Plant and Soil

, Volume 99, Issue 1, pp 17–29 | Cite as

Advances in salt tolerance

  • Emanuel Epstein
  • D. W. Rains


Advances in and prospects for the development of salt tolerant crops are discussed. The genetic approach to the salinity problem is fairly new, but research has become quite active in a short span of time. Difficulties and opportunities are outlined. Salinity varies spatially, temporally, qualitatively, and quantitatively. In addition, the responses of plants to salt stress vary during their life cycle. Selection and breeding, including the use of wide crosses, are considered the best short-term approaches to the development of salt tolerant crops, but the new biotechnological and molecular biological techniques will make increasingly important contributions. Cooperation is called for among soil and water scientists, agronomists, plant physiologists and biochemists, cytologists, and plant geneticists, breeders, and biotechnologists. Given such cooperation and adequate support for these endeavors, the potential for increasing productivity in salt-affected areas can be realized.

Key words

Cell culture Molecular biology Plant breeding Salinity Seawater Selection 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Croughan T P 1981 The application of cell culture techniques to the selection and study of salt tolerance. Ph.D. Diss. University of California, Davis.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deverel S J, Gilliom R J, Fujii R, Izbicki J A, Fields J C 1984 Areal Distribution of Selenium and Other Inorganic Constituents in Shallow Groundwater of the San Luis Drain Service Area, San Joaquin Valley, California: A Preliminary Study. U. S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 84-4319. Sacramento, California.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dvorák J, Ross K, Mendlinger S 1985 Transfer of salt tolerance fromElytrigia pontica (Podp.) Holub to wheat by the addition of an incompleteElytrigia genome. Crop Sci. 25, 306–309.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Epstein E 1977 Adaptation of crops to salinity.In Plant Adaptation to Mineral Stress in Problem Soils. Ed M J Wright. A Special Publication of Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, Ithaca, N.Y., pp 73–82.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Epstein E 1981 Impact of Applied Genetics on Agriculturally Important Plants: Mineral Metabolism. Report to the Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress. Department of Land, Air and Water Resources, University of California, Davis. 42 p.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Epstein E 1985 Salt-tolerant crops: origins, development, and prospects of the concept. Plant and Soil 89, 187–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Epstein E, Norlyn J D, Rush D W, Kingsbury R W, Kelley D B, Cunningham G A, Wrona A F 1980 Saline culture of crops: a genetic approach. Science 210, 399–404.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Frey K J 1985 The unifying force in agronomy — biotechnology. Agron. J. 77, 187–189.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gottschalk W 1981 Mutation: higher plants. Progress in Botany 43, 139–152.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harvey P H 1939 Hereditary variation in plant nutrition. Genetics 24, 437–461.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jones R A, Qualset C O 1984 Breeding crops for environmental tolerance.In Application of Genetic Engineering to Crop Improvement. Eds. G B Collins and J G Petolino. Martinus Nijhoff/Dr W Junk, Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 305–340.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kleinhofs A, Warner R L, Muehlbauer R J, Nilan R A 1978 Induction and selection of specific gene mutations inHordeum andPisum. Mutation Res 51, 29–42.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maliga P 1984 Isolation and characterization of mutants in plant cell cultures. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 35, 519–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Meins F Jr. 1983 Heritable variation in plant cell culture. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 34, 327–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Muller A J, Grafe R 1978 Isolation and characterization of cell lines ofNicotiana tabacum lacking nitrate reductase. Molec. Gen. 161, 67–76.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Murphy T M 1982 Analysis of distributions of mutants in clones of plant-cell aggregates. Theor. Appl. Genet. 61, 367–372.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nabors M W, Gibbs S E, Bernstein C S, Meis, M E 1980 NaCl-tolerant tobacco plants from cultured cells. Z. Pflanzenphysiol. 97, 13–17.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Papadopoulos I Rendig V V 1983 Tomato plant response to soil salinity. Agron. J. 75, 696–700.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rains D W, Croughan T P, Stavarek S J 1980 Selection of salt-tolerant plants using tissue culture.In Genetic Engineering of Osmoregulation. Impact on Plant Productivity for Food, Chemicals, and Energy. Eds. D W Rains, R C Valentine and A Hollaender. Plenum Press, New York, pp 279–292.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ram N V R, Nabors M W 1986 Salinity tolerance.In Biotechnology Application and Research. Eds. P N Cheremissinoss and R P Ouellette. pp 623–642. Technomic Publications, Inc., Lancaster.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Richards R A 1983 Should selection for yield in saline regions be made on saline or non-saline soils? Euphytica 32, 431–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Richards R A, Dennett C W, Qualset C O, Epstein E, Norlyn J D, Winslow M D 1986 Variation in yield of grain and biomass in wheat, barley, and triticale in a salt-affected field. Field Crops Res.In press.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rush D W, Epstein E 1981 Breeding and selection for salt tolerance by the incorporation of wild germplasm into a domestic tomato. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 106, 699–704.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schell J, Van Montagu M, Holsters M, Depicker A, Zambryski P, Dhaese P, Hernalsteens J-P, Leemans J, De Greve H, Willmitzer L, Otten L, Schröder J and Schröder G 1982 Plant cell transformations and genetic engineering.In Plant Improvement and Somatic Cell Genetics. Eds. I K Vasil, W R Scowcroft, K J Frey. Academic Press, New York, pp 255–276.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schieder O 1982 Somatic hybridization: A new method for plant improvement.In Plant Improvement and Somatic Cell Genetics. Eds. I K Vasil, W R Scowcroft, K J Frey. Academic Press, New York, pp 150–178.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Scowcroft W R, Larkin, P J 1982 Somaclonal variation: A new option for plant improvement.In Plant Improvement and Somatic Cell Genetics. Eds. I K Vasil, W R Scowcroft, K J Frey. Academic Press, New York, pp 159–178.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shannon M C 1984 Breeding, selection, and the genetics of salt tolerance.In Salinity Tolerance in Plants. Strategies for Crop Improvement. Eds. R C Staples and G H Toeniessen. John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp 231–254.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shephard J F, Bidney D, Shahin E 1980 Potato protoplasts in crop improvement. Science 208, 17–24.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stavarek S J, Croughan T P, Rains D W 1980 Regeneration of plants from long-term cultures of alfalfa cells. Plant Sci. Letters 19, 253–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stavarek S J, D W Rains 1984 The development of tolerance to mineral stress. Hort Sci. 19, 377–382.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sybena J 1983 Genetic manipulation in plant breeding: somatic versus generative. Theor. Appl. Genet. 66, 179–201.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wong C, Ko S, Woo S 1983 Regeneration of rice plantlets on NaCl-stressed medium by anther culture. Bot. Bull. Acad. Sinica 24, 59–64.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yeatman C W, Kafton D, Wilkes G, Eds 1984 Plant Genetic Resources. A Conservation Imperative. American Association for the Advancement of Science Selected Symposium Series. Vol. 87. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emanuel Epstein
    • 1
  • D. W. Rains
    • 1
  1. 1.Departments of Land, Air and Water Resources, and of Agronomy and Range ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations