Natural Halophytes as a Potential Resource for New Salt-Tolerant Crops: Some Progress and Prospects

  • G. Fred Somers
Part of the Environmental Science Research book series (ESRH, volume 14)


The desirability of salt-tolerant terrestrial crops has been recognized for some time. The vast areas of the world which are essentially unproductive of food crops because of the high salinity of the water and or soil which characterize them have long challenged man to find ways to utilize them to meet his needs for food and fiber. Historically the production of these staples has been dependent upon a supply of fresh water. Recently the supply of this resource has become ever more critical as populations and technologies continue to expand. The problem with respect to crop production was stated succintly by Flowers et al. (1977):

To plant life, salinity is just one inimical factor of the environment. To man, salinity creates a problem due to its effects on his crops which are predominantly sensitive to the presence of high concentrations of salts in the soil.


Salt Marsh Salt Tolerance Saline Water Tide Marsh Potential Resource 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bernstein, Leon. 1964, Salt tolerance of plants. U.S. Department of Agriculture Inf. Bull. 283.Google Scholar
  2. Bernstein, Leon. 1975. Problems in managing saline soils. In Seed-bearing halophytes as food plants. Proceedings of a conference, G.F. Somers (ed.), DEL-SG-3-75 College of Marine Studies, Univ. of Delaware, Newark: 120–133.Google Scholar
  3. Boyko, H. (ed.). 1966. Salinity and Aridity: A new approach to old problems. W. Junk, the Hague.Google Scholar
  4. Boyko, H. (ed.). 1968. Saline Irrigation for Agriculture and Forestry. Proceedings of the international symposium on plant growing with saline or sea-water without desalination. W. Junk, The Hague.Google Scholar
  5. Bronowski, J. 1969. The impact of new science. In The environment of change. A.W. Warner, D. Morse and T.E. Cooney (eds.), Columbia University Press, NY: 67–95.Google Scholar
  6. Broome, S.W., W.W. Woodhouse Jr., and E.D. Seneca. 1974. Propagation of smooth cordgrass, Spartina alterniflora, from seed in North CarolinaGoogle Scholar
  7. Chapman, V.J. 1975. Terrestrial halophytes as potential food plants. In Seed-bearing halophytes as food plants. Proceedings of a conference, G.F. Somers (ed.), DEL-SG-3-75, College of Marine Studies, Univ. of Delaware, Newark: 75–87.Google Scholar
  8. Chase, A. 1950. Manual of the grasses of the United States, 2nd rev. ed. (A.S. Hitchcock, 1935 ). Dover pubi., New York, Reprint 1971.Google Scholar
  9. Daiber, F. C. 1974. Salt marsh plants and future coastal salt marshes in relation to animals. In R.J. Reimold and W.H. Queen (eds.), Ecology of Halophytes, Academic Press, NY: 475–508.Google Scholar
  10. Epstein, E. 1975. Mineral Nutrition of Plants: Principles and Perspectives. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Epstein, E. 1977. Genetic potentials for solving problems of soil mineral stress: Adaptation of crops to salinity. In Proceedings of a workshop on plant adaptation to mineral stress, M.J. Wright (ed.) Cornell Univ. Agr. Expt. Station Special Bull: 73–82.Google Scholar
  12. Epstein, E. and R.L. Jeffries. 1964. The genetic basis of selective ion transport in plants. Ann. Review Plant Physiol. 15: 169–184.Google Scholar
  13. Epstein, E., J. D. Norlyn. 1977. Sea-water based crop production: A feasibility study. Science 197: 249–251.Google Scholar
  14. Fernald, M. L. 1950. Gray’s Manual of Botany. 8th ed. Corrected printing 1970. VanNostrand Co., New York.Google Scholar
  15. Flowers,T. J., P. F. Troke, A. R. Yeo. 1977. The mechanism of salt tolerance in halophytes. Ann. Review Plant Physiol. 28: 89–121.Google Scholar
  16. Garbisch, E. W. 1976. Spartina alterniflora seed collections in the vicinity of Branford Harbor, Conn, and various seed characteristics tests and comparisons. Environmental Concern Inc., St. Michaels, MD.Google Scholar
  17. Gleason, H. A. 1952. The New Britton and Brown Illustrated Flora of the Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada. Hafner Pubi. Co., New York and London.Google Scholar
  18. Handler, P. (ed.). 1970. Biology and the Future of Man. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Haslam, S. M. 1972. Biology flora of the British isles. Phragmites communis Trin. J. Ecology 60: 585–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heiser, C. B., Jr. 1973. Seed to civilization: The story of man’s food Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  21. Kirby, C. J., J. G. Gosselink. 1976. Primary production in a Louisiana Gulf Coast Spartina alterniflora marsh. Ecology 57: 1052–1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lopez, J. G. 1973. Evolution of protein quality of Quinoa by protein efficiency ratio, biological values and amino acid composition. M.S. thesis, Utah State University, Logan, Utah.Google Scholar
  23. Maas, E. V. G. J. Hoffman. 1977. Crop salt tolerance; Evaluation of existing data. In Managing Saline Water for Irrigation, H.E. Dregne (ed.), Proceedings of international salinity conference, Texas Tech Univ., Lubbock, TX: 187–198.Google Scholar
  24. Marten, G. C., R. N. Andersen. 1975. Forage nutritive value and palatibility of 12 common annual weeds. Crop Science 15: 821–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mason, H.L. 1969. A Flora of the Marshes of California. Univ. of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  26. Mooring, M. T., A. W. Cooper, E. D. Seneca. 1971. Seed germination response and evidence for height ecophenes in Spartina alterniflora from North Carolina. Amer. J. Bot. 58: 48–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mudie, P.J. 1974. The potential economic uses of halophytes. In Ecology of Halophytes, R.J. Reimold and W.H. Queen (eds.), Academic Press, New York: 565–597.Google Scholar
  28. Nabors, M. W. 1976. The use of spontaneously occurring and induced mutations to obtain agriculturally useful plants. Bioscience 26: 761–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Oelke, E. A. 1975. Wild rice domestication as a model. In Seed-bearing halophytes as food plants. Proceedings of a conference, G. F.Somers (ed.), DEL-SG-3-75 College of Marine Studies, Univ. of Delaware, Newark: 47–56.Google Scholar
  30. O’Leary, J.W. 1975. Potential for adapting present crops to saline habitats. In Seed-bearing halophytes as food plants: Proceedings of a conference, G.F. Somers (ed.),DEL-SG-3-75 College of Marine Studies, Univ. of Delaware, Newark: 91–114.Google Scholar
  31. Parrondo, R. T., J. G. Gosselink, and C.S. Hopkinson. 1978. Effects of salinity and drainage on the growth of three salt marsh grasses. Bot. Gaz. 139: 102–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pihl, K., D. M. Grant, G. F. Somers. 1978. Germination of seeds of selected coastal plants. Del-SG-11-78, College of Marine Studies, Univ. of Delaware, Newark.Google Scholar
  33. Rains,D.W. 1972. Salt transport by plants in relation to salinity. Ann. Review Plant Physiol. 23: 367–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rains, D. W. E. Epstein. 1967. Preferential absorption of potassium by leaf tissue of the mangrove, Avicennia marina: An aspect of halophytic competence in coping with salt. Austr. J. Biol. Sci. 20: 847–857.Google Scholar
  35. Ranwell, D. S. 1972. Ecology of Salt Marshes and Sand Dunes. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
  36. Reimold, R. J., R. A. Linthurst. 1977. Primary productivity of minor marsh plants in Delaware, Georgia and Maine. Technical Report D-77-36, U.S. Army Corps, of Engr., Waterways Expt. Station, Vicksburk, MS.Google Scholar
  37. Richards, L. A. (ed.). 1954. Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils. U. S. Dept. Agr. Handbook No. 60.Google Scholar
  38. Rush, D. W., E. Epstein. 1976. Genotypic responses to salinity: Differences between salt-sensitive and salt-tolerant genotypes of the tomato. Plant Physiol. 57: 162–166.Google Scholar
  39. Shreve, F. and I.L. Wiggins. 1964. Vegetation and flora of the Sonoran Desert, Vols. I and I I. Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  40. Smith, B. N., E. Epstein. 1971. Two categories of C13/C12 ratios for higher plants. Plant Physiol. 47: 380–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Somers, G. F. (ed.). 1975. Seed-bearing halophytes as food plants. Proceedings of a conference: DEL–SG–3–75, College of Marine Studies, Univ. of Delaware, Newark.Google Scholar
  42. Somers, G. F. (ed.). 1975. Seed-bearing halophytes as food plants. Proceedings of a conference: DEL–SG–3–75, College of Marine Studies, Univ. of Delaware, Newark.Google Scholar
  43. Somers, G.F., D.M. Grant, and R.D. Smith. 1978. Domestication of halophytes as potential crops for food and/or feed or for marsh improvement: Summary of progress 1974–1977. DEL-SG-12-78, College of Marine Studies, Univ. of Delaware, Newark.Google Scholar
  44. Squiers, E.R. and R.E. Good. 1974. Seasonal changes in the productivity, caloric content and chemical composition of a population of salt marsh cord-grass ( Spartina alterniflora ). Chesapeake Sci. 15: 63–71Google Scholar
  45. Vietmeyer, N.D. (Study Staff director). 1975. Underexpolited Tropical Plants with Promising Economic Value. Natfl. Acad. Sci., Wash., DC.Google Scholar
  46. Waisel, Y. 1972. Biology of Halophytes. Academic Press, NY.Google Scholar
  47. Walsh, G.E. 1974. Mangroves: A review. In R.J. Reimold and W.H. Queen (eds.). Ecology of Halophytes, Academic Press, NY: 51–174.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Fred Somers
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Life and Health SciencesUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA
  2. 2.College of Marine StudiesUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations