Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T08:40:32.062Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

LEAF ION CONTENT, YIELD AND FRUIT QUALITY OF FIELD-GROWN MELON UNDER SALINE CONDITIONS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2018

MAHMOUD AKRAMI ,
AHMAD ARZANI  and
ZAHRA MAJNOUN
MAHMOUD AKRAMI
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture, Isfahan University ofTechnology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
AHMAD ARZANI*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture, Isfahan University ofTechnology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
ZAHRA MAJNOUN
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture, Isfahan University ofTechnology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
*
†Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Our knowledge of melon (Cucumis melo L.) response to salinity stress is limited under field conditions and then the genotype × environment interaction and heritability of agro-morphological traits are poor understood. A field trial (2014/2015) was carried out to evaluate the performance of 17 melon cultivars, including 16 native and one exotic (Galia), under salinity stress. Leaf ion concentrations, agronomic, morphological and fruit quality traits were evaluated and their heritabilities were estimated. The results showed significant effects of salinity stress and genotype on the studied traits except for days to anthesis and peel thickness. Salinity stress also caused significant reductions in fruit weight and leaf K+ concentration, while increasing leaf Na+ and Ca2+ concentrations and total soluble solids. The most salt-tolerant cultivars (‘Sabouni’ and ‘Shahabadi-1’) had higher fruit yield, low leaf Na+ and high leaf K+ concentrations and enhanced K+/Na+ ratio under stress conditions. In general, the heritability estimates were higher under control than under salinity conditions, and the highest heritability was observed for total soluble solids. In addition, fruit weight, number of fruit per plant and leaf Na+ concentration were the strongest predictors of fruit yield, explaining 92% of yield variation under salt stress. These observations suggest that indirect selection based on these traits would be effective in improving fruit production under saline conditions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 55 , Issue 5 , October 2019 , pp. 707 - 722
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arzani, A. (2008). Improving salinity tolerance in crop plants: a biotechnological view. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology – Plant 44:373–383.Google Scholar
Arzani, A. and Ashraf, M. (2016). Smart engineering of genetic resources for enhanced salinity tolerance in crop plants. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 35:146–189.Google Scholar
Botia, P., Navarro, J. M., Cerda, A. and Martinez, V. (2005). Yield and fruit quality of two melon cultivars irrigated with saline water at different stages of development. European Journal of Agronomy 23:243–253.Google Scholar
Colla, G., Rouphael, Y., Cardarelli, M., Massa, D., Salerno, A. and Rea, E. (2006). Yield, fruit quality and mineral composition of grafted melon plants grown under saline conditions. The Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology 81:146–152.Google Scholar
Del Amor, F. M., Martinez, V. and Cerda, A. (1999). Salinity duration and concentration affect fruit yield and quality, and growth and mineral composition of melon plants grown in perlite. HortScience 34:1234–1237.Google Scholar
FAO. (2000). Global Network on Integrated Soil Management for Sustainable use of Salt-Affected Soils. Country Specific Salinity Issues—Iran. FAO: Rome. Available online at http://www.fao.org/ag/agl/agll/spush/degrad.asp?country=iranGoogle Scholar
Franco, J. A., Esteban, C. and Rodriguez, C. (1993). Effects of salinity on various growth stages of muskmelon cv. Revigal. Journal of Horticultural Science 68:899–904.Google Scholar
Huang, C. H., Zong, L., Buonanno, M., Xue, X., Wang, T. and Tedeschi, A. (2012). Impact of saline water irrigation on yield and quality of melon (Cucumis melo cv. Huanghemi) in northwest China. European Journal of Agronomy 43:68–76.Google Scholar
Johnson, H. W., Robinson, H. F. and Comstock, R. E. (1955). Estimates of genetic and environmental variability in soybean. Agronomy Journal 47:314–318.Google Scholar
Kearsey, M. J. and Pooni, H. S. (1996). The Genetical Analysis of Quantitative Traits. New York: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Mansour, M. M. F. (2014). The plasma membrane transport systems and adaptation to salinity. Journal of Plant Physiology 171:1787–1800.Google Scholar
Mavrogianopoulos, G. N., Spanakis, J. and Tsikalas, P. (1999). Effect of carbon dioxide enrichment and salinity on photosynthesis and yield in melon. Scientia Horticulturae 79:51–63.Google Scholar
Mendlinger, S. and Fossen, M. (1993). Flowering, vegetative growth, yield, and fruit quality in muskmelons under saline conditions. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 118:868–872.Google Scholar
Moradmand, R., Arzani, A. and Saeidi, G. (2011). Plant regeneration via somatic embryogenesis in three Iranian Cucumis melo L. genotypes. Journal of Crop Improvement 25:183–190.Google Scholar
Munns, R. and Tester, M. (2008). Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annual Review of Plant Biology 59:651–681.Google Scholar
Navarro, J. M., Botella, M. A. and Martinez, V. (1999). Yield and fruit quality of melon plants grown under saline conditions in relation to phosphate and calcium nutrition. The Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology 74:573–578.Google Scholar
Negrao, S., Schmockel, S. M. and Tester, M. (2017). Evaluating physiological responses of plants to salinity stress. Annals of Botany 119:1–11.Google Scholar
Nerson, H. and Paris, H. S. (1987). Effects of plant type and growth regulators on the flowering, fruiting and yield concentration of melon. Crop Research 27:19–30.Google Scholar
Rosa, J. T. (1928). Changes in composition during ripening and storage of melons. Hilgardia 3:421–443.Google Scholar
Rouphael, Y., Cardarelli, M., Rea, E. and Colla, G. (2012). Improving melon and cucumber photosynthetic activity, mineral composition, and growth performance under salinity stress by grafting onto Cucurbita hybrid rootstocks. Photosynthetica 50:180–188.Google Scholar
Slama, I., Abdelly, C., Bouchereau, A., Flowers, T. and Savouré, A. (2015). Diversity, distribution and roles of osmoprotective compounds accumulated in halophytes under abiotic stress. Annals of Botany 115:433–447.Google Scholar
Tedeschi, A., Lavini, A., Riccardi, M., Pulvento, C. and Andria, R. (2011). Melon crops (Cucumis melo L., cv. Tendral) grown in a mediterranean environment under saline-sodic conditions: Part I. Yield and quality. Agricultural Water Management 98:1329–1338.Google Scholar
Tedeschi, A., Zong, L., Huang, C. H., Vitale, L., Volpe, M. G. and Xue, X. (2017). Effect of salinity on growth parameters, soil water potential and ion composition in Cucumis melo cv. Huanghemi in North-Western China. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 203:41–55.Google Scholar
Zalapa, J. E., Staub, J. E. and McCreight, J. D. (2008). Variance component analysis of plant architectural traits and fruit yield in melon. Euphytica 162:129–143.Google Scholar
Zong, L., Tedeschi, A., Xue, X., Wang, T., Menenti, M. and Huang, C. (2011). Effect of different irrigation water salinities on some yield and quality components of two field-grown Cucurbit species. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 35:297–307.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Akrami et al. supplementary material

Table S1

Download Akrami et al. supplementary material(File)
File 71.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Akrami et al. supplementary material

Table S2

Download Akrami et al. supplementary material(File)
File 93.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Akrami et al. supplementary material

Table S3

Download Akrami et al. supplementary material(File)
File 57.9 KB