{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03392330383480826, 'fraction_numerical': 0.022861356932153392, 'mean_word_length': 4.977973568281938, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effect of Partial Root Drying and Deficit Irrigation on Yield and Water Use Efficiency of Tomato Grown Under Greenhouse

Water conservation strategies are becoming increasingly important as a result of the shortage of water and climate change. The purpose of this study is to address water-saving irrigation strategies by evaluating the effect of partial root drying irrigation (PRD) and Deficit Irrigation (DI) practice on the yield and water use efficiency of tomatoes (Shivam variety). The treatments were partial root drying (PRD) at 75% and 50% crop evapotranspiration, ETc (PRD25 and PRD50, respectively), and deficit irrigation (DI) at 75% and 50% of ETc (DI25 and DI50, respectively). The PRD practice requires wetting one half of the root zone and keeping the other half dry, consequently using less amount of irrigation water that was applied. In the successive irrigations, the wet and dry sides were alternated. Over a growing season after transplanting, the highest fruit yield was obtained under FULL irrigation (225 t ha-1). In comparison to deficit irrigation that received the same quantity of water, the PRD treatments produced an increased yield of 5–10%. PRD and DI irrigation improved WUE considerably, and that was 30.35% and 25.71% respectively higher than FI. Results suggest that PRD treatment may be an option in a water shortage.