Euphytica

, Volume 146, Issue 1–2, pp 133–142 | Cite as

Utilization of genetic resources for the introduction and adaptation of exotic vegetable crops: The case of pepino (Solanum muricatum)

  • Jaime Prohens
  • Adrián Rodríguez-Burruezo
  • Fernando Nuez
Article
Received:
Accepted:

Summary

Pepino (Solanum muricatum), a vegetatively propagated plant from the Andean region used for its edible fruits, has been identified as a potential crop for greenhouse cultivation in Mediterranean regions. However, attempts for introducing it have been unsuccessful, either because of the low yield, poor fruit quality, or both. Screening of germplasm under Mediterranean conditions showed that sources of variation for high yield existed in the cultivated genepool and that wild species S. caripense and S. tabanoense could contribute to a considerable improvement of soluble solids content (SSC) of pepino. Progenies obtained after crossing genetically distant (AFLP-based) parental clones were heterotic for yield, and allowed the selection of clones with an improved combination of yield and SSC. As a result of this intraspecific programme, two new improved cultivars (‘Turia’ and ‘Valencia’), which outperform the rest of cultivars available, have been selected for cultivation in Mediterranean conditions. The interspecific programme involved the selection of clones with high yield and SSC in backcross generations. The results show that introgression of genes from the wild species can contribute to improve the SSC of pepino. The backcross programme is in an advanced stage and new cultivars derived from the interspecific crosses are expected to be released in a near future. New prospects for the future in pepino breeding include the genetic transformation, the establishment of a genetic map, and the use of the genomic information from related Solanaceae important crops. All the information obtained is illustrative for the breeding for adaptation of vegetatively propagated crops.

Key words

adaptation fruit quality heterosis source of variation wild relatives yield 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allard, R.W., 1999. Principles of Plant Breeding. 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, G.J., 1979. Systematic and evolutionary consideration of Solanum section Basarthrum In: J.G. Hawkes, R.N. Lester & A.D. Skelding (Eds.), The Biology and Taxonomy of the Solanaceae. Linnean Soc Symp Ser, No. 7, pp. 549–562. London.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, G.J., R.K. Jansen, & Y. Kim, 1996. The origin and relationships of the “Pepino”, Solanum muricatum (Solanaceae). Econ Bot 50: 369–380.Google Scholar
  4. Atkinson, R.G. & R.C. Gardner, 1991. Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of pepino and regeneration of transgenic plants. Plant Cell Rep 10(4): 208–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burge, G.K., 1989. Fruit set in the pepino (Solanum muricatum). Sci Hort 41: 63–68.Google Scholar
  6. Cossio, F. 1986. Il pepino o pera-melone, frutto esotico da sperimentare in orticultura. L´informatore Agrario-Verona 42(29): 49–51.Google Scholar
  7. Doganlar, S., A. Frary, M.C. Daunay, R.N. Lester & S.D. Tanksley, 2002. A comparative linkage map of eggplant (Solanum melongena) and its implications for Genome Evolution in the Solanaceae. Genetics 161: 1697–1711.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Ercan, N. & M. Akilli, 1996. Reasons for the parthenocarpy and the effects of various hormone treatments on fruit set in the pepino (Solanum muricatum Ait.). Sci Hort 66: 141–147.Google Scholar
  9. Falconer, D.S. & T.F.C. Mackay, 1996. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Longman, Essex.Google Scholar
  10. Heiser, C.B., 1969. Solanum caripense y el origen de Solanum muricatum Revista Politécnica 1(3): 5–11.Google Scholar
  11. Grigg, F.D.W., P.R. Smith, M.A. Stenersen & B.G. Murray, 1988. Variable pollen fertility and abnormal chromosome behaviour in the pepino (Solanum muricatum Ait., Solanaceae). Sci Hort 35: 259–268.Google Scholar
  12. Mather, K. & J.L. Jinks, 1977. Biometrical Genetics. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
  13. Murray, B.G., K.R.W. Hammett & F.D.W., 1992. Seed set and breeding system in the pepino (Solanum muricatum, Ait., Solanaceae). Sci Hort 49: 83–92.Google Scholar
  14. National Research Council, 1989. Lost crops of the Incas: Little-known Plants of the Andes with Promise for Worldwide Cultivation. National Academy Press, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  15. Nesbitt, T.C. & S.D. Tanksley, 2001. fw 2.2 directly affects the size of developing tomato fruit, with secondary effects on fruit number and photosynthate distribution. Plant Physiol 127: 575–583.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Nuez, F. & J.J. Ruiz, 1996. El pepino dulce y su cultivo. FAO, Rome.Google Scholar
  17. Nuez, F., R. Morales, J. Prohens, P. Fernández de Córdova, S. Soler, E. Valdivieso & V. Solórzano, 1999. Germplasm of Solanaceae horticultural crops in the South of Ecuador. Plant Gen Res Newsl 120: 44–47.Google Scholar
  18. Nuez, F., J. Prohens & J.M. Blanca, 2004. Relationships, origin, and diversity of Galapagos tomatoes: Implications for the conservation of natural populations. Amer J Bot 91: 86–99.Google Scholar
  19. Paz, M.M. & R.E. Veilleux, 1997. Genetic diversity based on randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and its relationship with the performance of diploid potato hybrids. J Amer Soc Hort Sci 122: 740–7.Google Scholar
  20. Pérez-Benlloch, L., J. Prohens, S. Soler & F. Nuez, 2001. Yield and fruit quality loses caused by ToMV in pepino and search for sources of resistance. Euphytica 120: 247–256.Google Scholar
  21. Péron, J.Y., E. Demaure & C. Hamnetel, 1989. Les posibilités d'introduction et de development de Solanacées et de Cucurbitacées d'origine tropicale en France. Acta Hort 242: 179–186.Google Scholar
  22. Pluda, D., H.D. Rabinovitch & U. Kafkafi, 1993. Pepino dulce (Solanum muricatum Ait.) quality characteristics respond to nitrogen nutrition and salinity. J Amer Soc Hort Sci 118: 86–91.Google Scholar
  23. Prohens, J. & F. Nuez, 1999. Strategies for breeding a new greenhouse crop, the pepino (Solanum muricatum). Can J Plant Sci 79: 269–275.Google Scholar
  24. Prohens, J., J.J. Ruiz & F. Nuez, 1996. The pepino (Solanum muricatum, Solanaceae): A “new” crop with a history. Econ Bot 50: 355–368.Google Scholar
  25. Prohens, J., J.J. Ruiz & F. Nuez, 1998. The inheritance of parthenocarpy and associated traits in the pepino. J Amer Soc Hort Sci 123: 376–380.Google Scholar
  26. Prohens, J., J.J. Ruiz & F. Nuez, 1999. Yield, earliness and fruit quality of pepino clones and their hybrids in the autumn-winter cycle. J Sci Food Agr 79: 340–346.Google Scholar
  27. Prohens, J., M. Leiva-Brondo, A. Rodríguez-Burruezo & F. Nuez, 2002. ‘Puzol’: A facultatively parthenocarpic hybrid of pepino (Solanum muricatum). HortScience 37: 418–419.Google Scholar
  28. Rodríguez-Burruezo, A., 2003. Utilización de la variación intraespecífica e interespecífica para la mejora genética del rendimiento y la calidad del pepino dulce (Solanum muricatum). Ph.D. Thesis, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Valencia.Google Scholar
  29. Ruiz, J.J. & F. Nuez, 1991. Relación entre algunas características florales y el cuajado de frutos en pera-melón (Solanum muricatum Ait.). Actas Horticultura 8: 337–342.Google Scholar
  30. Ruiz, J.J., J. Prohens & F. Nuez, 1997. ‘Sweet Round’ and ‘Sweet Long’: Two pepino cultivars for Mediterranean climates. HortScience 32: 751–752.Google Scholar
  31. Sakamoto, K. & T. Taguchi, 1991. Regeneration of intergeneric somatic hybrid plants between Lycopersicon esculentum and Solanum muricatum Theor Appl Genet 81: 509–513.Google Scholar
  32. Spooner, D.M., G.J. Anderson & R.K. Jansen, 1993. Chloroplast DNA evidence for the interrelationships of tomatoes, potatoes, and pepinos (Solanaceae). Amer J Bot 80: 676–688.Google Scholar
  33. Stiefkens, L., G. Bernardello & G.J. Anderson, 1999. Karyotypic studies in artificial hybrids of Solanum Sections Anarrhichomenum and Basarthrum (Solanaceae). Aust J Bot 47: 147–155.Google Scholar
  34. Trognitz, F. & B. Trognitz, 2004. Mapping genes of Solanum caripense involved in resistance to Phytophthora infestans, the causal agent of potato late blight. In: J. Vollmann, H. Grausgruber & P. Ruckenbauer (Eds.), Genetic Variation for Plant Breeding, pp. 249–253. EUCARPIA & BOKU – University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna.Google Scholar
  35. Wricke, G. & W. Weber, 1986. Quantitative Genetics and Selection in Plant Breeding. De Gruyter, Berlin.Google Scholar
  36. Wright, S., 1968. Evolution and Genetics of Populations, Vol 1: Genetics and Biometric Foundations. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  37. Xiao, J., J. Li, L. Yuan, S.R. McCouch & S.D. Tanksley, 1996. Genetic diversity and its relationships to hybrid performance and heterosis in rice as revealed by PCR-based markers. Theor Appl Gen 92: 637–43.Google Scholar
  38. Zhang, Q., Y.J. Gao, S.H. Yang, R.A. Ragab, M.A. Saghai-Maroof & Z.B. Li, 1994. A diallel analysis of heterosis in elite hybrid rice based on RFLPs and microsatellites. Theor Appl Gen 89: 185–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zhao, M.F., X.H. Li, J.B. Yang, C.G. Xu, R.Y. Hu, D.J. Liu & Q. Zhang, 1999. Relationship between molecular marker heterozygosity and hybrid performance in intra- and inter-subspecific crosses of rice. Plant Breed 118: 139–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jaime Prohens
    • 1
  • Adrián Rodríguez-Burruezo
    • 2
  • Fernando Nuez
    • 1
  1. 1.Instituto para la Conservación y Mejora de la Agrodiversidad ValencianaUniversidad Politécnica de ValenciaValenciaSpain
  2. 2.Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones AgrariasMoncadaSpain

Personalised recommendations