For one thing, your own source shows that tomatoes are a rich source of many different vitamins, minerals, and fiber. But furthermore, this treatment of nutrition is a little reductive. You could eat highly processed food that is formulated to deliver the desired daily value of major nutrients, yet it would fail to deliver the same benefits as a simple diet of fruit, vegetables, small fatty fish, and nuts - even if the latter isn't optimized for nutrients. Why is this? We don't seem to know enough to answer at this time, but it appears food is more complex than a tabulation of various nutrients.
So does this mean we should be trucking tomatoes long distance? Not at all. People should eat whatever fresh produce grows locally, and supplement with canned or fermented foods that capture the benefits of faraway and out-of-season crops without the downside of wastage and shelf-life optimization.
My take is that it makes sense to grow the water-heavy vegetables yourself. These vegetables seem to be the most prone to damage during transport anyway. Plus, you can select heirloom varieties.
Then just get your staples (grains, potatoes, dairy products), plus fruits which require specialised agriculture, via the commercial food system.
If I had a house, instead of an apartment, I'd test the soil and then replace most of the backyard plants with good-looking and low-maintenance food producers; and replace the front lawn with pollinator-attracting xeriscape and maybe some herbs.
So does this mean we should be trucking tomatoes long distance? Not at all. People should eat whatever fresh produce grows locally, and supplement with canned or fermented foods that capture the benefits of faraway and out-of-season crops without the downside of wastage and shelf-life optimization.