Services on Demand
Journal
Article
Indicators
-
Cited by SciELO -
Access statistics
Related links
-
Similars in
SciELO
uBio
Share
Journal of the Selva Andina Biosphere
Print version ISSN 2308-3867On-line version ISSN 2308-3859
J. Selva Andina Biosph. vol.13 no.2 La Paz 2025 Epub Nov 30, 2025
https://doi.org/10.36610/j.jsabs.20252290
COMUNICACIONES CORTAS
Fertigation in mulched fields for the Starfighter lettuce cultivar. An alternative to consider
1 State University of the South of Manabí. Faculty of Natural Sciences and Agriculture. Km 1.5 via Noboa, Los Angeles Campus. Panama hat. Tel: + 05-2600229/05-2601657/05-2600223. Manabí, Ecuador.
2 Independent professional. Manabí, Ecuador.
Con el objetivo de analizar la respuesta del cultivar Starfighter de lechuga a la fertirrigación en campo acolchado, fue implementada una parcela experimental en campo. Los 3 tratamientos fueron en un diseño experimental de bloques completamente aleatorios (T1 fertirrigación media, T2 fertirrigación alta, T3 fertirrigación básica, como acostumbra el agricultor), y 4 repeticiones. Se bloqueó el efecto del tiempo de trasplante. Los análisis de varianza y de medias mediante Tukey al 5 % fueron realizados con la técnica de medidas repetidas en el tiempo. Cada unidad experimental estuvo constituida por 40 plantas sembradas en 4 hileras a 0.20 m entre plantas y 1.80 m entre platabandas. Se evaluaron las 20 plantas de las hileras centrales. Las variables de respuesta fueron: altura de planta, número de hojas, diámetro de la cabeza, porcentaje de área foliar, largo de raíz, peso de planta y sabor. Los resultados refieren, T2 de fertirrigación (alta) fue la que mejor respuesta expreso, con un promedio de 25 hojas, porcentaje de área foliar de 59.95 %, diámetro de la cabeza 22.59 cm y peso 184 g por planta, en relación a T3 (testigo). Las hojas en los 3 tratamientos fueron frescas y no presentaron picantes. Fue notorio el uso del acolchado, riego por goteo y fertirrigación en la mejora de la producción del cultivar Starfighter, que no tuvo ningún ataque de plagas ni de enfermedades.
Palabras clave: Tamaño de raíz; calidad de hoja; frescura; peso de planta; sabor picante
In order to analyze the response of the Starfighter lettuce cultivar to fertigation in mulched field, an experimental field plot was implemented. The 3 treatments were in an experimental design of completely randomized blocks (T1 medium fertigation, T2 high fertigation, T3 basic fertigation, as the farmer is accustomed to), and 4 replications. The effect of transplant time was blocked. Analyses of variance and means using Tukey at 5 % were performed using the technique of repeated measures over time. Each experimental unit consisted of 40 plants planted in 4 rows at 0.20 m between plants and 1.80 m between platforms. The 20 plants in the center rows were evaluated. The response variables were: plant height, number of leaves, head diameter, percentage of leaf area, root length, plant weight and flavor. The results refer to the best response expressed by fertigation T2, with an average of 25 leaves, a percentage of leaf area of 59.95 %, head diameter 22.59 cm and weight 184 g per plant, in relation to T3 (control). The leaves in the 3 treatments were fresh and did not present spiciness. The use of mulching, drip irrigation and fertigation in the improvement of the production of the Starfighter cultivar was notorious, which did not have any attack of pests or diseases.
Keywords: Root size; leaf quality; freshness; plant weight; pungent flavor
Introduction
In today's agriculture, the efficient use of available irrigation water resources is essential to increase agricultural production, thus ensuring food and nutritional security for a constantly growing population. Water and fertilizers are two key factors that determine agricultural production; both are becoming scarce and expensive over time1. In the face of dwindling land resources, increasing water scarcity, rising fertilizer prices, energy crises, environmental pollution, and the rapid degradation of other natural resources, it is necessary to improve nutrient and water use efficiency for the sustainability of agriculture2.
Lack of irrigation usually results in poor crop growth and vigor, which reduces yield and quality; while overwatering not only causes water loss, but also increases vulnerability to various diseases and contamination of surface and groundwater, due to fertilizer leach3. Therefore, efficient irrigation systems are needed, not only to overcome the aforementioned problems, but also to promote the sustainable use of resources4. The rational use of water resources such as drip irrigation is necessary to improve the yield, quality and efficiency of water use in crops, especially vegetables.
In drip irrigation, water is delivered drop by drop near the root zone continuously or at frequent intervals. The regulated supply of water via drippers not only provides conditions conducive to root flowering, but also ensures optimal nutrient acquisition and ultimately better shoot growth5. Drip irrigation helps to reduce overexploitation of water resources that are otherwise overused by inefficient surface irrigation methods6. In addition, untimely nutrient application after an inappropriate application method leads to severe nutrient losses through leaching and fixation with low use efficiency7. The use of fertilizers is also optimized with drip irrigation and is called fertigation8. Drip fertigation optimizes nutrient use by applying them at critical stages, resulting in better absorption and higher efficiency of use, thus ensuring greater water and nutrient savings, as well as higher crop yield and quality9,10. Fertigation by drip irrigation also reduces energy consumption, improves disease and pest control, labor cost, and is feasible in all types of terrain9.
Plastic mulching technology, widely used since the 1950s, has revolutionized modern agriculture by improving the microenvironment of crops. Thanks to its thermal insulation and moisture retention properties, it raises the floor temperature by 3 to 5° C and reduces water evaporation by up to 50 %. In addition, it acts as a physical barrier that decreases weed germination by more than 60 %, limits soil-borne diseases and optimizes the use of light and heat by 20 %. These effects translate into an increase in crop yields of between 15 and 25 %, significantly improving commercial productivity11,12.
On the other hand, it is known that the world production of lettuce is estimated at 26,866,557 t per year with an average yield of 21.89 t ha13. Data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations indicate that the main producer of this species is Spain, as it exports to more than 53 countries, exceeding 900,000 tons per year13.
In Ecuador, it is one of the main vegetables for fresh consumption, it is grown from 2800 meters above sea level in the center of the country; its popularity increased progressively, as it is a product with a pleasant, nutritional, medicinal flavor and low caloric content. Lettuce is produced at any time of the year and like the rest of the vegetables, it is a supplier of vitamins, minerals and salts, essential for the body. The awareness that exists to maintain health has increased the consumption of fruits and vegetables, which includes the different types of lettuce14-16. Lettuce is grown mainly in the Sierra with about 1145 ha, and an average yield of 7928 kg ha-1. The main provinces producing this crop are Cotopaxi (481 ha), Tungurahua (325 ha) and Carchi (96 ha)17.
For all the above, the objective of this research was to analyze the response of the Starfighter lettuce cultivar to fertigation in mulched field, in the area of Puerto la Boca, Manabí.
Materials and methods
Geographical location. The research was carried out in a greenhouse owned by Mr. Miguel Correa, in the Puerto La Boca Campus, in the Puerto Cayo Parish, in the Jipijapa Canton, located at 1°18'20'' South latitude and 80°45'42" West longitude, at an altitude of 53 meters above sea level. The average temperature is 24.8° C/year and the average rainfall is 298 mm/year, with rainfall concentrated in the month of February and the driest month in August18.
Table 1 Doses of macronutrients required for lettuce fertigation by growth stages, corresponding to T1
| Nutrients | Dosage (ppm) | Dosage (mL L-1) | Fertilizer | g 100 L-1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| First stage: 15-20 days after transplant | ||||
| Nitrogen | 120 | .12 | ||
| Phosphorus (P2O5) | 120 | .12 | Monopotassium phosphate | 3.75 |
| Potassium (K2O) | 120 | .12 | Potassium nitrate | 55.33 |
| Calcium (CaC) | 60 | .06 | Calcium nitrate | 61.20 |
| Magnesium (MgO) | 30 | .03 | Magnesium Sulfate | 10.89 |
| Sulfur | 168 | .168 | Potassium Sulfate | 61.00 |
| Iron | 5 | .05 | Iron chelate (10 % iron): | 5.00 |
| Second stage: 25-30 days after transplantation | ||||
| Conductivity from 1.5 to 1.8 mS | ||||
| Nitrogen | 120 | .12 | ||
| Phosphorus (P2O5) | 120 | .12 | Monopotassium phosphate | 3.75 |
| Potassium (K2O) | 150 | .12 | Potassium nitrate | 69.17 |
| Calcium (CaC) | 80 | .08 | Calcium nitrate | 81.60 |
| Magnesium (MgO) | 40 | .04 | Magnesium Sulfate | 14.52 |
| Sulfur | 168 | .168 | Potassium Sulfate | 61.00 |
| Iron | 5 | .05 | Iron chelate (10 % iron): | 5.00 |
The experiment was carried out between the months of September and October 2022.
Study factors. The research was single-factorial, the study factor was the application of 2 fertigation strategies and a control (T1 medium fertigation, T2 high fertigation, T3 basic fertigation, as the farmer does) in the lettuce Starfighter cultivar.
Treatments. The sources and treatments applied were 3 doses of fertilizers (Tables 1, 2).
Table 2 Doses of macronutrients required for lettuce fertigation by growth stages, corresponding to T2
| First stage: 15-20 days after transplant | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0 mS conductivity | ||||
| Nitrogen | 140 | .14 | ||
| Phosphorus (P2O5) | 120 | .12 | Monopotassium phosphate | 55.20 |
| Potassium (K2O) | 200 | .12 | Potassium nitrate | 6.25 |
| Calcium (CaC) | 120 | .12 | Calcium nitrate | 55.33 |
| Magnesium (MgO) | 60 | .06 | Magnesium Sulfate | 61.20 |
| Sulfur | 168 | .168 | Potassium Sulfate | 61.00 |
| Iron | 5 | .05 | Iron chelate (10 % iron): | 5.00 |
| Second stage: 25-30 days after transplantation | ||||
| Conductivity from 2.5 to 2.8 mS | ||||
| Nitrogen | 140 | .14 | ||
| Phosphorus (P2O5) | 120 | .12 | Monopotassium phosphate | 55.20 |
| Potassium (K2O) | 270 | .27 | Potassium nitrate | 8.44 |
| Calcium (CaC) | 140 | .14 | Calcium nitrate | 64.56 |
| Magnesium (MgO) | 70 | .07 | Magnesium Sulfate | 71.40 |
| Sulfur | 168 | .168 | Potassium Sulfate | 61.00 |
| Iron | 5 | .05 | Iron chelate (10 % iron): | 5.00 |
The T3 treatment (basic fertilization, as the farmer does).
Experimental design. The experimental plot was implemented in an experimental design of completely randomized blocks (DBCA) with 4 replications and 3 treatments19. The transplant time effect was blocked. The analysis of variance was performed with the model of repeated measures over time19. Each experimental unit (UE) had 40 plants planted in 4 rows at 0.20 m between plants and 1.80 m between platforms. Each platform per treatment had 40 plants, and 160 plants for the 4 repetitions. The central lines were evaluated, which corresponded to 20 plants of each treatment by repetition.
To prepare 1000 L of nutrient solution 1 (S1) for lettuce, the recommended formulas for pepper20 were used, in which it is suggested to make the applications by stages of development of the crop Table 1.
Statistical analysis. In morphological and agronomic assessments, once the data satisfied the assumptions of normality and homogeneity, analyses of variance were performed to test hypotheses about fixed effects, as well as comparisons of means of treatments using Tukey's test (P<0.05).
Analysis of variance also estimated the variance components for random effects. The analyses were performed using the infoStat software21.
Response variables. i) Floor height (cm) (ADP). During the trial, periodic measurements were made every 15 days, starting 15 days after transplanting (ddt) until harvest, ADP was measured from the base to the top of the head with a tape measure22. ii) Number of leaves (NDH). The total per floor was counted23. iii) Head diameter (cm) (DDC). Every 15 days from head formation to harvest day with a caliper or caliper24. iv) Percentage of leaf area (PAF). It was evaluated every 15 days using the Canopy Cover Free application from the Play Store23. v) Root length (cm) (LDR). It was evaluated with a tape measure23. vi) Plant weight (g) (PDP). Once the harvest was done, when the head of the lettuce was compact, each one was weighed with its roots using a gram scale24.
Management of the investigation. The experimental plot was implemented in the field in an area of 134 m2. The floors were distributed at 0.20 m between plants and 0.8 m between rows. Each UE was composed of 40 plants, transplanted into the field in a DBCA. The soil was removed using a rototiller, then crumbled to obtain finer particles for the development of seedlings on the platforms. Biocompost was applied to the soil at a rate of 75 kg per row of 33 m long. The ground was measured with the help of a winch, for the formation of the platforms of 0.80 m wide by 33 m long and a height of 0.15 m, finally, the leveling of the platforms was carried out.
For sowing in germination trays, the substrate was prepared with biocompost, guava leaf and local soil, in a 2:1:1 ratio. 10 kg of humus and a bag (10 g) of commercial mycorrhiza purchased at the Agropecuaria Del Valle in Jipijapa were put in to prevent the attack of pathogens that cause damping off. Once the substrate was prepared, the holes were filled with it, taking care to moisten it. The seeds of the cultivar were then sown in these trays. The trays were watered 2 times a day to maintain humidity.
The final transplant in the field was carried out in rows, for which holes were made with a depth of 0.15 m at a distance between plants of 0.20 m and 0.80 m between rows, then one plant per hole was transplanted. A coat of worm humus (50 g) was added to the transplant to encourage root development. The platforms were covered with a white plastic mulch on the side and black on the other side, in order to keep the temperature stable in the soil, control weeds, conserve moisture and prevent the loss of nutrients by leaching and evaporation.
To control mildew caused by the oomycete Bremia lactucae and other leaf spots, Metalaxyl + Mancozeb (Ridomil) (2.5 g L-1) alternated with Chlorothalonil (2.5 mL L-1), Trichoderma (3 mL L-1) and Bacillus subtilis (3 mL L-1) was applied from the eighth day after transplantation25.
Pest control was carried out according to the monitoring and application of the damage threshold for the control of insect pests such as whitefly (Bemisia tabaci), bold (Prodiplosis longifila) and aphids (Myzus persicae), the application of Thiamethoxam (0.25 mL L-1) was used, alternating with abamectin (2.25 mL L-1), Confidor (0.60 g L-1) and Neem (4 mL L-1).), starting at 10 ddt26.
The plots were irrigated with drip irrigation and the frequency was 2 to 3 times a day, for 1 hour, depending on the temperature. The harvest was carried out from 40 days ddt.
Results
Analysis of normality and homogeneity of variances. It was observed with the Shapiro-Wilks test (P<0.05), that there were no significant differences for ADP and NDH, for the LDR, PDP and flavor variables. For DDC and FAP, there were no significant differences (P<0.01).
The homogeneity of variances by the Levene test, ADP, NDH, DDC, PAF, LDR, PDP and taste were not significant (P<0.01).
The analyses of normality and homogeneity of variances suggested the continuity of the analyses of variance and the comparison of means of the treatments.
Analysis of morpho-agronomic and yield variables. The ANVA for cultivars and dates were highly significant (P<0.01) (Table 3), for ADP, NDH, DDC, and PAF, the percentages of coefficients of variation (CV) were between 4 and 10 %. There were also highly significant differences (P<0.01) for the Treatment * Date interaction, so these effects are not independent.
Table 3 Analysis of variance for leaf count, leaf area percentage, leaf area index, head diameter and plant height
| FV | gl | Medium squares | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ADP (cm) | NDH | DDC (cm) | PAF | ||
| Rep | 3 | 12.82* | 22.83** | 1.79ns | 28.81** |
| Treatment | 2 | 723.29** | 1418.01** | 542.82** | 2171.99** |
| Date | 2 | 3987.79** | 11817.23** | 2567.80** | 22268.65** |
| Treatment*Date | 4 | 24.44** | 54.00** | 31.26** | 102.34** |
| Error | 708 | 4.00 | 5.10 | 2.95 | 4.16 |
| total | 719 | ||||
| Rep | 10.35 | 9.68 | 8.23 | 3.55 | |
*: Significant to P<0.05, **: Highly significant to P<0.01, ns not significant, ADP plant height, NDH number of leaves, DDC head diameter, PAF percentage of leaf area, Trat fertigation.
The ANVA of the effects of the treatments for the LDR, PDP, and taste variables, which had QOL between 8 and 27 %, there were no highly significant differences (P<0.01) (Table 4).
Table 4 Analysis of variance for number of leaves, percentage of leaf area, leaf area index, head diameter and plant height
| FV | gl | Medium squares | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LDR (cm) | PDP (g) | Sabor | ||
| Rep | 3 | 12.10** | 3039.57** | .08ns |
| Treatment | 2 | 83.79** | 38640.70** | .18ns |
| Error | 6 | 1.84 | 267.56 | .15 |
| Total | 11 | |||
| CV | 27.34 | 9.82 | 7.99 | |
*: Significant at P<0.05, ** highly significant at P<0.01, ns not significant, LDR root length, PDP plant weight, treated fertigation.
The comparison of means using the Tukey test (P<0.05) (Table 5) indicated that the T2 treatment was outstanding for ADP, NDH, DDC and PFA, compared to the T3 (control).
Table 5 Analysis of means of response variables
| Treatment | ADP | NDH | DDC | PFA | LDR | PDP (g) | Sabor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 21.31 a | 25.63 a | 22.59 a | 59.95 a | 5.93 a | 184.26 a | 4.88 a |
| 1 | 18.54 b | 23.59 b | 20.08 b | 58.14 b | 5.08 b | 173.33 b | 4.80 a |
| 3 | 18.11 c | 20.79 c | 19.90 b | 54.08 c | 3.89 c | 141.93 c | 4.79 a |
| DSH | .43 | .48 | .37 | .44 | .50 | 6.07 | .14 |
Stockings with a common letter are not significantly different (P<0.05). ADP plant height, NDH number of leaves, DDC head diameter, PAF percentage of leaf area, LDR root length, PDP plant weight, 1: high fertigation, 2: medium fertigation, 3: basic fertigation (as the farmer does).
T2 was outstanding in LDR, PDP and taste compared to the other 2 treatments (Table 4). In Table 6, the comparison of means using the Tukey test (P<0.05), date 3 was the most outstanding for the ADP, NDH, DDC and PAF.
Table 6 Analysis of means using Tukey at P<0.05 probability for dates
| Date | ADP (cm) | NDH | DDC (cm) | PAF |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date 3 | 23.49 a | 30.12 a | 24.15 a | 66.91 a |
| Date 2 | 19.13 b | 23.78 b | 20.83 b | 57.62 b |
| Date 1 | 15.34 c | 16.10 c | 17.60 c | 47.65 c |
| DSH | .43 | .48 | .37 | .44 |
Stockings with a common letter are not significantly different (P<0.05). ADP plant height, NDH number of leaves, DDC head diameter, PAF percentage of leaf area.
Date 1: 01/01/2023, Date 2: 10/01/2023, Date 3: 18/01/2023.
It was notorious to observe that there was interaction between the variables evaluated (Figure 1), a significant interaction is observed between the ADP and the date of evaluation, indicating that the ADP depends on the evaluation time, also, it was observed for the DDC, it depends on the evaluation time.
Discussion
The Starfighter cultivar from the company Rik Zwaan Rijk Zwaan27. It is an open green plant, with great vigour and yield, recommended for winter crops and especially for processing. This cultivar was used, because it was outstanding in previous research carried out23 however, there was no known fertigation strategy to improve its productivity.
The ADP was 23.49 cm at 25-30 ddt, which was outstanding, in relation to Ríos Mesa et al.28, who reported ADP of 25.8 cm on average. López Carhuatanta29, applying calcium phosphonate and boron to lettuce plants of the Greak Lakes 659 cultivar obtained 25.40 cm of AP at harvest.
The NDH at harvest was 25.63 on average at 25-30 ddt, which was excellent, in relation to Rojas Hidalgo30, who applied calcium phosphonate, from the Greak Lakes 659 cultivar, was 16.4 leaves on average. López Carhuatanta29, obtained 22.1 leaves at harvest.
The DDC at 25-30 ddt was 22.59 cm, Pechu Santisteban31, determined that the DDC in 88 in Romaine lettuce were 8.50 to 18.00 cm on average. Ríos Mesa et al.28, applying chemical fertilization, determined a DDC of 10.80 to 15.20 cm at harvest. All these results, there was a better response to the fertigation performed.
Chacha Barba & Chávez López32 conducted research to evaluate the morpho-physiological and productive behavior of 2 lettuce cultivars, in a hydroponic cultivation system, in the nutritious and conventional field film technique. This experiment was developed at the Center for Research, Graduate Studies and Amazonian Conservation (CIPCA). The cultivars studied were Cherokee RZ (81 - 36) and Starfighter RZ (81 - 85). The results were that the Starfighter cultivar had 11 leaves, 724 cm2 of leaf area and 8272 kg ha-1 of yield. In our study, 25.63 leaves, 59.95 % leaf area and 11500 kg ha-1, when a high dose of fertigation was applied.
It should be mentioned that the average annual temperature in Puerto la Boca is 24° C, which indicates that species in general must adapt to high temperatures. The Starfighter cultivar according to Rijk Zwaan27, has a wide range of adaptation, this was notorious, being sown in summer the cultivar had a behavior suitable for fresh consumption.
The benefit of the use of mulching, drip irrigation and fertigation in the production of the Starfighter cultivar was notorious, which did not have any pest or disease attacks, and the quality of the leaves were fresh and without a spicy taste, which was observed in a previous study23.
In summary, the results of this study suggest that modifications of the soil microenvironment, in part, moisture and nutrients, played diverse roles due to management practice such as plastic mulching associated with fertigation, and influenced various cellular processes, while the resulting soil nutrient supply had greater control over its composition. and there is still a lack of studies in the area on these effects and give signs of the benefits of this alternative, which contributes to increasing yields.
REFERENCES
1. Sneha R, Jegadeeswari V, Vijayalatha KR, Kale-eswari RK, Nithila S, Muthuvel I, et al. Effect of fertigation on soil nutrients, microbial activity, plant and fruit (s) growth parameters grown under tropical environments: a discussion. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal. 2025;56(17):2589-617. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2025.2522190 [ Links ]
2. Banjara NC, Thakur O, Sahu GD. Response of fertigation and mulch on chilli (Capsicum frutescence). Trends Biosci. 2017;10(3):959-61. [ Links ]
3. Pardossi A, Incrocci L, Incrocci G, Malorgio F, Battista P, Bacci L, et al. Root zone sensors for irrigation management in intensive agriculture. Sensors (Basel). 2009;9(4):2809-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/s90402809. PMID: 22574047; PMCID: PMC3348840. [ Links ]
4. Kadirbeyoglu Z, Özertan G. Power in the governance of common‐pool resources: a comparative analysis of irrigation management decentralization in Turkey. Environ Policy Gov. 2015;25(3):157-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1673 [ Links ]
5. Vo KP, Das JC. Effect of drip irrigation and fertilizer management on capsicum (Capsicum Annum L). J Agri Vet Sci. 2025;8(1):10-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9790/2380-08111013 [ Links ]
6. Meena M, Sagarka BK, Man MK. Influence of drip irrigation along with nitrogen levels on yield attributes, yield and quality parameters of rabi drill fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill). Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci. 2017;6(5):2115-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.605.236 [ Links ]
7. Harisha CB, Diwakar Y, Aishwath OP, Singh R, Asangi H. Soil fertility and micronutrient uptake by fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill.) as influenced by micronutrients fertilization. Environ Ecol. 2017;35(1B):514-8. [ Links ]
8. Smith RJ, Uddin JM, Gillies MH, Moller P, Clurey K. Evaluating the performance of automated bay irrigation. Irrig Sci. 2016;34(3):175-85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-016-0494-8 [ Links ]
9. Sandal SK, Kapoor R. Fertigation technology for enhancing nutrient use and crop productivity: An overview. Himachal Journal of Agricultural Research. 2015;41(2):114-21. [ Links ]
10. Brewer MT, Morgan KT, Zotarelli L, Stanley CD, Kadyampaken D. Effect of drip irrigation and nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium application rates on tomato biomass accumulation, nutrient content, yield, and soil nutrient status. J Hortic. 2018;5(1):1000227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4172/2376-0354.1000227 [ Links ]
11. Wang X, Wang G, Guo T, Xing Y, Mo F, Wang H, et al. Effects of plastic mulch and nitrogen fertilizer on the soil microbial community, enzymatic activity and yield performance in a dryland maize cropping system. Eur J Soil Sci. 2021;72(1):400-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ejss.12954 [ Links ]
12. Mo F, Zhu Y, Wang ZY, Deng HL, Li PF, Sun SK, et al. Polyethylene film mulching enhances the microbial carbon-use efficiency, physical and chemical protection of straw-derived carbon in an Entisol of the Loess Plateau. Sci Total Environ. 2021;792:148357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148357 [ Links ]
13. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 2016 [cited March 5, 2025]. Retrieved from: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home [ Links ]
14. Desantis NA, Malbrán I (dir). Marchitamiento o Fusariosis vascular de la lechuga. Posibles alternativas para su manejo [tesis licenciatura]. [Buenos Aires]: Universidad Nacional de La Plata; 2018 [citado 26 de mayo de 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: https://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/65416 [ Links ]
15. Pertierra Lazo R, Quispe Gonzabay J. Análisis económico de lechugas hidropónicas bajo sistema raíz flotante en clima semiárido. Granja. 2020;31(1):118-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17163/lgr.n31.2020.09 [ Links ]
16. Cordero Arévalo MA. Determinación de la eficiencia de la técnica de riego solar en la producción de lechuga (Lactuca sativa) en agricultura urbana [tesis licenciatura]. [Ambato]: Universidad Técnica de Ambato; 2021 [citado 26 de abril de 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: https://repositorio.uta.edu.ec/items/a6827af2-a4cf-4178-b81e-d03b48418c35 [ Links ]
17. Cangás Mejía S de los Á. Evaluación de dos variedades de lechuga (Lactuca sativa L.), sometida a la aplicación de tres dosis de sulfato de calcio, Cantón Espejo - provincia del Carchi [tesis licenciatura]. [Carchi]: Universidad Técnica de Babahoyo; 2018 [citado 18 de julio 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: https://dspace.utb.edu.ec/items/478e6230-dcba-4911-a433-6d76f45b9c64 [ Links ]
18. Gabriel-Ortega J, Pereira-Murillo E, Ayón-Villao F, Castro-Piguave CC, Delvalle-García I, Castillo JA. Development of an ecological strategy for the control of downy mildew (Pseudoperonospora cubensis) in cucumber cultivation (Cucumis sativus L.). Bionatura. 2020;5(2):1110-05. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21931/RB/2020.05.02.3 [ Links ]
19. Gabriel Ortega J, Valverde Lucio A, Castro Piguave C, Indacochea Ganchozo B, Alcívar Cobeña J, Vera Tumbaco M, et al. Diseños experimentales: Teoría y práctica para experimentos agropecuarios [Internet]. Quito: Mawil Publicaciones de Ecuador; 2022. p 315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26820/978-9942-602-26-8 [ Links ]
20. Rizo E. Guía de nutrición para pimientos [Internet]. Hortalizas. 2016 [citado 3 de mayo de 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.hortalizas.com/cultivos/guia-de-nutricion-para-pimientos/?amp [ Links ]
21. InfoStat [Internet]. InfoStat: Software para análisis estadístico. 2020 [citado 18 de julio 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.infostat.com.ar/ [ Links ]
22. Arcos B, Benavides O, Rodríguez M. Evaluación de dos sustratos y dos dosis de fertilización en condiciones hidropónicas bajo invernadero en lechuga Lactuca sativa L. Rev Cienc Agríc. 2011;28(2):95-108. [ Links ]
23. Baque López GM. Evaluación del comportamiento productivo de tres nuevas variedades de lechuga (Lactuca sativa L.) en campo acolchado [tesis licenciatura]. [Manabí]: Universidad Estatal del Sur de Manabí; 2023 [citado 18 de mayo de 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: https://repositorio.unesum.edu.ec/handle/53000/5740 [ Links ]
24. Bravo SM, Paspur JM, Unigarro A, España JF. Evaluación de la fertilización con fósforo en lechuga Lactuca Sativa L. en el Altiplano de Pasto, Nariño [tesis licenciatura]. [Nariño]: Universidad de Nariño; 2009 [citado 18 de marzo 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: https://sired.udenar.edu.co/5486/1/80063.pdf [ Links ]
25. Gabriel J, Briones J, Morán J, Narváez W, Vera M, Burgos G. Desarrollo de una estrategia química y orgánica para el control del mildiu velloso (Pseudoperonospora cubensis Berkeley et Curtis) en melón. Agrosilvicultura y Medioambiente. 2023;1(2):4-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47230/agrosilvicultura.medioambiente.v1.n2.2023.4-13 [ Links ]
26. Gabriel J, Parrales J, Morán J, Vera Tumbaco M, Narvaez Campana W, Burgos G. Chemical strategy to combat insect's pest of melon (Cucumis melo L.) in greenhouses. Centrosur. 2025;1(24):1-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37959/revista.v1i24.277 [ Links ]
27. Rijk Zwaan Zaadteelt. Variedades hortícolas de Rijk Zwaan [Internet] en Zaadhandel B.V. 2020 [citado 15 de julio de 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.rijkzwaan.es/home [ Links ]
28. Ríos Mesa D, Raya Ramallo V, Monge Bailón J, Suárez Encinoso T. Ensayo de variedades de lechuga. Campaña 2001 [Internet]. Tenerife: Servicio de Agricultura; 2002 [citado 12 de mayo de 2025]. 19 p. Recuperado a partir de: https://agrocabildo.org/publica/Publicaciones/hort_79_L_lechuga2.pdf [ Links ]
29. López Carhuatanta WF. Efecto de (magnet b) fosfonato de calcio boro en el cultivo de lechuga (Lactuca sativa) variedad Greak Lakes 659, en la Provincia de Lamas [tesis licenciatura]. [Tarapoto]: Universidad Nacional De San Martín-Tapapoto; 2014 [citado 18 de julio 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: https://repositorio.unsm.edu.pe/item/02e3edd1-4892-4069-aae0-4f52c1ff45d5 [ Links ]
30. Rojas Hidalgo LA. Rendimiento del cultivo de lechuga (Lactuca sativa L) variedad Great Lakes 659 con la aplicación de fosfonato de calcio, Provincia de Lamas [tesis licenciatura]. [Tarapoto]: Universidad Nacional De San Martín; 2015 [citado 15 de julio de 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: https://repositorio.unsm.edu.pe/item/339cc1f5-2f7e-4b5c-98e0-b1f278f0961b [ Links ]
31. Pechu Santisteban JM. Efecto de la inoculación de microorganismo eficiente (EM), Trichocastle y Basu en el crecimiento y rendimiento de la lechuga (Lactuca sativa L.) variedad romana en condiciones de azotea-Tarma-2016 [tesis licenciatura]. [Cerro de Pasco]: Universidad Nacional Daniel Alcides Carrión; 2019 [citado 26 de mayo de 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: http://repositorio.undac.edu.pe/handle/undac/2419 [ Links ]
32. Chacha Barba LM, Chávez López NM, Domínguez Brito J (dir). Evaluación de dos variedades de lechuga (Lactuca sativa L.) cultivadas en sistemas: hidropónica técnica de película nutritiva (NFT) y convencional [tesis licenciatura]. [Pastaza]: Universidad Estatal Amazónica; 2020 [citado 18 de julio 2025]. Recuperado a partir de: https://repositorio.uea.edu.ec/handle/123456789/615 [ Links ]
Source of financing Project "Production of vegetables in the field and greenhouse - Phase II" of the State University of the South of Manabí.
Conflicts of interest The authors declare that this research was carried out at the State University of the South of Manabí (Jipijapa Canton) and does not present conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgments The authors are grateful for the financial support and facilities provided by the State University of Southern Manabí (UNESUM). To Eng. Luis Miguel Correa, who provided us with the land and supplies to carry out the research in the community of Puerto La Boca, Puerto Cayo, and to the students involved in this research.
Ethical considerations The approval of the research by the Directorate of Research and Graduate Studies, the Ethics Committee, and the Research Committee of the Agricultural Career of the State University of Southern Manabí (UNESUM), (Jipijapa Canton), followed the guidelines established by these instances.
Limitations in the research The authors point out that there were no limitations in the present research work.
Authors' contributionJulio Gabriel-Ortega, planning of the experiment, statistical analysis, systematization, syntax, grammar and interpretation of the information. María Fernanda Pineda Vásquez, data collection, systematization and interpretation of information. Gema Burgos López, transcription, systematization and revision of the document. Jessica Morán Móran, syntax, spelling, and revision of the document.
Consent for publication The authors, after reviewing the document, are considered approved for publication.
Use of Artificial Intelligence We assume that the entire document was written based on ethical and professional criteria, and AI was not used to make the images or text.
Editor's Note: Journal of the Selva Andina Biosphere (JSAB). All statements expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the editor, publishers, or reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or any claims made by its manufacturer, are not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Received: July 01, 2025; Revised: September 01, 2025; Accepted: October 01, 2025










text in 





