## 3 Results
Total phenol content was affected by the tomatoes maturity stage, the digestate percentage in the substate, and their interaction was significant. The addition of digestate to peat, regardless of the amount, significantly increased the total amount of phenolic compounds in tomato fruits during their growth. During the ripening of fruits BBCH 84-85, the highest amount of TPC was found in fruits from the treatment with a 20% digestate supplement (Table 4). The addition of 20% digestate increased the total phenolic content of the dried fruits by about 2 times compared to the control. When the fruits reached the degree of full ripeness, significantly more phenols were accumulated in the fruits from the 15% and 20% digestate treatments. Adding digestate to peat increased the total content of phenolic compounds in fully rip fruits up to 44.6-37.6%, respectively. The amount of digestate used significantly affected the yield only when added to the peat substrate at 20%. Plants grown with the highest amount of digestate gave extremely uneven yields per plant, as well as significantly the lowest marketable yield (Table 5). The amount of wasted tomatoes, which included all fruits of inappropriate quality and those \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Treatments** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**BBCH 70–79**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**BBCH 84–85**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**BBCH 89**} \\ \hline Control (Peat) & 5.71 & \(\pm\) & 0.40 & c & 6.51 & \(\pm\) & 1.46 & b & 12.90 & \(\pm\) & 1.90 & bc \\ P + 5\% D & 6.45 & \(\pm\) & 1.00 & bc & 8.43 & \(\pm\) & 1.59 & b & 11.19 & \(\pm\) & 0.66 & c \\ P + 10\% D & 7.37 & \(\pm\) & 1.35 & bc & 6.10 & \(\pm\) & 0.60 & b & 17.40 & \(\pm\) & 3.12 & ab \\ P + 15\% D & 9.61 & \(\pm\) & 0.08 & a & 6.01 & \(\pm\) & 0.38 & b & 18.65 & \(\pm\) & 2.13 & a \\ P + 20\% D & 7.82 & \(\pm\) & 0.31 & ab & 11.84 & \(\pm\) & 1.11 & a & 17.76 & \(\pm\) & 1.38 & a \\ \hline \multicolumn{10}{c}{F actual} \\ \hline Factor A (digestate percentage) & & & & & & * & & & & & & & \\ Factor B (fruit maturity) & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ Interaction A \(\times\) B & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \hline \end{tabular} Values are mean \(\pm\) SE; different letters in column differed significantly by [PERSON] multiple comparisons test (\(p\leq 0.05\)), * shows significant differences at the confidence level \(p=0.05\).  
\end{table} 
Table 4: The effect of digestate and fruit maturity on tomato total phenolic content (TPC). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Treatments** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**BBCH 70–79**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**BBCH 84–85**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**BBCH 89**} \\ \hline Control (Peat) & 35.49 & \(\pm\) & 2.23 & ab & 51.47 & \(\pm\) & 1.77 & b & 86.45 & \(\pm\) & 0.46 & a \\ P + 5\% D & 31.03 & \(\pm\) & 0.75 & b & 49.18 & \(\pm\) & 0.79 & b & 90.17 & \(\pm\) & 6.18 & a \\ P + 10\% D & 32.71 & \(\pm\) & 7.07 & ab & 50.54 & \(\pm\) & 6.42 & b & 79.03 & \(\pm\) & 1.09 & a \\ P + 15\% D & 35.10 & \(\pm\) & 5.59 & ab & 41.04 & \(\pm\) & 4.95 & b & 83.70 & \(\pm\) & 6.62 & a \\ P + 20\% D & 42.60 & \(\pm\) & 1.34 & a & 72.56 & \(\pm\) & 2.76 & a & 84.86 & \(\pm\) & 6.31 & a \\ \hline \multicolumn{10}{c}{F actual} \\ \hline Factor A (digestate percentage) & & & & & * & & & & & & & & \\ Factor B (fruit maturity) & & & & & & & & & & & \\ Interaction A \(\times\) B & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \hline \end{tabular} Values are mean \(\pm\) SE; different letters in column differed significantly by [PERSON] multiple comparisons test (\(p\leq 0.05\)), * shows significant differences at the confidence level \(p=0.05\).  
\end{table} 
Table 3: The effect of digestate and fruit maturity on the antioxidant response of tomatoes as expressed by DPPH free radical scavenging capacity. that did not have time to grow and ripen at the end of the season, was determined to be very similar in all variants--about 3 kg per plant. The correlations between digestate content and antioxidant properties varied with the level of fruit ripening (Table 6).