Effects of grafting on fruit’s quality in two tomato cultivars (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) grown in hot bed

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/10/2015
Views (200) Download (2)

Effects of grafting on fruit’s quality in two tomato cultivars (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) grown in hot bed

Javid Emaratpardaz, Fahimeh Bagheri, Jaber Panahande, Zahra Eslaminezhad, Habib Davati-Kazemnia
Int. J. Agron. Agri. Res.7( 4), 166-171, October 2015.
Certificate: IJAAR 2015 [Generate Certificate]


Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) is a crop of high economic importance in many countries. The cultivation of grafted fruit bearing vegetable plants has increased greatly and grafting is an important technique for the sustainable production of fruit bearing vegetables in Iran and some Asian and European countries, where land use is very intensive and continuous cropping is common. The influence of different grafting methods on the success of grafting and fruit yield of two tomato cultivars (Es10002 and Heirloom) was studied in a hydroponic hot bed system The results of experiment showed that, grafting was effective on some of qualitative properties. Among these properties, could refer to pH, EC, vitamin c, dry weight and shelf life of fruit , which these ones also influenced by both stock and scions. The results showed that grafting didn’t have significant influence on fresh weight of fruit but for dry weight of fruit showed significant different. The results of this research showed that grafting had significant influence on potassium rate of fruit. The comparison of means showed that self-grafting treatments of variety ES10002 and heirloom had highest and lowest potassium level respectively, but grafting didn’t have significant influence on phosphor level of fruit. Grafting is thus considered an important technique for sustainable greenhouse production of fruit-bearing vegetables.


Balliu A, Vuksani G, Nasto T, Haxhinasto L, Kacia S. 2007. Grafting effects on tomato growth rate, yield and fruit quality under saline irrigation water. Acta Horticulture 801, 1161 – 1164.

Besri M. 2003. Tomato grafting as an alternative to methyl bromide in Morocco. Proceeding of international research conference on methyl bromide alternatives and emission reductions. Nov. 3-6 San diago, California.

Bletsos FA. 2005. Use of grafting and calcium cyanamide as alternatives to methyl bromide soil fumigation and their effects on growth, yield, quality and fusarium wilt control in melon. Journal of Phytopathology 153, 155 -161.

Chapagain BP, Wiesman Z. 2004. Effect of potassium magnesium chloride in the fertigation solution as partial source of potassium on growth, yield and quality of greenhouse tomato. Scientia Horticulturae 99, 279 – 288. doi:10.1016/S0304-4238(03)00109-2

Davis AR, Webber CL, Perkins-Veazie P, Ruso V, Lopez Galarza S, Sakata Y. 2008. A review of production systems on watermelon quality. Pitrat M. (ed): Cucurbitaceae 2008, Proceedings of the IXth EUCARPIA meeting on genetics and breeding of Cucurbitaceae, Avignon (France), May 21-24th, 2008, pp. 515-520.

Everett TH. 1984. Encylopedia of Horticulture. The New York Botanical Garden Illustrated. Vol. 1 – 10. Garland Publishing, Inc. New York, USA.

Huang Y, Tang R, Cao Q, Bie Z. 2009. Improving the fruit yield and quality of cucumber by grafting on to the salt tolerant rootstock under NaCl stress. Scientia Horticulturae 122, 26 – 31. doi:10.1016/j.scienta.2009.04.004

Kinet JM, Peet M. 1997. Tomato. In. H. C. Wien. The physiology of vegetable crops. CAB International, pp. 207 – 258.

Khahe EM, Kakava E, Mavromatis A, Chachalis D, Goulas C. 2006. Effect of grafting on growth and yield of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) in greenhouse and open-field. Applied Horticulture 8, 3 – 7.

Kotsiras A, Olympios CM, Drosopoulos J, Passam HC. 2002. Effect of nitrogen form and concentration on the distribution of ions within cucumber fruits. Scientia Horticulturae 95, 175 – 183. doi:10.1016/S0304-4238(02)00042-0

Lee JM, Oda K. 2003. Grafting of herbaceous vegetable and ornamental crops. In: J. Janick (ed) Horticultural Review 28, 61 – 124.

Lee JM. 1994. Cultivation of grafted vegetables I., current status, grafting methods and benefits. HortScience 29, 235 – 239.

Leonardi C, Giuffrida F. 2006. Variation of plant growth and macronutrient uptake in grafted tomatoes and eggplants on three different rootstocks. European Journal of Hort Science 71, 97 – 101.

Leoni S, Grudina R, Cadinu M, Madeddu B, Garletti MC. 1990. The influence of four rootstocks on some melon hybrids and a cultivar in greenhouse. Acta Horticulturae 287, 127 – 134.

McMurray  CH,  Blanchflower  WJ,  Rice  DA. 1980. Journal of the Association of official Analytical Chemists 63,1258-1268.

Maric NK, Osvald J. 2004. The influence of grafting on yield of two tomato cultivars (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) grown in plastic house. Acta Agriculturae Slovenia 13, 243 – 249.

Montanaro G, Dichio B, Xiloyannis C, Celano G. 2006. Light influences transpiration and calcium accumulation in fruit of kiwifruit plants (Actinidia deliciosa  var.  deliciosa).  Journal  of  Plant  Science 170, 520 – 527. doi:10.1016/j.plantsci.2005.10.004

Oda M. 1995. New grafting methods for fruit bearing vegetables in Japan. Japan Agricultural Research Ouarterly 29, 187 – 194.

Oda M. 1999. Grafting vegetables to improve greenhouse production. Food & Fertilizer Technology Center, Extension Bulletin 480, 1 – 11.

Olsen SR, Sommers LE. 1982. Phosphorus. In Methods of soil Analysis. Part П. ASA, SSSA, Madison .WI .USA. pp 403-430.

Rivard CL. 2006. Grafting tomato to manage soilborne disease and improve yield in organic production systems. Ms. Thesis North Crolina State University. P. 102.

Roberts BW, Fish WW, Bruton BD, Popham TW, Talor MJ. 2005. Effects of watermelon grafting on fruit yield and quality. Horticultural Science 40, 371.

Rubatzky VA. 1996. World vegetable, Principles and nutritive values. Chapman and Hall. pp. 532.

Ruiz M, Belakbir A, Lopez-Cantarere I, Romero L. 1997. Leaf-macronutrient content and yield in grafted melon plants. Amodel to evaluate the influence of rootstock genotype. Scientia Horticulturae 71, 227 – 234. doi: 10.2478/v10032-012-0007-0

Salam MA, Masum AS, Chowdhury SS, Dhar M, Saddeque MA, Islam MR. 2002. Growth and yield watermelon as influenced by grafting. Journal of Biological Sciences 2, 298 – 299.

Traka-Mavrona E, Koutsika-Sotiriou M, Prista T. 2000. Response of squash (Cucurbita spp.) as rootstock for melon (Cucumis melo L.). Scientia Horticulturae, 83, 353 – 362. doi:10.1016/S0304-4238(99)00088-6

Trionfetti Nisini P, Colla G, Granatie E, Temperioni O, Crino P, Sccardo F. 2002. Rootstock resistance to fusarium wilt and effect on fruit yield and quality of two muskmelon cultivars. Scientia Horticultura 93, 281 – 288. doi:10.1016/S0304-4238(01)00335-1

Waling I, Vark WV, Houba VJG, Van der lee JJ. 1989. Soil and Plant Analysis, a series of syllabi. Part 7. Plant Analysis Procedures. Wageningen Agriculture University, Netherland.

Zhilong ZY. 2007. Effect of grafting on the growth and quality of cucumber fruits. Acta Horticulturae 761, 341 – 347.