COMPARISON AMONG TWELVE EXOTIC ACCESSIONS OF TOMATO (SOLANUM LYCOPERSICUM L.) FOR ROOT AND SHOOT DEVELOPMENT UNDER POLYETHYLENE GLYCOL INDUCED WATER STRESS
Abstract
Genetic variation for tolerance in the gene pool of the species for which increased tolerance is a primary requisite in selecting and breeding for drought tolerance. Inter-specific and intra-specific variation for drought tolerance provides scope for selecting for its improvement. Hence, this study was carried out to evaluate and compare the drought tolerance in 12 exotic tomato accessions viz., ‘Ailsa Craig’ (LA2838A), ‘Floradade’ (LA3242), ‘Condine Red’ (LA0533), ‘New Yorker’ (LA2009), ‘Pennheart’ (LA0020), ‘Hotset’ (LA3320), ‘Edkawi’ (LA2711), M-82 (LA3475), ‘VC-82’ (LA1706), ‘Solanum pennellii’ (LA0716), ‘Solanum chilense’ (LA0722) and ‘Solanum pimpinellifolium’ (LA0458). These accessions of tomato were evaluated and ranked for drought tolerance at seed germination and seedling stage under water stress induced by polyethylene glycol (molecular weight of 8000) in full strength Hoagland nutrient solution at T1= only nutrient solution; T2 = 2.5%; T3 = 5.0% and T4 = 7.5% (w/w) concentrations and to evaluate its effect on seed germination and rate, seedling growth, biomass and relative water content. Two-week-old accessions were subjected to various levels of PEG8000-imposed water stress for a period of two weeks. Significant decrease was recorded for all the attributes with increasing concentration of PEG8000 but maximum decrease was recorded at T3 treatment. Overall, wild genotypes performed well under various levels of stress whilst ‘Ailsa Criage’, ‘M-82’ and ‘UC-82’ were noted as sensitive genotypes. Remaining genotypes performed intermediate under water stress conditions. In view of these studies it seems plausible that through selection and breeding we can improve the drought tolerance of crop species.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Aazami, M.A., Torabi, M. and E. Jalili. 2010. In vitro response of promising tomato genotypes for tolerance to osmotic stress. Afr. J. Biotech. 9(26): 4014-4017.
Abdel-Raheem, A.T., A.R. Ragab, Z.A. Kasem, F.D. Omar and A.M. Samera. 2007. In vitro selection for tomato plants for drought tolerance via callus culture under polyethylene glycol (PEG) and mannitol treatments. Afr. Crop Sci. Soc., 8: 2027-2032.
Agong, S.G., S. Schittenhelm and W. Friedt. 2000. Genotypic variation of Kenyan tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) germplasm. Plant Genetic Res. Newslett., 123: 61-67.
Almaghrabi, O.A. 2012. Impact of drought stress on germination and seedling growth parameters of some wheat cultivars. Life Sci. J. 9(1): 590-598.
Almansouri, M., J.M. Kinet and S. Lutts. 2001. Effect of salt and osmotic stresses on germination in durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.). Plant Soil, 231: 243-254.
Ashraf, M. 2010. Inducing drought tolerance in plants: Recent advances. Biotechnol. Adv. 28: 169-183.
Ashraf, M.Y. and S.S.M. Naqvi. 1995. Studies on water uptake, germination and seedling growth, of wheat genotypes under PEG 6000 induced water stress. Pak. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 38: 130-133.
Bai, Y. and P. Lindhout. 2008. New challenges for durable resistance breeding in tomato. Acta Hortic. 789: 61-73.
Bai, Y. and P. Lindhout. 2007. Domestication and Breeding of Tomatoes: What have we gained and what can we gain in the future. Ann Bot. 100(5): 1085–1094.
Basha, P.O., G. Sudarsanam, M.M.S. Reddy and S. Sankar. 2015. Effect of PEG induced water stress on germination and seedling development of tomato germplasm. Inter J. Recent Sci. Res. 6(5): 4044-4049.
Carpita, N., D. Sabularse, D. Mofezinos and D. Delmer. 1979. Determination of the pore size of cell walls of living plant cells. Sci. 205: 114-1147.
Chartzoulakis, K. and G. Klapaki. 2000. Response of two greenhouse pepper hybrids to NaCl salinity during different growth stages. Scientia Hort. 86: 247-260.
Chaudhry, M.F., K.M. Khokhar, S.I. Hussain, T. Mahmood and S.M. Iqbal. 1999. Comparative performance of local and exotic tomato cultivars during spring and autumn season. Pak. J. Arid Agric. 2(2): 7-10.
Dasgan, H.Y., H. Aktas, K. Abak and I. Cakmak. 2002. Determination of screening techniques to salinity tolerance in tomatoes and investigation of genotype responses. Plant Sci. 163: 695-703.
Dodd G.L. and L.A. Donovan. 1999. Water Potential and Ionic Effects on Germination and Seedling Growth of Two Cold Desert Shrubs. Am. J. Bot. 86: 1146.
Farooq, M., A. Wahid, N. Kobayashi, D. Fujita and S.M.A. Basra. 2009. Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 29: 185-212.
Foolad, M.R. 1996. Response to selection for salt tolerance during germination in tomato seed derived from PI 174263. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci., 121: 1006-1011.
Foolad, M.R. 2007. Genome mapping and molecular breeding of tomato. Int. J. Plant Genom. doi:10.1155/2007/64358.
Foolad, M.R. and G.Y. Lin. 1997. Genetic potential for salt tolerance during germination in Lycopersicon species. Hort. Sci. 32: 296-300.
Foolad, M.R. and G.Y. Lin. 1999. Relationships between cold and salt tolerance during seed germination in tomato: Germplasm evaluation. Plant Breed. 118: 45-48.
Foolad, M.R., P. Subbiah, C. Kramer, G. Hargrve and G.Y. Lin. 2003. Genetic relationships among cold, salt and drought tolerance during seed germination in an interspecific cross of tomato. Euphytica 130: 199-206.
George, S., N.M. Minhas, S.A. Jatoi, S. Siddiqui and A. Ghafoor. 2015. Impact of polyethylene glycol on proline and membrane stability index for water stress regime in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). Pak. J. Bot. 47(3): 835-844.
George, S., S.A. Jatoi and S.U. Siddiqui. 2013. Genotypic differences against peg simulated drought stress in tomato. Pak. J. Bot. 45(5): 1551-1556.
Govindaraj, M., P. Shanmugasundaram, P. Sumathiand A.R. Muthiah. 2010. Simple, rapid and cost effective screening method for drought resistant breeding in pearl millet. Elect. J. Plant Breed. 1: 590- 599.
Hoagland, D. R. and D. I. Arnon. 1950. The water culture for growing plants without soil. Calif. Agic. Expt. Station Circ. 347, Univ. California, Berkeley Press, CA.
ISTA. 1996. International rules for seed testing. Rules for Seed Science and Technology. 24: Supplement.
Jacomini, E., A. Bertani and S. Mapelli. 1988. Accumulation of polyethylene glycol 6000 and its effects on water content and carbohydrate level in water-stressed tomato plant. Can. J. Bot. 66: 970-973.
Janes, B.E. 1974. The effect of molecular size concentration in nutrient solution and exposure time on the amount and distribution of polyethylene glycol. Plant Physiol. 54: 226-229.
Jurado, O., A. Albacete, M.C. Martinez-Ballesta, M. Carvajal, F. Perez-Alfocea, I.C. Dodd and M.R. Romeroo-Aranda. 2009. Water relations of the tos1 tomato mutant at contrasting evaporative demand. Physiol. Plantarum, 137: 36.43.
Kulkarni, M. and U. Deshpande. 2007. In vitro screening of tomato genotypes for drought resistance using polyethylene glycol. Afr. J. Biotech. 6: 691-696.
Lawlor, D.W. and G. Cornic. 2002. Photosynthetic carbon assimilation and associated metabolism in relation to water deficits in higher plants. Plant Cell Environ. 25: 275-294.
Mittova, V., M. Volokita and M. Guy. 2014. Antioxidative systems and stress tolerance: insight from wild and cultivated tomato species. Reactive oxygen and nitrogen species signaling and communication in plants. Vol. 23 pp 89-131. Springer international publishing Switzerland.
Nahar K. and R. Gretzmacher. 2011. Response of shoot and root development of seven tomato cultivars in hydrophonic system under water stress. AJPS. 4(2): 57-63.
Nuez, F., M.J. Diez, J. Prohens, J.M. Blanca, A. Sifres, B. Pico, L. Cordero and E. Zuriaga. 2008. Proc. XVth EUCARPIA Tomato. (Eds.): M. Cirulli et al. Acta Hort. 789.
Osorio, S., R. Yong-Ling and A.R. Fernie. 2014. An update on source-to-sink carbon partitioning in tomato. Front. Plant Sci. Vol. 5. (DOI=10.3389/fpls.2014.00516).
Prodriguez, P., J.D. Amico, D. Morakes, M.J.S. Blanco and J.J. Alarcon. 1997. Effects of salinity on growth, shoot water relations and root hydraulic conductivity in tomato plants. J. Agic. Sci. 128: 439-444.
Sanchez-Rodriguez, E.M., M.R. Wilhelmi, L. M. Cervilla, B. Blasco, J.J. Rios, M.A. Rosales, L. Romero and J.M. Ruiz. 2010. Genotypic differences in some physiological parameters symptomatic for oxidative stress under moderate drought in tomato plants. Plant Sci. 178(1): 30-40.
Shamim, F., H.R. Athar, A. Waheed. 2013. Role of osmolytes in degree of water stress tolerance in tomato. Pak. J. Phytopath. 25(01): 37-42.
Shamim, F., S.M.S. Naqvi, H.R. Athar and A. Waheed. 2014. Screening and selection of tomato genotypes/cultivars for drought tolerance using multivariate analysis. Pak. J. Bot. 46(4): 1165-1178.
Shtereva, L., B. Atanassova T. Karcheva and V. Petkov. 2008. The effect of water stress on the growth rate, water content and proline accumulation in tomato calli and seedlings. Acta Hort. 789: 189-197.
Soltani, A., S. Galeshi, E. Zeinali, N. Latifi. 2002. Germination, seed reserve utilization and seedling growth of chickpea as affected by salinity and seed size. Seed Sci. Technol. 30(1): 51-60.
Steel, R.G.D. and J.H. Torrie. 1980. Principles and procedures of statistics. 2nd Ed. Mc Graw Hill Inc. New York, USA.
Tester, M. and P. Langridge. 2010. Breeding technologies to increase crop production in a changing world. Sci. 327: 818-822.
Yaniv, Z. and Werker, E. 1983. Absorption and secretion of polyethylene glycol by Solanaceous plants. J. Exp. Bot. 34:1577-1584.
Zafar, S. and M.T. Azhar. 2015. Assessment of variability for drought tolerance in Gossypium hirsutum L. at seedling stage. Pak. J. Agri. Sci. 52(2): 301-307.
Zeng, L., M.C. Shannon and C.M. Grieve. 2002. Evaluation of salt tolerance in rice genotypes by multiple agronomic parameters. Euphytica. 127: 235-245.
Zgallai, H., S. Kathy and L. Raoul. 2005. Photosynthetic, physiological and biochemical responses of tomato plants to polyethylene glycol-induced water deficit. J. Integ. Plant Biol. 47(12):1470-1478.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2016 Fakhra Shamim, Khalida Khan, Sana Khalid
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Pakistan Journal of Phytopathology ISSN: 1019-763X (Print), 2305-0284 (Online). © 2013 Pak. J. Phytopathol. All rights reserved. |