Abstract—The tomato is a very important crop, whose cultivation in the Mediterranean basin is severely affected by the phytoparasitic weed Phelipanche ramosa. The semiarid regions of the world are considered the main areas where this parasitic weed is established causing heavy infestation as it is able to produce high numbers of seeds (up to 500,000 per plant), which remain viable for extended period (more than 20 years). In this paper the results obtained from eleven treatments in order to control this parasitic weed including chemical, agronomic, biological and biotechnological methods compared with the untreated test under two plowing depths (30 and 50 cm) are reported. The split-plot design with 3 replicates was adopted. In 2014 a trial was performed in Foggia province (southern Italy) on processing tomato (cv Docet) grown in the field infested by Phelipanche ramosa. Tomato seedlings were transplant on May 5, on a clay-loam soil. During the growing cycle of the tomato crop, at 56-78 and 92 days after transplantation, the number of parasitic shoots emerged in each plot was detected. At tomato harvesting, on August 18, the major quantity-quality yield parameters were determined (marketable yield, mean weight, dry matter, pH, soluble solids and color of fruits). All data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the means were compared by Tukey's test. Each treatment studied did not provide complete control against Phelipanche ramosa. However, among the different methods tested, some of them which Fusarium, gliphosate, radicon biostimulant and Red Setter tomato cv (improved genotypes obtained by Tilling technology) under deeper plowing (50 cm depth) proved to mitigate the virulence of the Phelipanche ramose attacks. It is assumed that these effects can be improved combining some of these treatments each other, especially for a gradual and continuing reduction of the “seed bank” of the parasite in the soil. Keywords—Control methods, Phelipanche ramosa, tomato crop. I. INTRODUCTION PHELIPANCHE ramosa, also known as Orobanche ramosa L., is the crhrolopyll-lacking root parasite of many dicotyledonous species. It cause severe damage to vegetable and field especially in the semiarid regions of the world 1. In the Apulia region (southern Italy) this devastating weed there is particularly in the field of processing tomato, where endangering the future existence of this crop 2, 3. The heavy infestation are due to the ability of the Phelipanche to produce high number of seeds (up to 500,000 per plant) 4 Disciglio G., Lops F., Carlucci A, Gatta G., Tarantino A. Frabboni L., Cibelli F., Raimondo M.L., Tarantino E. are with the Department of Science of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Foggia - 71122 Foggia, Italy (phone: +39 0881589337; e-mail: grazia.disciglio@unifg.it ). Carrieri F.- Alsia – Centro Ricerche Metapontum Agrobios S.S. Jonica 106 km 448,2 – 75024 Metaponto (MT) Italy with very small dimensions (about 0,2-0,3 mm), which remain viable for extend period (up to 20) years in the soil 5, 6. As their small size, the seeds are easily spread by wind, water, animals, human means equipment and machinery for agriculture and especially through the mechanical harvesting of tomatoes that is cutting the plants at the level of soil where there are also shoot of Phelipanche 7, 8. Seeds of parasitic plant germinate only if stimulated by host strigolactone root exudates and start producing a tubercle only if they are near enough to the host roots. The germinating seed produces a germ tube and haustorium that attacks the roots of the host plant, producing a connection with the plant’s vascular system and subsequently withdraws nutrients and water from the host. This specie attacks tomato roots early in the growing season at 14 to 28 days after planting (DAP) depending on temperature conditions, and the shoot emerges 35 to 56 DAP 9. After germination the parasite has a long underground phase and by the time it emerges on soil surface when the damage to tomato plants has already been produced. The tomato plants parasitized initially manifest a more or less stunted growth and subsequently a decrease-quantity production, in consequence of the reduction of the capacity utilization of the nutrients and the absorption of water. The quantitative decrease is very variable as it is dependent on the duration of the parasitization: if it takes place starting from the early stages of growth of the tomato is obviously greater, coming to wander up to 40% and in some cases even up to 75% compared to the production obtainable in the absence of infestation 10. Given the particular biology of Phelipanche, the control of this weed is far from easy. To eliminate completely the parasite seed bank in the soil is practically impossible 11, 12. The measures are expected to lead to successful containment of the parasitic weeds problem should be targeted at (1) reducting of existing seed banks, (2) preventing of further seed production and (3) avoiding seed dissemination. These objectives are mutually dependent. The seed bank can only be reduced when new seed inputs are smaller than the output caused by un successful germination, pathogens, seed predation or natural death of the seed 13-[16. A wide variety of parasitic weed control methods (physical, chemical, agronomic, biological and biotechnological) has been tried. However, the main concern is that, up to date, no single cheap method of control proved to be effective, economical and complete in protection against the parasite because of pedoclimatic condition variability of the several environments 17-21. Phelipanche ramosa (L. - Pomel) Control in Field Tomato Crop Disciglio G., Lops F., Carlucci A., Gatta G., Tarantino A., Frabboni L., Carriero F., Cibelli F., Raimondo M. L., Tarantino E. P World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Vol:9, No:1, 2015 13 International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 9(1) 2015 scholar.waset.org/1307-6892/10000238 International Science Index, Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Vol:9, No:1, 2015 waset.org/Publication/10000238