot Development

Secondary stem number, a determinant of plant structural integrity and fruiting capacity, was highest in P3 (10.44 ± 1.51 shoots), indicating that Nutriplant and Resid simultaneously promote vertical and lateral growth. P1 (9.11 ± 1.36 shoots) also exhibited enhanced branching. The control (P5, 8.11 ± 2.26) showed limited lateral development, confirming the stimulatory effects of fertilization. Notably, RT1 (7.78 ± 1.39) exhibited reduced branching despite increased height, reflecting the complex interaction between soil management and nutrient availability. These results suggest that plowed soil amplifies the branching response to fertilization relative to rotary tillage.

3.1.3. Collar Stem Diameter

Stem diameter, indicative of mechanical strength, was greatest in P1 (12.66 ± 1.07 mm) and P3 (11.9 ± 0.84 mm), illustrating the capacity of Albit and Turboroot to enhance structural robustness. P5 (11.8 ± 1.21 mm) was comparable, underscoring the adequacy of baseline soil fertility. Among rotary tiller variants, RT4 (11.35 ± 1.88 mm) and RT5 (11.26 ± 2.36 mm) maintained substantial diameters, demonstrating that even in the absence of fertilization, soil management within controlled environments supports stem integrity.

3.1.4. Flower Number

Flower number, a proxy for reproductive potential, was maximal in P3 (16.44 ± 4.77), indicating that the combination of Nutriplant and Resid enhances reproductive development. P1 (12.53 ± 3.54) also showed improved floral production, while the control (P5, 12.33 ± 4.09) was comparatively lower. Within rotary tiller treatments, RT3 (12.23 ± 1.92) achieved the highest flower count, although still below that of P3. Interestingly, RT5 (13.67 ± 1.96) maintained high flower numbers despite the absence of fertilization, suggesting that controlled environmental conditions mitigate nutrient limitations. Overall, these findings highlight that plowed soil, coupled with targeted fertilization, optimally supports both vegetative and reproductive development in greenhouse-grown tomatoes.

3.2. Anthocyanin and Chlorophyll Pigment Content

Anthocyanin and chlorophyll pigments are key indicators of tomato plant physiological status and stress response [33,34,35,36,37]. Anthocyanins, flavonoid pigments, contribute to stress tolerance, protecting plants against UV radiation and pathogens [33,34], whereas chlorophyll directly reflects photosynthetic activity and overall productivity [35,36,37]. The experimental results (

Table 4. Sequential Influence of Soil Management and Fertilization Scheme on Anthocyanin and Chlorophyll Pigment Content in ‘Bacuni’ Tomato Plants.

Variant	ACI	CCI
P	8.62 ± 0.93	46.45 ± 6.24
RT	9.73 ± 1.39	53.65 ± 2.42
	*	*
Variant	ACI	CCI
A×T	9.21 ± 1.56 a	54.75 ± 10.68 a
B×W×C	9.23 ± 1.47 a	48.15 ± 9.03 a
N×R	9.44 ± 1.54 a	48.39 ± 6.18 a
O×K	8.56 ± 1.11 a	47.80 ± 9.25 a
U	9.43 ± 0.96 a	51.18 ± 8.43 a

P—plowed soil; RT—soil incorporated with rotary tiller; t-Test for Equality of Means: *—statistical significance at the 0.05 level; A×T—Albit×Turboroot; B×W×C—Biochar×Woodvinegar×Cropmax; N×R—Nutriplant×Resid; O×K—Orgevit×Kerafol; U-untreated; ACI—Anthocyanin Content Index; CCI—Chlorophyll Content Index. Within each column and within each experimental factor, different letters mean fertilization treatments differ significantly according to Duncan’s test at p ≤ 0.05.

) reveal how different soil management and fertilization strategies influence these indices, reflecting the health and adaptive responses of tomato plants under varying environmental conditions.

The data show significant variations in both Anthocyanin Content Index (ACI) and Chlorophyll Content Index (CCI) across treatments (Table 4). Plowed soil (P) exhibited an ACI of 8.62 ± 0.93 and a CCI of 46.45 ± 6.24, whereas rotary tiller (RT) treatments showed higher indices (ACI 9.73 ± 1.39; CCI 53.65 ± 2.42). Fertilization with Albit and Turboroot (AT) yielded the highest mean CCI (54.75 ± 10.68), while the untreated control (U) maintained relatively consistent ACI (9.43 ± 0.96) and CCI (51.18 ± 8.43). These results highlight the differential impact of soil management and fertilization on pigment content, underscoring their roles in optimizing physiological responses. The elevated CCI in RT-treated soils may result from improved soil aeration and nutrient assimilation, supporting photosynthetic efficiency, whereas the superior performance of AT suggests a synergistic effect between Albit and Turboroot in promoting chlorophyll synthesis.

3.2.1. Anthocyanin Content Index

Anthocyanin levels are influenced by environmental conditions and nutrient availability [38,39], with higher content indicating adaptive responses to stress, and moderate levels reflecting balanced growth [40].

In plowed soil (P) variants, the control (P5) exhibited the highest anthocyanin content (9.13 ± 1.53), suggesting moderate stress induced by the absence of fertilization. P2, treated with biochar and wood vinegar, also showed elevated ACI (9.02 ± 1.48), likely due to temporary nutrient immobilization despite improved soil structure and water retention [41,42]. P3 (Nutriplant 20:20:20×Resid) showed moderate ACI (8.60 ± 1.09), reflecting balanced nutrient supply mitigating excessive stress. P1 (8.42 ± 1.98) and P4 (7.77 ± 1.04) had the lowest anthocyanin levels, indicating sufficient nutrient availability and minimal stress.

In rotary tiller (RT) variants, RT3 (10.29 ± 1.94) exhibited the highest ACI, suggesting that even balanced fertilization can induce moderate stress in protected environments, potentially due to microclimatic factors. RT1 (9.99 ± 1.76) and RT5 (9.72 ± 2.48) also showed elevated anthocyanin levels, while RT2 (9.40 ± 2.53) and RT4 (9.24 ± 2.25) were slightly lower. Overall, RT variants showed a more pronounced response to cultivation conditions than P variants, emphasizing the influence of environmental factors and soil management on anthocyanin production (Figure 7).

3.2.2. Chlorophyll Content Index

Chlorophyll content reflects photosynthetic capacity, with higher levels indicating enhanced light absorption and biomass production potential [43].

Among plowed soil variants, P1 (Albit×Turboroot) had the highest CCI (50.12 ± 10.99), indicating biostimulant-driven enhancement of chlorophyll synthesis via improved root development and nutrient uptake. P2 (48.44 ± 11.59) and P3 (46.54 ± 10.36) also maintained satisfactory chlorophyll levels, reflecting the positive effects of biochar on water retention and balanced nutrient supply, respectively. P5 (control) showed reduced CCI (45.70 ± 5.07), while P4 (Orgevit×Kerafol) had the lowest CCI (41.48 ± 11.41), potentially due to slower nutrient release limiting nitrogen availability for chlorophyll synthesis.

In RT variants, RT1 (Albit×Turboroot) achieved the highest CCI (59.39 ± 16.89), highlighting the combined benefits of soil management and biostimulants in protected environments. Surprisingly, the unfertilized control RT5 also exhibited high CCI (56.67 ± 14.42), suggesting that protected conditions alone can support chlorophyll production. RT4 (54.10 ± 12.91) and RT3 (50.23 ± 9.56) demonstrated acceptable CCI, while RT2 (47.86 ± 18.00) showed the lowest, likely due to temporary nitrogen immobilization from biochar.

Overall, RT-treated variants displayed markedly higher chlorophyll content than P variants, emphasizing the advantage of controlled environments for photosynthetic efficiency. Biostimulants such as Albit, combined with effective fertilization strategies, enhanced chlorophyll synthesis, whereas soil preparation method modulated nutrient dynamics and pigment accumulation in plowed soils (Figure 7).

3.3. Assessment of Yield Metrics

The analysis indicated that soil management practices (plowing vs. rotary tiller) had limited influence on most fruit characteristics, as supported by non-significant t-test results for equality of means (

Table 5. Sequential Influence of Soil Management and Fertilization Scheme on Some Yield Metrics.

Variant	Average Fruit Weight (g)	Fruit Width (mm)	Fruit Height (mm)	Fruit Form Index (Height/Width)	Number of Fruits per Plant	Total Yield per Plant (g)
P	207.27 ± 24.68	78.51 ± 6.01	48.18 ± 2.43	0.62 ± 0.06	27.13 ± 4.22	5697.15 ± 1408.02
RT	228.87 ± 36.67	77.85 ± 7.73	48.39 ± 3.03	0.63 ± 0.07	25.87 ± 5.00	5836.81 ± 1109.30
	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns
A×T	222.57 ± 26.52 ab	74.75 ± 8.37 a	48.56 ± 1.83 a	0.66 ± 0.08 a	28.00 ± 3.99 ab	6208.38 ± 1025.02 ab
B×W×C	234.62 ± 43.32 a	75.22 ± 5.05 a	48.13 ± 4.92 a	0.64 ± 0.06 a	23.00 ± 3.22 b	5382.66 ± 1201.88 ab
N×R	211.95 ± 18.60 ab	79.07 ± 2.65 a	48.94 ± 1.69 a	0.62 ± 0.03 a	26.17 ± 3.09 ab	5592.39 ± 1126.24 ab
O×K	229.35 ± 28.87 ab	82.20 ± 9.47 a	48.83 ± 1.97 a	0.60 ± 0.07 a	28.83 ± 3.30 a	6619.89 ± 1185.17 a
U	191.88 ± 32.23 b	79.68 ± 5.42 a	46.96 ± 3.25 a	0.59 ± 0.06 a	26.50 ± 7.17 ab	5031.58 ± 1374.08 b

P—plowed soil; RT—soil incorporated with rotary tiller; t-Test for Equality of Means: ns—not significant; A×T—Albit×Turboroot; B×W×C—Biochar×Woodvinegar×Cropmax; N×R—Nutriplant×Resid; O×K—Orgevit×Kerafol; U-untreated; Within each column and within each experimental factor, different letters mean fertilization treatments differ significantly according to Duncan’s test at p ≤ 0.05.

). However, fertilization strategies demonstrated significant effects on average fruit weight, number of fruits per plant, and total yield per plant. These findings suggest that while baseline fruit traits remain relatively stable under the experimental conditions, specific fertilization schemes—such as Orgevit×Kerafol and Albit×Turboroot—can enhance fruit size and productivity.

3.3.1. Average Fruit Weight

Table 6. Determination of The Combined Effect of Soil Management and Fertilization Scheme on Yield Parameters of ‘Bacuni’ Tomato Crop.

Variant	Average Fruit Weight (g)	Fruit Width (mm)	Fruit Height (mm)	Fruit Form Index (Height/Width)	Number of Fruits per Plant	Total Yield per Plant (g)
P1	203.28 ± 36.57 b	79.75 ± 5.6 ab	48.35 ± 2.66 a	0.61 ± 0.03 ab	30.33 ± 7.02 a	6166.03 ± 773.51 a
P2	202.78 ± 29.54 b	74.12 ± 15.83 ab	49.72 ± 6.33 a	0.67 ± 0.08 ab	24.67 ± 21.59 ab	5001.82 ± 1321.65 a
P3	205.54 ± 37.35 b	78.8 ± 7 ab	47.92 ± 2.36 a	0.61 ± 0.03 ab	25.67 ± 13.2 ab	5275.5 ± 1164.7 a
P4	229.54 ± 49.81 ab	80.94 ± 13.73 ab	47.17 ± 1.66 a	0.59 ± 0.09 ab	30.33 ± 7.09 a	6962.61 ± 1502.87 a
P5	195.34 ± 37.16 b	78.95 ± 4.38 ab	47.75 ± 5.24 a	0.61 ± 0.06 ab	24.67 ± 5.13 ab	4818.44 ± 1815.42 a
RT1	241.88 ± 43.11 ab	69.73 ± 8.96 b	48.76 ± 4.97 a	0.70 ± 0.08 a	25.67 ± 14.43 ab	6208.22 ± 1428.1 a
RT2	266.47 ± 48.85 a	76.31 ± 8.51 ab	46.53 ± 5.32 a	0.61 ± 0.02 ab	21.33 ± 3.21 b	5684.65 ± 1239.38 a
RT3	218.37 ± 42.87 ab	79.33 ± 6.46 ab	49.98 ± 3.22 a	0.63 ± 0.02 ab	26.67 ± 5.03 ab	5823.14 ± 1259.97 a
RT4	229.19 ± 64.04 ab	83.45 ± 9.73 a	50.49 ± 3.22 a	0.61 ± 0.06 ab	27.33 ± 5.51 ab	6264.47 ± 899.07 a
RT5	188.46 ± 42.99 b	80.42 ± 8.81 ab	46.17 ± 3.35 a	0.58 ± 0.07 b	28.33 ± 3.51 ab	5339.79 ± 1180.91 a

P1—Plowed soil × Albit + Turboroot; P2—Plowed soil × Biochar + Woodvinegar + Cropmax; P3—Plowed soil × Nutriplant + Resid; P4—Plowed soil × Orgevit + Kerafol; P5—Plowed soil × Untreated; RT1—Rotary tilled soil × Albit + Turboroot; RT2—Rotary tilled soil × Biochar + Woodvinegar + Cropmax; RT3—Rotary tilled soil × Nutriplant + Resid; RT4—Rotary tilled soil × Orgevit + Kerafol; RT5—Rotary tilled soil × Untreated. Within each column and within each experimental factor, different letters mean soil management and fertilization treatments differ significantly according to Duncan’s test at p ≤ 0.05.

summarizes the combined effects of soil management and fertilization on key yield metrics. In plowed (P) variants, the highest average fruit weight was recorded in P4 (229.54 ± 49.81 g), treated with Orgevit and Kerafol, highlighting the beneficial effects of organic fertilization on fruit development through improved nutrient availability and soil health. Variants P1, P2, and P3 displayed similar intermediate weights (202.78–205.54 g), reflecting moderate gains from Albit and Turboroot, Biochar with wood vinegar, and Nutriplant 20:20:20. The control variant P5 (195.34 ± 37.16 g) exhibited the lowest weight, demonstrating the importance of fertilization in optimizing fruit size.

Among rotary tiller (RT) variants, RT2 (266.47 ± 48.85 g) achieved the highest fruit weight, significantly outperforming other treatments. This indicates that the combination of Biochar and wood vinegar, under controlled environmental conditions, maximized fruit growth. RT1, RT3, and RT4 also showed elevated weights, with RT1 (241.88 g) closely following RT2, emphasizing the positive impact of Albit and Turboroot in protected cultivation. The control RT5 (188.46 ± 42.99 g) had the lowest fruit weight, reinforcing the need for nutrient supplementation. Overall, RT variants produced heavier fruits than P variants, likely due to the controlled conditions enhancing nutrient absorption and reducing stress. The enhanced fruit weight in RT2 may also suggest that Biochar improved nutrient availability, consistent with previous research [44,45].

3.3.2. Fruit Width

In plowed soil, P4 (80.94 ± 13.73 mm) produced the widest fruits, supporting the role of organic fertilizers in increasing fruit dimensions. Other P variants showed similar widths, except P2 (74.12 ± 15.83 mm), which was smaller, possibly due to temporary nutrient immobilization from Biochar.

In RT variants, RT4 (83.45 ± 9.73 mm) recorded the largest fruit width, indicating the effectiveness of Orgevit and Kerafol under protected conditions. RT2 (76.31 ± 8.51 mm) had narrower fruits despite high weight, while the control RT5 (80.42 ± 8.81 mm) achieved a relatively large width, suggesting that protected environments support lateral fruit growth even without fertilization. Overall, RT variants tended to produce wider fruits than P variants, with organic fertilization promoting larger dimensions.

3.3.3. Fruit Height

In P variants, fruit height was relatively stable, ranging from 47.17 mm (P4) to 49.72 mm (P2), indicating limited treatment effects. RT variants displayed slightly greater variability, with RT4 (50.49 mm) showing the highest height. Treatments that promoted broader fruit growth also influenced height, particularly under controlled conditions, though the effects were less pronounced than those on weight or width.

3.3.4. Number of Fruits per Plant

Plowed variants exhibited higher fruit numbers, ranging from 24.67 (P2, P5) to 30.33 (P1, P4), with Albit×Turboroot and Orgevit×Kerafol treatments favoring increased fruit counts. RT variants produced fewer fruits per plant (21.33–28.33), with the control RT5 showing relatively high fruit numbers, suggesting that in protected cultivation, fruit count is less sensitive to fertilization. Overall, plowed soil favored higher fruit numbers, whereas RT variants supported fewer but larger fruits.

3.3.5. Total Yield per Plant

In P variants, total yield peaked in P4 (6962.61 ± 1502.87 g) with Orgevit×Kerafol, reflecting the positive impact of organic fertilization. P1 (6166.03 g) also achieved high yield due to Albit×Turboroot, while the control P5 (4818.44 g) had the lowest yield.

In RT variants, RT4 (6264.47 ± 899.07 g) achieved the highest yield, similar to P4, confirming the efficacy of Orgevit×Kerafol. RT1 (6208.22 g) also performed well, supporting Albit×Turboroot’s productivity benefits. The lowest yield was observed in RT5 (5339.79 g). These results indicate that while soil management influences fruit size distribution, fertilization strategies play a crucial role in maximizing overall yield.

3.4. Analysis of Lycopene and Carotenoid Content in Tomato Fruits

The independent evaluation of the two investigated factors (

Table 7. Sequential Influence of Soil Management and Fertilization Scheme on Lycopene and Carotene Content of ‘Bacuni’ Tomato Fruits.

Variant	Lycopene (mg ×100 g−1 Fresh Weight)	Carotene (mg ×100 g−1 Fresh Weight)
P	7.14 ± 0.49	11.77 ± 1.12
RT	6.38 ± 0.92	9.63 ± 1.12
	*	**
A×T	7.63 ± 0.25 a	11.66 ± 1.11 a
B×W×C	6.84± 0.41 b	10.42 ± 0.59 a
N×R	5.85 ± 0.90 c	10.77 ± 1.79 a
O×K	6.85 ± 0.77 b	9.76 ± 1.55 a
U	6.65 ± 0.58 b	10.88 ± 2.09 a

P—plowed soil; RT—soil incorporated with rotary tiller; t-Test for Equality of Means: *—statistical significance at the 0.05 level; **—statistical significance at the 0.01 level; A×T—Albit×Turboroot; B×W×C—Biochar×Woodvinegar×Cropmax; N×R—Nutriplant×Resid; O×K—Orgevit×Kerafol; U-untreated; Within each column and within each experimental factor, different letters mean fertilization treatments differ significantly according to Duncan’s test at p ≤ 0.05.

) underscores that soil management practices significantly influenced carotene levels (p ≤ 0.01) and lycopene levels (p ≤ 0.05), with plowed soil (P) exhibiting higher values than rotary tiller-treated soil (RT). Among fertilization treatments, lycopene content showed significant variation, with the highest value recorded for the Albit×Turboroot treatment (7.63 ± 0.25 mg/100 g). These results emphasize the distinct roles of soil management and fertilization strategies in modulating antioxidant compound synthesis, particularly lycopene and carotene. The superior performance of the Albit×Turboroot treatment highlights its potential to enhance nutritional quality, while differences in soil management suggest the importance of cultivation practices in optimizing bioactive compound content.

3.4.1. Lycopene Content

Among the P variants, P1 exhibited the highest lycopene content (7.85 mg/100 g), indicating that the combination of the Bacuni cultivar with the Albit and Turboroot fertilization scheme enhances lycopene accumulation. This may be attributed to improved nutrient availability and better overall plant health resulting from these treatments. P4 also demonstrated a relatively high lycopene level (7.55 mg/100 g), suggesting that the Orgevit and Kerafol fertilization scheme effectively promotes lycopene synthesis.

Variants P2 and P5 reported lower lycopene concentrations (6.82 mg/100 g), which could reflect the reduced efficacy of Biochar and wood vinegar in stimulating lycopene synthesis or highlight the limitations imposed by the absence of fertilization in the control variant (Figure 8).

In the RT variants, RT1 reported a lycopene content of 7.41 mg/100 g, slightly lower than P1, yet still indicative of the effectiveness of the fertilization scheme. Conversely, RT2 exhibited the lowest lycopene content (6.86 mg/100 g), despite high variability, suggesting potential inconsistencies in the effectiveness of Biochar and wood vinegar. RT4 and RT3 demonstrated intermediate lycopene levels, measuring 6.15 mg/100 g and 5.03 mg/100 g, respectively. Notably, RT3 had the lowest lycopene content, likely due to the specific nutrient profile of Nutriplant 20:20:20 and Resid or environmental stresses in protected cultivation (Figure 8).

Lycopene, a potent antioxidant, is significantly influenced by soil fertilization schemes and environmental conditions [46,47]. In plowed soil variants, higher lycopene content in P1 suggests that Albit and Turboroot positively impact accumulation, potentially due to enhanced plant vigor and nutrient absorption. In contrast, RT2 and RT3 variants exhibited lower lycopene levels, likely reflecting variations in fertilization effectiveness and controlled environmental conditions. The reduced lycopene in RT2 may also relate to high data variability, indicating that Biochar and wood vinegar may not consistently enhance lycopene in protected environments.

3.4.2. Carotenoid Content

In plowed soil, P5 recorded the highest carotenoid content (12.68 mg/100 g), indicating that carotenoid synthesis can be sustained even in the absence of fertilization, possibly due to inherent soil fertility or cultivar adaptability. P3 and P1 also exhibited relatively high carotenoid levels (12.39 mg/100 g and 12.66 mg/100 g, respectively), suggesting that these fertilization schemes favor carotenoid synthesis in Bacuni tomatoes. In contrast, P4 and P2 showed lower carotenoid contents (11.17 mg/100 g and 9.94 mg/100 g, respectively), reflecting a less effective contribution of Orgevit and Cropmax in stimulating carotenoid production (Figure 8).

Among RT variants, RT5 (control) showed moderate carotenoid content (9.09 mg/100 g), suggesting that protected environments may inherently support carotenoid synthesis even without fertilization. RT1 and RT2 reported the highest carotenoid levels (10.65 mg/100 g and 10.90 mg/100 g, respectively), reiterating that certain fertilization schemes can enhance carotenoid synthesis.

Overall, carotenoid synthesis, another important antioxidant process, exhibits variable responses to the applied fertilization schemes. In plowed soils, the high carotenoid content in the control variant suggests that soil quality and natural nutrient availability play a significant role. However, variability across both soil management types indicates that while some fertilization schemes enhance carotenoid synthesis, others may not consistently affect this process.

3.5. Determination of Total Dry Matter and Total Soluble Solids Contents in Tomato Fruits

Regarding the individual influence of the studied factors, soil management practices did not demonstrate any significant effect on either dry matter content or soluble solid content. However, analysis of the various fertilization treatments revealed significant variations (

Table 8. Sequential Influence of Soil Management and Fertilization Scheme on Total Dry Matter and Soluble Solid Content of ‘Bacuni’ Tomato Fruits.

Variant	Dry Matter (%)	Soluble Solid Content (°Bx)
P	5.29 ± 0.56	5.00 ± 0.35
RT	5.44 ± 0.49	4.77 ± 0.71
	ns	ns
A×T	5.32 ± 0.48 a	5.04 ± 0.34 ab
B×W×C	5.47 ± 0.69 a	5.19 ± 0.67 a
N×R	5.11 ± 0.43 a	4.38 ± 0.69 b
O×K	5.45 ± 0.40 a	4.85 ± 0.28 ab
U	5.47 ± 0.63 a	4.98 ± 0.52 ab

P—plowed soil; RT—soil incorporated with rotary tiller; t-Test for Equality of Means: ns—not significant; A×T—Albit×Turboroot; B×W×C—Biochar×Woodvinegar×Cropmax; N×R—Nutriplant×Resid; O×K—Orgevit×Kerafol; U-untreated; Within each column and within each experimental factor, different letters mean fertilization treatments differ significantly according to Duncan’s test at p ≤ 0.05.

). Specifically, the untreated variant (U) demonstrated the highest mean dry matter content (5.47 ± 0.63), whereas the Nutriplant×Resid treatment (NR) exhibited the lowest mean dry matter (5.11 ± 0.43).

Regarding soluble solid content, the Biochar×Woodvinegar×Cropmax treatment showed the highest value (5.19 ± 0.67), while the Nutriplant×Resid treatment again recorded the lowest (4.38 ± 0.69), highlighting the differential impact of fertilization treatments on key biochemical parameters. These findings underscore the pivotal role of fertilization strategies in modulating both dry matter and soluble solid content. The observed differences, particularly between Nutriplant×Resid and other treatments, suggest that the incorporation of specific amendments, such as Biochar×Woodvinegar×Cropmax, significantly enhances soluble solid content, which is crucial for optimizing crop yield quality.

3.5.1. Total Dry Matter Content

The total dry matter content varies based on both fertilization strategies and soil conditions, reflecting biomass accumulation. Elevated values of total dry matter observed in the control variants (A5, F4) suggest that the natural fertility of the soil or the resilience of the employed cultivar plays a crucial role (Figure 9).

Within the P variants, the control variant (P5) exhibited the highest total dry matter content, potentially attributable to the inherent quality of the soil. Fertilization schemes utilizing Albit and Turboroot (P1), as well as Biochar and Wood Vinegar (P2), also demonstrated superior total dry matter contents in Bacuni tomato fruits.

Among the RT variants, RT4 exhibited the highest dry matter content, indicating that the fertilization scheme based on Orgevit and Kerafol is highly effective in protected cultivation environments. Other fertilization schemes, such as those employing Biochar and Wood Vinegar, also highlighted significant biomass accumulation, suggesting efficient nutrient management under these conditions.

3.5.2. Soluble Solids Content

Soluble solids content in tomato fruits, expressed in degrees Brix, reflects sugar levels and contributes to fruit sweetness. The results underscore the efficacy of fertilization schemes in enhancing sugar content. The highest values observed in the control variants (representative of the P group) and those treated with Biochar, Wood Vinegar, and Cropmax (representative of the RT group) underscore the predominant influence of environmental factors and specific fertilization treatments in driving a marked enhancement of sugar concentrations in Bacuni tomato fruits (Figure 9).

3.6. Management of Diseases and Pests

Regarding disease management, among the plowed (P) variants, P1 (Bacuni × Albit + Turboroot) exhibited a low incidence of diseases, with only 8.3% infection by Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus (TSWV) and 2% by Phytophthora infestans. The combination of Albit and Turboroot appears to enhance the systemic resistance of Bacuni tomato plants, particularly against fungal infections (

Table 9. Combined Effect of Soil Management and Fertilization Scheme on Pest and Disease Management of ‘Bacuni’ Tomato Crop.

Variant	Disease and Pest Management
	Disease	Attack Severity (%)	Pest	Attack Severity %
P1	Tomato spotted wilt virus	8.3%	-	-
	Late blight (Phytophthora infestans)	2%
P2	Late blight (Phytophthora infestans)	17%	Thrips tabaci	16%
	Tobacco mosaic virus	6.7%
P3	Bacterial spot (Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria)	16%	Thrips tabaci	16%
	Tomato spotted wilt virus	16%	Tetranichus urticae	16%
	Tobacco mosaic virus	32%
P4	Tomato spotted wilt virus	16%	Tetranichus urticae	30%
	Late blight (Phytophthora infestans)	11%
P5	Late blight (Phytophthora infestans)	17%	Thrips tabaci	16%
	Tobacco mosaic virus	6%
	Bacterial spot (Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatora)	1.6%
RT1	Tomato spotted wilt virus	13.3%	-	-
	Bacterial spot (Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatora)	1.6%
	Late blight (Phytophthora infestans)	6.7%
RT2	Bacterial spot (Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatora)	1.3%	Tetranichus urticae	23%
RT3	Tomato spotted wilt virus	2.3%	Thrips tabaci	30%
	Tobacco mosaic virus	3%
RT4	Bacterial spot (Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatora)	16%	Thrips tabaci	16%
	Tobacco mosaic virus	10%	Tetranichus urticae	50%
RT5	Late blight (Phytophthora infestans)	40%	Tetranichus urticae	25%
	Tobacco mosaic virus	23%

P1—Plowed soil × Albit + Turboroot; P2—Plowed soil × Biochar + Woodvinegar + Cropmax; P3—Plowed soil × Nutriplant + Resid; P4—Plowed soil × Orgevit + Kerafol; P5—Plowed soil × Untreated; RT1—Rotary tilled soil × Albit + Turboroot; RT2—Rotary tilled soil × Biochar + Woodvinegar + Cropmax; RT3—Rotary tilled soil × Nutriplant + Resid; RT4—Rotary tilled soil × Orgevit + Kerafol; RT5—Rotary tilled soil × Untreated.

). The absence of pest attacks in this variant suggests potential suppression, although it remains unclear whether the fertilization scheme directly influenced pest populations.

P2 (Bacuni × Biochar + Wood Vinegar + Cropmax) showed a significantly higher incidence of Phytophthora infestans (17%), indicating that while biochar may enhance soil health, it is not always effective in suppressing fungal pathogens. Nevertheless, TSWV (6.7%) and Tobacco Mosaic Virus (TMV, 6.7%) remained at low levels, possibly due to the synergistic effects of biochar and wood vinegar.

P3 (Bacuni × Nutriplant + Resid) recorded a high incidence of diseases, with TSWV at 16% and TMV at 32%. Although Nutriplant provides a balanced nutrient composition, it appears insufficient to protect against viral pathogens, raising concerns regarding its effectiveness in virus-prone areas. However, Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria and Phytophthora infestans remained at manageable levels (16% and 5%, respectively), suggesting some potential for bacterial and fungal control.

P4 (Bacuni × Orgevit + Kerafol) demonstrated promising results in controlling Phytophthora infestans (11%), but high attack rates of Tetranychus urticae (30%) and TSWV (16%) indicate a need for improved pest management strategies. The relatively high pest presence may exacerbate viral transmission, making this combination less suitable in areas with high pest pressure.

The control variant exhibited the highest incidence of Phytophthora infestans (17%), similar to P2, highlighting the importance of soil treatments for pathogen management. Interestingly, TMV remained relatively low (6%), suggesting that soil tillage without amendments does not necessarily increase susceptibility to viral infections, although fungal pathogens such as Phytophthora may thrive in untreated soils.

For the rotary tilled (RT) variants, RT1 exhibited moderate disease incidence, with TSWV (13.3%) and Phytophthora infestans (6.7%) under control. The absence of pest data suggests minimal pest impact. RT2 recorded the lowest incidence of Xanthomonas campestris (1.3%), highlighting biochar’s potential in managing bacterial pathogens, but the high attack rate of Tetranychus urticae (23%) underscores the need for pest control measures.

RT3 displayed a notably low TSWV incidence (2.3%); however, Thrips tabaci (30%) remained a significant pest. Both RT4 and RT5 experienced elevated pest pressure, particularly from Tetranychus urticae (50% in RT4 and 25% in RT5). Additionally, the control variant RT5 exhibited the highest incidence of Phytophthora infestans (40%), indicating that fungal diseases remain a major challenge in protected environments without soil treatments.

3.7. Results Regarding Compaction Levels in Different Types of Soil Management for Protected Spaces

The Visual Evaluation of Soil Structure (VESS) serves as a crucial system for characterizing soil structure [48], which, in turn, can directly influence plant health, water management, and fertilizer use efficiency (

Table 10. Determination of Soil Compaction Degree in ‘Bacuni’ Tomato Crop Cultivated in Protected Spaces Under Different Types of Soil Management.

Analyzed Variants (Mean Sample)	Visual Assessment Score	Observations	Significance
P Variants	3–4	Aggregates measuring approximately 12 cm, characterized by the presence of macropores and fissures.	A well-structured matrix conducive to enhanced air and water movement; macropores facilitate rapid drainage and aeration, essential for root respiration and microbial activity, while the fissures contribute to root penetration and expansion, supporting plant stability and nutrient acquisition; the structural composition suggests an advanced degree of aggregation likely favorable for soil health, susceptibility to compaction but and enhanced overall ecosystem resilience.
RT Variants	2–3	A mixture of aggregates exhibiting varying degrees of porosity, rounded and granular, approximately 5 cm in size, with roots distributed throughout the entire sample.	An aerated soil matrix capable of facilitating root penetration and distribution, likely enhancing water retention and promoting efficient nutrient exchange; the presence of well-dispersed roots throughout the sample implies favorable conditions for root anchorage and resource absorption, indicative of a supportive environment for plant growth; this aggregate diversity also contributes to soil stability, potentially mitigating erosion and promoting sustainable soil health in agricultural applications.

P—plowed soil; RT—soil incorporated with rotary tiller.

).

The plowed variants received scores of 3 to 4, featuring aggregates measuring 12 cm, with macropores and fissures, indicative of a soil structure favorable for plant growth in protected environments. The presence of macropores contributes to efficient drainage and good aeration, which are crucial in controlled growth conditions. These characteristics can help prevent excessive water accumulation and reduce the risk of moisture-related diseases.

Conversely, the rotary tilled variants achieved scores ranging from 2 to 3, characterized by a mixture of aggregates exhibiting variable porosity and dimensions of approximately 5 cm, with roots distributed uniformly. This suggests a well-structured soil conducive to tomato development. Such a structure can facilitate adequate aeration and drainage, which are essential for root health. However, the degree of friability indicates a tendency for slight aggregate breakdown, which may adversely affect long-term structural stability

4. Discussion

Understanding the combined effects of different fertilization strategies and soil management techniques on the growth, yield, and quality of greenhouse-grown tomatoes is of paramount importance in the context of evident climate changes. By comparing various fertilization regimes alongside two distinct soil management methods—plowing and rotary incorporation—this research provides nuanced insights into optimizing tomato production under protected conditions, addressing both yield and fruit quality through the interactions of these factors. Observed variations in vegetative growth parameters, including plant height, stem diameter, and the number of secondary stems, were highly significant in evaluating the efficacy of different fertilization treatments. The rotary-tilled variant fertilized with Albit and Turboroot produced the tallest plants (58.56 cm on average), emphasizing the importance of biostimulant-enhanced fertilization. The growth-promoting effect of these fertilizers can be attributed to their stimulation of plant growth regulators such as cytokinins and gibberellins, which enhance cell division and elongation [49,50], thereby promoting early vegetative development and creating a robust framework to support fruit production [51].

Larger stem diameters, as observed in variants treated with Albit×Turboroot and Nutriplant 20:20:20 × Resid on plowed soil, correlated with greater mechanical strength [52], facilitating better vascular development and more efficient translocation of nutrients and water from roots to shoots [18,53,54,55]. The combination of optimal fertilizer composition and proper soil aeration contributed to a balance between vegetative growth and reproductive output [6,56]. Additionally, secondary stem production, which influences canopy size and photosynthetic capacity [57], was enhanced in the Nutriplant 20:20:20×Resid variant under plowed soil, suggesting that this treatment promoted a balanced hormonal profile that reduced apical dominance and encouraged lateral branching [58,59]. Increased branching expanded leaf area, directly impacting carbohydrate synthesis and allocation to developing fruits [60].

Fertilization and soil management also influenced anthocyanin and chlorophyll pigment content, reflecting the plants’ physiological responses. The control variant under plowed conditions showed a pronounced increase in anthocyanins, likely as a stress response to nutrient deprivation, indicating adaptive protective pigment production [61]. In contrast, treatments combining biochar, wood vinegar, and balanced nutrient formulations exhibited moderate anthocyanin levels, suggesting that while these amendments alleviate some stress, physiological adaptations remain necessary under challenging conditions [62,63]. Chlorophyll content was highest in biostimulant-treated variants (Albit + Turboroot) under rotary tillage, reflecting enhanced photosynthetic efficiency. Controlled greenhouse conditions further optimized light absorption and nutrient assimilation, promoting biomass accumulation [64,65]. Interestingly, even the untreated control under rotary tillage displayed elevated chlorophyll levels, implying that soil management alone can substantially influence plant health and productivity [66,67].

Yield, as the key economic trait, varied significantly across treatments. Albit×Turboroot (6166.03 g/plant in P and 6208.22 g/plant in RT) and Orgevit×Kerafol (6962.61 g/plant in P and 6264.47 g/plant in RT) consistently outperformed other treatments, demonstrating that these fertilization strategies provide an optimal balance of macro- and micronutrients during critical stages of fruit development. Nitrogen promotes vegetative growth, phosphorus supports root development and energy transfer, and potassium regulates water movement, improves fruit size, and enhances stress resistance [65,68,69,70]. Larger average fruit weights observed in RT2 were likely due to the biochar component, which enhances soil structure and water retention, ensuring a more consistent water supply during key stages of fruit growth and mitigating environmental stresses [71,72,73,74]. Variations in fruit size, as seen with Orgevit×Kerafol in RT (83.55 mm width and 50.49 mm height), reflect the influence of nutrient availability, particularly potassium and calcium, on cell division, expansion, cell wall formation, membrane stability, firmness, and post-harvest durability [75,76].

Regarding carotenoid and lycopene content, treatments significantly affected the nutritional and health-promoting properties of the fruits. Lycopene, a potent antioxidant with cardiovascular and anticancer benefits [77,78,79], reached its highest levels in the Albit×Turboroot scheme (7.85 mg/100 g in P and 7.41 mg/100 g in RT), likely due to an optimal supply of micronutrients such as magnesium, a cofactor for enzymes in carotenoid biosynthesis [80]. Carotenoid content also varied, indicating that nutrient management influenced both the quantity and quality of pigments. The untreated control achieved notably high carotene values (12.68 mg/100 g in plowed soil; 9.09 mg/100 g in rotary tillage), comparable to biochar- and biostimulant-treated variants, highlighting the interplay between nutrient availability, soil structure, and biochemical pathways in determining fruit quality [81].

Total dry matter content, a measure of organic compound accumulation that affects fruit flavor, texture, and storability [82,83], was highest in the RT variants Orgevit×Kerafol (5.78%) and Biochar×Wood vinegar×Cropmax (5.57%), reflecting improved water and nutrient uptake as well as photosynthetic efficiency from larger and healthier leaf area. Conversely, in the P group, the highest dry matter content was unexpectedly observed in the control (5.78%). Soluble solids (°Brix), a proxy for sugar concentration that play a critical role in defining both the sensory attributes and post-harvest quality of tomato fruits [84,85] were highest in the Biochar×Wood vinegar×Cropmax RT variant (5.68 °Brix), suggesting enhanced photosynthate partitioning to fruits, whereas the P variant showed lower values (4.70 °Brix). Reduced soluble solids in the Nutriplant×Resid treatment, despite favorable growth, may reflect a dilution effect: nutrient-driven vegetative growth increases biomass, diverting carbon allocation from sugar accumulation to structural expansion, a phenomenon documented in processing tomatoes under high nitrogen regimes [86,87,88,89].

The effect of fertilization on disease and pest management was also significant. Lower disease severity in Biochar×Wood vinegar×Cropmax treatments underscores the role of soil amendments in enhancing plant defenses. Biochar, with high surface area and capacity to improve microbial diversity, likely suppresses soil-borne pathogens through competitive microbial interactions [90,91,92,93]. Organic-based fertilizers in Orgevit×Kerafol can stimulate innate plant immunity via secondary metabolites, such as phenolic compounds, which strengthen cell walls and produce antimicrobial substances that deter pests and diseases [94,95,96,97]. Reduced attacks by pests like Tetranychus urticae in biochar- and organic-amended variants indicate that these strategies promote healthier, more resilient plants, reducing reliance on chemical pesticides.

In summary, the interaction between fertilization strategies and soil management techniques profoundly influenced tomato vegetative growth, physiological performance, fruit yield, quality, nutritional content, and resistance to pests and diseases. Treatments incorporating biostimulants such as Albit and Turboroot or organic amendments such as Orgevit + Kerafol consistently enhanced growth, photosynthetic efficiency, yield, fruit size, and carotenoid content, while biochar and wood vinegar contributed to stress resilience, improved soluble solids, and disease suppression. These findings highlight the necessity of integrated fertilization and soil management approaches to optimize the productivity and quality of greenhouse-grown tomatoes under variable environmental conditions.

Soil management, particularly the method of tillage, had a pronounced influence on plant growth and productivity. Rotary incorporation, by improving soil aeration and aggregate formation, provided a more favorable environment for root development compared to plowing. The benefits of this method, especially in enhancing the upper soil structure [98], likely facilitated more efficient nutrient and water uptake during periods of rapid vegetative growth. While plowing can promote deep root penetration, it may lead over time to compaction of the upper soil layers [99,100], thereby limiting oxygen availability to roots and restricting the movement of water and nutrients [101]. In contrast, the more porous structure maintained under rotary incorporation supports healthier root systems and allows plants to access a broader spectrum of nutrients [102]. The reduced compaction associated with this method could explain the higher yields observed in most fertilization strategies, with the exception of the Orgevit×Kerafol variant. Reduced compaction favors root proliferation and increases access to water and nutrients, while the gradual accumulation of organic matter in these soils can enhance nutrient retention, reduce the need for excessive fertilization, and improve the long-term sustainability of the cropping system [103].

A deeper understanding of these results emerges when considering plant physiological processes and rhizosphere dynamics. The type and composition of fertilizer directly influence nutrient availability, microbial community structure, and phytohormonal balance, which in turn shape vegetative growth and fruit quality traits [104,105]. Organic amendments such as chicken manure-based fertilizers (e.g., Orgevit) offer a slow-release nutrient profile enriched with organic carbon, fostering microbial proliferation and enhancing nutrient mineralization [106]. Biostimulants such as Albit, Turboroot, and Kerafol have been documented to activate plant defense pathways, improve root architecture, and modulate antioxidant metabolism, leading to improved stress resilience and yield stability under controlled-environment conditions [53,54]. Differences in soluble solids content and other quality parameters across treatments may reflect variations in carbon partitioning, sink–source dynamics, and water relations arising from these physiological and microbiological interactions [107]. When viewed in the context of previous greenhouse studies, it becomes evident that such responses are highly context-dependent, shaped by environmental conditions, crop genotype, and the specific biochemical profile of each input [108]. Considering these aspects not only clarifies the mechanistic basis of the present findings but also situates them within the broader framework of sustainable horticultural production.

4.1. Implications for Greenhouse Production, Economic Viability, and Environmental Adaptability

The findings of this study present significant implications for greenhouse-based cultivation systems, where production inputs are closely regulated and cost-efficiency is critical. The demonstrated ability of biochar- and wood vinegar–enriched fertilization management practices (FMPs) to promote both vegetative growth and reproductive development provides tangible agronomic advantages under controlled environmental conditions.

From an economic standpoint, the porous structure of biochar enhances nutrient retention and stimulates microbial activity, potentially reducing the frequency and volume of chemical fertilizer applications. This can improve long-term cost–benefit outcomes, particularly in high-value horticultural systems [109,110]. While the initial production cost of biochar—reported at USD $450–$2,080 per ton—can be substantial, these expenses may be offset over time by gains in yield stability, improved resource use efficiency, and potential benefits from carbon sequestration credits [109,111]. In Mediterranean-type greenhouse production systems, biochar applications have demonstrated economic returns within three to six years, when reductions in irrigation and fertilization costs are factored in alongside carbon savings.

Although the present experiments were conducted under temperate greenhouse conditions, the physiological mechanisms underpinning these benefits—such as enhanced root-zone aeration, improved water-holding capacity, and microbially mediated nutrient cycling—are broadly applicable across diverse environmental contexts [109]. Successful adaptation to different climates and production scales, however, would require careful calibration of application rates, irrigation regimes, and substrate formulations to ensure optimal results.

Overall, integrating these sustainable amendments into greenhouse cultivation offers growers an evidence-based pathway to enhance productivity while improving resource stewardship, contributing to broader goals of carbon emission reduction and long-term agronomic resilience. In addition, biostimulants such as Albit, Turboroot, and Kerafol—which act by enhancing root morphogenesis, optimizing nutrient assimilation, and stimulating plant hormonal pathways—provide notable advantages in controlled environments, where precise management of root-zone conditions facilitates rapid plant establishment and sustained productivity [112]. Similarly, chicken manure–based organic fertilizers such as Orgevit, with their slow-release nutrient profile and high organic matter content, support long-term substrate fertility, reduce reliance on synthetic fertilizers, and align with both economic efficiency and environmental sustainability targets in protected horticulture [113].

4.2. Recommendation and Long-Term Perspectives

The implications of these findings hold particular significance for growers seeking to enhance the sustainability of tomato production. The application of biochar and organic fertilizers not only supports improved plant growth and yield but also contributes to enhanced soil health, a cornerstone of long-term agricultural sustainability. The observed reduction in pest and disease severity under these treatments further suggests that biologically active fertilization strategies can lessen dependence on chemical inputs such as pesticides and synthetic fertilizers. Coupling these inputs with appropriate soil management practices—particularly those that minimize compaction and improve aeration—can substantially enhance nutrient uptake and overall plant health, a factor of critical importance in greenhouse systems where soil quality may decline over time due to intensive production cycles. Gaining a deeper understanding of how these fertilization schemes influence soil microbial communities and nutrient cycling will be essential for refining sustainable production strategies. Furthermore, investigating the interactions between soil management methods and fertilization regimes offers a pathway toward optimizing greenhouse tomato cultivation in a way that maximizes both yield and fruit quality while preserving environmental integrity.

4.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions

While the present study provides valuable insights into the interactive effects of fertilization strategies and soil management techniques on greenhouse tomato production, several limitations should be acknowledged. This study was conducted in a single greenhouse location, which may limit the applicability of results to other environments and tomato cultivars. Long-term effects of repeated applications of biochar, organic fertilizers, and biostimulants on soil health and microbial communities also remain to be in depth explored. Moreover, although preliminary economic considerations were addressed, a comprehensive cost–benefit assessment and life-cycle evaluation were not undertaken. Future work should therefore include multi-season and multi-location trials, coupled with detailed studies on soil microbiology, nutrient cycling, and comprehensive economic assessments. Such efforts will help refine best practices and support the broader adoption of sustainable tomato production strategies.

5. Conclusions

This study demonstrates that the interaction between soil management practices and targeted fertilization strategies exerts a decisive influence on the growth, yield, and quality of greenhouse-grown Bacuni tomatoes. Distinct effects were observed between plowed and rotary-tilled soils; while both systems supported vigorous vegetative development, plowing favored higher fruit numbers, whereas rotary tillage produced fewer but larger fruits. When fertilization regimes were aligned with soil structural characteristics, total yield was optimized.

Biostimulants such as Albit and Turboroot, in combination with organic amendments such as Orgevit, consistently enhanced vegetative vigor, fruit size, antioxidant capacity, and carotenoid content, underscoring the value of integrating nutrient supply with root-targeted stimulation to achieve simultaneous gains in productivity and nutritional quality. In contrast, treatments with biochar and wood vinegar were associated with reduced growth under the experimental conditions, likely due to transient nutrient immobilization. This finding highlights the importance of optimizing application timing and dosage when implementing such amendments in greenhouse systems.

Physiological assessments indicated that chlorophyll and anthocyanin dynamics were modulated by both soil preparation and biostimulant application, reflecting the central role of integrated environmental and fertilization management in optimizing photosynthetic performance and stress resilience. Pest and pathogen pressures remained a critical factor, with Albit- and Turboroot-based treatments conferring improved resistance to viral and fungal pathogens, although targeted pest control remains necessary to mitigate susceptibility to Thrips tabaci, Tetranychus urticae, and other biotic stressors.

Furthermore, soil structural properties were shown to be pivotal in determining root development and nutrient uptake efficiency. Rotary tillage generated large, stable aggregates that facilitated water and nutrient absorption, while more friable, less stable soils benefitted from amendment-based interventions to alleviate compaction and reduce nutrient losses.

Overall, these results emphasize the necessity of harmonizing soil management, fertilization strategy, and environmental control to achieve sustainable intensification of greenhouse tomato production. Adaptive management approaches—integrating biostimulants, organic amendments, and soil structural optimization—offer a viable pathway toward high-yield, nutritionally enriched, and resilient horticultural systems.