Interactive effects of salinity and air humidity on two tomato cultivars differing in salt tolerance

被引:15
|
作者
An, P
Inanaga, S
Li, XJ
Eneji, AE
Zhu, NW
机构
[1] Tottori Univ, Arid Land Res Ctr, Tottori 6800001, Japan
[2] Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Sch Environm Sci & Engn, Shanghai 200030, Peoples R China
关键词
humidity; salt tolerance; tomato;
D O I
10.1081/PLN-200049177
中图分类号
Q94 [植物学];
学科分类号
071001 ;
摘要
An environmentally controlled experiment was conducted in growth chambers to investigate the interactive effects of salinity and air humidity on two cultivars of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.), Daniela (relatively salt tolerant) and Naomi (relatively salt sensitive). One month after germination, the plants were exposed for 15 days to factorial combinations of two salinity levels, 0 (control) and 80 mM sodium chloride (NaCl), and two relative humidity (RH) levels, 30% and 70%. The NaCl treatment decreased the growth of cv. Naomi by 34% and 21% at 30% and 70% RH, respectively, while there was no decrease in the growth of cv. Daniela at 30% RH and only a slight decrease at 70% RH. Under NaCl treatment, cv Daniela had significantly lower Na+ concentrations in leaves and stems and a higher root-to-shoot ratio than cv. Naomi at both relative humidities. Salt tolerance of cv. Daniela may be related to its high root-to-shoot ratio and its ability to exclude Na+ from the shoot. NaCl-treated plants of cv. Daniela had a lower biomass at 70% than at 30% RH. Conversely, NaCl-treated plants of cv. Naomi had a greater biomass at 70% compared with 30% RH. The ameliorating effects of high RH on NaCl-induced growth reductions in cv. Naomi could be attributed to an increase in leaf area, root growth, photosynthetic rate, and stomatal conductance and a decrease in Cl- concentration in leaves. The overall findings of this study suggest that the growth of salt-sensitive tomato cultivars under saline conditions could be improved by increasing air humidity.
引用
收藏
页码:459 / 473
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Effects of salinity and relative humidity on two melon cultivars differing in salt tolerance
    An, P
    Inanaga, S
    Lux, A
    Li, XJ
    Ali, MEK
    Matsui, T
    Sugimoto, Y
    BIOLOGIA PLANTARUM, 2002, 45 (03) : 409 - 415
  • [2] Salt effect on K influx by two rice cultivars differing in salinity tolerance
    Stephens, DB
    Beyrouty, CA
    Gbur, EE
    Norman, RJ
    ROOT DEMOGRAPHICS AND THEIR EFFICIENCIES IN SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE, GRASSLANDS AND FOREST ECOSYSTEMS, 1998, 82 : 483 - 491
  • [3] Effects of salicylic acid and salinity on apoplastic antioxidant enzymes in two wheat cultivars differing in salt tolerance
    Mutlu, S.
    Atici, Oe
    Nalbantoglu, B.
    BIOLOGIA PLANTARUM, 2009, 53 (02) : 334 - 338
  • [4] PROTEIN EXPRESSION AFTER NACL TREATMENT IN TWO TOMATO CULTIVARS DIFFERING IN SALT TOLERANCE
    Khalifa, Noha S.
    ACTA BIOLOGICA CRACOVIENSIA SERIES BOTANICA, 2012, 54 (02) : 79 - 86
  • [5] Response of two tomato cultivars differing in salt tolerance to inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi under salt stress
    Al-Karaki, GN
    Hammad, R
    Rusan, M
    MYCORRHIZA, 2001, 11 (01) : 43 - 47
  • [6] Response of two tomato cultivars differing in salt tolerance to inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi under salt stress
    G. N. Al-Karaki
    R. Hammad
    M. Rusan
    Mycorrhiza, 2001, 11 : 43 - 47
  • [7] Photosynthesis parameters in two cultivars of mulberry differing in salt tolerance
    Kumar, SG
    Lakshmi, A
    Madhusudhan, KV
    Ramanjulu, S
    Sudhakar, C
    PHOTOSYNTHETICA, 1999, 36 (04) : 611 - 616
  • [8] Salinity tolerance in Hordeum vulgare:: ion concentrations in root cells of cultivars differing in salt tolerance
    Flowers, TJ
    Hajibagheri, MA
    PLANT AND SOIL, 2001, 231 (01) : 1 - 9
  • [9] Salinity tolerance in Hordeum vulgare: ion concentrations in root cells of cultivars differing in salt tolerance**
    T. J. Flowers
    M. A. Hajibagheri
    Plant and Soil, 2001, 231 : 1 - 9
  • [10] ION UPTAKE IN TWO SPECIES OF TOMATO DIFFERING IN SALT TOLERANCE
    Wrona, Anne F.
    Epstein, Emanuel
    PLANT PHYSIOLOGY, 1983, 72 : 79 - 79