## 3 Results and Discussion
### Organoleptic and Nutraceuticaltical Quality of Soilless-Grown Pisanello Tomatoes (2021)
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Tomato Varieties and County**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Growing Conditions**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**TPC 1**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**DPPH 2**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Lycopene 3**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Reference**} \\  & & & & & \\ \hline Local landrace of a long-storage & \multirow{2}{*}{G greenhouse and open  field} & \multirow{2}{*}{45.0–90.0} & \multirow{2}{*}{75.0–85.0} & \multirow{2}{*}{5.50–11.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{[46]} \\ tomato, Catania, Sicily, Southern Italy & & & & & \\ Six high-lycopene cultivars and one  ordinary tomato cultivar, Lecce, & & & & \\ Puglia, Southern Italy & & & & \\ Different parts of tomato (peel, fruit, & & & & \\ pulp, and seeds) of niche cultivars & & & & \\ compared with commercial ones, & & & (Fruit pulp) & (Fruit pulp) & \\ Campania region, Southern Italy & & & & \\ Five traditional tomato Greek & \multirow{2}{*}{Soilless  greenhouse} & \multirow{2}{*}{48.3} & \multirow{2}{*}{111.6–196.9} & \multirow{2}{*}{7.60–22.78} & \multirow{2}{*}{[50]} \\ germplasm varieties alongside a  commercial F1 hybrid, Greece & & & & \\  & & & & \\ Seven cultivars, comprising two & \multirow{2}{*}{Open field} & \multirow{2}{*}{13.98–35.24} & \multirow{2}{*}{111.6–196.9} & \multirow{2}{*}{7.60–22.78} & \multirow{2}{*}{[50]} \\ high-pigment varieties, five & & & & & \\ underutilized ancient tomato & & & & \\ genotypes considered as landraces, & & & & \\ Tunisia & & & & & \\ Ten Cypriot landraces, eight Greek  varieties and one French variety, & Soil  greenhouse & 4.50–8.87 & 1.42–5.85 & [51] \\ Cyprus & & & & \\ Nine commercial varieties, Spain & & & 25.9–49.9 & 1.86–6.50 & [52] \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* Total phenolic content (mg GAE 100 g\({}^{-1}\) FW); 2; DPPH (mg TE 100 g\({}^{-1}\) FW). 3; lycopene (mg 100 g\({}^{-1}\) FW).  
\end{table} 
Table 3: _Cont._aeroponics (-2 g fruit\({}^{-1}\)) compared to tomatoes cultivated using a hydroponics system (-1.5 g fruit\({}^{-1}\)). [PERSON] et al. [53] suggested that the aeroponic system might lead to higher concentrations of certain nutrients and improved organoleptic quality, as well as higher fruit production due to optimized nutrient delivery and the oxygenation of plant roots. However, the Pisanello tomatoes cultivated in rockwood in the present work showed promising results, since the reported values in all investigated parameters were lower in a precedent study [54]. Unlike the organoleptic results, no significant differences were found among the different soilless cultivation systems in terms of total phenolic and lycopene content and antioxidant activity (Table 5). The values found for the total phenolic content, lycopene, and antioxidant activity of the tomatoes cultivated in the soilless system were in line with our previous results obtained on soilless-cultivated Pisanello tomatoes [27]. [PERSON] et al. [27], using a rockwood soilless cultivation, found similar values of pH juice (4.19); TA (0.79 g citric acid per 100 g); TSS (5.47 \({}^{\circ}\)Brix); and DMC (6.08%) in tomatoes grown in similar cultivating conditions (3.00 dS m\({}^{-1}\) in the nutrient solution). The lack of significant differences suggests a positive management of tomato quality through the utilization of both efficient soilless cultivation systems. However, the absence of a treatment did not lead to variation in quality, since the accumulation of secondary metabolites is always a response of plants to adverse environmental conditions [55,56].