SELECTION OF SALT TOLERANT GENOTYPES BASED ON AGROMORPIIOCENIC PHYSIOLOGICAL AND
N Ui' R ITIONA L TRAITS OF TOMATO (Solan ii,,: I)'copersicwn L.) BY
MI). EHSANUL HAQ REGISTRATION NO.: 08-02821
A Thesis
Submitted to the Faculty of Agriculture Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural IJnivcrsity, Dhaka,
in partial fulfilment of the requirements br the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE IN
GENETICS AND PLANT BREEDING SEMESTER: JULY-DECEMBER, 2014
Approved by:
(Dr. Naheed Zeba) Professor Supervisor
(Dr. Moham mad Saiful Islam) Professor
Co-Supervisor
POO
(Professor Dr. Md. Sarowar Ilossain) Cli airman
Examitialion Committee
Naheed
Zeha,
Ph.I) ProfessorDepartment of Genetics and Plant Breeding Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University
Sher-c-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka- 1207, Bangladesh Tel: 88-02-9140770
Mobile: +8801913091772
E-mail: [email protected]
CERTIfICA! 1E
'mu is to certfj that thesis entitled "Selection
ofsalt tolerant genotypes based on agromoiphogenic, physiological and nut ritiona( traits
oftomato (Solarium lycopersicum L)" submitted to the faculty
offigricufture, Slier-e-Barwth Agricultural Vniversity, a)hakjz, inpariialfu(fiffment
ofthe requirements for the degree
of &WAYThQt 'YF SCIT5TCE IN GTZINEMS AWDLrEEViWg, embodies the result
ofa piece
ofbonafide research work,carrieIout by iMt Ehisanu(
f/1aq, (Rjgistration &\'b: 08-02821 under my supervision anti guidance. No part
ofthe thesis has been submitteifor any other degree ordipibma.
If-lrther certtfy that such help or source
ofinformation, as has been availed
ofduring the course of this investigation has been duly been ac&nowThdgedby him.
Dated: December, 2014 Place: Dhaka, Bangladesh
(Dr. Naheed Zeba) Professor Sn pervisor
Dedicated to my
Abbu Md. Imdadu! Haq
Ammu Saijura Begum
Some commonly used abbreviations
Full word Abbreviations Full word Abbreviations
Agricultural Agril. Mi lii mole mM
Agriculture Agne. Nitrate NC)3
And others ci aL Number No.
Applied App. Murashige and Skoog MS
Bamiladesh BARC Nanometre nm
Agricultural Research Council
Bangladesh DARt Negative logarithm p1-1
Ai-ieu1tura1 of hydrogen ion
Research Institute concentration
(-log[I I4j)
Bangladesh Bureau BBS Nitric Acid 11NO3
of Statistics
Biology BioL Nutri lion Nuir.
Calcium ion Ca2 Perchioric Acid 11C104
Centimeter Cm Percentage %
Chlorine ion Cl* Plant Genetic PGRC
Resource Centre
Chlorophyll ChI Potassium ion K•
Days after DAT Potassium Chloride KCI
transplanting
Dccisiemcns per dS/rn Parts per million ppm meter
Environment Environ. Review Rev.
Etcetera etc. Physiology Phvsio/.
Food and FAC) Research and Rn.
Agricultural Resource
Organization
Gram g Serial SI.
Grain per liter giL Science Set
Hcetare ha. Soil Resource SRDI
Development Institute
Horticulture lion. Sodium ion Na
International Intl. Technology TechnoL
Journal J. That is i.e.
Kilogram Kg Ton T
Liter I.. Videlicet (namely) viz.
Milligram per liter mg/I. United States of U.S.A.
America
Milligram(s) mg Ultraviolet UV
Milliliter rnL
AC7.9VOWLWJIJç!&MTiVZ
Atfirct the autliorexpresses his pro found,qnht:tucle to Aim üjfitvi4 ETa/i for his never-c riding blessing to complete tflsworksuccessfull5c It is a great pleasure to epress his reflective gratitude to his respected pare uts, who e,tti&'dr,tz,cii uzard'sliip inspiring for prosecuting his studies, there/h' receiving proper eclucat lost.
'Vze author would tike to express his cattiest respect, sincere appreciation and enormous I/ian ffulness to his revere/ti supervisor,'rof br. Wa/iced ZeSa, Dq;artment of gesse tics and 'JYiszt qjreeding, Siier-e-Qjanghi Agricultural Vnic'ersity. DIiaIg, for her schohutic supervision, con! inuous encouragement, constructive suggestion anIunvasying inspiration throughout the research worlcandfor taPjng immense care in preparing this manuscnpt.
The author wishes to express his gratitude and best regards to his respected Co-Supervisor.
cprof 'Dr. siic'/lazr:majcaifrf Islam, 'Department of genetics aszdQ'la;zt i3reeding, S/icr-c- '/3ang&z figriculturat iJuiversity, Q)fiaçi, for his cooperation, encouragement and' valuable
teaching.
'711€ author is hzg/lly grattful to 11th fionora6le teacher (Prof Or flid 5arowar Jlossain, Chairman.. Dcpartment of genetics and 'Plant 'Breeding, .SIier-e-'Bangla _flgncuftural' University, D/lakg, for his 'valuable teaching, encouragement and cooperation diring the whole clucly penod
'The author feels to e.vpn'ss fits heartfelt ti1anIs to his honora 6/i' teachers, 'Prof tor. ,%1d
Shahudur flashid'B/iuiyan, or 'Firoz iMa/imudandaif the lunsora bEe course instructors
of
the 'Department of genetics a,ulQ&znt Breeding, 5/icr-e-'l3aug&i Agricultural 'University, Dlza&a, for their valuable teaching, direct and indirect adi'ice, encouragement and cooperation dining the period of the study.
¶7/ic author is than ful to all cf the academic officers and staff of the 'Department of genetics and KPlaut 'Breeding, Sfier-e43angla Agricultural :U,jiversjty, 'Dfla/g, for their continuous cooperation throng/lout the study period
'Vie author is also grateful to fDr. 'Karna( Vdliin j4/imed Prq/essor. 'Department of' 'Biochemistry, Siier-e-'Bang&i Agricultural Lnivcrsiiy, Or Md: )lbditr '&azzaque, (Professor, Department of Agricultural Chemistry, Sher-e-'Bangla Agricultural University, ]vasuna AiQEter, A.csoczate 'Professor, 'Departnzent of Agncultural I3otany, Sfier-e-'Bangla Agricultural University and9loflammad9dofludur cR,giiman, Pfl.q) student, 'Department of ,Agn'cultural :i3otany, S/ier-e-Baugla Agricultural 'University, 'DflaILa _for giving their
iTh4u;le suggest ions dun'ng the periodofdata collection.
ifie author 'won/i hR1 to ihan& to Or. WA &Maleh cPrx'ncipalscientijic Officer, Thint (jenet ic Q?,,esources ('en tre, 'Rang&id?sfi figricultural '2tesearcfl Institute, gazipu r for providing germplasm of the e.vpen'mental;naterial
[he tvouldhiIç to tiiarzi allof/lisfrienls and well wisfiers'u'hzo ahvays inspired Ii tin d'udng his research speciahl .8ilkich 'Begurn, Vild 31oszir [Ifossain Silo/lag, Jiud jIfidul Aiatin, Rozina )1fiter, :liohammai9eiaIzafiub yllam Liayhn and ,Md. Rayhanullsfizinwho helped
[rim with their valuable suggest loris and directions diring tile preparation of this thesis paper.
Jie can never repay the debt of/Us uncle, aunty, sisters, brothers an'! all other welt wishers for their inipiration, constant encouragement and sacrifice for fits fltgfier education specialty his aunty Dr. 1(hialeda IC/lawn, Jissociate 'Professor. Department of9forticufture, Shzer-e-Qiang&.z figricultural ?Jrnversity, 'bfiakç, tv/lose inspiration gusted (rim toward the acE ie-vemeni of his goal
He expresses his immense gratefulness to all of them who assisted and inspired flim to ac/Ueve lUg/Icr education ant regret for fits inabilityfor not to mention cveiy one by name-
qlieflutfior
4
LIST OF CONTENTS
PAGE
CHAPTER TITLES
ABBREVIATIONS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LIST OF CONTENTS iv
LIST OF TABLES vii
LIST OF PLATES ix
LIST OF FIGURES x
LIST OF APPENDICES xi
ABSTRACT xii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION I
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 4
2.1 Tomato 4
2.2 Salinity 5
2.3 Mechanism of salt tolerance 7
2.4 (lenotypic variation 7
2.5 Effect of different salinity treatment on tomato plant 8 2.5.1 Effect of salinity on agrornorphogenic traits 8 2.5.2 Effect of salinity cm physiological traits 13 2.5.3 Effect of salinity on nutritional traits 17
CHAPTER III MATERIALS AND METHODS 20
3.1 Experimental site 20
3.2 Planting materials 20
3.3 Treatments in the experiment 20
3.4 Design and layout of the experiment 22
3.5 Climate and soil 22
3.6 Seed bed preparation and raising of seedlings 22
3.7 Manure and fertilizers application 25
LIST OF CONTENTS (CONT'D)
PAGE
CHAPTER TITLES NO.
3.8 Pot preparation and transplanting of secdlings 25 3.9 Application of sodium chloride (NaCl) 25
3.10 Intercultural operations 27
3.11 H arvesting and processing 27
3.12 Data recording 27
3.12.1 Agromorphogenic traits 30
3.12.1.1 Days to first Ilowering 30
3.12.1.2 Palnthehzht 30
3.12.1.3 Number of clusters per plant 30
3.12.1.4 Days to maturity 30
3.12.1.5 Number of fruits per cluster 30 3.12.1.6 Number of fruits per plant 30 3.12.1.7 Avera2e fruit length and diameter 30 3.12.1.8 Average fruit weight per plant 30
3.12.1.9 Yicldperplant 31
3.12.2 Physiological traits 31
3.12.2.1 Measuring of chlorophyll content 31 3.12.2.2 Determination of Na' and K! content 31
3.12.3 Nutritional traits 32
3.12.3.1 Determination of brix percentage 32 3.12.3.2 Determination of vitamin-C 32 3.12.3.3 Determination of lycopene content 32
3.13 Statistical analysis 33
CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 34
4.1 Agromorphogenic traits 34
4.1.1 Days to first Ilowering 34
LIST OF CONTENTS (CONT'D)
CHAPTER TITLES PACE
4.1.2 Plant height 36
4.1.3 Number of cluster per plant 39
4.1.4 Days to maturity 41
4.1.5 Number of fruits per cluster 45
4.1.6 Number of fruits per plant 45
4.1.7 Average fruit length 46
4.1.8 Average fruit diameter 47
4.1.9 Average fruit weight per plant 51
4.1.10 Yield per plant 52
4.2 Physiological traits 54
4.2.1 Chlorophyll content 54
4.2.2 Na content 55
4.2.3 Kt content 59
4.3 Nutritional traits 60
4.3.1 Brix 60
4.3.2 Vitamin-C content 62
4.3.3 Lycopene content 65
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 68
REFERENCES 71
APPENDICES 80
LIST OF TABLES TABLE
TITLE - PAGE
NO
Name and origin of fifteen tomato genotypes used in the 21 present study
2 Performance of tomato genotypes on plant height. days to 35 first flowering and number of cluster per plant
3 Perlbrmance of salinity treatments on plant height. days 35 to first flowering and number of cluster per plant
4 Interaction effect of tomato genotypes and salinity 37 treatments on plant height. days to first flowering and
number ofeluster per plant
5 Performance of tomato genotypes on days to mathrity. 42 number of fruits per cluster and number of fruits per plant
6 Perfonnance of salinity treatments on days to maturity. 42 number of fruits per cluster and number of fruits per plant
7 Interaction effect of tomato genotypes and salinity 43 treatments on days to maturity, number of fruits per
cluster and number of fruits per plant
8 Performance of tomato genotypes on average fruit length. 48 average fruit diameter. average fruit weight per plant and
yield per plant
9 Performance of salinity treatments on average l'ruit 48 length, average fruit diameter. average fruit weight per
plant and yield per plant
10 Interaction effect of tomato genotypes and salinity 49 treatments on average fruit length. average fruit diameter,
average fruit weight per plant and yield per plant
II Perfonnanee of tomato gcnotypes on chlorophyll content. 56 Na content and K content
12 Perfonnance of salinity treatments on chlorophyll 56 content. Na content and K content
13 Interaction effect of tomato genotypes and salinity 57 treatments on chlorophyll content. Na' content and K'
content
LIST OF TABLES (CONT'D)
TABLE PAGE
TITLE
NO. NO.
14 Performance of tomato genotypes on brix (%). vitamin-C 61 content and lycopene content
15 Performance of salinity treatments on brix (%). vitamin-C 61 content and lycopene content
16 Interaction effect of tomato genotypes and salinity 63 treatments on brix (%), vitamin-C content and lycopene
content
LIST OF PLATES
PLATE PAGE
TITLE
NO. NO.
Measuring soil pH and soil F.C. 23
2 Seedbed preparation. raising of seedling, transfer in 24 polybag for hardening and transplanting to the plastic
pots
3 Formaldehyde treatment and preparation of saline 26 solution for required salinity treatments
4 Intercultural operations 28
5 Diflèrent types of data recording 29
6 Comparison of plant height under control and salinity 40 stress conditions
7 Comparison of fruit morphology under control and stress 50 conditions
LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE
TITLE PAGE
NO.
NP
Reduction percentage in days to first flowering. plant 38
height and number of cluster per plant under increasing salinity
2 Reduction percentage in days to maturity and number oF 44 fruits per plant under increasing salinity
3 Reduction percentage in average fruit weight per plant 53
and yield per plant under increasing salinity
4 Reduction/increase percentage in chlorophyll content. 58 Na content and K4 content under increasing salinity
5 Increase percentage in brix (%) and vitamin-C content 64 under increasing salinity
6 Reducing percentage in lycopene content under 67 increasing salinity
LIST OF APPENDiCES APPENDIX
NO. TITLE PAGE
NO.
Map showing the experimental site under the study 80 2 Monthly records of air temperature, relative humidity. 81
rainihll and sunshine hours during the period from October 2013 to March 2014
3 The mechanical and chemical characteristics of soil of 82 the experimental site as observed prior to
experimentation (0
-
15 cm depth)4 Analysis of variance of the data on days to iirst 83 flowering, plant height. number of cluster/plant. days
to mawritv and number of fruits/cluster of tomato
5 Analysis of variance of the data on number of 84 fruits/plant. average fruit length. average fruit diameter.
average fruit weight./plant and yield/plant of tomato
6 Analysis of variance of the data on chlorophyll content. 85 Na. K. Brix. vitamin-C and lycopcnc content of
tomato
7 Mean values of agromorphoenic. physiological and 86 nutritional traits of tomato under control and salinity
stress conditions
8 Reduction percentage in days to first flowering, plant 89 height, number of cluster per plant. days to maturity
and number of fruits per plant under increasing salinity
9 Reduction/increase percentage in average fruit weight 90 per plant. yield per plant. chlorophyll content. Na'
content and Kcontent under increasing salinity
10 Reduction/increase percentage in brix (%). vitamin-C 91 content and lycopene content of under increasing
salinity
SELECTION OF SALT TOLERANT GENOTYPES BASEI) ON AGROMORPHOGENIC, PHYSIOLOGICAL AND NUTRITIONAL
TRAITS OF TOMATO (SoIa:utn Ivcvpercicwn L.) BY
MD. EHSANUL HAQ
ABSTRACT
A pot experiment was conducted to observe the performances of lilieen tomato genotypes under three different salinity treatments. Ile experiment was conducted beside the net house of Genetics and Plant Breeding Department, Sher-e-l3angla Agricultural University. Dhaka- 1207. Bangladesh. durin2 the months of November 2013 to March 2014. Iwo factorial experiment included lifleen tomato genotypes viz. Ci (BD-7289). G2 (BD-7291). C: (BD-7298). G4
(BD-7748), Gs (BD-7757). (Is (BD-7760). G7 (BD-7761). (is (13D-7762). Gv (BD-901 I). Uio (l3D-9960). Ch (BAlti Toniato-2). Cii: (BARI Tomato-3). Ch3
(SARI Thmato- 1!). Ciii (BAR! I lybrid Tomato-4). (35 (BARI Hybrid lomato-
5) and three salinity treatments Ti (Control). 12 (8 dSTh). 13 (12 dS/rn) were outlined in Completely Randomized Design (CRD) with three replications.
Seedlings of 30 days were transplanted to main plastic pots and two salinity treatments S dSim and 12 dS/m were applied after 7 days of transplanting. The results showed that both the di lierent tomato genotypes and salinity treatments significantly influenced independently and also in interaction on agromorphogenic. physiological and nutritional traits of tomato plant. Almost all traits responded negatively as the salinity level increased except days to first flo ering. maturit. Na content. brix (%) and vitamin-C content. l:ruit characters like fruit diameter. fruit length and average fruit weight increased in genotype (Is for both the stresses than the control condition. llie minimum reduction was observed in case of yield per plant in the same (Is genotype.
Lyeopene content increased in 2enotvpe (313 and (Iii from slightly saline to moderate saline soil respectively. Brix (%) increased and was maximum in Gio genotype and vitamin-C content was the highest in genotype C I i at moderate salinity. Therefore, genotype (Ig could he recommended for higher yield and enotype 014 and (I i i could he recommended for high vitamin-C and lycopene content to the farmers for cultivation under slightly saline to moderate saline soil in the coastal regions of Bangladesh. These genotypes could also be served as parent material for fttture hybridization or genetic transfoniiaiion program.
Chapter I
Introduction
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
lomato (So/anuin Iycopersicwn L.) belongs to family Solanaceae. It is one of the most important vegetables in the world because of its wider adaptability.
high yielding potentiality and suitability for variety of uses in fresh as well as processed Food industries (Meena and Bahadur. 2015). The cultivated tomato is the second most important vegetable crop in the world in terms of consumption per capita and is the most popular garden vegetable. in addition to tomatoes that are eaten directly as raw vegetable or added as ingredient to other food items. a variety of processed products have gained popularity. They contribute significantly to the dietary intake of vitamins Aand C as well as essential minerals and nutrients. In the U.S.A. diet. tomato ranks first among all fruits and vegetables as a source of vitamins and minerals (Rick and Chetelat. 1995).
Tomato is cultivated in almost all home gardens and also in the field for its adaptability to wide range of soil and climate in Bangladesh. It ranks next to potato and sweet potato in respect of vegetable production in the world. It is widely cultivated in tropical. sub-tropical and temperate climates and thus it ranks third in terms of world vegetable production (FAO. 2006).
In Bangladesh. tomato is cultivated all over the country due to its adaptability to wide range of soil and climate (Ahamed. 1995). Although a tropical plant, tomato is grown in almost every corner of the planet. Worldwide, a total of 4.98 million hcctarcs of tomato were harvested in 2009 with a total production of 141.4 million Metric tons (Anonymous, 2004). Major production countries include China. L'.S.A.. India. Turkey. Egypt. Italy and Iran. In Bangladesh.
tomato is grown on an area of 534 million hcctares with an average production of 251 thousand metric tons (BBS. 2013) which is very low compared to other countries like India (15.67 tfha). Japan (52.82 t'ha). USA (65.22 L'ha). China (30.39 vita). Egypt (34.00 Uha) and 1urkey (41.77 1./ha) (FAQ. 2006).
Salinity is one of the major stress factors among the ahiotic stresses. In the world, about 400 million hectares of land are affected by high salinity. In Bangladesh about I million hectares of land are affected by high salinity in the coastal regions and it is increasing day by day. Salinity affects almost every aspect of' the morphology, physiology and biochemistry of plants and significantly reduces yield (Azammi et al.. 2010: Amini and Ehsanpour. 2006:
Zhang et aL. 2004). As saline soils and saline waters are common around the world. great effort has been devoted to understanding physiological aspects of tolerance to salinity in plants, as a basis for plant breeders to develop salinity- tolerant genotypes. In spite of this great effort, only a small number of eultivars. partially tolerant to salinity, have been developed. Further effort is necessary if the exploitation of saline soils and saline waters that are not currently usable is to be achieved. Salinity affects yield and quaIit. so that yield characters must be taken into account when breeding for salinity tolerance. But not only yield-related characters are important. As salinity affects almost every aspect ol'the physiology and biochemistry of the plant. the enhancement of crop salt tolerance will require the combination of several too many physiological traits (Cuartero el cii.. 2006: Cuartero and Femandez- Munoz. 1999; Flowers and Yeo. 1995), not simply those directly influencing yield. As salinity in soils is variable and plant tolerance depends on the stage of' plant development, plants should be phcnotvped at several salinity concentrations and at the most sensitive plant stage(s).
The tomato plant is moderately tolerant to salinity stress (Foolad. 2004) and can tolerate salinity up to 2.5-2.9 dS/m in root zone without yield losses (Sonneveld and Van der Burg. 1991). Salinity adversely affects the vegetative growth of tomato. and it reduced plant length and dry weight (Ornar et al..
1982: Adler and Wilcor. 1987). Al-Karaki (2000). also reported that increasing NaCI concentralion in nutrient solution adversely affected tomato shoot and roots. plant height. K concentration, and K/Na ratio. This reduction in dry weights due to increased salinity may be result of a combination of osmotic and specific ion effects of Ct and Na (Al-Rwaliv. 1989). Salinity also reduce the
fresh and dry shoot and root weight of tomato (Shannon and Francois. 1987;
Satti and Al-Yahyai. 1995). So, extensive research is necessary to develop growing conditions in moderate salinity to produce good vegetative growth of tomato plants. Crops yield varies from variety to variety due to internal and external factors of plant. lomato cultivers varied greatly in their response to different salinity Levels (Byari and Almaghrabi. 1991). Most of the seed companies of the world develop crop varieties suitable for varied climatic condition and if the varieties are used without adaptability test, the growers may thce economic losses. Therefore, it is necessary to find out a suitable variety for higher yield and economic return as well as for the salinity affected Southern region of Bangladesh.
This study was conducted to explore the bioassay so as to establish a reproducible protocol for selecting of different salt tolerant tomato genotype in different concentrations of NaCl. With conceiving the above scheme in mind.
the present research work has been undertaken in order to fulfill the following ohjcctivcs:
> to observe the growth and yield of tomato genotypes under different salinity conditions.
r to determine the response of genotype x treatment interaction based on yield and yield contributing characters.
> to detennine the response of genotype x treatment irneracrion based on nutritional traits.
to determine the Na. K and chlorophyll content under control and stress conditions as indicators of salt tolerance and
> To asses the magnitude of genotypic variation under control and stress conditions.
Chapter H
Review of Literature
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Tomato is a vell-studicd crop species for breeding, genetics and genornics in plants. Various resources are accessible now for its research, which can lead to uprising in evaluation of tomato biology (l3arone ci at. 2008). Many studies have been done using different genes to examine its genetic diversity (Asamizu and Ezura. 2009: Carelli ci at. 2006: Martinez cial.. 2006).
Now a day's salinity problem is in limelight in the whole world as well as in our country. The salt affected area is increasing day by day. Tomato is a very popular vegetable in our country and it is moderately tolerant to salinity stress.
Screening of salt tolerant lines of tomato is a way to make a perfect use of the soil having dilièrent saline levels. Some of inFormative works have so far been done in home and abroad related to this experiment have been presented in this chapter.
2.1 Tomato
1'onrnto translates to "woljpeac/i" peach because it was round and luscious and wolf because it was erroneously considered poisonous. The English word -tomato- comes from the Spanish word. toinate. which in turn comes From the Nahuatl (Aztec lan(Mage) word tomato!!. It first appeared in print in 1595. A member of the deadly nightshade Family. tomatoes were erroneously thought to be poisonous (although the leaves are poisonous) by Europeans who were suspicious of their bright, shiny frtut. Native versions were small, like cherry
tomatoes. and most likely yellow rather than red (Fillipone. 2014).
Tomato is a tropical plant and grown in almost every corner of the world From tropics to within a few degrees or the Arctic Circle. Mexico has been considered the most likely center of domestication of tomato. Italy and Spain are considered secondary centers of' diversilication (Cientilcore. 2010: Smith.
1994). The cultivated tomato originated in the Peru-Ecuador-Bolivia area of the
South American (Vavilov. 1951). Major tomato producing countries are Spain.
Brazil. frau. Mexico. Greece. Russia. China. USA. Tndia. Turkey. Egypt and Italy. It is believed that the tomato was introduced in subcontinent during the British regime. It is adapted to a wide range of climates. In tomato (Solwzum lycopersicutu I..), one cultivated species and 12 wild relatives have been reported (Peralta et al.. 2006). Genetic variation in modem cultivars or hybrids is limited (Chcn c/ al.. 2009). It is estimated that cultivated tomato genuine contains less than 5% of the genetic variation of the wild relatives (Miller and Tankslev. 1990). It has been suggested by Yi et ciL (2008); that domestication and inbreeding dramatically reduced the genctic variation.
The tomato (So/anu,n Ivcopersicun L.). is an autogamous species with a narrow genetic base. The introduction of the species in Europe. from Mexico.
was pivotal in the reduction of genetic variability, since in the European habitat tomatoes were generally cultivated in protected environments. This protected the wild forms, then allogamous. from the action of wind and insect pollinators.
culminating in the maintenance of a germplasm adapted to autogamy only (Foolad, 2007).
According to "international Plant Name Index" and "Slow Food ) Upstate". in 1753. Linnacus placed the tomato in the genus Solanurn as Solanum lvcopersicum and in 1768 Philip Miller moved it to its own genus. naming it Lycopersicon esculeiziwn. This name came into wide use. but was in violating of the plant naming niles. Genetic evidence has now shown that Linnaeus was correct to put the tomato in the genus Solarnun. making So/auwn lycopersicum
the correct name (Peralta c/ aL. 2006). [3 oth names. however, will probably be found in the literature for some time.
2.2 Salinity
Salinity is a measure of dissolved salts in sea water. It is calculated as the amount of salt (in rams) dissolved in 1.000 grams (one kilogram) of seawater.
Soil salinity is the salt content in the soil, the process of' increasing the salt
content is known as salinization ("Soil salinity" in Water Wiki.. the on-line Knowledge and Collaboration Tool). Soil salinity causes due to the excess accumulation of sails. typically most pronounced at the soil surface, can result in salt-affected soils. Salts may rise to the soil surface by capillary transport from a salt-laden water table and then accumulate due to evaporation. They can also become concentrated in soils due to human activity, for example the use of potassium as fertilizer, which can form sylvite, a naturally occurring salt. As soil salinity increases, salt effects can result in degradation of soils and vegetation. Salinization as a process can result from, high levels of salt in water, landscape features that allow salts to become mobile (movement of water table). climatic trends that favor accumulation. human activities such as land clearing. irrigation, salt runoff from streets (in winter if the streets are salted for snow). Salinity is detrimental effects on plant growth and yield and soil erosion ultimately, when crops are too strongly affected by the amounts of salts (Vidal cial.. 2009: Moya ci at. 2003)
Salt stress is a polvmorphous stress that affects plant growth and reduces yield through three direct ways: First, the presence of salt reduces the ability of the plant to take up water which leads to reductions in the growth rate. This is referred to as the osmotic effect of salt stress. which starts immediately after the salt concentration around the roots increases over a threshold level. There is a second and slower response due to the accumulation of ions in leaves. This ion-specific phase of plant response to salinity starts when accumulated salt reaches toxic concentrations in the leaves and the third one is nutritional stress (Gomez-Cadenas ci at. 1998). Within many species. documented genetic variation exists in the rate of accumulation of Na and Cl in leaves, as well as in the degree to which these ions can be tolerated (Munns and Tester. 2008).
For most species, Na' appears to reach a toxic concentration before Cl does.
l-lowever for some Cl' considered being the more toxic ion (Lopez-Climent ci al.. 2008).
2.3 Mechanism of salt tolerance
The salt tolerance of a plant is the degree to which the plant Cal) withstand, without significant adverse eliects, moderate or high concentrations of salt in water ott its leaves or in the soil within reach of its roots. In practice. salt tolerance is a relative term. Researchers who assess and describe such phenomena often rely on definitions of degrees of tolerance that are specific to their particular studies. Despite physiological evidence that control of Na invasion of the tissues is a key determinant of salt tolerance (Niu et ci.. 1995;
'leo and Flowers, 1986). The mechanisms involved in this control are poorly understood. There is an ongoing debate regarding whether Na* enters the cells by K transport systems and. if so. what kind of Kt transport systems could he involved (Amtmann and Sanders. 1999: Walker ci ci.. 1996; Ruhio ci al..
1995). Based on our present knowledge, two kinds of transport systems are likely to play a major role in Na transport: transporters of the 111CC! family.
with the Arahidopsis member suspected of transporting Na more efficiently than K (Uozumi ci al.. 2000) and the Na/F1 tonoplastic antiporter. which is suspected to play a role in sequestering Na in the vacuole (Garharino and DuPont. 1988: l3lumwald and Poole. 1985). A report presenting the effects of the over expression of a Na7HS tonoplastic antiporter in Arabidopsis has provided the first experimental evidence that control of Na transport within tissues has a great effect on salt tolerance (Apse ci ci.. 1999). Thus. it is important to identify variants altered in thnctions involved in the control of Na transport and Na accumulation to evaluate the impact of these alterations on salt tolerance.
2.4 Genotypic variation
Hajer ci ci. (2006): conducted ,in experiment to assess the effect of sea water salinity (1500. 2500 and 3500 ppm) On the growth of tomato (Lvcopersicon escuienrurn) cultivars (Trusl. Grace and Plitz) in Saudia Arabia. The grace cultivar was less affected by sea water salinity on the germination stage. while
the lutz cultivar gave a good performance on dry weight ol' root when it was treated by sea water dilution.
Shaahan et cii. (2004): Ibund that the success of developing salt tolerant tines.
through selection and breeding depends on how much variation is present within crop species. A lot of inlbrmation has been reported on salt tolerance, which tells us that variation exists between and within plant species (tomato and other crops). Hassan ci al. (1999): reported by introgression. variation may also be generated by closely related species such as inter-specific cross between domestic and wild relative of tomato had been made to overcome the limited variation of domestic tomato for salinity tolerance. Wild species may be used as a source of genes to improve different traits of existing cultivars.
Rush and Epstein (1981). conducted an experinient by on tomato. They reported that there are different criteria to measure the salt tolerance in crop plants. These may be absolute growth, relative growth and survival rate under salinity. Some scientists think plan survival rate, an important criterion for screening salt tolerant plants such as wild type plants. Results of studies on tomato have been shown that on increasing stress the total soluble salts are also increased.
2.5 Effect of different salinity treatment on tomato plant 2.5.1 Effect of salinity on agromorphogenic traits
Islam ci ci. (2011): found that salt stress affects plant growth and development.
In higher salinity level ( tOdS/m) plant height. primary branches. Cluster/plant.
fruit/cluster, number of fruits and total yield/plant, individual fruit weight.
amino acid content in leaves gradually decrease while total sugar and reducing sugar content in leaves increased with the increase in salinity levels. In this experiment eight tomato genotype viz. J-5, 'Binatomato-5'. 'BARI tomato-7'.
'CLN-2026'. 'CLN-2366'. 'CLN-2413'. 'CLN-2418' and 'CLN-2443 were used at Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear Agriculture during October 2006 to January 2007.
Al-Yahai ci al. (2010): conducted a two-tactor experiment at the Agricultural Research Station, Rumais. Oman to evaluate the performance of yield and quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentuin L.) with three levels of saline water (3. 6 and 9 dS/m) and three types of fertilizers viz, inorganic NPK.
or2anic (cow manure). and a mixed fertilizer of both. Results indicated that growing tomatoes under 3 and 6 dS/m irrigation water produced the highest yield whereas irrigating with 9 dS/m significantly reduced the final fruit number and fruit weight. Tomatoes grown using cow manure produced the least amount of yield compared to those with inorganic and mixed fertilizers.
Al-l3usaidi et at (2009); conducted an experiment on the response of different tomato cultivars to diluted seawater salinity and the result of the experiment showed that saline water remarkably affect the evapo-transpiration rate, soil moisture, salts accumulation and plant biomass production. Saline irrigation had the ability to keep mitch water in the soil with higher value of salt content.
Low salinity treatment exhibited highest plant growth and lowest soil moisture and salts deposition. Al-Ormran (2008), conducted an experiment to study the effect of saline water and drip irrigation on tomato yield in sandy ealcareous soil amended with naturaL conditioners. The results showed a significant decrease in yield with saline water in both season and the decrease was more apparent in the open field experiment compared to green house.
Magan etal. (2008): conducted an experiment to evaluate the effect of salinity on fruit yield, yield components and fruit quality of tomato grown in soil-less culture in plastic greenhouses in Mediterranean climate condition. Two spring growing periods (experiments 1 and 2) and one long season. autumn to spring growing period (experiment 3) studies were conducted with two cultivars, Daniela' (experiment 1) and 'Boludo' (cxperiments 2 and 3). Seven levels of electrical conductivity (EC) in the nutrient solution were compared in experiment 1 (2.5-8.0 dS/m) and live levels in experiments 2 and 3 (2.5- 8.5 dS/ni). Total and marketable yield decreased linearly with increasing salinity above a threshold EC value (EC1 ). Average threshold EC values for
total and marketable fruit yield were. respectively. 3.2 and 3.3 dS/ni. Increasing salinity improved various aspects of fruit quality, such as: (i) proportion of Exira fruits (high visual quality). (ii) soluble solids content, and (iii) titratable acidity content. However, salinity decreased fruit size, which is a major determinant of price.
Ahd-El-Warth (2005). studied the effect of suriuice and suhsuri'ace drip irrigation systems with different water salinity on the distribution of soil salinity and tomato yield in south sinai. lie revealed that the tomato yield decreased in the successive season under salt stress. but under subsurface drip irrigation the decrease in yield was lower than that under surface drip irrigation. Agrawal er al. (2005); conducted an experiment on the eliect of water salinity on tomato under drip irrigation and reported that the tomato yield is drastically affected when the salt is increased in the root zone. Which also decrease the number of fruits/cluster. fruits/plant. fruit weight, fruit maturity and other yield contributing characters.
Ephcuvclink (2005). stated in his book "Tomatoes (Crop Production Science in Horticulture)" salinity can reduce the fruit growth rate and final fruit size by an osmotic elièct. High salinity lower water potential in the plant which was reduce the water flow in the fruit and that thereibre the rate of fruit expansion.
ITs of 4.6-8 dS/m reduced fruit yield because reduction of fruit size whereas ECs Of 12 dS/m reduced number and size of fruit. Ohadiri ci al. (2005);
reported restricted water uptake by salinity due to the high osmotic potential in soil and high concentrations of specilic ions that may cause physiological disorders in plant tissues. fruit size and maturity as a result reduced yields.
Magan (2005). reported that the reduction in fruit number observed in the present study appeared to be related to a reduction in the averagc number of flowers per trees. fruits per cluster and per plant observed with increasing salinity. Reina-Sanchez et aL (2005); reported that plant irrigated with saline
water reached maximum daily water uptake earlier than control plants because salinity enhanced plant senescence.
Maggoi et al. (2004): demonstrated in field grown tomato plants exposed to increasing NaCl concentration, that the physiological basis for short (24 hours) and long term (entire growth season) osmotic adjustment may respond to different biological and environmental cures, since plants that best somatically adjusted to short term stress were not necessarily those that best adjusted to a
long term stress.
Olympios ci al. (2003); found that salinity negatively affects the size of the plant and total weight of fruits: the higher the concentration. the lower the growth and yield. Four levels of salinity in the irrigation water (1 1.7 dS/,n (control). 11: 3.7 dS/m. Ill : 5.7 dS/m and IV : 8.7 dS/m) were applied to tomato plants at various stages of growth and for different time duration. The number of fruits and the average weight of fruit were reduced at the highest salinity especially when applied at an early stage of growth. When good quality water was applied at the beginning of growth. followed later by salinity, the negative effect on plant height, fresh and dry weight of shoots. leaf area. yield.
average weight of fruits and the percentage of fruit with blossom-end-rot was less severe. On the other hand Cicek and Cakirlar (2002). investigated that effect of salinity with different osmotic potential on shoot length. total fresh and dry weight. amount of organic and teal' area in two tomato cultivars. They found decreasing result with increasing salinity.
Eltez et al. (2002): studied the effect of different EC level of nutrient solution on greenhouse tomato growing and reported that the number of fruit was unaffected by moderate salinity and the reduced yield was entirely due to smaller fruit. Irshad ci al. (2002): reported that increase soil salinity reduced the plant height. shoot and root dry weight of tomato as well as with all yield contributing characters.
Munns ci al. (2002): studied the salinity stress resulted in a clear stunting of plant growth. which results in a considerable decrease in the fresh weight of leaves and sterns. Increasing salinity was accompanied also by signihcant reductions in shoot weight and plant height. FJao ci al. (2000): found higher salinity reduced total marketable yield and fruit size, but improved tomato fruit quality. Tomato cv. •Frust plants were grown with Nutrient Film Technique NFT). The EC of nutrient solution was increased to 40 or 80% above the standard. with either all malor macronutrients. NaCl or NaCl/KCI following a seasonal IT schedule. in which target EC changed with plant age and ambient solar radiation.
Cuartero and Fema'ndez-Munoz (1999). observed salinity adversely affected the fruits number/plant of tomato under dillèrent levels of salt. All other yield contributing characters also adversely react with the increasing salinity level.
Vanleperen (1996): Adams and lb (1989), conducted three different experiments at different time to find out the effect of salinity on tomato and they reported separately that, the number of cluster/plant was reduced both with high salinity and long salinization periods in case of tomato. Whereas Grunberg etal. (1995): found the number of Leaves developed per plant. flowering from the number of clusters per plant and the number of flowers per cluster, the mean numbers of pollen grains per flower and fruit-set were reduced in the salt-treated plant. Tomato plants of cv. 'Moneymaker' were grown in gravel culture received a basic nutrient solution, either with or without the addition of NaCI (10 mM). Salt-treated plants produced about 50% fewer flowers per plant than the controls. The mean numbers of pollen grains per Ilower decreased progressively form the beginning to the end of the salt treatment and the counted pollen was about 30% of that of the control plants. Reduction in the number of fruits per plant produced by saline conditions was probably due to a decrease in the number of flowers per plant.
Said and Al-Yahyai (1995), conducted an experiment on salinity tolerance in tomato Implication of potassium, ealciaum and phosphorus and resulted that
leaf and stern dry weights of tomato reduced significantly in plants irrigated with saline nutrient solution in contrast with control plants.
Adams and Ho (1992). conducted an experiment and find out that increasing salinity to 10 dS/m does not affect fruit set significantly but fruit set was reduced particularly on the upper trusses at higher salinity (15 dS/m). The tomato cultivars Counter. Calypso and Spectra were grown in NUT at a range of salinities 5. 10 and 15 dS/m. The incidence of the blossom end rot (RUR) was higher in high salinity thus reduce the fruit number. Shannon et al. (1987);
reported that salinity stress reduces elongation rate of the main stem in tomato.
Cruz and Cuartero (1990). reported that shoot length is one of the responsive indicators for a wide range of tomato genotypes under salinity stress.
Signilicant reductions in dry weight of tomato shoots were reported in response to salinity stress (Bolarin c/aL, 1991 and 1993).
2.5.2 Effect of salinity on physiological traits
Edris ci ciL (2012); reported that salinity treatment strongly affected the yield in cherry tomato. Addition of supplemental Ca and K' can ameliorate negative impact of high salinity. Small fruit development in salinity conditions could be related to disorder in water relations and decrease in photosynthetic productions (due to leaf area reduction) as well as chlorophyll content. Siddiky ci al. (2012); reported that different salinity level (2. 4. 8 and 12 dS!m) significantly affects on tomato plant height. leaf area, plant growh. yield, dry matter plant. Na and Cl accumulation in tomato tissues.. Under saline condition, all plant parameters of tomato varieties were reduced compared to the control. Plant growth. fruit number. fruit size and yield were decreased gradually with the increase of salinity levels.
Hajiboland ci al. (2010): conducted an experiment where plants treated with the arhuseular rnycorrhizal fungi Glo,nttc intraradices (+AMF) showed beneficial effect in salt condition. Tomato (Solatiurn /vcopersicum L.) cultivars Behta and Piazar were cultivated in soil without salt (EC = 0.63 dS/m). with
low (EC = 5 dS/m). or high (EC = 10 (IS/m) salinity. Growth and plant yield reduction affected by salinity can he the reason of variation in photosynthetic products translocation toward root. decrease of plant top especially leaves, partial or total enclosed of stomata. chlorophyll content. direct effect of salt on phou synthesis system and ion balance. Mycorrhization alleviated salt-induced reduction of P. Ca. and K uptake. Ca/Na and lCJa ratios were also better in
—AMP. Mycorrhization improved the net assimilation rates through both elevating stomatal conductance and protecting photoehemical processes of PSIT against salinity.
Rafat and Raliq (2009). reported that, total chlorophyll content in tomato plant proportionally decrease with the increase in salinity levels up to 0.41/0 sea sail solution (EC 5.4 dS/m). Amini and Ehsnapour (2006). studied the effect of MS and agar medium containing NaCI and sucrose on germination percentage, seedling growth. chlorophyll content. acid phosphate activity and soluble proteins in different eultivars of Lvcopersicon escu/entum Mill.(Cv. Isfahani.
Shirazy. Khozestani and Khorasani). Seeds were germinated under various mediuni. MS with sucrose, water agar with and without sucrose with different concentration of NaCI (0. 40. 80. 120 and 160 mM). Increasing salinity decrease the germination percentage and seedling dry weight. The highest germination percentage was found in cv. Isfahani and lowest in cv. Shirazy.
Chlorophyll content (Chl-a. Chl-h. and total Chi) were decreased with increasing salinity in both cv. Isilihani and Shirazy. Acid PhOsPhates activity was decreased in stem leaf while it was increased in roots. Enzyme activity was decreased on stem leaf in cv. Shirazy but increased in cv. Isfahani. Soluble proteins in roots of both cv. showed variation.
1-lajer et al. (2006); conducted an experiment to assess the effect of sea water salinity (1500, 2500 and 3500 ppm) on the growth of tomato (Lycopersicon escu/entum) cultivars (Trust. Grace and Plitz) in Saudi Arabia. The sea water salinity delayed seed germination and reduced germination percentage especially with increasing salinity level. They also I'ound that leaf area, total
chlorophyll and k contents. fresh weight of area! parts and percentage of dry weight of areal parts. as well as yield and some areal quality parameters rcsponded negatively as the salinity level increase. Al-Sobhi et al. (2005) found that chlorophyll-a and b content of tomato cultivars leaves decreased in general with the increasing sea water salinity. The highest chlorophyll content was in P11t7 cultivars leaves, while the lowest content was in the Trust cultivar leaves for plants grown under salinity stress. The chlorophyll content of leaves of different tomato cultivars decreased by NaCl stress.
Juan et al. (2005); conducted an experiment to identi!y the most reliable nutritional and biochemical indicators for improving salt tolerance in tomato.
The result showed that salt-resistant tomato cultivars were characterized by reduced uptake and foliar accumulation of Na and Cl'. increased K! uptake.
and greater synthesis of sucrose. carotenoids. and thiol groups. Akinci et al.
(2004); tested the response of tomato to salinity and concluded that increasing NaCl stress caused reduction in relative root, shoot and whole plant growth.
They also showed that salinity increase Na content and decrease the K content of tomato seedling leaves.
Dasgan ci al. (2002); worked on 55 tomato genotpcs to investigate the relationships among the salinity scale classes based on visual appearance and shoot Na accumulation. K'/Na' and Ca7 Naratios and shoot root dry weights.
Higher Na4 concentration on shoot of tomato indicated higher shoot damage.
Shoot K/Na and Ca1 Na ratios were signilicantly correlated with the salinity scale classes. The higher shoot KVNat and Ca/ Na ratios indicated lower shoot damage. Munns (2002). reported that salinity reduces the ability of plants to take up water, and this quickly causes reductions in plant growth rate. When excessive amounts of salt enter the plant. salt will eventually rise to toxic levels in the older transpiring leaves, causing premature senescence. and reduce the photosynthetic leaf area of the plant to a level that cannot sustain growth.
Higher amount of Na and Cl- accumulation in plant was the cause of salt toxicity. Salt-tolerant plants differ from salt-sensitive ones in having a low rate
of Na and Cl' transport to leaves, and the ability to compartmentalize these ions in vacuoles to prevent their build-up in cytoplasm or cell walls and thus avoid salt toxicity.
Foolad and [in (1997). conducted study on tomato and concluded that the inherent capabilities of a variety to maintain high tissue Ca' levels and to exclude Na from shoot were essential for the adaptation under salt stress environment and these features were highly heritable. Faiz et al. (1994):
reported that fruit yield and plant dry weight decreased with increasing salinity.
The concentration of N. K' and Ca decreased with shoots and fruits with increasing salinity. Johnson ci c'sL (1992): reported that low stem water potentials have an immediate and direct effect on phloeni turgor. reducing the driving force for sap flow into the fruit. Fruit diameter increased when the apoplasmic water potential gradient thvored solution flow into the fruit and fruit shrinkage occurred only when the water potential gradient was inverted.
Since fruit water potential remained relatively constant, the diurnal variation in stern water potential was sufficient to account for the correlation with changes in fruit diameter. An automated psychrometer was used to measure fruit and stern water potentials of tomato plants.
Blits and Al-Maghrahi (1991). conducted an experiment on plant under salinity srcss show succulence and xero-rnorphism e.g. NaCl caused succulence on cotton. tomato and salicomia. It cause many structural changes as smaller leaves with reduetuction in number. fewer stomata and thickening of leaf cuticles and earlier lignifications of roots. Increasing NaCI concentration in nutrient solution adversely affected tomato shoot and root. plant height. K concentration and K4 \Na ratio. Rrungnoli and Lauteri (1991). reported that growth of leaf area is inhibited by salinity in tomato plants. Acid phosphate activity was decrease in stcm leaf while it was increased in roots.
2.5.3 Effect of salinity on nutritional traits
Antioxidants like vitamin-C and lycopene with their antagonist liinctions against free radicals are very useful in protection against various biotic and abiotic stresses (Dc Pascale et UI.. 2001). From the nutritional and health points of view, tomato is characterized by high content in carotenoids (lycopene) and vitamin-C. Recent studies on tomato (Mittova et al., 2000) showed the involvement of antioxidative enzymes in the tolerance mechanism to salt stress induced by NaCI. SmidovA and lzzo (2009). evaluated the change in antioxidant content with maturation stage in tomato berries under elevated salinity conditions. The examined antioxidants were lipoic acid, vitamin C and vitamin E. It was found that in the majority ol' berries examined the content of dihydrolipoic acid, reduced ascorhate and u-tocopherol increased with maturation. Furthermore. the interplay between them was shown. These results are of great importance also from nutritional and health point of view. The data on mechanisms of the antioxidant response in tomato berries under salinity conditions are inadequate and incomplete.
Lycopene is the pigment principally responsible for the characteristic deep-red color of ripe tomato fruits and tomato products. It has attracted attention due to its biological and physicoehemical properties, especially related to its effects as a natural antioxidant. Although it has no provitamin A activity. lycopene does exhibit a physical quenching rate constant with singlet oxygen almost twice as high as that of beta-carotene. This makes its presence in the diet of considerable interest. Increasing clinical evidence supports the role of lycopene as a inicronutrient with important health benefits. because it appears to provide protection against a broad range of epithelial cancers (Shi and i.e Maguer.
2000).
Yong-Gen et al. (2009): conducted an experiment to elucidate the mechanisms, of the transport of carbohydrates into tomato fruits and the regulation of starch synthesis during fruit development in tomato plants. Tomato plants cv. Micro-
Foul exposed to high levels of salinity stress were examined. Growth with 160 mM NaCI doubled starch accumulation in tomato fruits compared to control plants during the early stages of development, and soluble sugars increased as the fruit matured. Tracer analysis with l3C confirmed that elevated carbohydrate accumulation in fruits exposed to salinity stress was confined to the early development stages and did not occur a1er ripening. Salinity stress also up-regulated sucrose transporter expression iii source leaves and increased activity of ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase (AGPase) in fruits during the early development stages. The results indicate that salinity stress enhanced carbohydrate accumulation as starch during the early development stages and it is responsible for the increase in soluble sugars in ripe fruit.
Satio c/al. (2008): conducted an experiment to investigate the effects of SOnilvI NaCI in a hudroponic solution on the levels of various metabolites, including amino acids, soluble sugars. and organic acids, and on the expression level of salinity-responsive genes during fruit development. Results indicate that under salinity. brix (%). surface color density and flesh firmness of the fruit were signifleantly enhanced. whereas fruit enlargement was suppresses. Salinity stress strongly promoted glucose and amino hutyric acids. Cuartero ci al.
(2003); conducted an experiment on the effect of salinity on tomato crop and reported that salinity has increased fruit taste by increasing both sugars and ascorbic acid. but can't produce too much acid.
Flores ci al. (2003): conducted an experiment with tomato plants cv. Daniela grown in a nutrient solution containing 0. 30 and 60 mM NaCI and fertilized with 14/0. 12/2 and 10/4 NO3 INII.( niM ratio to determine the effect of salinity and nitrogen source. The increase in salinity and NH4 concentration in the nutrient solutions increased fruit quality by increasing the content of sugars.
organic acids and antioxidants. However, the increase in fruit quality was associated with a decrease in yield.
Dc Pascale et at (2001): found that increased EC leads to higher contents of Vitamin-C and total soluble solid in tomato fruits. Lycopene content increase with the increasing salinity up to 6-7 dS/m but at excessive salinity inhibition cffects may take over, resulting in reduced lycopene. Vitamin-C (ascorbic acid) content of tomato fruits increased with salinity and it was 60% higher in tomatoes grown at EC of 15.7 dS/m. compared with non-saitized controls.
(iiannakoula and Iliyas (2013) has showed in their research that the application of moderate salt stress on tomato plants can enhance lcopene and potentially other antioxidant concentrations in fruits. The increase in lycopene in response to salt stress in the tomato fruits varied from 20% to 80%. Although the specific biological mechanisms involved in increasing fruit lycopene deposition has not been clearly elucidated, evidence suggests that increasing antioxidant concentrations is a primary physiological response of the plant to salt stress.
Petersen et al. (1998): conducted an experiment with tomato plants irrigated by saline water. The NaCl-salinity enhances the lycopene concentrations up to 4-6 dS/m but restrict the lycopene concentration
or
tomato fruits at high salinity.This was probably due to a high temperature-induced inhibition of lycopene biosynthesis in tomatoes exposed to high solar radiation arising from smaller leaf area and consequently more fruits directly exposed to sunlight in salt- stressed plants. Vitamin-C content and brix percentage of tomatoes increase with the increasing salinity level of irrigation water.
From the above review of literature, it may conclude that salinity has marked effect on tomato plant growth and development with its nutritional quality as well as yield of tomato plant.
Chapter III
Matedals and Methods
CHAPTER 111
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This chapter illustrates information concerning methodology that was used in execution of the experiment. It comprises a brief' description of locations of experimental site. planting materials, climate and soil, seed bed preparation, layout and design of the experiment. pot preparation, fertilizing, transplanting of seedlings. intercultural operations, han'esting data recording procedure, statistical and nutritional analysis procedure etc.. which are presented as follows:
3.1 Experimental site
The experiment was accomplished beside the net house of Genetics and Plant Breeding Department. Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University. Dhaka-1207.
Bangladesh during the period from November 2013 to March 2014. Location of the site is 23°74' N latitude and 90035! F longitude with an elevation of8 meter from sea level (Anonymous. 2014) in Agro-ecological zone of
"Madhupur Tract" (AEZ-28) (Anonymous. 1988). The experimental site is shown in the map of AU of Bangladesh in (Appendix 1).
3.2 Planting materials
A total of fifteen genotypes of tomato were collected from Plant Genetic Resource Centre (PQRC) at Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI). Ciazipur On October 2013.
3.3 Treatments in the experiment
The two factorial experiment was conducted to evaluate the performance of flfieen tomato genotypes under different sodium chloride (NaCI) salinity treatments.
Factor A. Tomato genotypes
. 7
In this experiment, fifteen tomato genotypes were used. These were-
Table 1. Name and origin of fifteen tomato genotypes used in the present study
SI. No. Genotypes No. Name/Ace No. (BD) Origin
I 61 B1)-7289 PGRC.BARI
2 0: BD-7291 PGRC. BARI
3 03 130-7298 PGRC. BARI
4 (34 BD-7748 PGRC, BARI
5 Us B1)-7757 PGRC. BARI
6 06 80-7760 PGRC. BARI
7 07 80-7761 PGRC. BARI
8 Os BD-7762 PGRC. BARI
9 O' BD-90 11 PGRC. BARI
10 (ii; BD-9960 PORC. BARI
II (iii BARI Tomato-2 PGRC. BARI
12 C1 12 BAR! 'roinato-3 PGRC. BARI
13 013 BARI Tomato-I I PGRC. BARI
14 014 BARI Hybrid Tomato-4 PGRC. BARI
15 G 1.5 BARI Hybrid Tomato-S PGRC. BARI
PGRC=Plant Genetic Resource Centre. RARlflangladesh Agricultural Research Institute
Factor B. Different salinity treatments
Salinity treatments were chosen by the classitication of saline area given by Soil Research Development Institute. Bangladesh (Report. 2010). According to this classification: Non saline with some very slightly saline (2.0-4.0 dS/in).
very slightly saline with some slightly saline (4.1-8.0 dS/m). slightly saline with some moderately saline (8.1-12.0 dS/m). strongly saline with some moderately saline (12.1-16.0 dS/rn). very strongly saline with some strongly
saline (>16.0 dS/rn). l'hree different salinity treatments applied iii this experiment were Ii (control condition) . 1 (8 dS/m) and T3 (12 dSim).
3.4 Design and layout of the experiment
The experiment was laid out and evaluated during Rabi season 2013-14 in Completely Randomized Design (CRD) using two thetors. Factor A included fifteen genotypes and Factor B included three salinity treatments. The experiment was conducted in three replications and total 135 plastic pots were used.
3.5 Climate and soil
Experimental site was located in the subtropical climatic zone, set aparted by plenty of sunshine and moderately low temperature prevails during October to March (Rabi season) which is suitable for tomato growing in Bangladesh. The soil was sandy loam in texture having pH 5.46- 5.62 and EC 0.60 dSIm.
Measuring of soil pT-I and soil EC are presented in Plate 1. Weather information and physicochemical properties of the soil are presented in (Appendix II and Appendix ITT respectively).
3.6 Seed bed preparation and raising of seedlings
The sowing was carried out on November 4. 2013 in the seedbed. Before sowing. seeds were treated with Bavistin for five minutes. Seedlings of all genotypes were raised in seedheds in the net house of Genetics and Plant Breeding Department. Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University. Dhaka- 1207.
Seeds were sown in rows spaced at 10 cm apart. beds were watered regularly.
Seedlings were raised using regular nursery practices. Recommended cultural practices were taken up before and after sowing the seeds. When the seedlings become 15 days old those were transplanted in the polybag for hardening. After hardening when the seedlings become 30 days old were transplanted to the main plastic pot. Seedhed preparation, raising ol' seedling, transfer in polyhag for hardening, and transplanting to the plastic pots are shown in Plate 2.
a
1,'-4
---I,
1ae H-'
*
ti
Plate 1. Measuring soil pH and soil
EC. A)
Soil pH, B) Soil EC1
r ..*LS&t5
V
- -' ....IC
nr:
0rd"
Plate 2. Seedbed preparation, raising of seedlings, transfer in polybag for hardening and transplanting to the plastic pots. A) Seed bed preparation, B) Raising of seedlings, C) Hardening in polybag, D) Transplanting to the plastic pots
3.7 Manure and fertilizers application
Soil was well pulverized and dried in the sun and only well decomposed cow dung was mixed with the soil according to the fertilizer recommendation guide BARC. 2012. Well decomposed cow dung was calculated for each pot considering the dose of one hectare soil at the depth of 20 cm. one million kg.
On an average each plastic pot was filled with soil containing 100 g decomposed cow dung (as 10 tonsiliectare). Total decomposed cow dung was applied before transplanting the seedlings to plastic pots.
3.8 Pot preparation and transplanting of seedlings
Weeds and stubbles were completely removed from soil and soil were treated with Formaldehyde (45%) for 48 hours before transplanting to polbag and plastic pot to keep soil free from pathogen (Plate 3A). Pots were filled up to days before transplanting on December 4.2013. Each pot was tilled with 10 kg soil. Height of the pot was 20cm with top diameter 30 cm and bottom diameter 20 cm. Three pores were made in each plastic pot and then the pores were covered by gravels so that excess water could easily drain out. When the seedlings become 15 days old on November 19. 2013 were transplanted in the polhag and when the seedlings be
