CHAP1'ER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Tomato (Sofanum lycopersicwn L.) belongs to the Solanaceae family is one of the important vegetable in Bangladesh and total production is low as compared to total demand. Large amounts of land in southern region of Bangladesh remain uncultivable due to high level of soil salinity. The affected areas of Bangladesh are increasing rapidly. To overcome the salinity problem saline soils can be used to grow salt-tolerant plants. Thus development of salt tolerant crops is it key agricultural goal. Tomato plant is moderately tolerant to salinity stress but exact salinity tolerance level may depend on cultivar sensitivity.
Screening can he an easier method to determine salt tolerant genotypes.
A pot experiment was conducted to observe the performances of fifteen tomato genotypes tinder three different salinity treatments. The experiment was conducted beside the net house of Genetics and Plant Breeding Department.
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka-1207. Bangladesh, during the months of November 2013 to March 2014. Two factorial experiment included fifteen tomato genotypes viz. Gi (BD-7289). G2 (BD-7291). G (13D-7298). Gi (BD-7748). G (BD-7757). 06 (BD-7760). (17 (BD-7761). C3s (BD-7762). Gg BD-901 I). (Ito (BD-9960). (iii (BAR! Tomato-2). 012 (BARI Tomato-3). 013
(BAR! Tomato-lI). Ci14 (BARI Hybrid Tomato-4). (315 (BAR! Hybrid Tomato- 5) and three salinity treatments viz. Ti (Control). l'2 (8 dSfm). l (12 dS/m) were outlined in Completely Randomized Design (CR1)) with three replications.
Collected data were statistically analyzed for the evaluation of treatments for the detection of the suitable tomato genotypes grown in higher sodium chloride (NaCl) salinity level. Among interactions of tomato genotypes and salinity treatments earlier tiowering was observed in 0511. G13T1 and G13T3 (13.33 days) interactions and G;sTi interaction required maximum period (23.67 days)
for flowering. In case of plant height the tallest plant (90.60 cm) was observed in G'?Ti and (12T1 whereas the shortest plant (49.93 cm) was found from Gifl at mature stage. Considering the number of cluster per plant maximum number of cluster per plant (9.66/plant) was counted in (1 ii)Ti interaction and minimum number of cluster per plant (2.66/plant) was counted in GiL interaction. Earlier harvesting period (62.67 days) was observed in G512 and 0513 interaction and Chili (85.33 days) was the delayed one. In interaction of tomato genotypes and salinity treatments maximum number of fruits was obtained from 01(iT1 (85.67 /plant) and minimum number of fruits was found from C4T3 (8.00 /plant). The longest fruit Lentzth (50.77 mm) was recorded from Oi:i'j interaction whereas the shortest (19.52 mm) was recorded from 0613 interaction. In case of diameter of fruit maximum fruit diameter (55.06 mm) was obtained from (jpTi interaction whereas minimum (17.30 mm) from (35T2 interaction. Maximum average fruit weight per plant (73.27 g/plani) was obtained from Gi:ii interaction whilc minimum (3.98 g/plant) from U1312 interaction. Considering yield per plant maximum yield (1.280 kg/plant) was obtained from Ci121'1 interaction while minimum yield per plant (0.219 kg/plant) from 0:13.
Salinity stress adversely affected the physiology of tomato at all stages of growth and development. Observation of physiological characters played important role for the selection of suitable genotype for future breeding purpose. Genotypes showed significant variation in physiological characters such as. chlorophyll content and indigenous W and IC. In ease of chlorophyll content the highest amount of chlorophyll (57.33%) was ohscn'ed in (1211 interaction and the lowest amount of chlorophyll (1 3.4?/o) in (31213. The highest amount of Na' (l.820°/o) was found in (loT3 interaction and the lowest amount of Na' (0.780%) in (3 Ti and Gisli interactions. On the other hand the highest amount of K (1.920%) was found in Gisli interaction and the lowest amount of IC (0.910%) in 01013 interaction.
Not only the yield characters but also the nutritive characters were adversely affected by high salinity. The genotypes varied significantly in their nutritive
characters as niaxinium brix in tomato (6.00%) was obtained from (ioT2
interaction while minimum brix (0.13%) from G2Ti interaction. In case of vitamin-C content the highest amount of vitamin-C in toniato (31.69 mg/l00 g) was obtained from G13!'3 interaction while minimum (10.61 mg/i 00 g) From
(11211. Among interactions of tomato genotypes and salinity treatments the highest amount of lycopene was counted in 61211 combination in case of both 472 nm (65.43 mgiIOO g) and 502 rim (48.55 mg/lOG ) whereas the lowest amount of lycopene was counted on 0512 in case of both 472 nm (2.64 mg/lOG g) and 502 nni (1.86 mgIlOO g).
Considering the growth and yield of tomato, fruits per plant increased in uenotvpe Gj at slight salinity and in genotype Os at moderate salinity. Average fruit weight per plant and yield per plant increased in genotype Cig at slight salinity conditions. As an indicator of salt tolerance. minimum chlorophyll reduction was observed in genotype Go for both stresses. Na uptake was minimum in genotype (is and minimum reduction of' K' ion uptake was observed in same (i5 genotype. Regarding nutritional traits, increase of brix (%) was found highest in genotype Go for slight salinity and genotype 04 and Ow for moderate salinity stresses. Increase of vitamin-C content was measured maximuni in genotype (14 under both the salinity stresses. Increase of lycopene content was maximum in the genotype
G1,
at slight salinity and genotype Gi at moderate salinity under both observance (472 nm and 502 nm).Based on yield, genotype (is could be recommended to the Ilirmers for cultivation tinder slightly saline to moderate saline soil in the coastal regions of Bangladesh. As K' is an important nutrient Jor yield and quality of tomato, genotype Gi could be selected as minimum reduction of K uptake at salinity condition. Genotype (iii can be recommended for increased lycopene content for coastal regions. Genotype Gio and 014 could be selected for high hrix% and vitamin-C content respectively for slight to moderate salinity stress. These genotypes could be recommended as parent material for future hybridization or genetic traiisformation program.
r References
REFERENCES
Ahd-EI-Warth. M. (2005). Effect of surface and subsurlhce drip irrigation system with different water salinity on distribution of soil salinity and tomato yield in South Sinai. Annalc Agril. Sd. 43(3): 1341-1355.
Adams. P. and Ho. L.C. (1989). Effects of constant and fluctuating salinity on the yield, quality and calcium status of tomatoes..!. limit Sd. 64: 725- 732.
Adams. P. and ITo. L.C. (1992). The susceptibility of modern tomato cultivars to blossom end rot in relation to salinity. J. Hortt Sd. 67: 827-839.
Adler, P.R. and Wilcor. G.E. (1987). Salt stress.. mechanism sires..s or chloromequat chloride eliects on morphology and growth recovery of hydroponic tomato transplants. .1. Amer. 11cr!. Sd. 112: 22-15.
Agrawal. P.N., Purohit. R.C. and Jaspal. S. (2005). Effect of water salinity on tomato under drip irrigation, drainage and irrigation water management.
I. Lithupur India. pp. 232-244.
Ahamad. K. (1995). Phul Phal 0 Shak-Sabjee. 5th Edn. 414 Senpara. Parbata.
Mirpur. Dhaka. p. 440.
Akinci, S.. Yilmaz and ALinci. I.E. (2004). Response of tomato (Eveopersicon esculemum mill) to salinity in early gowth stages of agricultural cultivation in saline environments. I. Environ. BioL 25(3): 351-357.
Al-I3usaidi. A.. Al-Rawahy. S. and Ahmed, M. (2009). Response of different tomato cultivars to diluted sea water salinity. Asian I. Crop Sd. 1(2):
77-86.
Alda. L.M.. Ciogoasa. I.. Bordean. D.M.. Gergen. I.. Alda. S.. Moldovan. C.
and Nita. L. (2009). Lycopene content of tomatoes and tomato products. I. Agro. Proc. Teclionoi 15(4): 540-42.
Al-Karaki. G.N. (2000). Growth and water use efficiency. sodium and potassium acquisition by tomato cultivars grown under salt stress. .1 Plant iVutr. 23: 1-8.
Al-Omran. A. (2008). Effect of saline water and drip irrigation on tomato yield in sandy calcareous soils amended with natural conditioners. Soil Science Department. College of Food Science and Arriculture. King Saud University. Riyadh. Saudi Arabia. )nd International Salinity Forum. Salinity, water, and society-global issues, local action. pp. 1-4.
Al-Rwahy. S.A. (1989). Nitro2en uptake. growth rate and yield of tomatoes under saline condition. Ph.D Thesis. University of Arizona. Tucson. p.
118.
Al-Sohhi. O.A.. Al-7.ahrani. 11.5. and A]-Ahniadi. S.B.L. (2005). Effect of salinity on growth and chlorophyll content in tomato. Pakistan I. md.
Res. 43: 130-131.
Al-Yahyai. R. Al-lsmaily. S. and Al-Rawahy. S.A. (2010). Growing tomatoes tinder saline Ileld conditions and the role of fertilizers. In: A monograph on management of salt-affcctcd soils and water for sustainable agriculture. M. Ahmed. S.A. Al-Rawahy and N. 1-lussain (ed.). 62(4): 83-88.
Amini. F. and Fhsanpour. A.A. (2006). Response of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) cultivars to MS. water agar and salt stress in in vitro culture. Asian .J Plant Sci. 9(l): 170-175.
Amtmann. A. and Sanders.. D. (1999). Mechanisms of Na' uptake by plant cells. Ac/v. Bar. Rev. 29: 75412.
Anonymous. (1988). Crop Status Report. Christian Reformed Worlds Relief Committee, Bogra. pp. 24-127
Anonymous. (2004). www.faostat.fao.org. FAO Static Division. Rome. Italy.
Anonymous. (2014). Distances From.com. http:;!www.distancesfrom.eom/.
Apse. M.P., Aharon. G.S., Snedden. W.A. and Blumwald. E. (1999). Salt tolerance conferred by overexpression of a vacuolar NaA F antiport in Arahidopsis. Science. 285: 1256-1258.
Asamizu. E. and Ezura. Fl. (2009). Inclusion of tomato in the genus Solanum as
"Solanum lvcopersicurn" is evident from ph1ogenetic studies. I. Japan Soc. Hart. Sd. 78: 3-5.
Azammi. M.A.. Torabi. M. and Shckari. F. (2010). Response of some tomato cultivars to sodium chloride stress under in vitro culture condition.
Africani. Agrit Res. 5(18): 2589-2592.
Barone. A.. Chiusano. M.i... Ercolano. M.R.. Giuliano. G.. Grandillo. S. and Frusciante. L. (2008). Structural and functional genomics of tomato.
liv. I P/ant Geno,'nics. 2008: 1-12.
BBS. (2013). Statistical Pocket Book, Statistics Division. Ministry of Planning.
Govt. of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh. Dhaka. p. 62.
Blits. S.H. and Al-Maghrahi. A.A. (1991). Effect of salt concentration on morphological and physiological traits of tomato cultivars. .4grrd. Res.
14:91-ELI.
Blumwald. E. and Pook. R.J. (1985). NaVI1 antiport in isolated tonoplast vesicles from storage tissue of Beta vulgaris. P/wit Phvsiol. 78: 163-
167.
Bolarin. M.C.. Cuartero. E.G.. Cruz. V. and Cuartero. J. (1991). Salinity tolerance in four wild tomato species using vegetative yield-salinity response curves. .1. American. Soc. Hoti. Sci. 116: 286-290.
Bolarin, M.C.. Perez-Allbcea. F.. Cano. E ..A.. Estan. M.T. and Carol. M.
(1993). Growth, fruit yield and ion concentration in tomato genotypes alier pre- and post-emergence salt treatments. I Aineric.wz. Soc. ifort.
Set 118: 655-660.
Brugnoli. B. and Lauteri. M. (1991). Effects of salinity on stomatal conductance. photosyntheticcapacity. and carbon isotope discrimination of salt—tolerant (Gossvpium hirsutum L.) and salt—sensitive (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) C3 non-halophvtes. Plant Ph vsiol. 95: 628-635.
Byari. S.11. and Al-Maghrabi. A.A. (1991) Effect of salt concentrations on morphological and physiological traits of tomato cultivar Lycopersicon eseulensum Mill. A/-AzharJ. Agric. Res. 14: 91-111.
Carelli. BY.. Gerald. I.T.S.. Grazziotin. E.G. and Echeverrigaray. S. (2006).
Genetic diversity among Brazilian cultivars and landraces of tomato So/anion lvcopersicwn L. revealed by RARD markers. Genet. Res.
Crop. Environ. 53: 395-400.
Chen. X.. Yang. I)., Yang. 1... l.i Y.Y. Zhang. II. (2009). The genetic analysis of quality of fruit of 7 tomato breeding lines. .J Ywinan Agrit Univ.
19(5): 518-523.
Cicek. N. and Cakirlar. Ii. (2002). The effect of salinity on some physiological parameters in two tomato cultivars. Bulgarian I P/out Physiot 28(1-2):
66-74.
Cru7.. V. and Cuartero. J. (1990). Effect of salinity at several deveLopmental stages of six genotypes of' tomato Lvcopersicon spp) .Scientia
Hon/cu/tunic. 32: 73-105.
Cuartero. J. and Ferna'ndez-Munoz. R. (1999). Tomato and salinity. Scientia Horticu/turae. 78: 83-125.
Cuartero, J.. Bolan'n. M.C.. As(ns. M.J. and Moreno. V. (2006). Increasing salt tolcranee in the tomato. I Evpt. Bot. 57(5): 1045-1058.
Cuartero. J.. Gomez-Guillamon. ?vLL.. Romero-Aranda, R.. Reina Sanchez. A.
and Bolarin. M.C. (2003). Eliect of salinity on tomato crop and approaches to reduce deleterious effects. International Workshop Cairo.
Egypt. pp. 202-2 17.
Dasgan. T.Y.. Aktas. If.. Ahak. K. and Cakmak. 1. (2002). Determination of screnning technique to salinity tolerance in tomatoes and investigation ofgenotype response. Plant Sd. 136: 095-703.
Dc Pascale. S.. Maggio...Fogliano. V.. Ambrosino. P. and Ritieni. A. (2001).
Irrigation with saline water improves earotenoids content and antioxidant activity oftomato. .J ilort Set Biotechnol. 76: 447-453.
Edris, S.. Sayed. T.. Sahehali. B. and Karnran. G. (2012). Vegetative growth and nutrient uptake of salinity stressed cherrr tomato in different calcium and potassium level. me. Rey. J. App. Basic Set 3(9): I 845-
1853.
Eltez. R.T. Tii-zeL Y.. CIua. L.A.. Tii-zel. I.H. and Duyar. H. (2002). E!iècts of different EC levels of nutrient solution on greenhouse tomato growing.
Acta Sort. 573: 443-448.
Epheuvelink. (2005). Tomatoes (Crop production seicncc in horticulture).
CABI Publication. 7th Edn. p. 114.
Faiz, S.M.A., UIlah. S.M.. Hussain, A.K.M.A.. Kamal. A.T.MJvl. and Ardus.
S. (1994). Yield, mineral contents and quality of tomato (iveopersicon escu/entwn) tinder salt stress in a saline soil. Current Aric 18(112): 9-
12.
FAO. (2006). FAO Production Yearbook. (1996). Basic Data Unit, Statistics Division. FAO. Rome. Italy. 55: 125-127.
Fillipone.
p:r.
(2014). Tomato Ilistor - The history of tomatoes as food. Once considered poisonous. The tomato is now a thvorite food. Home Cooking Expert. (http://homecooking.about.com/od/foodhistory/a/tomatohistorv.htin.
Flores. P.. Josefa. M.N.. Micacla. C.. Antonio. C. and Vicente. M. (2003).
Tomato yield and quality as a affected by nitrogen source and salinity.
Agronornie. 23: 249-256.
Flowers. T.J. and Yco. A.R. (1995). Breeding for salinity resistance in crop plants: where next? Austrlian I. Plant Phvsiol. 22: 875-884.
Foolad. M. R. (2007). Genome mapping and molecular breeding of tomato. Inc.
J. Plant Genoinicv 12: 58-64.
Foolad. M.R. (2004). Recent advances in genetics of salt tolerance in tomato.
Plant Organ Ctelt 76: 101-119.
Foolad. M.R. and Liii. G.Y. (1997). Genetic potential for salt tolerance during germination in Lycopersicon species. Fort Set 32: 296-300.
ERG. (2012). Fertilizer recommendation guide. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council(BARC). Farmgate. New Airport Road. Dhaka-1215.
p. 117.
Garbarino. J. and DuPont. F.M. (1988). NaCl induces a Nail-I antiport in tonoplast vcsicics from barley roots. Plant Physiol. 86: 231-236.
Cientileore. D. (2010). A History of the Tomato in Italy Pomodoro. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. ISBN 0231 15206X.
CIhadiri. H.. Dordipur, L. Byhordi. M. and Malakourti. M.J. (2005). Potential use of Caspian Sea for supplementary irrigation in north Iran. Agric.
Water A'Ianage. 79: 209-224.
Giannakoula. A.E and Ilias. I.F. (2013). The eflect of water stress and salinity on growth and physiology of tomato (Lycopersicon esculeniwn ,nill. ).
Arc/i. Blot Sct 65(2): 611-620.
Gomez. K.A. and Gomez. A.A. (1984). Comparison between treatment means.
In: Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. K.A. Gomez and A.A. Gomez. (eds.). 2nd Edn ..Iohn Wiley and Sons. NY. USA. pp.
187-240.
Gomez-Cadenas. A., Tadco. FR.. Primo-Millo. F. and Talon. M. (1998).
Involvement of abscisic acid and ethylene in the response of citrus seedlings to salt shock. P/nsioL Plant 103: 475-484.
Orunhcrg, K., Fcrna'ndez-Munoz. R. and Cuartero. J. (1995). Growth.
flowering, and quality and quantity of pollen of tomato plants grown under saline conditions. Acm Horticu/turac. 412: 484-489.
Hajcr. A.S.. Malihari. A.A.. Al-Zahrani. H.S. and Almaghrahi. O.A. (2006).
Response of three tomato eultivars to sea water. AJricau .J Iloitechnot 5(10): 855-861.
Uajihoiand. R.. Naser. A.. Shirin. F.L. and Charlotte. P. (2010). Colonization with arbuscular mycorrhi7al fungi improves salinity tolerance of tomato (Solanum Iveopersicum L.) plants. Plan: Soil. 33(2): 313-327.
Hao....Papadopoulos. A.P.. Dorais. M.. Ehret. D.L.. Turcotte. G. and (losselin. A. (2000). Improving tomato fruit quality by raising the EC of NUT nutrient solutions and calcium spraying: Effects on growth.
photosynthesis. yield and quality. Acm Hon. 511: 213-224.
Hassan. A.A.. Nassar. Hi-I.. Barl<at. M.A. and Tolba. M.S. (1999). Tomato breeding for salinity tolerance. Ill. Genetics ol tolerance. Egyptian J.
[fort 26(3): 39 1-403.
Irshad. M.. Yamamoto. A.E. and Honna. T. (2002). InFluence of composed manure and salinity on growth and nutrient contents of tomato tissue.
Svmp. No. 58. Paper No. 96. [7th WCSS. 14-21 August. Thailand.
Islam. M.L. Ara...Hossain, M.A. Sen. A.K. and Dutta. R.K. (2011).
Identification of tomato genotypes tbr salt tolerance. hit J. Susta/n.
Crop Prod. 6(1): 17-21.
Johnson. R.W.. Dixon. M.A. and Lee. D.R. (1992). Water rehuions of the tomato fruit during growth. P/ant ('cli Environ. IS: 947-953.
Juan. M.. Rivero. R.M.. Romero. 1.. and Ruiz. J.M. (2005). Evaluation of some nutritional and bio chemical indicators in selecting salt-resistant tomato eultivars. Environ. Expt.
&,L
54: 193-201.Lopez-Clirncnt. ?vI.F .. Arbona. V.. Perez-Clemente. R.M. and Gornez-Cadenas.
A (2008). Relationship between salt tolerance and photosynthetic machinery performance in citrus.. Environ. Expi. Dot. 62:176-1 84.
Magan. J.J. (2005). Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. P/a;?! Ce//
Environ. 25: 239-250.
Magan. J.J., Gallardo. M.. Thompson. R.B. and Lorenzo P. (2008). Effects of salinity on fruit yield and quality of tomato grown in soil-less culture in greenhouses in Mediterranean climatic conditions. .1gric. Water Manage. 95(9): 1041-1055.
Maggoi. A.. Pascale. S.D.. Angelio. U.. Ruggiero. C. and Harbieri. Ci. (2004).
Physiological response of tomato to saline irrigation in long-term salinized soils. European .1. Agron. 21: I 49-159.
Martinez. U.. Andreani. S., Gusano. L.G.. Geuna. M. and Ruiz, F.J.J. (2006).
Evolution of amplilied length polymorphism and simple sequence repeats for tomato gcrmplasm fingerprinting: Utility (or grouping closely related traditional cultivars. Genome. 49: 648-656.
Meena. O.P. and Bahadur. V. (2015). Genetic associations analysis for fruit yield and its contributing traits of indeterminate tomato (So/anuüz lvcopersicum L.) Gerrnplasni under Open Field Condition...4 grit Sci.
7(3): 148-163.
Miller. J.C. and Tanksley. S.D. (1990). RFLP analysis of phylogenetic relationships and genetic variation in the genus Lycopersicon. Theor.
Appt Genet. 80: 437-448.
Mittova. V.. 'volokita. M.. Guy. M. and Tal. NI. (2000). Activities of SOD and ascorhate-glutathione cycle enzymes in subeellular compartments in leaves and roots of the cultivated tomato and its wild salt-tolerant relative Lvcopersicon peniwllii. Phvsiul. Plw;tarwn. 110: 42-51.
Mova. J.L.. (jomez-Cadcnas. A.. Primo-Millo. E.. talon. M. (2003). Chloride absorption in salt-sensitive Carrizo citrange and salt-tolerant Cleopatra mandarin citrus rootstocks is linked to water use. .1. ExpI. Rot. 54: 825- 833.
Nlunns, R. and Tester. R. (2008) Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annie. Rev.
Plant Biol. 59: 65 1-681.
Munns. R.. Pessarakli. M. and Tucker. T.C. (2002). Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. Plant Cell Environ. 25: 239-250.
Niu. X.. Bressan. R.A.. 1-lasegawa. P.M.. and Pardo J.M. (1995). Ion homeostasis in NaCl stress environments. Plant Physiol. 109: 735-742.
Olympios. CM.. Karapanos. IC.. Lionoudakis. K. and Apidianakis. 1. (2003).
The growth. yield and quality of greenhouse tomatoes in relation to salinity applied at different stages of plant growth. .4cta Lion. 609: 313- 320.
Omar. M.A.. Omar. F.A. and Samarral. S.M. (1982). rffect of diflèrent soil treatments on tomato plants grown in Wadi Fatima soil. Technical report. Faculty of Meteorol-Environ and Arid land Agric. p.26.
Peralta. I.E.. Knapp. S. and Spooner. D.M. (2006). Nomenclature for wild and cultivated tomatoes. Genet. Coop. 56: 6-12.
Petersen, K. K, Willumsen. J. and Kaack. K. (1998). Composition and taste of tomatoes as affected by increased salinity and diflèrent salinity sources.
J. Nor!. Sd. 73: 205-215.
Rafat. S. and Rafiq. A. (2009). Vegetative growth and yield of tomato as affected by the application of organic mulch and gypsum under saline rhizosphere. Pakistan J. But. 41(6): 3093-3105.
Reina-Sanehez. A.. Romero-Aranda. R. and Cuartero. J. (2005). Plant water uptake and water use efficiency of greenhouse tomato cultivars irrigated with saline water. Agric. Water Manage. 78:54-66.
Rick. C.M. and Chetelat. R.T. (1995). Utilization of related wild species for tomato improvement. Acne i-tort 412: 145-154.
Ruble. F.. Ciassniann. W. and Schroeder. J.l. (1995). Sodium driven potassium uptake by the plant potassium transporter IIKT1 and mutations conferring salt tolerance. Science. 270: 1660-1663.
Rtish. D.W. and Epstein. F. (1981). Comparative studies on the sodium, potassium and chloride relations of wild halophytic and a domestic salt sensitive tomato species. Plant Phvsiol. 68: 1308-1313.
Satio. T.. Chaiki. M.. Yusuke. B.. Keiko. S. Naoya. F. and Shigeo. N. (2008).
Salinity stress affects assimilate metabolism at the Gene-expression level duriniz fruit development and improves fruit quality in tomato (Solanwn lycopersiewn L.)...Japan Soc. f-fort. Set 77(1): 61-68.
Satti. S.M. and Al-Yahvai. R.A. (1995). Salinity tolerance in tomato:
implications of potassium. calcium and phoaphorus. Soil Sci. Plant Annals. 26: 2749-2760.
Shaaban, M.M.. Fouly. E.L. and Zanatv. F.L. (2004). llalophytes and foliar fertilizer as a useful technique for growing processing tomatoes in the saline aliècted soils. Pakistan. J. Blot ScL 7(4): 503-507.
Shannon. M.C. and Francois. lIt. (1987). Salt tolerance of three cantaloupe cultivars ( Cucwnis melo L.). J. American. Soc. f-fort. Sd. 103: 127-130.
Shi. J. and I.e Maguer. M. (2000). Lycopene in tomatoes: chemical and physical properties affected by food processing. Food Set Nutr. 40(1):
1-42.
Siddiky, M.A.. Sardar. P.K.. Hossain, M.M. Khan. .M.S. and Uddin. M.K.
(2012). Screening of dofferent tomato varieties in saline arca.s of Bangladesh. tnt. I. Agrit Res. Innov. Tech. 2(1): 13-IS.
midová. Z. and Izzo. R. (2009. Improvement olnutritional value of tomatoes under salt stress conditions special issue. Czecl; I. Food Sd. 27: 138- 139.
Smith. A.F. (1994). lhc Tomato in America: Early I-Iistorv. Culture. and Cookery. Columbia SC, LISA: University of South Carolina Press.
ISBN 1-57003-000-6.
Sonneveld. C. and Van Der Burg. A.M.M. (1991). Sodium chloride salinity in fruit vegetable crops in soillcss culture. et/ierlaii/s .1....I. Sct 39:
115-122.
SRDI. (2010). Soil Salinity Report of Bangladesh. Soil Resources Development institute. SRMAF Project Ministry of Agriculture Mrittika Rhahan, Krishikhamar Sarak F'anngate. Uhaka- 1215. p. 5.
Tee. ES.. Young. S.L. Ho. S.K. and Mizura. S.S. (1988). Determination of vitamin C in fresh fruits and vegetables using the dye-titration and microfluorometric methods. Perianika. 11(1): 39-44.
Thomas. S. and Nambisan. D. (1999). Effect of salt stress on uptake and partitioning of sodium. potassium and calcium in rice seedling. Ot:ica.
36(I): 42-45.
Lozumi. N.. Kim. E.K.. Rubio. F.. Yamagushi. T.. Muto, S., Tsuhoi. A..
Bakker, E.P.. Nakamura. T. and Schroeder. J.1. (2000). The Arabidopsis 1-11(11 gene homolog mediates inward Na cunents in Xenopus laevis oocytes and Na' uptake in Saccharomvces cerevisiae.
Plant Phvsiol. 122: 1249-1259.
Vanlepercn. W. (1996). Effect of different day and night salinity levels on vegetative growth. yield and quality of tomato. I. 1-for,....1.71:99-111.
Vavilov. N.J. (1951). The orhuin. variation, immunity and breeding of cultivated plants. C/iron/ca Rot. 13: 361-366.
Vidal.M.. Almudena . M.. Climent. L.. Fernanda...Vicent. M.. Clemente.
P., Maria. R., Cadenas. G. and Aurelio. (2009). A novel in vitro tissue culture approach to study salt stress responses in citrus. 59(2): 179-187.
Walker. N.A.. Sanders. D. and Maathuis. F.J.M. (1996). High affinity potassium uptake in plants. Science. 273: 977-979.
Yco. A.R. and Flowers. T.J. (1986). Salinity resistance in rice (Oiyza saliva L.) and a pvraniiding approach to breeding varieties for saline soils.
Australian .J Plant Physiol. 13: 16 1 - 1 73.
Yi. S....Jatoi. S.A.. Fujimura. 1.. Yamanaka. S. and Watanabe. K.N. (2008).
Potential loss of unique genetic diversity in tomato landraccs by genetic colonization of modern cultivars at a non-center of origin. Plant Breed.
127: 189-196.
Yong-Gen Y.. Yoshie. K.. Atsuko. S.. Satoru. K.. ?4aova. F.. Hiroshi. F..
Sumiko S. and Chiaki. M. (2009). Salinity induces carbohydrate accumulation and sugarrcgulatcd starch biosynthetic genes in tomato (So/anton 1,vcoperswu,n L. cv. Micro-Tonf) fruits in an ABA- and osmotic stress-independent manner. J. Expt. Bat. 61(2): 563-574.
Zhang, F.. Yang. Y.L.. He. W.L.. Zhao, X. and Zhang. I..X. (2004). Effects of salinity on growth and compatible solutes of callus induced from Populus euphratica. In vitro Ccli Dcv. Biol. 40(5): 49 1-494.