Evaluation of a promising tomato line (Solanum lycopersicum) derived from mutation breeding

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

PDF
DOI https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d220432
Issue
Vol. 22 No. 4 (2021)
Section
Articles

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

ENIK NURLAILI AFIFAH ♥
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Gadjah Mada. Jl. Flora No.1, Bulaksumur, Sleman 55281, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9258-8432
RUDI HARI MURTI
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Gadjah Mada. Jl. Flora No.1, Bulaksumur, Sleman 55281, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0791-1750
ADITYA WAHYUDHI
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Riau. Jl. Hr. Subrantas Km 12,5, Kampus Bina Widya, Simpang Baru, Panam, Pekanbaru 28293, Riau, Indonesia

Abstract

Abstract. Afifah EN, Murti RH, Wahyudhi A. 2021. Evaluation of a promising tomato line (Solanum lycopersicum) derived from mutation breeding. Biodiversitas 22: 1863-1868. Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) is a common crop that is widely cultivated and consumed around the world. Demand for tomatoes has increased along with the growth of the human population. Therefore, tomato production has to be continuously developed to meet the ever-rising global demand. Mutation breeding is one of the strategies applied to improve plant yield and quality. This study evaluated a promising mutant breeding line called G6 and compared it to existing varieties. G6 (mutant line), Ratna, Tora, and Intan (commercial varieties) were used as materials and were evaluated for their qualitative and quantitative traits. Overall, G6 showed a slightly flattened fruit shape similar to Ratna. It also had the highest value of locules, long shelf life, and the number of bunches per plant compared to the existing varieties (Ratna, Intan, and Tora). The number of locules is assumed to be linked to fruit size and dimension. Long shelf life is one of the preferred qualities of both consumers and farmers, as it could prevent overmature and rotten tomato fruit during transportation. G6 differed from commercial varieties (Intan, Ratna, and Tora) in terms of the number of locules, shelf life, and the number of bunches per plant.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

References
Casals J, Rivera A, Sabaté J, Castillo RR, and Simó J. 2019. Cherry and Fresh Market Tomatoes: Differences in Chemical, Morphological, and Sensory Traits and Their Implications for Consumer Acceptance. Agronomy. DOI: 10.3390.
Causse M, Friguet C, Coiret C, Lépicier M, Navez B, Lee M, Holthuysen N, Sinesio F, Moneta E, and Grandillo S. 2010. Consumer preferences for fresh tomato at the European scale: a common segmentation on taste and firmness. J Food Sci. 75: 31-41.
Chaudhary J, Alisha A, Bhatt V, Chandanshive S, Kumar N, Mir Z, Kumar A, Yadav SK, Shivaraj SM, Sonah H, and Deshmukh R. 2019. Mutation Breeding in Tomato: Advances, Applicability and Challenges. Plants. DOI:10.3390/plants8050128.
Chu YH, Jang JC, Huang Z, and Knaap E. 2019. Tomato locule number and fruit size controlled by natural alleles of lc and fas. Plant Direct. 3:1–20.
Citation: Aparna Tiwari. “Plant Breeding: A Prospect in Developing World”
Cronicon
Degefa, I. 2019. Plant breeding methods: In brief for student. International Journal of Agriculture and Agribusiness 3: 156-203.
EC Microbiology
EC Microbiology
Fentik D.A. 2017. Review on Genetics and Breeding of Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill). Adv Crop Sci Tech 5: 306.
Frusciante L, Carli P, Ercolano MR, Pernice R, Matteo AD, Fogliano V, and Pellegrini N. 2007. Antioxidant nutritional quality of tomato. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 51: 609 – 617.
Gonzalo MJ, Brewer MT, Anderson C, and Sullivan D, Simon Gray, Knaap E. 2009. Tomato Fruit Shape Analysis Using Morphometric and Morphology Attributes Implemented in Tomato Analyzer Software Program. J. AMER.SOC.HORT.SCI. 134:77–87.
Holme IB, Gregersen PL, and Brinch-Pedersen H. 2019. Induced Genetic Variation in Crop Plants by Random or Targeted Mutagenesis: Convergence and Differences. Front. Plant Sci. 10:1468.
Hossain MS., Ashrafuzzaman M, Malek MA, Mondal MMA, Rafii MY, Ismail MR, AND Islam MS. 2013. Evaluation and selection of tomato mutants for cultivation in Summer. Res. on Crops 14: 546-550.
Ishige, T. 2009. Summary of the FAO/IAEA International Symposium on Induced Mutations in Plants In: Induced Plant Mutations in Genomics Era. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United States. pp. 11-12.
Malek MA, Begum HA, Begum M, Sattar MA, Ismail MR, and Rafii, MY. 2012. Development of two high yielding mutant varieties of mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czern & Coss] through gamma rays-irradiation. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 6: 922-27.
MGM’s Institute of Biosciences and Technology, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
Nkansah GO, Blay ET, Asante IK, Ochar K. 2019. Evaluation of Selected Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) Cultivars in Ghana for Superior Fruit Yield and Yield Component Traits. J Horttic 6:262.
OPEN
Plant Breeding: A Prospect in Developing World
Review Article
Spencer-Lopes and Jankuloski, L. 2018. Manual on mutation breeding, Vienna Austria. Third edition.
Tiwari A. 2017. Plant breeding: A prospect in developing world. EC Microbiology 8: 272-278.
Zhang Y, Butelli E, Stefano RD, Schoonbeek H, Magusin A, Pagliarani C, Wellner N, Hill L, Orzaez D, Granell A, Jones JDG,6 and Martin C. 2013. Anthocyanins Double the Shelf Life of Tomatoes by Delaying Overripening and Reducing Susceptibility to Gray Mold. Curr Biol 23: 1094–1100.

Most read articles by the same author(s)