Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Hortic.
Sec. Controlled Environment Horticulture
Volume 3 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fhort.2024.1425285

Microclimate monitoring in commercial tomato (Solanum Lycopersicum L.) greenhouse production and its effect on plant growth, yield and fruit quality

Provisionally accepted
Jakub Šalagovič Jakub Šalagovič 1Dorien Vanhees Dorien Vanhees 2Pieter Verboven Pieter Verboven 1Kristof Holsteens Kristof Holsteens 3Bert Verlinden Bert Verlinden 2Marlies Huysmans Marlies Huysmans 4Bram Van De Poel Bram Van De Poel 3,5*Bart Nicolai Bart Nicolai 1,2*
  • 1 Division of Mechatronics, Biostatistics and Sensors, Department of Biosystems, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
  • 2 Vlaams Centrum voor Bewaring van Tuinbouwproducten (VCBT), Leuven, Belgium
  • 3 Division of Crop Biotechnics, Department of Biosystems, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
  • 4 Proefcentrum Hoogstraten, Meerle, Belgium
  • 5 Plant Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Introduction: High annual tomato yields are achieved using high-tech greenhouse production systems. Large greenhouses typically rely only on one central weather station per compartment to steer their internal climate, ignoring possible microclimate conditions within the greenhouse itself. Methods: In this study, we analysed spatial variation in temperature and vapour pressure deficit in a commercial tomato greenhouse setting for three consecutive years. Multiple sensors were placed within the crop canopy, which revealed microclimate gradients. Results and Discussion: Different microclimates were present throughout the year, with seasonal (spring – summer – autumn) and diurnal (day – night) variations in temperature (up to 3 °C, daily average) and vapour pressure deficit (up to 0.6 kPa, daily average). The microclimate effects influenced in part the variation in plant and fruit growth rate and fruit yield – maximum recorded difference between two locations with different microclimates was 0.4 cm d-1 for stem growth rate, 0.6 g d-1 for fruit growth rate, 80 g for truss mass at harvest. The local microclimate effect on plant growth was always larger than the bulk climate variation measured by a central sensor, as commonly done in commercial greenhouses. Quality attributes of harvested tomato fruit did not show a significant difference between different microclimate conditions. In conclusion, we showed that even small, naturally occurring, differences in local environment conditions within a greenhouse may influence the rate of plant and fruit growth. These findings could encourage the sector to deploy larger sensor networks for optimal greenhouse climate control. A sensor grid covering the whole area of the greenhouse is a necessity for climate control strategies to mitigate suboptimal conditions.

    Keywords: Tomato, Microclimate, temperature, Vapour pressure deficit, yield, fruit quality

    Received: 29 Apr 2024; Accepted: 23 Sep 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Šalagovič, Vanhees, Verboven, Holsteens, Verlinden, Huysmans, Van De Poel and Nicolai. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence:
    Bram Van De Poel, Division of Crop Biotechnics, Department of Biosystems, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, KU Leuven, Leuven, 3001, Belgium
    Bart Nicolai, Division of Mechatronics, Biostatistics and Sensors, Department of Biosystems, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, KU Leuven, Leuven, 3001, Belgium

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.