Phenotypic evaluation and molecular characterization of alc / Vaibhav recombinant inbred population of tomato for yield, shelf life and fruit quality parameters
Paper Details
Phenotypic evaluation and molecular characterization of alc / Vaibhav recombinant inbred population of tomato for yield, shelf life and fruit quality parameters
Abstract
Tomato is second most important vegetable, having nutritional and aesthetic value. Due to high temperature and lack of proper storage facility most of the produce is wasted. This loss can be reduced by increasing shelf life of tomato, so that produce can be stored for long time. In the present investigation alcobacca, a ripening mutant of tomato has been crossed with tomato variety, Vaibhav. To dissect trait genetics, Genetic variability, Correlation and path coefficient analysis were conducted in the F6 recombinant inbred population developed from alc x Vaibhav by single seed descent method. Highest shelf life of 85 days was observed with a mean of 51 days for RILs. Shelf life was significantly and positively associated with fruits per cluster (0.13@5%), fruit firmness (0.23 @ 1%, 5%), total soluble solutes (0.15@1%,5%), lycopene content (0.12@5%), yield per plant (0.30@1%,5%) and number of fruits per plant (0.38@1%,5%). Thirty eight polymorphic SSR markers have been screened for RILs. QTL detection was done using ANOVA and Linear regression using Minitab® 16.1.1. Three SSR markers viz., SSR146, LEaat007 and TGS2259 have been found to be linked to shelf life with R square value of 2.9, 4.1 and 3.5 respectively.
Almeida JLF. 1961. Um novo aspecto de melhoramento do tomato. Agriculture 10, 43–44.
Ara´Ujo ML, Maluf WR, Gome LAA, Oliveira AB. 2002. Intra and inter-locus interactions between alcobaça (alc), crimson (ogc), and high pigment (hp) loci in tomato Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. Euphytica 125, 215–226.
Beckles DM. 2012. Factors affecting the postharvest soluble solids and sugar content of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) fruit. Postharvest Biology and Technology 63, 129–140.
Burton GW and Dewane EM. 1953. Estimating heritability in tall fescue (Festuca arundanaceae) from replicated clonal material. Agronomy Journal 45, 478– 481.
Cantu D, Blanco-Ulate B, Yang L, Labavitch JM, Bennett AB, Powell AL. 2009. Ripening-regulated susceptibility of tomato fruit to Botrytis cinerea requires NOR but not RIN or ethylene. Plant Physiology 150, 1434–1449.
Casals J, Pascual L, Canizares J, Cornejo JC, Casanas F, Nuez F. 2012. Genetic basis of long shelf life and variability into Penjar tomato. Genetic Resource and Crop Evolution 59, 219–229.
Costa JHP, Rodríguez GR, Pratta GR, Picardi LA, Roxana ZR. 2013. QTL detection for fruit shelf life and quality traits across segregating populations of tomato. Scientia Horticulturae 156, 47–53.
Cvikic D, Zdravkovic J, Pavlovic N, Adžic S, Dordevic M. 2012. Postharvest Shelf Life of Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) Mutants (nor and rin) and their Hybrids. Genetika 44(3), 449 – 456.
Dewey DR, Lu KH. 1959. A correlation and path coefficient analysis of components of crested wheat grass seed production. Agronomy Journal 15, 515-518.
Dhatt AS, Singh S, Dhaliwal MS. 2003. Genetic analysis of shelf life and firmness of tomato using rin, nor and alc lines. Journal of Genetics and 57, 313-318.
Dias TJM, Maluf WR, Faria MV and De Freitas JA, Augusto Gomes LA, Resende JTV, De Azevedo SM. 2003. Alcobaça allele and genotypic backgrounds affect yield and fruit shelf life of tomato hybrids. Scientia Agricola 60, 269-275.
FAOSTAT. 2013. Statistical data bases. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) of United Nations, Rome.
Faria MV, Maluf WR, Azevedo SM, Andrade JRVC, Gomes LAA, Moretto P, Licursi V. 2003. Yield and post-harvest quality of tomato hybrids heterozygous at the loci alcobaca, old gold-crimson or high pigment. Genetic and Molecular Research 2, 317–327.
Foolad MR, Panthee DR. 2012. Marker-Assisted Selection in Tomato Breeding. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 31, 93–123.
Frary A, Xu Y, Liu J, Mitchell S, Tedeschi E, Tanksley SD. 2005. Development of a set of PCR-based anchor markers encompassing the tomato genome and evaluation of their usefulness for genetics and breeding experiments. Theoritical and Applied Genetics 111, 291–312.
Garg N, Cheema DS. 2011. Assessment of fruit quality attributes of tomato hybrids involving ripening mutants under high temperature conditions. Scientia Horticulturae 131, 29–38.
Garg N, Cheema DS, Dhatt AS. 2008. Genetics of yield, quality and shelf life characteristics in tomato under normal and late planting conditions. Euphytica 159, 275–288.
Gautier H, Lopez-Lauri F, Massot C, Murshed R, Marty I, Grasselly D, Keller C, Sallanon H, Genard M. 2010. Impact of ripening and salinity on tomato fruit ascorbate content and enzymatic activities related to ascorbate recycling. Functional Plant Science and Biotechnology 4, 66–75.
Georgelis N, Scott JW, Baldwin EA. 2004. Relationship of tomato fruit sugar concentration with physical and chemical traits and linkage of RAPD markers. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 129, 839–845.
Girish TN, Gireesha TM, Vaishali MG, Hanamareddy BG, Shailaja Hittalmani. 2006. Response of a new IR50/Moroberekan recombinant inbred population of rice (Oryza sativa L.) from an indica x japonica cross for growth and yield traits under aerobic conditions. Euphytica 152,149–161.
Hanson CH, Robinson HF, Comstock RE. 1956. Biometrical studies of yield in segregating population of Korean Lespedeza. Agronomy Journal 48, 267-282.
He C, Poysa V, Yu K. 2003. Development and characterization of simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers and their use in determining relationships among Lycopersicon esculentum cultivars, Theoritical and Applied Genetics 106, 363–373.
Johnson HW, Robinson HF, Comstock RE. 1955. Estimation of genetic and environmental variability in soybean. Agronomy Journal 47, 477-483.
Jones J. 1999. Tomato Plant Culture: in the Field, Greenhouse and Home Garden. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL pp. 1–30.
Kaur C, George B, Deepa N, Singh B, Kapoor HC. 2004. Antioxidant status of fresh and processed tomato—a review. Journal of Food Science and Technology 41, 479–486.
Kopeliovitch E, Rabinowitch HD, Mizrahi Y, Kedar N. 1981. Mode of inheritance of alcobaca, a tomato ripening mutant. Euphytica 30, 223–225.
Luengwilai K, Tananuwong K, Shoemaker CF, Beckles DM. 2010. Starch molecular structure shows little association with fruit physiology and starch metabolism in tomato. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 58, 1275–1282.
Lush JL. 1949. Heritability of quantitative characters in farm animals. Proc. 8th Cong. Genet. Hereditas 35, 356 – 375.
Manna M, Paul A. 2012. Studies on genetic variability and characters association of fruit quality parameters in Tomato. Horticultural. Flora Research Spectrum 1(2), 110-116.
Mutschler MA, Wolfe DW, Cobb ED, Yourstone KS. 1992. Tomato Fruit Quality and Shelf Life in Hybrids Heterozygous for the alc Ripening Mutant. Horticultural Science 27(4), 352-355.
Pech JC, Purgatto E, Girardi CL, Rombaldi CV, Latché A. 2013. Current challenges in postharvest biology of fruit ripening. Current Agricultural Science and Technology 19, 1-18.
Ranganna S. 1976. In: manual of analysis of fruits and vegetable products, McGraw hill, New Delhi pp 77.
Reid MS. 2002. Maturation and Maturity Indices. University of California, Agriculture and Natural Resources Publication 3311, Oakland.
Rick CM, Butler L. 1956. Cytogenetics of the tomato. Advanced Genetics 8, 267–382.
Rick CM. 1974. High soluble solids content in large-fruited tomato lines derived from a wild green-fruited-species. Hilgardia 42, 493–510.
Rodríguez GR, Costa JHP, Tomat DD, Pratta GR, Zorzoli R, Picardi LA. 2011. Pericarp total protein profiles as molecular markers of tomato fruit quality traits in two segregating populations. Scientia Horticulturae 130, 60–66.
Saladie M, Matas AJ, Isaacson T, Jenks MA, Goodwin SM, Niklas KJ, Ren XL, Labavitch JM, Shackel KA, Fernie AR, Lytovchenko A, O’neill MA, Watkins CB, Rose JKC. 2007. A re-evaluation of the key factors that influence tomato fruit softening and integrity. Plant Physiology 144, 1012–1028.
Schuelter AR, Casaliv WD, Cruz CD, Finger FL, Amaral AT, Shimoya A. 2001. Biometrical analysis of a mutant that increases shelf-life of tomato fruits.Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnology 1, 44–53.
Snedecor GW. 1961. Statistical methods. The Iowa State University Press, Acer, Iowa, USA pp-388.
Stevens MA, Kader AA, Albright HM, Algazi M. 1977. Genotypic variation for flavour and composition in fresh market tomatoes. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 102, 680– 689.
Thompson AJ, Tor M, Barry CS, Vrebalov J, Orfila C, Jarvis MC, Giovannoni JJ, Grierson D, Seymour GB. 1999. Molecular and genetic characterization of a novel pleiotropic tomato-ripening mutant. Plant Physiology 120, 383–389.
Tigchelaar EC, Tomes ML, Kerr EA, Barman RJ. 1973. A new fruit ripening mutant, non-ripening (nor). Rep. Tomato Genetic Cooperative 23, 33.
Weber CR, Moorthy BR. 1952. Heritability and non-heritability relationships and variability of oil content and agronomic characters in the F2 generation of soybean crosses. Agronomy Journal 44, 202-209.
Wright S. 1921. Correlation and Causation. Journal of Agricultural Research 20, 557-585.
Yogendra KN, Ramanjini Gowda PH. 2012. Phenotypic and molecular characterization of a tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) F2 population segregation for improving shelf life. Genetic and Molecular Research 12(1), 506-518.
Yogendra KN. 2011. Development of Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) for extended shelf life through molecular marker approach. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences Bangalore.
Zhang Y, Butelli E, Stefano RD, Schoonbeek H, Magusin A, Pagliarani C, Wellner N, Hill L, Orzaez D, Granell A, Jones JDG, Martin C. 2013. Anthocyanins Double the Shelf Life of Tomatoes by Delaying Overripening and Reducing Susceptibility to Gray Mold. Current Biology 23, 1094–1100.
Pallavi Pawar, Ramanjini Gowda PH, Ramegowda, Ravishankar P (2016), Phenotypic evaluation and molecular characterization of alc / Vaibhav recombinant inbred population of tomato for yield, shelf life and fruit quality parameters; IJAAR, V8, N2, February, P25-36
https://innspub.net/phenotypic-evaluation-and-molecular-characterization-of-alc-vaibhav-recombinant-inbred-population-of-tomato-for-yield-shelf-life-and-fruit-quality-parameters/
Copyright © 2016
By Authors and International
Network for Natural Sciences
(INNSPUB) https://innspub.net
This article is published under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0