RESPONSE OF TOMATO (Lycoperscon esculentum ...

BANGLADESH RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS JOURNAL ISSN: 1998-2003, Volume: 10, Issue: 3, Page: 249-254, November - December, 2014

RESPONSE OF TOMATO (Lycoperscon esculentum) TO SALINITY IN HYDROPONIC STUDY M. A. H. Shimul1, It o Shin-ichi 2, S. Sadia3, M. Z. K. Roni4 and A. F. M. Jamal U ddin4* M. A. H. Shimul, It o Shin-ichi, S. Sadia, M. Z. K. Roni and A. F. M. Jamal U ddin ( 2014). Res pons e of Tomat o ( Lycoperscon esculent um) t o Salinit y in Hydroponic St udy. Banglades h Res. Pub. J. 10( 3): 249-254. Ret rieve from htt p://www.bdres earchpublicat ions.com/admin/journal/upload/1410033/1410033.pdf

Abstract An ex periment w as accomplished at Hort icult ure Research Cent er (HRC), Bangladesh Agricult ural Research I nst it ut e (BARI ), Gazipur, during t he period of 2011-2012, to find out t he grow t h and y ield of t omato in different salinity lev el. Fiv e salinity lev els w ere account ed at T0, Co nt rol; T1, 4 dS m-1 ; T2, 8 dS m-1 ; T3, 12 dS m-1 and T4, 16 dS m-1 t reat ments respectiv ely and w ere carried out w it h completely randomized design (CRD). Significant results w ere rev ealed among grow t h, y ield and y ield contribut ing charact ers. Cont rol (T0) show ed t he best performance in plant height , number of fruits plant -1, fruit w eight , leaf area plant -1, t ot al chlorophy ll cont ent and plant dry matt er compared t o t he ot her salinity lev el. Stomat al resist ance w as best in 16 dSm-1 (T4) t reat ments. On t he ot her hand, t he salinity lev el 16 dS m-1ex hibit ed highest Na- and Cl- upt ake w hich reduced t he upt ake of K +. At cont rol (0 dSm-1) salinity w hen Na and Cl ions w ere low in w at er, t han t he K+ upt ake increased. Salinity had a great er impact on st omat al resist ance and chlorophy ll cont ent of plants.

Key words: Salinity, Hydroponics and yield. Introduction Salinity is considered a significant abiotic factor affecting crop production and it reduces the crop value and agricultural sustainability of the affected land (Abdelrahman et al., 2005; Cano et al., 1996; Rus et al., 1999; Shibli et al., 2007). On the other hand, salinization continues to increase, particularly in the arid and semiarid regions (Rus et al. 2000), even Bangladesh. Morover, high salinity level reduces the productivity of many agricultural crops including most of the vegetables. Salt stress also affects some major processes such as germination, speed of germination, root/shoot dry weight and Na+/K+ ratio in root and shoot (Parida and Das 2005). Nevertheless, salinity stress in the root zone is accompanied by yield loss through a reduction in fruit weight, but not in the number of fruits (Li et al., 2001; Willumsen et al., 1996). Water influx into fruits is reduced by the high osmotic pressure of the irrigation solution and the water stress inhibits fruit size (Chretien et al., 2000; Li et al., 2001; M avrogianopoulos et al., 2002). The duration of salinity stress is important because it affects fruit yield and quality. There have been a few studies on the starting time and duration of salinity treatment in the tomato (Sakamoto et al., 1999). Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) is one of the most important horticultural crops in the world. Tomato fruit is a major component of daily meals and constitutes an important source of minerals, vitamins, and antiox idant compounds (Dorais et al., 2005). The organoleptic quality of tomato is mainly attributed to its aroma volatiles, sugar and acid content, w hile it’s mineral, vitamin, carotenoid and flavonoid content define the nutriant quality. So it is one of the economically important vegetable crops. Southern part of Bangladesh has a lot of cultivable area to contribute agricultural production. The amount of cultivable saline area, 86% area i.e. low saline (0-4 dS m -1) area of 287 thousand hectares and medium saline (4-8 dS m -1) area of 426 thousand hectares have scope for successful crop production (BRRI, 2004). Suitable vegetables are required to overcome *Corresponding Author Email: [email protected] 1 ACI Limited, Tejgaon Industrial Area, Dhaka; 2 Depertment of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Yamaguchi University, Japan; 3 Department of Agricultural Extension and Information System, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka; 4 Department of Horticulture, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka

Shimul et al.

250

the serious limitation posed by salt affected coastal areas. As tomato is an important vegetable in Bangladesh, extensive research is necessary to develop grow ing conditions in moderate salinity to produce good vegetative growth. However, a few studies w ere done on the effect of salinity stress on the growth, yield and the quality of tomato fruits. According to USDA report, out of all vegetables, tomato is moderately sensitive to salinity. On the other hand, large genetic variation of tolerance to salt level ex ists among tomato genotypes (Singh et al., 2012). It can tolerate salinity up to 2.5-2.9 dS m -1 in the root zone without yield losses (Sonneveld and Burg, 1991). The ex act salinity impact may vary depending on cultivar sensitivity and environmental conditions (Karlberg et al., 2006). Therefore, the ex periment was undertaken to observe the performance of tomato under different salinity level. Finally, the objective of this present work w as to investigate the different salinity level for growth and yield of tomato. It had been observed the physiological attributes in tomato plants as well as nutritional content of Na, Cl and K also studied in tomato plants with salt stress. Methods and material A hydroponic culture study was conducted in Horticulture Research Center (HRC), Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI), Gazipur during the period of 2011-2012, to find out the growth and yield of tomato in different salinity level. The experiment was laid out in Completely Randomized Design (CRD) with four replications. Salinity levels were accounted at T0, Control; T 1, 4 dS m -1; T 2, 8 dS m -1; T3, 12 dS m -1 and T4, 16 dS m -1 treatments respectively. Tomato seed (var. BARI Tomato 14) was collected from Olericulture Division, HRC, BARI, Gazipur. Tomato seeds were germinated in open polythene coated iron trays containing foam. Size of each foam w as 3 m x 2 m and thickness was 2.5 cm. Furrow to furrow distances in each direction was 2 cm and as such 2 cm x 2 cm blocks were made. A ½ cm depth cut w as made at the centre of each block in which seeds were put. The foams were placed on water in 3 m x 4 m water tanks made in steel plate. Germination of seedlings was monitored and recorded everyday. Proper aeration of the culture solution was provided for 10 minutes daily by a bamboo stick. At two-leaf stage, seedlings of uniform size were transplanted in foam-plugged holes of polystyrene sheets floating over 1/2 strength Hoagland’s nutrient solution (Hoagland and Arnon, 1950). Two seedlings were considered as one replication. Cork sheet was used on the water tank to hold the seedlings in the nutrient solutions. Salinity treatments were developed by adding NaCl in three/four applications was given in starting two days after transplanting. No NaCl w as added in the control treatment. Electrical Conductivity Meter (EC meter) was used to measure the salinity of the nutrient solution. The pH of the solution was monitored daily and adjusted at 6.0±0.5, w hen needed. The substrate solutions were changed fortnightly. Total chlorophyll content was measured by a hand-held chlorophyll meter (SPAD reading, M inolta Camera Co., Osaka, Japan) at the four weeks plants in each treatment. Leaf area was recorded by leaf area meter (CL-202 Leaf Area Meter, USA). In stomatal resistance determination we applied a diffusion porometer (Delta T Manufacturers, AP4 type transient porometer). The data were analyzed statistically by MSTAT-C to find out the significance of the difference among the treatments. Mean values of all the characters were evaluated and analysis of variance was performed by the 'F' (variance ratio) test. The significance of the differences among the pairs of treatment means w as estimated by the Least Significant Difference (LSD) test at 5% probability (Gomez and Gomez, 1984). Results Plant height (cm): The plant height increased significantly with decreasing level of salinity. The tallest plant height (108.2 cm) was obtained from 0 dSm -1 and shortest (74.57 cm) was T 4 (16 dSm -1) (Table 1). Shoot dry matter (g): Shoot dry matter (g) showed a statistically significant variation for different salinity levels. Max imum dry matter (17.8 g) was obtained from lowest salinity level at T0 (0 dS m -1) and minimum (8.1 g) was counted at T 4 (Table 1). Cumulative leaf area (cm 2) per plant: Significant variation was found with different level of salinity in leaf area. Highest leaf area (946.80 cm 2) was showed in T0 as the no application of salinity level, w hile lowest (410.80 cm2) was recorded at T 4 (Table 1).

http://www.bdresearchpublications.com/journal/

Response of Tomat o t o Salinity in Hydroponic St udy

251

Root dry matter (g): Significant variation w as found with different level of salinity at hydroponic tomato culture for root dry matter. Highest root dry matter (0.75 g) was obtained from control, w here lowest (0.33 g) was in T4 (Table 1) . Fruit weight per plant (kg): Fruit weight plant per plant was significantly affected by different salinity levels. In salinity level T 0 (control) gave the highest values (1.60 kg) fruit weight. Whereas high salinity level i.e. EC 16 dSm -1 (T 4) treatment provided the lowest values (0.40 kg) (Table 1). Table 1. Effect of different salinity levels on growth and yield of Tomato planty

TreatmentX

Plant height (cm)

Shoot dry matter weight (g)

T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 LSD (0.05) CV (%)

108.2 a 94.8 b 85.6 c 81.6 d 74.6 e 2.5 1.8

17.8 a 17.7 a 14.9 b 13.8 b 8.1 c 2.3 1.5

Cumulative leaf area/plant (cm 2) 946.8 a 865.9 b 504.8 c 424.1 d 410.8 e 1.1 0.1

Root dry matter weight (g) 0.75 0.73 0.6 0.48 0.33 0.2 9.9

Fruit wt./ plant (kg)

Number of Fruits/ plant

1.60 a 1.48 b 1.10 c 1.05 c 0.40 d 0.1 3.1

19.0 a 17.0 a 14.0 b 12.0 b 8.0 c 2.8 3.5

x

T0, Cont rol; T1, 4 dS m-1; T2, 8 dS m-1 ; T3, 12 dS m-1 and T4, 16 dS m-1 I n a column means hav ing similar lett er(s) are st at ist ically ident ical and t hose hav ing dissimilar lett er(s) differ significant ly at 0.05 lev el of significance y

Number of fruits per plant: Number of tomato fruit w as significantly affected w ith different salinity levels. Higher number of fruits (19.0) was obtained from control (T 0) which followed by T 1 treatment, w here as lower (8.0) w as found in T4 (16 dS m -1) (Table 1). Chlorophyll content (mg g -1): Significant variation was ex hibited w ith chlorophyll content by different salinity levels in plants. The highest chlorophyll content (24.1 mg g-1) w as found in control w hich was similarly comprised w ith T2. Lowest (15. 9 mg g-1) was recorded at 16 dS m -1 (Table 2). Stomatal resistance (s cm -1) Stomatal resistance was significantly influenced by different levels of salinity in tomato plants. Max imum stomata resistance (7.3 s cm -1) w as achieved at 16 ds m -1 salinity level which compared by T 4 treatment and minimum (3.1 s cm -1) obtained from T 0 (0 dS m -1) (Table 2). Table 2. Effect of total chlorophyll content and stomata resistance w ith different salinity level of Tomato planty TreatmentsX T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 LSD (0.05) CV (%)

Chlorophyll content (mg g -1) 24.1 a 23.2 a 20.3 b 17.7 c 15.9 d 1.5 4.6

Stomatal resistance (s cm -1) 3.1 d 4.6 c 5.7 b 6.7 a 7.3 a 0.7 7.9

x

I n T0, Cont rol; T1, 4 dS m-1 ; T2, 8 dS m- 1; T3, 12 dS m-1 and T4, 16 dS m-1 I n a column means hav ing similar lett er(s) are st at ist ically ident ical and t hose hav ing dissimilar lett er(s) differ significant ly at 0.05 lev el of significance y

Na content on shoot dry matter: Significant variation was observed for Na content in different levels of salinity at hydroponic culture. It increased with increasing salinity level. Highest Na content (43.6 mg kg-1) w as reported in T4 treatment and lowest (6.6 mg kg-1) was recorded in control which followed by T0 (Table 3).


Shimul et al.

252

Cl content on shoot dry matter: Chloride (Cl) content was significantly influenced by different salinity level among the shoot dry matter. The higher content of Cl (288.0 mg kg-1) was showed from 16 dS m -1 salinity level followed by T 4 treatment, w here as lower (49.8 mg kg-1) counted in T0 (Table 3). K content on shoot dry matter: K content of shoot dry matter was significantly influenced with different levels of salinity. The highest K content (467 mg kg-1) was obtained on shoot dry matter while salinity level was applied at 0 dS m -1. Lowest (314.8 mg kg-1) was calculated from T 4 (Table 3). Na content on root dry matter: Significant variation was observed on root dry matter w ith Na content among different level of salinity. Maximum Na content on root dry matter (169. 9 mg kg-1) was recorded from T4 (16 dS m -1) and minimum (21.1 mg kg-1) was T 0 (0 dS m -1) (Table 3). Cl content on root dry matter: Cl content on root dry matter was significantly influenced by different level of salinity. Utmost Cl content (303.8 mg kg-1) w as achieved at 16 dS m -1 saline level and least (45.0 mg kg-1) was reported from control (Table 3). K content on root dry matter: K content of root dry matter increased with increasing salinity level and it showed significant variation. Highest K content (440.0 mg kg-1) was obtained from T 0 (0 dS m -1) treatment and lowest (204.5 mg kg-1) found at 16 dS m -1 (T 4) (Table 3). Table 3. Effect of different salinity levels on Na, Cl and K content in shoot and root dry matter of tomato plant Treatments (dSm -1) T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 LSD (0.05) CV (%)

In shoot (mg kg-1) Na 6.6 d 7.9 d 14.6 c 25.9 b 43.6 a 3.3 2.0

Cl 49.8 c 136 b 145.8 b 258.5 a 288 a 31.8 1.8

K 467.0 a 387.8 b 337.0 c 333.3 c 314.8 d 9.3 1.6

In root (mg kg -1) Na 21.1 e 97.8 d 124.4 c 153.9 b 169.9 a 9.7 5.5

Cl 45 e 89 d 150 c 253.8 b 303.8 a 41.8 16.1

K 440 a 382.3 b 317.5 c 282 d 204.5 e 13.0 2.6

x

T 0, Cont r ol; T 1, 4 dS m -1; T 2, 8 dS m -1; T 3, 12 dS m -1 and T 4, 16 dS m -1 I n a colum n means having similar lett er(s) are st at ist ically ident ical and t hose having dissim ilar let t er(s) differ significant ly at 0.05 level of significance y

Discussion It was reported that plant growth increased w ith decreasing salinity level and probably salinity create an unfavorable condition on plant growth, that is w hy plant height decreases w ith increasing level of salinity on this hydroponic culture, as w ay to plant height increased in control application of salinity (Table 1). Salinity also showed the same effect that plant height reduced w ith increasing level of salinity and it reduces elongation rate of the main stem in tomato (Tal and Shannon, 1983; Oztekin and Tuzel, 2011). So plant height may reduce at high salinity level in irrigation water (Zaiter and Mahfouz, 1993). Consequently, cumulative leaf area (cm 2) was affected by high salinity level (Table 1). Subsequently, ex cessive accumulation of salts can lead to death of tissues, organs and whole plants and inhibits leaf area as well as other tomato genotypes (Agong et al., 2003). Munns and Termaat, (1986) found the effect of salinity on leaf area of tomato plant that one of the first plant responses to salinity stress is a reduction in plant growth rate w ith associated reductions in leaf area available for photosynthesis. According to Table 1, the reduction of plant dry matter and root dry matter resulted by salinity which inhibits photosynthesis and subsequent failure in the translocation of assimilation or photosynthesis (Satti and Lopez, 1994). It was well documented that shoot and root dry weight production of tomato decreased by salinity (Mohammad et al., 1998; Abdelrahman et al., 2005; and Shibli et al., 2007). Nevertheless, significant variation was observed in fruit weight and fruit number at 0 dS m -1 salinity. Since this comparing, the response of tomato plants to different salinity levels, it could be clear that the values of fruit number and weight per plant were reduced in 8.0-12.0 dSm -1 salinity levels and it is lowest in 16 dSm -1 (Table 1). This evidence could be a good sign for positive response of tomato plants to salinity. Hossain http://www.bdresearchpublications.com/journal/

Response of Tomat o t o Salinity in Hydroponic St udy

253

and Nonami, (2012) stated that if ex cess amount of salt entered into plant, this salt finally rises to tox ic level in leaf tissue which can cause early senescence of leaf. Finally, it reduces the photosynthetic capability of plant and retards the growth rate of plant and its other organs. Compared to control plants, total leaf chlorophyll content and stomatal resistance w ere decreased in high salinity and photosynthetic activities were also significantly reduced in increasing salinity (Table 2). Horchani et al. (2010) w as also support this result. In terms of tomato plants had high Na+ concentrations in shoot and root dry matter under high salinity level (Table 3). As Na+ concentration in leaf sap increased due to enhanced inward movement and inhibited outw ard active ex clusion of this ion and ratio of Na+ and Cl- concentration in the root depress nutrient ion activities and produce ex treme relations of Na+/Ca2+, Na+/K+, Ca2+/M g2+ and Cl-/NO 3- of under the combined stress of salinity and water logging (Nawaz et al., 1998; Grattan and Grieve, 1999 and Horchani et al., 2010). The higher concentrations of Na+ and Cl- in leaves become tox ic to plants and lead to salt injury (Serrano et al., 1999; and Saqib et al., 2005). Incase of higher salinity also promoted to uptake Cl in tomato plants which w as ex hibited in shoot and root dry matter and induced mineral nutrition disturbance (Amor et al., 2004) (Table 3). Interestingly, increased of Cl- concentration under salinity stress might have resulted from ex cessive chloride concentration in nutrient medium that resulted in more uptake of Cl- by plants (Shah and Jones, 1988). On the other hand, Potassium reduction w ith increased salinity may be due to antagonistic effect of Na+ to K+ or probably K+ did not match Na transport to fulfill conditions of intercellular compartmentalization of osmoregulating ions (Greenw ay and Munns 1980). Effect of high concentration of Na and Cl ion accumulation suppressed the uptake of K+, Ca2+, NO 3 etc. in both field and hydroponic sytem (Gorham and Jones 1993; M aggio et al., 2007; Horchani et al., 2010 and Al-Karaki, 2000). Ultimately, K content was high in shoot and root at control treatments and high salinity level respectively (Table 3). Conclusion This study forwarded to observe salinity stress among different life cycle of crops and revealed that growth and yield of tomato decreased w ith increasing salinity level. Physiological character of tomato plant also affected due to salinity. Reference Abdelrahman N, Shibli R, Ereifej K, and M. Hindiy eh. (2005). I nfluence of salinity on grow th and phy siology of in v itro grow n cucumber (Cucumis sat iv us L). Jordan J Agr Sci., 1: 93-106. Agong S. G., M. Kinget su, Y. Yoshida, S. Yazaw a and M. Masuda. (2003). Response of t omat o genoty pes t o induced salt st ress. African Crop Science Jo urnal., 11(2): 133-142. Al-Karaki G. (2000). Grow th, sodium, pot assium upt ake and t ranslocation in salt stressed t omat o. J Plant Nut r 23: 369-379. Amor B. N., K. B. Hamed and A. Debez. (2004). Phy siological and ant ioxidant responses of t he perennial halophy te Crit hmum marit imum t o salinity . Plant Sci., 168 (4): 89-899. Bangladesh Rice Research I nst it ut e (BRRI ) (2004). Annual Research Report . Soil Science Div ision. Cano E, F. Perez-Alfocea, V. Moreno, M. Bolarin. (1996). Responses t o NaCl st ress of cultiv ated and w ild t omat o species and t heir hy brids in callus cult ure. Plant Cell Rep., 15: 791-794. Chret ien S., A. Gosselin and M. Dorais. (2000). High elect rical conduct ivity and radiat ion-based w at er management improv e fruit quality of greenhouse t omat oes grow n in rockw ooI . Hort. indicat or of sensory fruit quality. Plant Science., 171 :323-331. Dorais M., J. Caron, G. Begin, A. Gosselin, L. Gaudreau and C. Menard. (2005). Equipment performance for det ermining w at er needs of t omato plant s grow n in saw dust based substrates and rockw ool. Act a Hort., 691:293-304. Gomez A. K. and A. A. Gomez. (1984). St at ist ical Procedures for Agricult ural Research. 2nd Ed., John Wiley and So ns, I nc., NY. pp. 8-20. Gorham J. and W. Jones. (1993). Ut ilizat ion of Trifle eae for improving salt tolerance in w heat. K/uw er Aced. Pub. The Net herlands. pp. 27-33. Gratt an S. T. and C. M. Griev e. (1999). Salinity mineral relat ions in hort icult ural crops. Sci. Hort ic., 78(14): 127-157. Greenw ay H. and R. Munns. (1980). Mechanisms of salt t olerance in halophyt es. Annu. Rev . Plant Phy siol., 28: 89-121.


Shimul et al.

254

Hoagland, D.R. and D.I. Arnon. 1950. The w at er-cult ure met hod for grow ing plants w it hout soil. California Agricult ural Ex periment St at ion Circular 347:1-32. Horchani F., R. Hajri, H. Khay at i and S. A. Smiti. (2010). Physiological responses of t omat o plants to t he combined effect of root hy pox ia and NaCl salinity . Journal of Phy tology., 2(11): 36–49. Hossain M. M. and V. Nonami. (2012). Effect of salt st ress on phy siological response of t omat o fruit grow n in hy dro¬ponic cult ure sy stem. Hort. Sci., 39(1): 26–32. Karlberg L., A. Ben-Gal, P. E. Jasson and U . Shani. (2006). Modelling transpirat ion and grow t h in salinity-st ressed t omato under different climat ic conditions. Ecological Modeling., 190: 15-40. Li Y. L., C. St anghellini and H. Challa. (2001). Effect of elect rical conductiv ity and t ranspirat ion on product ion of greenhouse t omat o (Ly copersicon esculent um L.). Sci. Hort., 88: 11-29. Maggio A., G. Raimondi, A. Marrino, and S. De Pascale. (2007). Salt stress response in t omat o bey ond t he salinity t olerance t hreshold. Env. Ex p. Bot ., 59:276-282. Mav rogianopoulos G., D. Savv as and V. Vogli. (2002). I nfluence of NaCl salinity imposed on half of t he root sy st em of hy droponically grow n t omat o on grow t h, y ield, and t issue mineral composition. J. Hort. Sci. Biot ech., 77: 557-564. Mohammad M., R. Shibli, A. Ajlouni and L. Nimrib. (1998). Tomat o root and shoot responses t o salt stress under different lev els of phosphorus nut rition. Journal of Plant Nut rit ion., 21(8): 1667-1680. Munns R. and A. Termaat . 1986. W hole-plant responses t o salinity. Aust . J. Plant Phy siol., 13: 143-160. Naw az S., R. H. Qureshi, M. Aslam, J. Akht ar and S. Parv een. (1998). Comparat iv e performance of different w heat v ariet ies under salinity and w at er logging :11 I onic relat ions. Pak . J . Bio. Sci., 1: 357-359. Ozt ekin G. B. and Y. Tuzel. (2011). Comparat iv e salinity responses among t omat o genoty pes and rootst ocks. Pak. J. Bot ., 43(6): 2665-2672. Parida A. K. and A. B. Das. (2005). Salt t olerance and salinity effect s on plant : a rev iew . Ecotox ical Env iron Safety., 60:324–349 Rus A, M., Panoff, F. Perez-Alfocea and Bolarin M. (1999). NaCl responses in t omat o calli and w hole plant s. J Plant Phy siol., 155: 727-733. Rus A., S. Rios, E. Olmos, A. Sant a-Cruz and M. Bolarin. (2000). Long-t erm cult ure modifies t he salt responses of callus lines of salt -t olerant and salt -sensit iv e tomat o species. J Plant Phy siol., 157: 413-420. Sakamot o Y., S. W at anabe, T. Nakashima and K Okano. (1999). Effect s of salinity at tw o ripening st ages on t he fruit quality of single-t russ t omat o grow n in hy droponics. J. Hort . Sci., 74: 690-693. Saqib M., J. Akht ar and R. H. Qureshi. (2005). Na+ exclusion and salt resist ance of w heat (Trit icum aestiv um) in saline-w at erlogged conditions are improv ed by t he dev elopment of adv entitious nodal root s and cort ical root aerenchy ma. Plant Sci., 169: 125–130. Sat t i S. and M. Lopez. (1994). Effect of increasing pot assium lev els for allev iat ing sodium chloride stress on t he grow t h and y ield of t omato. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal., 25: 2807-2823. Serrano R., J. M. Mullet, G. Rios, J. A. De Marquez, I . Larrinoa, M. P. Leube, I. Mendizabal, A. P. Ahuir, M. Proft, R. Ros and C. Mont esinos. (1999). A glimpse of t he mechanisms of ion homeost asis during salt stress. J. Ex p. Bot., 50: 1023-1036. Shah R. H. and R. G. Wy n Jones. (1988). Effect of different salinit ies on successive grow th and ionic composition of t etra and hex poid w heat s, 2nd Nat . Cong. Soil Sci., pp.12 Dec., 20-22, I slamabad, Pakist an. Shibli R., M. Kushad, G. Yousef and M. Lila. (2007). Phy siological and biochemical responses of t omato microshoots t o induced salinity stress w it h associat ed et hy lene accumulat ion. Plant Grw t h Reg., 51:159-169. Singh J., E. V. D. Sast ry and V. Singh. (2012). Effect of salinity on t omat o (Ly copersicon esculent um Mill.) during seed germinat ion st age. Phy siol Mol Biol Plant s., 18(1):45–50. Sonnev eld C. and V. D. Burg. (1991). Sodium shloride salinity in fruit v eget able crops in soilless cult ure. Net herlands J. Agri. Sci., 39: 115-122. Tal M. M. and C. Shannon. (1983). Salt t olerance in t he w ild relat iv es of t he cult iv at ed t omat o: Response of Ly copersicon esculent urn Mill., L. cheesrnanii, L. peruvian urn and Solanur n pennellii and F1 hy brid t o salinity . Aust. J. Plant Phy siol., 10: 109-117. Willumsen, K. K. Pet ersen and K. Kaack. (1996). Yield and blossom-end rot of t omat o affect ed by salinity and cat ion act iv ity rat ios in t he root zone. Hort. Sci., 71: 81-98. Zait er H. and B. Mahfouz. (1993). Salinity effect on root and shoot charact erist ics of common and t epary beans ev aluat ed under hy droponic and sand cult ure. J. Plant Nut r., 16: 1569–1592.
