Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A field experiment was conducted at the College of Agriculture, Shivamogga, during the summer seasons of 2023–24 and 2024–25. The experiment was laid out in split-plot design with factorial concept with 3 replications. The main plots comprised of 2 tomato types (M1: staking, M2: stakeless); in sub plot, factor A consisted of 3 nutrient levels (D1 : 125 : 125 : 125 kg N : P2O5 : K2O ha-1; D2: 187.5 : 187.5 : 187.5 kg N : P2O5 : K2O ha-1 and D3 : 250 : 250 : 250 kg N : P2O5 : K2O ha-1) and factor B included 3 scheduling (S1: Entire quantity during planting; S2: 50 % during planting and 50 % at 25 DAT; and S3: 50 % during planting, 25 % at 25 DAT and 25 % at 50 DAT). Results revealed that staking tomato recorded significantly higher plant height (138.63 cm) than the stakeless type, while other growth and yield parameters were statistically similar. Moderate nutrient levels (D2) and 3-split scheduling (S3) significantly enhanced vegetative growth and fruit yield, with the highest plant height (153.27 cm), dry matter (140.61 g plant-1) and yield (76.83 t ha-1). Other 2-way and 3-way interactions were found to be non-significant. Correlation analysis revealed strong positive relationships between growth and yield. The study suggests that stakeless tomato with moderate, well-timed nutrient application is a cost-effective alternative to staking, offering comparable productivity with lower labour and input costs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nisarga et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: