## 4 Conclusions  
The application of a continuous electric current at different intensities and in different manners influenced the characteristics of tomato fruits such as the morphological features (plants height), the yield and the quality of tomato fruits (firmness, acidity, total soluble solids, antioxidant activity, crude fibre, dietary fibres, tannins, oxalate, saponin, \(\alpha\)-amylase inhibitor and the content K, Mg, Fe and Zn). The lowest electric current intensity (T1, 0.15 A) had a significant positive effect on the plant height, yield, antioxidant activity and dietary fibre, but also led to the accumulation of higher amounts of tannins and \(\alpha\)-amylase inhibitor and increased the acidity of tomato fruits. Regarding the electric current intensity of 0.30 A (T2), a positive influence was observed only on the plant height. The highest electric current intensity used in the experiment (0.45 A, T3) positively influenced the crude fibre, the tannins, the oxalate and the K content, but at the same time, increased the acidity, \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Variant** & **Dy Matter (\%)** & **Moisture (\%)** & **K (ppm)** & **Ca (ppm)** & **Mg (ppm)** & **Fe (ppm)** & **Zn (ppm)** & **Na (ppm)** \\ \hline T1 & 5.82 \(\pm\) 0.14 ns & 94.18 \(\pm\) 0.14 ns & 2.02 \(\pm\) 0.13 d & 61.33 \(\pm\) 4.02 ns & 30.08 \(\pm\) 1.97 \(\mathrm{c}\) & 1.89 \(\pm\) 0.12 b & 0.59 \(\pm\) 0.04 b & 1.33 \(\pm\) 0.09 ns \\ T2 & 5.95 \(\pm\) 0.15 ns & 94.05 \(\pm\) 0.15 ns & 2.73 \(\pm\) 0.18 d & 65.56 \(\pm\) 4.30 ns & 33.47 \(\pm\) 2.19 b & 2.35 \(\pm\) 0.16 b & 0.33 \(\pm\) 0.02 d & 1.35 \(\pm\) 0.09 ns \\ T3 & 6.17 \(\pm\) 0.13 ns & 93.83 \(\pm\) 0.13 ns & 3.17 \(\pm\) 0.21 b & 69.88 \(\pm\) 4.58 ns & 34.50 \(\pm\) 2.26 b & 2.59 \(\pm\) 0.17 b & 0.53 \(\pm\) 0.03 b & 1.37 \(\pm\) 0.09 ns \\ T4 & 5.79 \(\pm\) 0.14 ns & 94.21 \(\pm\) 0.48 & 5.55 \(\pm\) 0.36 a & 75.58 \(\pm\) 49 s & 45.82 \(\pm\) 3.00 ab & 4.89 \(\pm\) 0.32 a & 0.89 \(\pm\) 0.06 a & 1.52 \(\pm\) 0.10 ns \\ T5 & 5.89 \(\pm\) 0.14 ns & 94.11 \(\pm\) 0.14 ns & 3.96 \(\pm\) 0.26 b & 71.86 \(\pm\) 4.71 ns & 49.54 \(\pm\) 3.25 a & 4.39 \(\pm\) 0.29 a & 0.67 \(\pm\) 0.04 b & 1.34 \(\pm\) 0.09 ns \\ C & 5.91 \(\pm\) 0.14 ns & 94.09 \(\pm\) 0.14 ns & 1.72 \(\pm\) 0.11 d & 76.13 \(\pm\) 4.99 ns & 43.55 \(\pm\) 2.85 ab & 2.63 \(\pm\) 0.17 b & 0.42 \(\pm\) 0.03 cd & 1.11 \(\pm\) 0.07 ns \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Different letters (a–d) in a column are significantly different from each other (\(p\leq\) 0.05) obtained from [PERSON]’s multiple comparison test; a–high value; ns—nonsignificant; T1—0.15 A; T2—0.30 A; T3—0.45 A; T4—polarity; T5—soil version; C—Control.  
\end{table} 
Table 8: The mineral content, dry matter and moisture of tomato fruits. the saponin content and decreased the antioxidant activity. The application of 1.5 V, the polarity version (T4), positively influenced the crude fibre, and the content of tannins, oxalate, K, Mg, Fe and Zn. The same electric current version decreased the total soluble, the antioxidant activity and the saponin content. When 1.5 V was applied through soil (T5) a positive influence was recorded for the content of dietary fibres, oxalate, K, Fe and Zn. Additionally, an increase in the saponin or \(\alpha\)-amylase inhibitor content and a decrease in the antioxidant activity was observed. Therefore, different electric current intensities and ways of application can have both a positive effect on some characteristics of tomato fruit and a negative one on other traits. More experiments are needed in order to establish a relationship between the electric current intensity and the manner of its application which results in a better tomato fruit quality.