Paper · 1981 · Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science

Breeding and Selection for Salt Tolerance by the Incorporation of Wild Germplasm into a Domestic Tomato1

Dale W. Rush; Emanuel Epstein

3
claims
6
verbatim quotes
70
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

Abstract Crosses were made between a salt tolerant wild tomato [ Lycopersicon cheesmanii ssp. minor (Hook) C. H. Mull.] and a domestic cultivar (L. esculentum Mill. cv. Walter). Selections were made from resulting progenies for salinity tolerance at germination, seedling establishment, and the reproductive stage of their life cycle. The selected progenies were tested for survival and fruit production in salinized solution culture experiments, and in field greenhouse trials where they were irrigated with various dilutions of seawater applied to sand. Salt tolerance was shown to be a heritable trait. Plants selected from the F 2 and successive backcrosses to ‘Walter’ survived and produced fruit when irrigated with up to 70% seawater in the sandy soil culture trials, whereas ‘Walter’ did not survive.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 3

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Salt tolerance was shown to be heritable in tomato progenies.

Outcome
Salt tolerance was shown to be a heritable traite0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Salt tolerance was shown to be a heritable trait”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 556–604 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 97–103 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Selected F2 and backcross tomato plants survived irrigation with up to 70% seawater, whereas Walter did not survive.

Material
F 2 and successive backcrossese0
Treatment
irrigated with up to 70% seawatere0
Outcome
survivede0
Value
70% seawatere0
Comparator
‘Walter’e0
Setting
sandy soil culture trialse0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Plants selected from the F 2 and successive backcrosses to ‘Walter’ survived and produced fruit when irrigated with up to 70% seawater in the sandy soil culture trials, whereas ‘Walter’ did not survive”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 606–807 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 97–103 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Selected F2 and backcross tomato plants produced fruit under up to 70% seawater irrigation.

Material
F 2 and successive backcrossese0
Treatment
irrigated with up to 70% seawatere0
Outcome
produced fruite0
Value
70% seawatere0
Comparator
‘Walter’e0
Setting
sandy soil culture trialse0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Plants selected from the F 2 and successive backcrosses to ‘Walter’ survived and produced fruit when irrigated with up to 70% seawater in the sandy soil culture trials, whereas ‘Walter’ did not survive”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 606–807 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 97–103 · show in text ↑

irrigation · survival · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.