Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of the Differences in the Agronomic Traits and Phytochemical Contents in Three Popular Tropical Tomato Cultivars

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, India Section B: Biological Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) is highly popular because of its versatility and the nutrient content of the fruit. Three tropical tomato cultivars; “Red Rock”, “Super Star”, and “Tropical” grown in controlled greenhouse conditions, were investigated to ascertain the influence of cultivar on the agronomic traits and phytochemical contents of fruits. Wide ranges of variation were found between cultivars for plant height, flower and fruit yield. Flowers of each cultivar varied in numbers of sepal and petals (5–6), style length (6.95–7.52 mm) and pollen size (20.64–28.81 µm) with ovary locules varying from three (Super Star) to five (Tropical). Tropical showed the highest fruit weight (fresh weight; 1.67–2.29-fold) and area (1.12–1.21-fold) compared to Red Rock and Super Star. Super Star showed the highest antioxidant (1.03–1.05-fold), total phenol (1.49–1.63-fold), total flavonoid (1.10–1.23-fold), total anthocyanin (1.86–3.48-fold) and lycopene content (2.22–1.05-fold) compared to Red Rock and Tropical. Red Rock showed the highest total sugar (2.16–4.45-fold) and Tropical (1.53–1.19-fold) showed the highest ascorbic acid content. PCA analysis of ten measured traits showed 92.27% of the total variability and a strong correlation between fruit characteristics and phytochemical properties. Total phenol, total flavonoid, antioxidant activity and total anthocyanins showed a positive correlation with each other and a negative correlation with ascorbic acid content and fruit weight. Total flavonoids and total sugar were positively correlated with each other and negatively correlated with lycopene and fruit weight. PCA showed a strong association of phytochemical properties with fruit characteristics. This study can serve as a reference for trait-based breeding studies in tomatoes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. FAOSTAT (2021) FAOSTAT. Accessed Feb 2022 from https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL/visualize

  2. Guan Z, Biswas T, Wu F (2017) The US tomato industry: An overview of production and trade, Uni of Florida:1

  3. IMARC (2021) Tomato Processing Market: Global Industry Trends, Share, Size, Growth, Opportunity and Forecast 2022–2027. Accessed Feb 2022 from https://www.imarcgroup.com/tomato-processing-plant

  4. Gonzali S, Perata P (2020) Anthocyanins from purple tomatoes as novel antioxidants to promote human health. Antioxidants 9:1017

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Forcada CF, Gogorcena Y, Moreno MA (2013) Fruit sugar profile and antioxidants of peach and nectarine cultivars on almond× peach hybrid rootstocks. Sci Hortic 164:563–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Beckles DM (2012) Factors affecting the postharvest soluble solids and sugar content of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) fruit. Postharvest Biol Technol 63:129–140

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Llauradó Maury G, Méndez Rodríguez D, Hendrix S, Escalona Arranz JC, Fung Boix Y, Pacheco AO, García Díaz J, Morris-Quevedo HJ, Ferrer Dubois A, Aleman EI, Beenaerts N (2020) Antioxidants in plants: A valorization potential emphasizing the need for the conservation of plant biodiversity in Cuba. Antioxidants 9(11):1048

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Agarwal S, Rao AV (2000) Tomato lycopene and its role in human health and chronic diseases. Can Med Assoc J 163:39–744

    Google Scholar 

  9. Xu X, Li J, Wang X, Wang S, Meng S, Zhu Y, Liang Z, Zheng X, Xie L (2016) Tomato consumption and prostate cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep 6:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  10. Schneider CA, Rasband WS, Eliceiri KW (2012) NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods 9:671–675

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Shahidi F, Chavan UD, Naczk M, Amarowicz R (2001) Nutrient distribution and phenolic antioxidants in air-classified fractions of beach pea (Lathyrus maritimus L.). J Agric Food Chem 49:926–933

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Elbadrawy E, Sello A (2016) Evaluation of nutritional value and antioxidant activity of tomato peel extracts. Arab J Chem 9:S1010–S1018

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Karadeniz F, Burdurlu HS, Koca N, Soyer Y (2005) Antioxidant activity of selected fruits and vegetables grown in Turkey. Turk J Agric Forest 29(4):297–303

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Di Stefano R, Cravero MC, Gentilini N (1989) Metodi per lo studio dei polifenoli dei vini. L’enotecnico 25:83–89

    Google Scholar 

  15. Iriti M, Rossoni M, Borgo M, Ferrara L, Faoro F (2005) Induction of resistance to gray mold with benzothiadiazole modifies amino acid profile and increases proanthocyanidins in grape: primary versus secondary metabolism. J Agric Food Chem 53:9133–9139

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Elgailani IEH, Elkareem MAMG, Noh E, Adam O, Alghamdi A (2017) Comparison of two methods for the determination of vitamin C (ascorbic acid) in some fruits. Am J Chem 2:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Zanini DJ, Silva MH, Oliveira EA, Mazalli MR, Kamimura ES, Maldonado RR (2018) Spectrophotometric analysis of vitamin C in different matrices utilizing potassium permanganate. Eur J Sci Theol 7:70–84

    Google Scholar 

  18. Martínez-Valverde I, Periago MJ, Provan G, Chesson A (2002) Phenolic compounds, lycopene and antioxidant activity in commercial varieties of tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum). J Sci Food Agric 82:23–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Albalasmeh AA, Berhe AA, Ghezzehei TAA (2013) new method for rapid determination of carbohydrate and total carbon concentrations using UV spectrophotometry. Carbohydr Polym 97:253–261

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Abdi H, Williams LJ (2010) Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) test. Encycl Res Des 3:1–5

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kazmi RH, Khan N, Willems LA, Van Heusden AW, Ligterink W, Hilhorst HW (2012) Complex genetics controls natural variation among seed quality phenotypes in a recombinant inbred population of an interspecific cross between Solanum lycopersicum x Solanum pimpinellifolium. Plant Cell Environ 35:929–951

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Akinfasoye J, Dotun A, Ogunniyan J, Ajayi EO (2011) Phenotypic relationship among agronomic characters of commercial tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum) hybrids. Am-Eurasian J Agron 4:17–22

    Google Scholar 

  23. Aguilar R, Bernardello G, Galetto L (2002) Pollen–pistil relationships and pollen size-number trade-off in species of the tribe Lycieae (Solanaceae). J Plant Res 115:335–340

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bedinger PA, Chetelat RT, McClure B, Moyle LC, Rose JK, Stack SM, van der Knaap E, Baek YS, Lopez-Casado G, Covey PA, Kumar A (2011) Interspecific reproductive barriers in the tomato clade: opportunities to decipher mechanisms of reproductive isolation. Sex Plant Reprod 24:171–187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rodríguez GR, Moyseenko JB, Robbins MD, Morejón NH, Francis DM, van der Knaap E (2010) Tomato Analyzer: a useful software application to collect accurate and detailed morphological and colorimetric data from two-dimensional objects. J Vis Exp 37:e1856

    Google Scholar 

  26. Muños S, Ranc N, Botton E, Bérard A, Rolland S, Duffé P, Carretero Y, Le Paslier MC, Delalande C, Bouzayen M, Brunel D (2011) Increase in tomato locule number is controlled by two single-nucleotide polymorphisms located near WUSCHEL. Plant Physiol 156:2244–2254

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Chu YH, Jang JC, Huang Z, van der Knaap E (2019) Tomato locule number and fruit size controlled by natural alleles of lc and fas. Plant Direct 3:e00142

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Georgelis N, Scott JW, Baldwin EA (2004) Relationship of tomato fruit sugar concentration with physical and chemical traits and linkage of RAPD markers. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 129:839–845

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Romeo R, Bruno AD, Piscopo A, Medina E, Ramírez E, Brenes M, Poiana M (2020) Effects of phenolic enrichment on vitamin C and antioxidant activity of commercial orange juice. Braz J Food Technol 27:23

    Google Scholar 

  30. Socaci SA, Socaciu C, Mureşan C, Fărcaş A, Tofană M, Vicaş S, Pintea A (2014) Chemometric discrimination of different tomato cultivars based on their volatile fingerprint in relation to lycopene and total phenolics content. Phytochem Anal 25:161–169

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme FP005-2020 (FRGS/1/2020/STG03/UM/02/1) and CEBAR Research University Grants (Project No.: RU004D-2020)

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Research in Biotechnology for Agriculture, Universiti Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    Jing Herng Khor, Gwo Rong Wong, Jennifer Ann Harikrishna, Sima Taheri & Purabi Mazumdar

  2. Faculty of Science, Universiti Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    Jing Herng Khor & Jennifer Ann Harikrishna

Authors
  1. Jing Herng Khor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gwo Rong Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jennifer Ann Harikrishna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sima Taheri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Purabi Mazumdar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Purabi Mazumdar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Significance Statement: Agronomic traits and phytochemical contents are valuable attributes for breeding plant lines with desirable traits. We explored association between different agronomic traits (plant height, leaf number, yield, fruit weight, reproductive phenology) and phytochemical contents (total phenols, flavonoid, anthocyanin, lycopene, ascorbic acid, total sugar and DPPH inhibition activity) of tomato cultivars, which can serve as a reference for trait-based breeding studies in tomatoes.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khor, J.H., Wong, G.R., Harikrishna, J.A. et al. Assessment of the Differences in the Agronomic Traits and Phytochemical Contents in Three Popular Tropical Tomato Cultivars. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., India, Sect. B Biol. Sci. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40011-024-01574-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40011-024-01574-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation