Optimizing tomato production with IoT-enabled precision irrigation: A case study of water and fertilizer management
Downloads
Published
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58993/ijh/2025.82.2.10Keywords:
Automated irrigation, fertigation, sensors, IoT, yieldIssue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Mahesh salimath, Nirmal Kaliannan, Sushant Ranjan, Varun Prabhakar

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Precision irrigation is key for increasing tomato yields, especially given the crop’s high-water demands. This study uses Internet of Things (IoT) technology and wireless sensor networks for automated irrigation and fertigation to improve water and fertilizer management for two tomato varieties, ‘Sahoo’ and ‘SVTD8323’, addressing resource inefficiency and water scarcity. The research compares different irrigation thresholds: -23 kPa during the seedling stage (100% water availability) and -30 kPa from vegetative to maturity stages (80% water availability). Fertigation schedules include 100% (F1) and 75% (F2) of the recommended fertilizer dose against a control treatment (constant -23 kPa) using Indian Institute of Horticulture Research fertilizer guidelines. Results show that ‘Sahoo’ under IF1 and IF2 treatments had a 12.5% and 13.5% yield increase over the control, using 34.9% and 38.7% less water, respectively. For ‘SVTD8323’, yields increased by 4.8% and 12.5% with water savings of 35.9% and 29% under IF1 and IF2. Additionally, IF2 treatment for ‘Sahoo’ and ‘SVTD8323’ resulted in a 31% and 14% rise in the number of fruits per plant, and an 8% and 5.5% increase in fruit weight, respectively. Cost analysis indicated that the control incurred the highest costs, with benefit-to-cost ratios of 1.28 and 1.34 for ‘Sahoo’ under IF1 and IF2, and 1.11 and 1.42 for ‘SVTD8323’. IoT-enabled irrigation at 75% RDF significantly improves yield and resource efficiency. Results show that ‘Sahoo’ under IF1 and IF2 treatments had a 12.5% and 13.5% yield increase over the control, using 34.9% and 38.7% less water, respectively. For ‘SVTD8323’, yields increased by 4.8% and 12.5% with water savings of 35.9% and 29% under IF1 and IF2. Additionally, IF2 treatment for ‘Sahoo’ and ‘SVTD8323’ resulted in a 31% and 14% rise in the number of fruits per plant, and an 8% and 5.5% increase in fruit weight, respectively. Cost analysis indicated that the control incurred the highest costs, with benefit-to-cost ratios of 1.28 and 1.34 for ‘Sahoo’ under IF1 and IF2, and 1.11 and 1.42 for ‘SVTD8323’. IoT-enabled irrigation at 75% RDF significantly improves yield and resource efficiency.Abstract
How to Cite
Downloads
1. Argo, W. R. and Biernbaum, J. A. 1994. The effect of irrigation method, water-soluble fertilization, replant nutrient charge, and surface evaporation on early vegetative and root growth of poinsettia. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 120: 163–169. 2. Aujla, M. S., Thind, H. S. and Buttar, G. S. 2007. Fruit yield and water use efficiency of eggplant (Solanum melongema L.) as influenced by different quantities of nitrogen and water applied through drip and furrow irrigation. Sci. Hortic.112: 142–148. 3. Eisenhauer, D. E., Martin, D. L, Heeren, D. M. and Hoffman, G. J. 2021. Irrigation systems management, Am. Soc. Agric. Biol. Eng., doi:10.13031/ISM.2021.1 4. Gutiérrez, J., Villa-Medina, J. F., Nieto-Garibay, A. and Porta-Gándara, M. Á. 2013. Automated irrigation system using a wireless sensor network and GPRS module. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas.63: 166–176. 5. Hicklenton, P. R. and Cairns, K. G. 1996. Plant water relations and mineral nutrition of containerized nursery plants in relation to irrigation method. Can. J. Plant Sci. 76: 155–160. 6. Jiang, H. M., Zhang, J. F., Song, X. Z., Liu, Z. H., Jiang, L. H. and Yang, J. C. 2012. Responses of agronomic benefit and soil quality to better management of nitrogen fertilizer application in greenhouse vegetable land. Pedosphere 22: 650–660. 7. Melvin, S. R. and Martin, D. L. 2018. Irrigation scheduling strategies when using soil water data. EC 3036. University of Nebraska-Lincoln Ext. 8. Monte, J. A., Carvalho, D. F. d., Médici, L. O., Silva, L. D. B. and Pimentel, C. 2013. Growth analysis and yield of tomato crop under different irrigation depths. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agríc. Ambient. 17(9): 926-931. 9. Mukherjee, S., Dash, P. K., Das, D. and Das, S. 2023. Growth, yield and water productivity of tomato as influenced by deficit irrigation water management. Environ. Process. 10: 10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40710-023-00624-z 10. Nangare, D. D., Singh, Y., Kumar, P. S. and Minhas, P. S. 2016. Growth, fruit yield and quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) as affected by deficit irrigation regulated on phenological basis. Agric. Water Manag. 171: 73–79. 11. Palconit, M. G. B., Macachor, E. B., Notarte, M. P., Molejon, W. L., Visitacion, A. Z., Rosales, M. A. and Dadios, E. P. 2020. IoT-based precision irrigation system for eggplant and tomato. 9th Int. Symp. Comput. Intell. Ind. Appl. (ISCIIA 2020). 12. Pramanik, S., Tripathi, S. K., Ray, R. and Banerjee, H. 2014. Economic evaluation of dripfertigation system in Banana cv. Martaman (AAB, Silk) cultivation in the new alluvium zone of West Bengal. Agric. Econ. Res. Rev. 27(347-2016-17115): 103-109. 13. Rohith, G. V., Rashmi, K. S., Hamsa, K. R., Lekshmi, U. D., Rajeshwari, D., Manjunatha, A. V. and Olekar, J. 2015. Incorporating the cost of irrigation water in the currently underestimated cost of cultivation: an empirical treatise. Indian J. Agric. Econ., 70: 1-14, 10.22004/ag.econ.230067 14. Rolfe, C. J., Currey, A. and Atkinson, I. 1994. Horticultural research; NSW agriculture; nursery industry association of australia. managing water in plant nurseries: A guide to irrigation, drainage and water recycling in containerised plant nurseries; NSW Agriculture: Wollongbar, NSW, Australia. 15. Sibomana, I. C., Aguyoh, J. N. and Opiyo, A. M. 2013. Water stress affects growth and yield of container grown tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill) plants. Glob. J. Bio-Sci. BioTechnol. 2: 461-466. 16. Singh, D., Biswal, A. K., Samanta, D., Singh, V., Kadry, S., Khan, A. and Nam, Y. 2023. Smart high-yield tomato cultivation: precision irrigation system using the Internet of Things. Front. Plant Sci. 14: 1239594. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2023.12395941 17. Sun, Y., Hu, K. L., Fan, Z. B., Wei, Y. P., Lin, S. and Wang, J. G. 2013. Simulating the fate of nitrogen and optimizing water and nitrogen management of greenhouse tomato in North China using the EU-Rotate_N model. Agric. Water Manag. 128:72–84. Doi. 10.1016/j.agwat.2013.06.016. 18. Tesfay, T., Berhane, A. and Gebremariam, M. 2019. Optimizing irrigation water and nitrogen fertilizer levels for tomato production. Open Agric. J. 13:198-206. DOI: 10.2174/1874331501913010198. 19. Wan, S. 2008. Effect of saline water on tomato growth and yield by drip irrigation in semi-humid regions of north China. Trans. CSAE 24: 30–35. 20. Wan, X., Li, B., Chen, D., Long, X., Deng, Y., Wu, H. and Hu, J. 2021. Irrigation decision model for tomato seedlings based on optimal photosynthetic rate. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng., 14:115–122. 21. Wang, X. and Xing, Y. 2017. Evaluation of the effects of irrigation and fertilization on tomato fruit yield and quality: a principal component analysis. Sci. Rep. 7: 350. 22. Zhai, Y., Yang, Q. and Hou, M. 2015. The effects of saline water drip irrigation on tomato yield, quality, and blossom-end rot incidence: A case study in the south of China. PLoS ONE, 10(11):e0142204. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142204 23. Zhao, F. Yoshida, H. Goto, E. and Hikosaka, S. 2022. Development of an irrigation method with a cycle of wilting partial recovery using an imagebased irrigation system for high-quality tomato production. Agronomy. 12: 1410.
References
Similar Articles
- Swati Barche, Pradeep Singh, Hind Mahasagar, D.B. Singh, Response of foliar application of micronutrients on tomato variety Rashmi , Indian Journal of Horticulture: Vol. 68 No. 02 (2011): Indian Journal of Horticulture
- Amit K. Gaikwad, D.S. Cheema, Studies on heterosis using heat tomato tolerant lines , Indian Journal of Horticulture: Vol. 69 No. 04 (2012): Indian Journal of Horticulture
- S. Rani, D. Rajakumar, N. Shoba, H.P. Maheswarappa, Productivity and economic advantages of flower crops in coconut based intercropping system , Indian Journal of Horticulture: Vol. 75 No. 02 (2018): Indian Journal of Horticulture
- A.V. Barad, B.M. Nandre, N.H. Sonwalkar, Effect of NPK levels on gerbera cv. Sangria under net house conditions , Indian Journal of Horticulture: Vol. 67 No. 03 (2010): Indian Journal of Horticulture
- S.K. Banyal, S.K. Sharma, Effect of fertigation and rootstocks on yield and quality of apple under high density plantation , Indian Journal of Horticulture: Vol. 68 No. 03 (2011): Indian Journal of Horticulture
- Mohammad Nasar, Md. Abu Kausar, Md Abu Nayyer, Vikash Kumar, Md. Arshad Anwer, The Explainable AI for mango leaf disease detection: bridging the gap between model accuracy and farmers usability , Indian Journal of Horticulture: Vol. 82 No. 03 (2025): Indian Journal of Horticulture
- Tamoghna Saha, Nithya C, Kalmesh M, S.N. Ray, Evaluation of trellis system for pest management in bitter gourd , Indian Journal of Horticulture: Vol. 73 No. 03 (2016): Indian Journal of Horticulture
- Arunadevi K., Ashok A. D., Singh M., Estimation of evapotranspiration of capsicum under polyhosue and open field condition , Indian Journal of Horticulture: Vol. 79 No. 02 (2022): Indian Journal of Horticulture
- N. Bhowmick, B.C. Banik, M.A. Hasan, B. Ghosh, Response of pre-harvest foliar application of zinc and boron on mango cv. Amrapali under New Alluvial Zone of West Bengal , Indian Journal of Horticulture: Vol. 69 No. 03 (2012): Indian Journal of Horticulture
- Madhubala Thakre, Shant Lal, A.K. Goswami, Pratibha, Effect of various methods of crop regulation in guava under double-hedge row system of planting , Indian Journal of Horticulture: Vol. 70 No. 2 (2013): Indian Journal of Horticulture
<< < 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 > >>
You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.
