Heterotic Pattern Involving Rin, Nor and Alc Alleles for Yield and Quality Traits in Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)

Abstract

An investigation on tomato was conducted at PAU, Ludhiana during 2020-21 with an objective of developing hybrids possessing maximum harvesting span with desirable horticultural traits. Experimental material, comprised of 56 F1 hybrids, 18 parental lines and standard check ‘PTH-2’, were transplanted in randomized complete block design in three replicates. Evaluation for all the experimental material was carried out during main as well as spring season. Cross combinations viz., PAU 114×nor-RM-1, PAU 2381×nor-RM-1 in main season while, crosses LT-44×rin-Rutgers, PAU 2381×rin-Rutgers in spring season recorded significant heterobeltosis and heterosis over check for yield and quality traits. Out of 56 hybrids, CLN1621L×alc-IIHR-2050, LT-44×rin-Rutgers in main as well as spring season, PAU 2381×nor-RM-1, Leader×nor-RM-1, LT-42×alc-IIHR-2050 and Roma×nor-RM-1 in main season and PAU 2381×rin-Rutgers, FL-556×rin-Rutgers, FL-556×alc-IIHR-2050 and LT-44×alc-IIHR-2050 in spring season were best for prolonged harvesting span vis-à-vis fruit yield, weight, minimum days from transplanting to first harvest, pericarp thickness, lycopene content, dry matter, TSS and titrable acidity. Therefore, the hybrid crosses which expressed higher yield potential in addition with acceptable qualitative performance together with maximum harvesting span could be utilized for commercial exploitation.

Keywords:
Ripening mutant; combining ability; heterosis

HIGHLIGHTS

• The heteroticpattern for yield and quality traits in tomato were assessed in two environmental conditions.

• Simultaneously, ripening genes i.e. rin, nor and alc genes were studied to prolong harvesting span.

• Out of 56 tomato hybrids, CLN1621L×alc-IIHR-2050 and LT-44×rin-Rutgers crosses were found best in main and spring season.

INTRODUCTION

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.), belongs to the family Solanaceae. It is one of the most widely cultivated as well as consumed vegetable crop in the world due to its nutritive value, versatile uses, processability and identical flavour. Tomato referred as “Poor man’s orange” and “Protective Food” due to its special nutritive importance. It is a rich source of vitamin-A, vitamin-C, potassium, folate, minerals, lycopene, flavonoids, antioxidants and organic acids [¹; ²]. Cultivated tomato is native of South America and it was introduced in India during the early 16th century by the Portuguese. It is well acclimatized under different climatic conditions due to its greater genetic variability and flowering behaviour. Therefore, leads to the development of infinite hybrids as well as open-pollinated varieties having special use and characteristics. In India, tomato is the leading processed vegetable and the third most important vegetable crop after potato and onion, while second in the world after potato. Tomato is used as raw in salad, sandwiches etc. and in processed forms like puree, sauce, chutney, soup, ketchup etc [³]. However, the postharvest shelf-life of tomato fruit is less due to its high perishable nature. To prolong postharvest availability, fruits are picked at the mature greenish stage but the quality of tomato is reduced as compared to those ripe on the plant itself [⁴]. If tomatoes are harvested in the full red ripe maturity stage, then fruits are marketable for four to six days under ambient room temperature [⁵; ⁶]. In the plains of north-western India, the main-season tomato crop raised from late November to early December and gives fruits for a short interval of time from late April to mid-May [⁷]. At many times the occurrence of heavy frost in December-January causing more loss in the main-season crop results in forcing growers to replant the crop in the late season. So, there is a need to develop tomato hybrids that delay ripening related processes and extend fruit availability up to the end of spring season.

A few ripening mutant alleles have been identified which interfere with the ripening related processes of tomato fruit which are slow ripening alcobaca (alc), non-ripening (nor), ripening inhibitor (rin), colourless non-ripening (Cnr), never ripe (Nr) and Green ripe (Gr) [⁸; ⁹; ¹⁰]. In heterozygous condition, these mutants extend the fruit availability period of tomato by delaying the ripening process also gives acceptable flavor and colour [¹¹]. Mutant alleles shows reduced fruit deterioration process and resistance against post-harvest disease, which jointly resulted into excellent shelf life. Fruits from heterozygote plant for these mutants exhibit extended postharvest shelf-life by 250-500 per cent than other normal cultivars [¹²]. F1 hybrids containing these mutant alleles relatively takes more number of days from mature green to fully ripe stage as compared to the normal cultivars [¹³]. In north Indian parts, these mutant alleles shows extended fruit availability period by delaying ripening process of fruits on the plant [¹¹; ¹⁴]. Heterozygous hybrids from these mutant alleles perform more uniformly in diverse environments as well as in stress condition than homozygous, this property discussed as a ‘physiological homeostasis’ [¹⁵]. Therefore, heterozygous F1 hybrids for these mutant alleles are a key solution to reduce the post-harvest losses and increase fruit availability period to a greater extent than other normal genotypes. Fruits from rin heterozygotes extended initiation of ripening and further proceeds very slowly as compared to normal cultivars [¹⁶]. Fruits softening also delayed when nor mutant appeared in heterozygous condition [¹⁷]. Studies by Mutschler [¹⁸] on alc and Kopeliovitch and coauthors [¹⁹] on rin and nor indicated the potential of exploiting mutant alleles in heterozygous condition to extend the availability period of tomatoes. Utilization and development of cultivars and lines by using rin, nor and alc with delayed ripening has been allowed in the traditional breeding [²⁰]. So, our main goal of the research is production hybrid cross combinations of tomato which have extended maturity and good quality parameters acceptable by end-users through evaluation of hybrids.

METHOD AND MATERIALS

The present research programme was conducted at Vegetable Research Farm, Department of Vegetable Science, Punjab Agricultural University Ludhiana, India, during 2019-2020 and 2020-2021. The location of research field is 30° 55' north latitude, 75° 54' east longitude with an altitude of 247 m from mean sea level. Soil texture was sandy loam. The material for the current experiment consisted fourteen genetically diverse lines viz. SMZ-867, CLN 1621L, PAU 114, FL-556, PAU 2381, LT-44, Punjab Ratta, Roma, LT-42, LST-17, LST-6, Leader, Malintka and Spectrum. All lines were procured from PAU, Ludhiana except Roma, Leader, Malintka and Spectrum from USA and CLN 1621L from AVRDC, Taiwan. Four testers of ripening mutants viz. alc-IIHR-2050, nor-RM-1, rin-Rutgers and Olive Green (gene unidentified) (rin-Rutgers from USA, alc-IIHR-2050 from IIHR, Bengaluru, nor-RM-1 and Olive Green procured from PAU, Ludhiana); 56 F₁ hybrids and one standard check PTH-2 (Punjab Tomato Hybrid-2 from PAU, Ludhiana). The mean performance of parents and hybrids has been given in Table 2 and Table 3, respectively.

The fifty-six F1 cross breds were developed using line x tester mating design [²¹] by crossing between fourteen lines and four testers during February-March, 2020. The experimental material including 56 F₁ hybrids, 18 parental lines and one standard check ‘PTH-2’ had been sown in the well-developed nursery beds for raising seedlings on October 30, 2020 for main season (E₁) and on January 19, 2021 for spring season (E₂) crop. The transplanting in the experimental field was done on November 27, 2020 and March 1, 2021 for main (E₁) and spring (E₂) crop respectively with 3 replications in Randomized Complete Block Design. Each entry consisted 10 plants in every row in all three replications. All the agronomic and horticultural practices were followed in accordance with recommendations in the Package of Practice for Vegetable Crops [²²]. The observations were recorded on pollen viability (%), days from transplanting to first harvest, harvesting span, average fruit weight (g), number of locules per fruit, pericarp thickness (mm), polar/equatorial diameter, total fruit yield (kg/plant), total soluble solids (Brix), dry matter (%), lycopene content (mg/100 g fresh weight) and titrable acidity (mg /100 ml of juice). Statistical analysis was performed through the OPSTAT program designed by Sheoran and coauthors [²³].

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The Analysis of variance for the experimental design has shown that mean sum of square due to replications were found non-significant for all the traits except dry matter in both seasons, lycopene content in main (E₁) season and for harvesting span and TSS in spring (E₂) season (Table 1). This clearly indicated that the experimental plot was in heterogeneous in level of fertility. Highly significant differences between genotypes were noticed for all the traits except total fruit yield in spring (E₂) season. The significant mean square due to the lines, testers and line × tester clearly revealed the role of additive and non-additive gene effects for the inheritance of all the characters under study.

Heterosis over better parent and check was observed for all the studied traits. The top performing hybrids for all the traits has been given in Table 4. In main season, the cross PAU 114 × nor-RM-1 displayed promising heterosis (%) over better parent for days from transplanting to first harvest (-4.85%), harvesting span (10.13%), average fruit weight (16.57%), lesser locules number (-25.09%), pericarp thickness (15.71%), total fruit yield (16.16%) and TSS (11.69%). Another cross combination, PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 was identified good over the better parent for pollen viability (36.53%), days from transplanting to first harvest (-4.10%), harvesting span (10.26%), locules number (-33.14%), pericarp thickness (7.15%), TSS content (13.68%) and lycopene content (29.08%). Under heterosis over checkPTH-2, the crosses Roma × nor-RM-1, PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1, PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050, Punjab Ratta × alc-IIHR-2050 and Leader × nor-RM-1 exhibited significant estimates for the most of the studied traits in main season. Similarly in spring season, cross combination SMZ-867 × Olive Green was found superior over better parent for lowest number of days from transplanting to first harvest (-12.87%), harvesting span (8.63%),average fruit weight (111.60%), lesser locules/ fruit (-29.58%), pericarp thickness (47.33%) and lycopene content (55.20%);and cross LT-44 × rin-Rutgers for days from transplanting to first harvest (-12.83%), harvesting span (8.22%), lesser locules (-16.91%), total fruit yield (53.08%) and dry matter content (21.83%). These results were in accordance with the findings of Kaushik and coauthors [²⁴] who reported that the cross 102-13-6-1 × 2-1 exhibiting highly significant positive heterosis (63.12%) over standard check for total fruits yield/ plant. Khan and Jindal [²⁵] identified that heterosis ranged from -6.49 % to -21.98 % over the better parent and -7.81% to -29.69% over check parent NS-524 in case of days to first harvest whereas Tamta and Singh [²⁶] observed heterosis range of -3.41% to -8.19% over their better parent. Similarly, Salim and coauthors [²⁷] found percent heterosis from -6.77 to 5.58% for harvesting duration over better parent. Karak and Hazra [²⁸] also reported significant positive heterosis percentage over the better parent for average fruit weight in cross combinations namely, BCT-90 × 110 (42.96), BCT-109 × BCT-115 (42.07), BCT-90 × 109 (21.58), BCT-82 × 110 (15.66), BCT-50 × 132 (11.47) and BCT-53 × BCT-115 (8.96). Avdikos and coauthors [²⁹] also reported the cross Elp-2 × Irn-1 exhibiting positive significant heterosis (10.00%) over the better parent for pericarp thickness. The crosses namely, SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1, LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050, LST-6 × nor-RM-1, FL-556 × nor-RM-1 and FL-556 × alc-IIHR-2050 were identified as promising crosses for heterosis for most of characters over check PTH-2 in spring season. Garg and coauthors [³⁰] also recorded standard heterosis for most of the traits which was 165.88 and 239.13% for yield, 102.28 and 195.96% for fruits number, 174.60 and 302.16% for marketable yield, -43.33 and -33.67% for firmness, 101.77 and 78.24% for average fruit weight, 71.51 and 126.47% for pericarp thickness, 70.61 and 33.84% for dry matter, 30.71 and 40.15% for lycopene, 40.98 and 45.10% for titrable acidity, 52.63 and 38.78% for TSS, 17.95 and8.04% for ascorbic acid content, 77.78 and 77.78% for shelf life in main and late season, respectively.

Out of fifty-six combinations, crosses namely, CLN1621L × alc-IIHR-2050, CLN1621L × Olive Green, CLN1621L × rin-Rutgers, PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050, FL-556 × alc-IIHR-2050, PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1, LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050, LT-44 × rin-Rutgers, Punjab Rattta × alc-IIHR-2050, Punjab Ratta × nor-RM-1, Roma × alc-IIHR-2050, Roma × nor-RM-1, LT-42 × alc-IIHR-2050, LT-42 × Olive Green, LST-6 × rin-Rutgers, Leader × rin-Rutgers, Leader × nor-RM-1, Spectrum × alc-IIHR-2050, Spectrum × nor-RM-1 and Spectrum × rin-Rutgers were identified with maximum harvesting span in main (E₁) season. In spring (E₂) season crosses viz. SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1, SMZ-867 × Olive Green, CLN1621L × alc-IIHR-2050, CLN1621L × nor-RM-1, PAU 114 × rin-Rutgers, FL-556 × alc-IIHR-2050, FL-556 × rin-Rutgers, PAU 2381 × rin-Rutgers, LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050, LT-44 × Olive Green, LT-44 × rin-Rutgers, Punjab Ratta × alc-IIHR-2050, LST-17 × Olive Green, LST-6 × nor-RM-1, Leader × nor-RM-1, Malintka × nor-RM-1, Malintka × Olive Green, Malintka × rin-Rutgers, Spectrum × Olive Green and Spectrum × rin-Rutgers were recorded with maximum harvesting duration.

Table 1
Analysis of variance for experimental design for different characters in main (E₁) and spring (E₂) season

Source of variation	d.f	Pollen Viability (%)		Days from Transplanting to the First Harvest		Harvesting Span (Days)		Average Fruit Weight (g)		Number of Locules per Fruit		Pericarp Thickness (mm)
		E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2
Replications	2	14.25	28.82	8.07	6.54	4.43	32.46**	1.73	36.17	0.04	0.11	0.06	0.17
Parents	17	178.06**	388.95**	18.28*	37.74**	25.17**	21.86**	838.89**	1730.91**	0.68**	1.56**	6.61**	6.06*
Lines	13	131.86**	459.18**	16.23*	32.47**	28.11**	26.16**	710.26**	1526.11**	0.79**	1.99**	4.35**	4.42**
Testers	3	434.44**	108.00**	5.40	11.64	14.87**	9.26*	1497.90**	2161.47**	0.28**	0.11	15.94**	13.89**
Lines vs testers	1	9.52	318.88**	83.73**	184.42**	17.86*	3.80	534.23**	3101.56**	0.03	0.39*	8.22**	3.91**
Parents vs. hybrids	1	1875.65**	1182.76**	169.17**	305.91**	228.25**	137.37**	466.34**	2846.14**	1.57**	0.62**	2.32**	0.01
Hybrids	55	364.89**	293.02**	37.14**	22.52**	41.92**	39.84**	1199.20**	947.28**	0.88**	0.47**	4.97**	3.87**
Error	146	17.01	12.45	8.86	5.34	3.23	3.00	2.44	68.90	0.05	0.07	0.06	0.47
Source of variation	d.f	Polar/Equatorial (P/E) ratio		Total Fruit Yield (kg plant-1)		Total Soluble Solids (°Brix)		Dry Matter (%)		Lycopene (mg/100 gm of fresh weight)		Titratable Acidity (mg /100 mL fruit juice)
		E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2
Replications	2	0.00	0.00	0.01	0.28	0.08	2.59**	0.99**	2.11*	1.26*	0.16	0.00	0.02
Parents	17	0.42**	0.29**	0.67**	0.36	4.30**	0.82**	6.48**	1.40**	3.52**	1.82**	0.07**	0.05**
Lines	13	0.48**	0.31**	0.695**	0.23	5.36**	0.442**	6.74**	1.28**	0.69**	0.278	0.02	0.06**
Testers	3	0.26**	0.30**	0.77**	0.50*	1.00**	2.48**	7.40**	2.37**	4.44**	6.47**	0.09**	0.01
Lines vs testers	1	0.09**	0.02*	0.00	1.69**	0.42**	0.69*	0.31*	0.02	0.03	7.91**	0.01	0.04
Parents vs. hybrids	1	0.61**	0.56**	3.06**	4.79**	5.83**	0.08	0.06	0.21	15.70**	6.36**	0.07**	0.00
Hybrids	55	0.10**	0.07**	0.52**	0.26**	3.31**	0.77**	2.83**	2.11**	2.37**	0.67*	0.04**	0.03**
Error	146	0.00	0.00	0.03	0.15	0.04	0.16	0.07	0.56	0.27	0.42	0.01	0.02

• *,** significant at 5% and 1% level, respectively

Table 2
Mean performance of parents and check for different characters in main (E₁) and spring (E₂) season

Parents	Pollen Viability (%)		Days from Transplanting to the First Harvest		Harvesting Span (Days)		Average Fruit Weight (g)		Number of Locules per Fruit		Pericarp Thickness (mm)
	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2
Lines
SMZ-867	70.00	60.27	140.00	70.73	36.07	36.27	20.60	21.20	2.00	2.00	4.25	3.93
CLN 1621L	81.67	91.53	138.07	72.47	36.27	30.93	55.45	51.66	2.50	3.73	4.15	4.19
PAU 114	85.40	56.13	138.80	73.13	31.40	33.00	76.32	77.90	2.00	2.07	6.00	6.84
FL-556	83.07	62.20	141.67	72.07	38.60	35.67	68.06	68.25	2.00	2.20	5.67	6.13
PAU 2381	72.40	76.67	136.67	71.60	39.00	40.07	78.85	74.60	3.50	2.07	5.38	6.34
LT-44	90.93	53.27	139.80	78.93	32.27	28.73	88.85	96.04	3.34	4.73	5.64	7.23
Punjab Ratta	79.93	57.27	140.73	66.00	36.60	38.07	78.53	70.68	2.17	2.07	7.06	6.61
Roma	80.40	75.67	138.67	72.53	31.47	34.73	68.86	50.89	2.67	2.07	5.37	4.68
LT-42	90.93	83.07	143.40	71.67	35.27	35.00	66.75	67.21	2.50	2.00	7.03	6.38
LST-17	90.73	73.93	135.27	71.20	40.20	34.67	36.06	36.47	2.17	2.07	5.98	5.03
LST-6	79.73	53.07	140.33	70.93	36.87	35.67	49.68	35.52	3.00	2.00	5.38	5.52
Leader	82.33	51.87	140.67	73.00	32.73	31.40	72.13	67.14	2.33	2.07	7.45	6.77
Malintka	81.07	69.60	135.20	66.67	31.07	34.00	13.92	12.76	2.00	2.07	3.62	3.54
Spectrum	91.13	70.73	139.60	76.67	33.13	32.07	63.12	59.76	2.00	2.07	7.40	6.64
Testers
alc-IIHR-2050	90.80	67.60	141.67	76.33	34.80	34.27	50.50	43.39	2.33	2.00	6.02	5.51
nor-RM-1	65.87	71.33	141.33	78.00	31.60	31.07	71.75	69.61	2.67	2.33	7.13	7.53
rin-Rutgers	88.40	81.33	141.60	73.67	36.27	34.93	42.87	27.71	2.17	2.33	4.21	4.87
Olive Green#	90.33	70.33	144.20	77.67	32.07	34.40	8.38	8.83	2.84	2.00	1.85	2.31
Check
PTH-2	75.40	67.93	144.00	71.13	34.47	33.00	75.84	67.04	4.17	3.71	5.72	5.19
Grand Mean	82.66	68.09	140.09	72.86	34.75	34.10	57.19	52.98	2.55	2.40	5.54	5.54
CD (5%)	7.68	6.48	5.61	4.62	3.97	3.90	3.78	15.22	0.50	0.58	0.45	1.23
CD (1%)	10.08	8.23	7.09	5.78	4.92	4.80	4.68	19.78	0.70	0.73	0.56	1.59
Parents	Polar/Equatorial (P/E) ratio		Total Fruit Yield (kg plant-1)		Total Soluble Solids (°Brix)		Dry Matter (%)		Lycopene (mg/100 gm of fresh weight)		Titratable Acidity (mg/100 mL fruit juice)
	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2
Lines
SMZ-867	1.58	1.48	1.71	0.93	7.29	5.07	7.16	7.21	3.09	2.21	0.74	0.59
CLN 1621L	0.98	0.89	1.66	1.46	5.64	4.93	7.41	6.66	3.27	3.34	0.58	0.70
PAU 114	1.29	1.19	1.98	1.46	4.17	4.40	5.40	5.94	4.03	2.55	0.68	0.68
FL-556	1.22	1.15	1.80	1.27	4.86	4.50	5.51	5.73	2.96	3.03	0.61	0.43
PAU 2381	0.96	1.14	2.24	1.75	4.24	4.87	5.17	5.81	5.02	4.66	0.52	0.66
LT-44	0.98	0.91	1.83	1.07	5.57	5.23	7.13	5.91	3.51	3.03	0.81	0.61
Punjab Ratta	1.31	1.09	2.40	2.01	4.86	5.00	5.74	7.36	6.59	5.72	0.40	0.66
Roma	2.46	2.21	1.10	0.69	3.99	4.10	6.23	5.47	3.34	2.25	0.64	0.45
LT-42	1.22	1.15	1.60	1.07	5.45	4.50	6.84	5.71	4.11	2.58	0.47	0.42
LST-17	0.97	1.04	1.73	1.47	5.07	5.07	6.28	7.05	3.69	2.58	0.89	0.45
LST-6	1.12	1.37	1.38	1.00	4.53	5.07	4.75	5.63	4.81	2.61	0.69	0.69
Leader	1.42	1.23	1.90	1.68	3.88	4.17	4.60	5.53	3.15	2.70	0.58	0.67
Malintka	0.87	1.16	1.50	1.46	3.01	4.37	7.27	6.26	4.13	2.40	1.01	0.61
Spectrum	1.27	1.19	1.12	1.09	4.73	4.33	4.59	5.71	2.42	2.67	0.60	0.49
Testers
alc-IIHR-2050	1.57	1.64	1.02	0.81	4.84	5.13	5.61	6.30	3.10	3.80	0.69	0.55
nor-RM-1	1.09	1.07	1.62	0.71	4.19	4.13	5.94	6.42	0.91	0.26	0.67	0.45
rin-Rutgers	1.10	1.11	1.49	1.30	3.64	4.40	5.33	4.96	3.71	3.20	0.80	0.59
Olive Green	0.87	0.91	0.50	0.31	4.84	6.17	8.73	7.09	1.02	0.72	0.87	0.51
Check
PTH-2	0.84	0.91	2.45	1.85	4.38	3.52	5.52	4.20	4.03	3.20	0.59	0.52
Grand Mean	1.22	1.20	1.63	1.23	4.69	4.68	6.06	6.05	3.52	2.82	0.68	0.56
CD (5%)	0.20	0.22	0.42	0.73	0.43	0.79	0.53	1.39	0.98	1.17	0.26	0.32
CD (1%)	0.23	0.25	0.52	0.93	0.55	1.01	0.67	1.81	1.26	1.52	0.30	0.38

• #gene unidentified

Table 3
Mean performance of crosses for different traits in main (E₁) and spring (E₂) season

Cross combinations	Pollen Viability (%)		Days from Transplanting to the First Harvest		Harvesting Span(Days)		Average Fruit Weight (g)		Number of Locules per Fruit		Pericarp Thickness (mm)
	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2
SMZ-867×alc-IIHR-2050	73.73	51.67	136.33	71.33	35.73	35.27	43.16	36.02	2.00	2.07	6.65	5.75
SMZ-867×nor-RM-1	80.80	61.93	141.60	65.80	36.93	43.60	33.02	48.44	2.33	2.00	6.15	5.98
SMZ-867×rin-Rutgers	94.27	53.80	140.13	71.47	35.80	33.20	34.78	35.94	2.00	2.00	6.02	4.77
SMZ-867×Olive Green	63.33	57.00	137.20	67.67	32.00	39.40	43.20	44.86	2.00	2.00	3.83	5.79
CLN 1621L×alc-IIHR-2050	89.93	63.07	140.67	70.27	39.40	37.60	76.35	59.78	3.67	2.93	5.09	6.17
CLN 1621L×nor-RM-1	91.80	66.67	140.40	68.93	33.60	38.87	51.04	49.58	2.50	2.53	4.39	5.14
CLN 1621L×rin-Rutgers	67.53	64.33	138.27	69.73	39.40	35.53	46.80	54.93	2.84	3.27	4.73	4.50
CLN 1621L×Olive Green	63.60	65.47	140.33	67.27	39.93	34.93	21.08	17.65	2.34	2.47	4.30	4.08
PAU 114×alc-IIHR-2050	77.87	55.33	131.33	71.80	42.40	30.53	85.36	75.99	2.00	2.07	8.41	5.75
PAU 114×nor-RM-1	81.20	58.27	134.47	66.33	34.80	33.07	63.67	44.32	2.00	2.00	8.25	6.49
PAU 114×rin-Rutgers	61.40	84.13	139.47	67.40	34.73	38.33	37.55	38.85	2.33	2.00	5.80	5.80
PAU 114×Olive Green	86.73	69.53	141.33	73.07	30.40	30.93	23.43	32.55	2.00	2.00	4.36	4.32
FL-556×alc-IIHR-2050	63.47	58.00	131.93	68.80	42.53	39.00	58.85	59.50	2.00	2.07	6.29	6.62
FL-556×nor-RM-1	79.33	64.47	135.20	76.27	31.47	37.40	67.05	65.28	2.00	2.07	8.31	6.41
FL-556×rin-Rutgers	58.67	55.60	141.33	68.80	37.13	40.00	46.57	47.79	2.34	2.00	6.27	5.47
FL-556×Olive Green	77.47	76.80	143.07	68.87	34.07	35.93	26.00	25.79	2.00	2.00	4.29	4.21
PAU 2381×alc-IIHR-2050	74.73	53.87	134.00	75.13	40.47	29.40	76.12	71.72	2.00	2.07	6.13	5.95
PAU 2381×nor-RM-1	89.93	65.53	135.53	73.40	43.00	32.00	79.27	85.42	2.34	2.37	7.64	7.96
PAU 2381×rin-Rutgers	62.47	62.47	141.40	70.33	36.40	41.00	50.81	63.84	2.33	2.40	5.42	6.25
PAU 2381×Olive Green	82.13	68.67	140.33	72.27	36.47	35.60	23.29	28.47	2.00	2.33	4.53	4.23
LT-44×alc-IIHR-2050	80.67	77.53	132.67	68.33	41.47	37.73	91.35	86.89	4.17	2.87	6.60	7.13
LT-44×nor-RM-1	81.93	51.67	138.00	74.27	35.73	33.20	75.78	53.51	2.38	2.53	4.97	5.15
LT-44×rin-Rutgers	58.73	66.33	131.53	68.80	42.67	37.80	82.03	75.61	4.84	3.93	5.87	6.50
LT-44×Olive Green	64.60	57.73	141.80	67.27	35.73	43.00	31.03	33.29	3.33	3.53	4.54	4.44
Punjab Ratta×alc-IIHR-2050	71.33	50.20	132.20	67.13	42.47	41.27	63.98	65.29	2.00	2.00	7.21	6.92
Punjab Ratta×nor-RM-1	89.33	50.67	134.00	71.27	40.73	37.07	63.61	68.02	2.00	2.07	7.64	7.55
Punjab Ratta×rin-Rutgers	71.00	52.07	139.80	67.27	34.33	35.40	43.47	52.62	2.00	2.07	6.19	5.96
Cross combinations	Pollen Viability (%)		Days from Transplanting to the First Harvest		Harvesting Span (Days)		Average Fruit Weight (g)		Number of Locules per Fruit		Pericarp Thickness (mm)
	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2
Roma×alc-IIHR-2050	72.53	83.93	131.00	73.60	42.00	31.93	56.79	58.17	2.00	2.00	4.69	5.81
Roma×nor-RM-1	87.33	53.13	142.53	71.47	37.33	33.33	85.64	90.90	2.13	2.13	6.67	6.45
Roma×rin-Rutgers	81.27	52.13	138.33	73.67	35.73	30.93	45.22	70.03	2.34	2.00	5.90	6.73
Roma×Olive Green	84.40	63.00	142.00	71.00	33.33	32.27	26.04	24.32	2.07	2.00	5.19	4.90
LT-42×alc-IIHR-2050	88.07	64.40	137.33	69.80	41.93	37.47	55.88	53.38	2.17	2.00	7.14	5.71
LT-42×nor-RM-1	79.33	53.47	140.33	70.67	32.70	31.87	61.34	57.27	2.00	2.07	7.05	7.27
LT-42×rin-Rutgers	79.33	52.20	138.00	72.73	37.57	32.33	60.15	66.96	2.33	2.13	6.05	6.48
LT-42×Olive Green	82.07	72.60	140.27	67.37	41.27	37.47	30.21	33.12	2.22	2.00	5.27	4.87
LST-17×alc-IIHR-2050	93.47	70.67	131.07	73.67	40.40	35.53	45.17	67.39	2.33	2.53	6.42	5.93
LST-17×nor-RM-1	64.20	53.67	137.00	68.60	32.80	35.60	50.36	54.18	2.00	2.00	6.59	6.43
LST-17×rin-Rutgers	88.67	85.00	138.73	68.60	36.33	35.27	42.63	47.62	2.33	2.07	4.45	5.03
LST-17×Olive Green	66.27	52.40	141.40	67.00	35.00	38.27	17.39	23.43	2.00	2.00	4.66	3.72
LST-6×alc-IIHR-2050	92.07	82.00	137.27	69.20	35.87	37.00	52.84	59.59	2.17	2.00	5.99	6.21
LST-6×nor-RM-1	81.40	66.00	138.20	66.87	38.20	41.40	36.37	47.97	2.00	2.00	6.03	6.28
LST-6×rin-Rutgers	60.73	71.00	136.80	66.33	42.67	39.07	28.14	40.76	2.00	2.00	5.42	5.44
LST-6×Olive Green	72.87	63.67	141.07	73.00	33.87	36.40	17.42	21.48	2.00	2.00	3.95	3.89
Leader×alc-IIHR-2050	93.33	52.67	135.60	71.93	41.27	32.93	41.70	53.69	2.17	2.13	7.11	7.73
Leader×nor-RM-1	95.47	51.07	132.00	77.47	42.20	36.33	73.38	78.75	2.00	2.07	6.38	7.59
Leader×rin-Rutgers	91.60	50.20	140.40	69.40	31.33	35.33	39.69	38.02	2.50	2.20	7.26	5.54
Leader×Olive Green	60.73	64.27	141.07	74.67	37.33	28.27	20.44	24.06	2.00	2.00	4.27	3.89
Malintka×alc-IIHR-2050	95.07	81.80	139.67	68.67	31.07	33.73	31.10	27.55	2.00	2.07	3.44	4.23
Malintka×nor-RM-1	83.33	55.67	142.93	67.27	30.67	43.53	36.95	32.24	2.00	2.00	5.05	4.53
Malintka×rin-Rutgers	62.67	53.73	135.60	69.27	39.00	38.40	27.14	21.72	2.00	2.07	4.15	3.87
Malintka×Olive Green	62.73	64.13	137.67	70.93	32.80	39.07	18.35	22.24	2.00	2.07	3.79	3.63
Spectrum×alc-IIHR-2050	92.07	77.73	134.40	68.80	41.00	29.93	48.50	48.65	2.00	2.00	7.65	5.56
Spectrum×nor-RM-1	82.73	70.60	140.47	73.53	38.80	32.93	71.23	72.65	2.00	2.00	7.19	5.77
Spectrum×rin-Rutgers	94.67	64.73	141.40	68.27	40.27	40.93	46.33	54.27	2.00	2.13	4.23	5.40
Spectrum×Olive Green	75.07	60.40	138.87	70.07	34.67	37.27	46.65	43.82	2.00	2.07	6.59	3.69
CD (5%)	7.68	6.48	5.61	4.62	3.97	3.90	3.78	15.22	0.50	0.58	0.45	1.23
CD (1%)	10.08	8.23	7.09	5.78	4.92	4.80	4.68	19.78	0.70	0.53	0.56	1.59
Cross combinations	Polar/Equatorial (P/E) ratio		Total Fruit Yield (kg plant-1)		Total Soluble Solids (°Brix)		Dry Matter (%)		Lycopene (mg/100 gm of fresh weight)		Titratable Acidity (mg /100 ml fruit juice)
	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2
SMZ-867 × alc-IIHR-2050	1.23	1.25	2.21	1.02	5.17	4.43	6.19	5.07	3.03	2.80	0.71	0.64
SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1	1.21	1.16	1.83	1.90	6.70	4.67	8.49	5.40	4.01	3.36	0.88	0.89
SMZ-867 × rin-Rutgers	1.35	1.27	1.57	1.65	4.86	4.97	6.50	6.68	4.24	2.79	0.62	0.79
SMZ-867 × Olive Green	1.10	1.17	2.14	0.97	6.72	4.43	7.50	6.45	4.00	3.43	0.83	0.70
CLN 1621L × alc-IIHR-2050	0.93	0.89	2.56	1.84	4.74	4.23	5.04	5.10	3.00	2.79	0.72	0.73
CLN 1621L × nor-RM-1	1.10	1.29	1.93	1.50	4.87	4.13	5.92	5.11	3.93	3.34	0.83	0.77
CLN 1621L × rin-Rutgers	0.90	0.91	1.57	1.71	5.29	4.40	6.91	6.15	2.99	3.30	0.95	0.72
CLN 1621L × Olive Green	0.84	0.89	1.96	1.44	6.60	5.37	7.16	6.32	3.87	3.15	0.64	0.66
PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050	1.19	1.11	1.92	1.32	4.59	4.17	6.81	5.83	3.69	4.10	0.77	0.89
PAU 114 × nor-RM-1	1.12	1.36	2.30	1.42	4.68	5.20	6.34	6.23	4.72	2.84	0.61	0.77
PAU 114 × rin-Rutgers	1.13	1.17	0.93	1.38	5.03	3.90	6.59	7.20	3.79	2.53	0.69	0.61
PAU 114 × Olive Green	1.08	0.98	2.08	1.42	6.34	5.37	7.28	7.49	4.19	3.15	0.66	0.68
FL-556 × alc-IIHR-2050	1.27	1.30	1.26	1.88	4.53	4.90	6.00	6.33	4.63	3.13	0.76	0.55
FL-556 × nor-RM-1	1.15	1.03	1.50	1.24	4.45	4.30	5.21	5.87	5.61	2.82	0.82	0.79
FL-556 × rin-Rutgers	1.16	1.01	1.62	1.60	4.81	3.90	6.73	5.05	4.52	3.43	0.71	0.80
FL-556 × Olive Green	1.03	0.99	1.48	1.15	5.93	5.43	8.00	7.54	3.13	2.93	0.74	0.58
PAU 2381 × alc-IIHR-2050	1.34	1.26	2.09	1.82	3.98	4.13	5.61	5.63	5.03	4.00	0.59	0.67
PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1	1.13	1.03	2.64	1.39	4.82	5.60	5.59	6.48	6.48	2.93	0.67	0.68
PAU 2381 × rin-Rutgers	1.03	1.30	1.51	1.99	4.03	4.40	4.99	5.35	3.51	2.41	0.70	0.65
PAU 2381 × Olive Green	1.13	0.95	1.57	1.48	6.21	5.10	7.65	7.48	5.71	2.38	0.50	0.63
LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050	0.99	1.13	1.69	1.88	4.18	4.37	5.02	5.43	5.08	2.89	0.56	0.61
LT-44 × nor-RM-1	0.93	0.96	2.26	1.82	5.18	4.50	6.13	6.24	3.55	3.42	0.80	0.79
LT-44 × rin-Rutgers	0.86	0.91	2.44	1.99	4.78	4.37	4.93	7.20	2.69	3.06	0.56	0.71
LT-44 × Olive Green	1.13	1.06	1.63	1.27	6.51	5.30	6.91	6.26	3.70	4.80	0.56	0.46
Punjab Ratta × alc-IIHR2050	1.13	1.23	1.66	1.47	4.90	4.57	6.52	5.89	2.56	3.00	0.80	0.70
Punjab Ratta × nor-RM-1	1.18	1.10	2.05	1.08	3.13	5.89	5.61	6.23	3.49	1.91	0.75	0.68
Punjab Ratta × rin-Rutgers	1.11	1.04	1.78	1.34	4.77	4.40	5.58	5.89	3.72	2.17	0.63	0.74
Punjab Ratta × Olive Green	1.02	0.97	1.95	1.39	6.11	5.70	7.40	8.04	4.08	4.07	0.77	0.75
Cross combinations		Polar/Equatorial (P/E) ratio		Total Fruit Yield (kg plant-1)		Total Soluble Solids (°Brix)		Dry Matter (%)		Lycopene (mg/100 gm of fresh weight)		Titratable Acidity (mg /100 ml fruit juice)
	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2	E1	E2
Roma ×nor-RM-1	1.43	1.44	2.61	1.94	4.95	4.70	6.26	5.94	4.66	3.11	0.76	0.67
Roma ×rin-Rutgers	1.51	1.13	2.10	1.20	4.05	5.20	5.42	7.01	5.19	2.26	0.64	0.77
Roma × Olive Green	1.51	1.42	1.56	1.17	6.05	5.53	7.17	7.43	3.18	3.99	0.81	0.64
LT-42 × alc-IIHR-2050	1.30	1.24	2.17	1.06	3.81	4.33	5.20	5.35	3.13	2.99	0.69	0.72
LT-42 × nor-RM-1	1.14	1.00	2.17	1.91	3.94	5.30	5.40	5.84	2.73	2.91	0.69	0.57
LT-42 × rin-Rutgers	1.10	1.17	1.81	1.90	3.94	4.37	4.61	4.48	4.36	3.43	0.70	0.71
LT-42 × Olive Green	1.01	1.00	1.77	1.02	5.28	5.67	8.38	8.33	3.83	3.89	0.56	0.49
LST-17 × alc-IIHR-2050	1.08	1.02	2.00	1.17	4.18	4.20	5.39	6.05	3.56	2.68	0.66	0.67
LST-17 × nor-RM-1	0.95	0.99	1.59	1.36	4.88	4.77	5.33	6.25	4.95	2.14	0.67	0.79
LST-17 × rin-Rutgers	0.91	1.01	1.56	1.82	4.08	4.37	4.95	7.19	3.52	2.92	0.74	0.74
LST-17 × Olive Green	1.07	1.00	1.10	1.28	6.48	5.67	7.04	7.91	4.38	3.64	0.61	0.54
LST-6 × alc-IIHR-2050	0.98	1.39	1.79	1.23	5.72	4.33	6.16	5.48	5.06	2.68	0.72	0.72
LST-6 × nor-RM-1	0.85	1.03	2.00	1.35	6.38	4.33	7.29	5.98	3.81	3.82	1.28	0.74
LST-6 × rin-Rutgers	1.15	1.15	1.72	1.63	4.43	4.60	5.31	6.19	3.34	2.35	0.86	0.77
LST-6 × Olive Green	1.03	0.99	1.86	1.45	6.86	5.73	7.40	7.81	4.23	2.58	0.68	0.62
Leader ×alc-IIHR-2050	1.29	1.34	0.94	1.44	4.43	5.20	5.92	6.30	2.83	2.57	0.67	0.73
Leader ×nor-RM-1	1.10	1.10	1.97	1.19	4.27	4.20	5.67	5.72	3.87	2.96	0.79	0.54
Leader ×rin-Rutgers	1.02	1.21	1.19	1.18	4.30	5.07	6.08	6.39	4.27	2.20	0.77	0.94
Leader × Olive Green	1.03	1.02	1.12	1.29	5.62	5.13	6.71	7.01	5.51	2.80	0.64	0.56
Malintka × alc-IIHR-2050	1.12	1.11	1.61	1.96	4.62	4.67	5.37	6.79	2.56	3.00	0.72	0.88
Malintka × nor-RM-1	0.95	0.92	1.29	1.19	4.92	4.37	6.49	6.29	4.94	2.66	0.80	0.78
Malintka × rin-Rutgers	1.00	1.05	0.84	1.19	4.37	4.70	5.43	6.15	3.21	2.33	0.79	0.81
Malintka × Olive Green	1.03	0.98	1.32	1.31	5.85	5.37	7.16	6.99	4.28	2.38	0.82	0.77
Spectrum × alc-IIHR-2050	1.32	1.18	1.18	1.03	4.41	5.21	5.58	5.82	2.94	2.13	0.72	0.55
Spectrum × nor-RM-1	1.18	1.06	2.00	1.78	4.43	4.50	6.44	5.45	4.34	1.89	0.67	0.81
Spectrum × rin-Rutgers	1.16	1.05	1.46	1.42	6.13	4.10	7.50	5.33	4.86	3.33	0.83	0.71
Spectrum × Olive Green	1.25	0.98	1.45	1.30	4.22	5.60	5.47	7.74	2.73	2.26	0.73	0.44
CD (5%)	0.20	0.22	0.42	0.73	0.43	0.79	0.53	1.39	0.98	1.17	0.26	0.32
CD (1%)	0.23	0.25	0.52	0.93	0.55	1.01	0.67	1.81	1.26	1.52	0.30	0.38

Table 4
Top performing hybrids for various characters in main (E₁) and spring (E₂) season

Traits		Best crosses Per se	Best heterotic crosses over better parent	Best heterotic crosses over check (PTH-2)
Pollen Viability (%)	E1	Leader × nor-RM-1 (95.47) Malintka ×alc-IIHR-2050 (95.07) Spectrum × rin-Rutgers (94.67) SMZ-867 × rin-Rutgers (94.27)	PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 (36.53**) Leader × nor-RM-1 (15.96**) SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (15.43**) Punjab Ratta × nor-RM-1 (12.61**)	Leader × nor-RM-1 (26.62**) Malintka × alc-IIHR-2050 (26.09**) Spectrum × rin-Rutgers (25.56**) SMZ-867 × rin-Rutgers (25.03**)
	E2	LST-17 × rin-Rutgers (85.00) PAU 114 × rin-Rutgers (84.13) Roma ×alc-IIHR-2050 (83.93) LST-6 ×alc-IIHR-2050 (82.00)	LST-6 × alc-IIHR-2050 (21.30**) Malintka × alc-IIHR-2050 (17.53**) LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050 (14.69**) Roma × alc-IIHR-2050 (10.92**)	LST-17 × rin-Rutgers (25.13**) PAU 114 × rin-Rutgers (23.85**) Roma × alc-IIHR-2050 (23.55**) LST-6 × alc-IIHR-2050 (20.71**)
Days from Transplanting to the First Harvest	E1	Roma ×alc-IIHR-2050 (72.53) LST-17 ×alc-IIHR-2050 (93.47) PAU 114 ×alc-IIHR-2050 (77.87) LT-44 × rin-Rutgers (58.73)	Punjab Ratta × Olive Green (-24.50**) Roma × alc-IIHR-2050 (-20.12**) LST-17 × alc-IIHR-2050(3.02) PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050 (-14.24**)	Roma × alc-IIHR-2050 (-3.81) LST-17 × alc-IIHR-2050 (23.97**) PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050 (3.28) LT-44 × rin-Rutgers (-22.11**)
	E2	SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (65.80) PAU 114 × nor-RM-1 (66.33) LST-6 × rin-Rutgers (66.33) LST-6 ×nor-RM-1 (66.87)	SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (-15.64**) PAU 114 × nor-RM-1 (-14.96**) LT-44 × Olive Green (-14.71**) LST-6 × nor-RM-1 (-14.27**)	SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (-7.49**) PAU 114 × nor-RM-1 (-6.75**) LST-6 × rin-Rutgers (-6.75**) LST-6 × nor-RM-1 (-5.99**)
Harvesting Span (Days)	E1	PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 (43.00) LT-44 × rin-Rutgers (42.67) LST-6 × rin-Rutgers (42.67) FL-556 ×alc-IIHR-2050 (42.53)	Leader × nor-RM-1 (28.93**) LT-42 × Olive green (27.89**) PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050 (21.84**) Roma × alc-IIHR-2050 (20.69**) LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050 (19.17**)	PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 (24.75**) LT-44 × rin-Rutgers (23.79**) LST-6 × rin-Rutgers (23.79**) FL-556 × alc-IIHR-2050 (23.38**) Punjab Ratta × alc-IIHR-2050 (23.21**)
	E2	SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (43.60) Malintka × nor-RM-1 (43.53) LT-44 × Olive Green (43.00) LST-6 × nor-RM-1 (41.40)	Malintka × nor-RM-1 (28.03**) CLN1621L × nor-RM-1 (25.10**) LT-44 × Olive Green (25.00**) SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (20.21**)	SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (32.12**) Malintka × nor-RM-1 (31.91**) LT-44 × Olive Green (30.30**) LST-6 × nor-RM-1 (25.45**)
Average Fruit Weight (g)	E1	LT-44 ×alc-IIHR-2050 (91.35) Roma × nor-RM-1 (85.64) PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050 (85.36) LT-44 × rin-Rutgers (82.03)	SMZ-867 × Olive Green (109.71**) PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050 (11.84**) Roma × nor-RM-1 (19.36**) LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050 (2.81)	LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050 (20.45**) Roma × nor-RM-1 (12.92** ) PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050 (12.55**) LT-44 × rin-Rutgers (8.16*)
	E2	Roma × nor-RM-1 (90.90) LT-44 ×alc-IIHR-2050 (86.89) PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 (85.42) Leader × nor-RM-1 (78.75)	SMZ-867 × Olive Green (111.60**) LST-17 × rin-Rutgers (30.57**) LST-17 × alc-IIHR-2050 (55.31**) Roma × rin-Rutgers (37.61**) Roma × nor-RM-1 (30.58**)	Roma × nor-RM-1 (35.59**) LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050 (29.61**) PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 (27.42**) Leader × nor-RM-1 (17.47**) PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050 (13.35)
Traits		Best crosses Per se	Best heterotic crosses over better parent	Best heterotic crosses over check (PTH-2)
Number of Loculesper Fruit	E1	SMZ-867 × alc-IIHR-2050 (2.00) PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050 (2.00) PAU 114 × Olive Green (2.00) FL-556 × nor-RM-1 (2.00)	PAU2381 × alc-IIHR-2050 (-42.86**) PAU 2381 × Olive Green (-42.86**) PAU 2381 × rin-Rutgers (-33.43**)	SMZ-867 × alc-IIHR-2050 (-52.04**) PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050 (-52.04**) PAU 114 × Olive Green (-52.04**) FL-556 × nor-RM-1(-52.04**)
	E2	SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (2.00) PAU 114 × rin-Rutgers (2.00) FL-556 × rin-Rutgers (2.00) LT-42 × alc-IIHR-2050 (2.00)	LT-44 × nor-RM-1 (-39.32**) LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050 (-46.51**) CLN1621L × Olive Green (-33.78**) CLN1621L × nor-RM-1 (-32.17**)	SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (-46.09**) PAU 114 × rin-Rutgers (-46.09**) FL-556 × rin-Rutgers (-46.09**) LT-42 × alc-IIHR-2050 (-46.09**)
Pericarp Thickness (mm)	E1	PAU 114 ×alc-IIHR-2050 (8.41) FL-556 × nor-RM-1 (8.31) PAU 114 × nor-RM-1 (8.25) Spectrum ×alc-IIHR-2050 (7.65)	SMZ-867 × rin-Rutgers (41.65**) PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050 (39.70**) FL-556 × nor-RM-1 (16.55**) PAU 114 × nor-RM-1 (13.71**)	PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050 (47.03**) FL-556 × nor-RM-1 (45.28**) PAU 114 × nor-RM-1 (44.23**) Spectrum × alc-IIHR-2050 (33.74**)
	E2	PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 (7.96) Leader ×alc-IIHR-2050 (7.73) Leader × nor-RM-1 (7.59) Punjab Ratta × nor-RM-1 (7.55)	SMZ-867 × Olive Green (47.33**) Roma × rin-Rutgers (38.19**)	PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 (53.37**) Leader × alc-IIHR-2050 (48.94**) Leader × nor-RM-1 (46.24**) Punjab Ratta × nor-RM-1 (45.47**)
Polar/Equatorial (P/E) ratio	E1	Roma ×alc-IIHR-2050 (1.90) Roma × Olive Green (1.51) Roma × rin-Rutgers (1.51) Roma × nor-RM-1 (1.43)	Malintka × Olive Green (18.39**) PAU 2381 × Olive Green (17.71**) LT-44 × Olive Green (15.31**) CLN1621L × Olive Green (12.24**)	Roma × alc-IIHR-2050 (126.19**) Roma × Olive Green (79.76**) Roma × rin-Rutgers (79.76**) Roma × nor-RM-1 (70.24**) SMZ-867 × rin-Rutgers (60.71**)
	E2	Roma ×alc-IIHR-2050 (1.66) Roma × nor-RM-1 (1.44) Roma × Olive Green (1.42) LST-6 ×alc-IIHR-2050 (1.39)	CLN1621L × nor-RM-1 (20.56**) LT-44 × Olive Green (16.48**) PAU 114 × nor-RM-1 (14.29**)	Roma × alc-IIHR-2050 (82.42**) Roma × nor-RM-1 (58.24**) Roma × Olive Green (56.04**) LST-6 × alc-IIHR-2050 (52.75**)
Total Fruit Yield (kg plant-1)	E1	PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 (2.64) Roma × nor-RM-1 (2.61) CLN1621L ×alc-IIHR-2050 (2.56) LT-44 × rin-Rutgers (2.44)	Roma × nor-RM-1 (54.44**) CLN1621L × alc-IIHR-2050 (54.22**) Roma × alc-IIHR-2050 (43.64**) Roma × Olive Green (41.82**)	PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 (17.76*) Roma × nor-RM-1 (16.53*)
	E2	PAU 2381 × rin-Rutgers (1.99) LT-44 × rin-Rutgers (1.99) Malintka ×alc-IIHR-2050 (1.11) Roma × nor-RM-1 (1.94)	Roma × nor-RM-1 (173.24**) SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (104.30**) LT-42 × nor-RM-1 (78.50*) LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050 (75.70*)	PAU 2381 × rin-Rutgers (27.57*) LT-44 × rin-Rutgers (27.57*)
Traits		Best crosses Per se	Best heterotic crosses over better parent	Best heterotic crosses over check (PTH-2)
Total Soluble Solids (°Brix)	E1	LST-6 × Olive Green (6.86) SMZ-867 × Olive Green (6.72) SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (6.70) CLN1621L × Olive Green (6.60)	LST-6 × Olive Green (41.74**) LST-6 × nor-RM-1 (40.84**) PAU 114 × Olive Green (30.99**) Spectrum × rin-Rutgers (29.60**)	LST-6 × Olive Green (56.62**) SMZ-867 × Olive Green (53.42**) SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (52.97**) CLN1621L × Olive Green (50.68**)
	E2	Punjab Ratta × nor-RM-1 (5.89) LST-6 × Olive Green (5.73) Punjab Ratta × Olive Green (5.70) LT-42 × Olive Green (5.67)	Spectrum × nor-RM-1 (20.32**) PAU 114 × nor-RM-1 (18.18**) Roma × rin-Rutgers (18.18*) Punjab Ratta × nor-RM-1 (17.8**)	Punjab Ratta × nor-RM-1 (67.33**) LST-6 × Olive Green (62.78**) Punjab Ratta × Olive Green (61.93**) LT-42 × Olive Green (61.08**) LST-17 × Olive Green (61.08**)
Dry Matter (%)	E1	SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (8.49) LT-42 × Olive Green (8.33) FL-556 × Olive Green (8.00) PAU 2381 × Olive Green (7.65)	Spectrum × rin-Rutgers (40.71**) FL-556 × rin-Rutgers (26.27**) LST-6 × nor-RM-1 (22.73**) PAU 114 × rin-Rutgers (22.04**)	SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (53.80**) LT-42 × Olive Green (51.81**) FL-556 × Olive Green (44.93**) PAU 2381 × Olive Green (38.59**)
	E2a	LT-42 × Olive Green (8.33) Punjab Ratta × Olive Green (8.04) LST-17 × Olive Green (7.91) LST-6 × Olive Green (7.81)	Roma × rin-Rutgers (28.15*) LST-6 × rin-Rutgers (27.71*) LT-44 × rin-Rutgers (21.83*) PAU 114 × rin-Rutgers (21.21*)	LT-42 × Olive Green (98.33**) Punjab Ratta × OliveGreen (91.43**) LST-17 × Olive Green (88.33**) LST-6 × Olive Green (85.93**) Spectrum × Olive Green (84.29**)
Lycopene (mg/100 gm of fresh weight)	E1	PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 (6.48) PAU 2381 × Olive Green (5.71) FL-556 × nor-RM-1 (5.61) Leader × Olive Green (5.51)	FL-556 × nor-RM-1 (89.53**) Spectrum × nor-RM-1 (79.34**) Leader × Olive Green (74.92**) Roma × rin-Rutgers (39.89**)	PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1 (60.79**) PAU 2381 × Olive Green (41.69**) FL-556 × nor-RM-1 (39.21**) Leader × Olive Green (36.72**)
	E2	LT-44 × Olive Green (4.80) PAU 114 ×alc-IIHR-2050 (4.10) Punjab Ratta × Olive Green (4.07) PAU 2381 ×alc-IIHR-2050 (4.00)	Roma × Olive Green (77.33**) SMZ-867 × Olive Green (55.20*) SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (52.04*) LT-42 × Olive Green (50.78*)	LT-44 × Olive Green (50.00**)
Titratable Acidity (mg /100 ml fruit juice)	E1	LST-6 × nor-RM-1 (1.28) CLN1621L × rin-Rutgers (0.95) SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (0.88) LST-6 × rin-Rutgers (0.86)	LST-6 × nor-RM-1 (85.51**) CLN1621L × nor-RM-1 (23.88*) FL-556 × nor-RM-1 (22.39*) SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (18.92*) CLN1621L × rin-Rutgers (18.75*)	LST-6 × nor-RM-1 (116.95**) CLN1621L × rin-Rutgers (61.02**) SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (49.15**) LST-6 × rin-Rutgers (45.76**)
	E2	Leader × rin-Rutgers (0.94) SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (0.89) PAU 114 ×alc-IIHR-2050 (0.89) Malintka ×alc-IIHR-2050 (0.88)	Spectrum × nor-RM-1 (80.00**) FL-556 × nor-RM-1 (75.56**) LST-17 × nor-RM-1 (75.56**) Roma × alc-IIHR-2050 (52.73**) Roma × nor-RM-1 (48.89*)	Leader × rin-Rutgers (80.77**) SMZ-867 × nor-RM-1 (71.15**) PAU 114 × alc-IIHR-2050(71.15**) Malintka × alc-IIHR-2050 (69.23**) Roma × alc-IIHR-2050 (61.54**)

CONCLUSION

Ripening mutants such as rin, nor, alc, Nr, Cnr and Gr which interfere the ripening process of tomato found beneficial for extending fruit availability period up to the end of spring season through hybrid development. Evaluation of crosses gives an opportunity of selecting supreme heterotic hybrids showing maximum harvesting span. From overall analysis, it was concluded that the F1 combinations viz. PAU 2381 × nor-RM-1, LT-44 × rin-Rutgers, Leader × nor-RM-1, LT-42 × alc-IIHR-2050, CLN1621L × alc-IIHR-2050 and Roma × nor-RM-1 in main (E₁) season (Supplementary Table 1) while crosses, PAU 2381 × rin-Rutgers, FL-556 × rin-Rutgers, FL-556 × alc-IIHR-2050, LT-44 × rin-Rutgers, LT-44 × alc-IIHR-2050 and CLN1621L × alc-IIHR-2050 in spring (E₂) season (Supplementary Table 2) were recorded for prolonged harvesting span vis-à-vis desirable quality characters i.e. total fruit yield, average fruit weight, minimum days from transplanting to first harvest, pericarp thickness, titratable acidity, lycopene contet and dry matter with permissible amount of heterosis. Henceforth, the hybrid crosses which possessed maximum harvesting span along with good yield potential and superior quality traits performance can be exploited for commercial purpose.

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful Department of Science and Technology for creating the facilities under DST-PURSE and DST-FIST programme for conduct of research study.

REFERENCES

• ¹
  Dorais M, Ehret DL, Papadopoulos AP. Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) health components: from the seed to the consumer. Phytochem Rev. 2008 Jul;7:231-50.
• ²
  Kumar KS, Paswan S, Srivastava S. Tomato-a natural medicine and its health benefits. J.Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 2012;1(1):33-43.
• ³
  Nwosu DJ, Onakoya OA, Okere AU, Babatunde AO, Popoola AF. Genetic variability and correlations in rainfed tomato (Solanum spp.) accessions in Ibadan, Nigeria. Greener J. Agric. Sci. 2014;4(5):211-9.
• ⁴
  Bisogni CA, Armbruster G, Brecht PE. Quality comparisons of room ripened and field ripened tomato fruits. J. Food Sci. 1976 Mar;41(2):333-8.
• ⁵
  Saimbhi MS, Singh S, Cheema DS. Shelf life of different varieties of tomato. Punjab Veg Grower1995; 30:45-6.
• ⁶
  Nandpuri KS, Kaur GU, Kanwar JS, Bajaj KL. Studies on some physicochemical changes during the storage of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). J.Res. 1979.15:31-7.
• ⁷
  Garg N, Cheema DS, Dhatt AS. Utilization of rin, nor, and alc alleles to extend tomato fruit availability. Int.J. Veg. Sci. 2008 Mar 20;14(1):41-54.
• ⁸
  Robinson R. Ripening inhibitor: a gene with multiple effects on ripening. Rep Tomato Genet Coop. 1968;18:36-7.
• ⁹
  Osei MK, Danquah A, Blay ET, Danquah E, Adu-Dapaah H. An overview of tomato fruit-ripening mutants and their use in increasing shelf life of tomato fruits. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2017 Dec 21;12(51):3520-8.
• ¹⁰
  Wang R, Lammers M, Tikunov Y, Bovy AG, Angenent GC, de Maagd RA. The rin, nor and Cnr spontaneous mutations inhibit tomato fruit ripening in additive and epistatic manners. Plant Sci. 2020 May 1;294:110436.
• ¹¹
  Garg N, Cheema DS, Dhatt AS. Utilization of rin, nor, and alc alleles to extend tomato fruit availability. Int. J. Veg. Sci. 2008 Mar 20;14(1):41-54.
• ¹²
  Garg N, Pathak D, Cheema DS. Heterosis Breeding in Tomato Involving" rin"," nor" and" alc" Alleles: A Review of Literature. Heterosis Breeding in Tomato Involving" rin"," nor" and" alc" Alleles. 2008:1000-9.
• ¹³
  Nguyen VQ, Ashcroft WJ, Jones KH, McGlasson WB. Evaluation of Fsub (1) hybrids incorporating the rin (ripening inhibitor) gene to improve the storage life and fruit quality of fresh market tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). Aust J Exp Agric. 1991;31(3):407-13.
• ¹⁴
  Garg N, Dhatt AS, Cheema DS. Combining Ability Analysis Involving" rin, nor" and" alc" Alleles in Tomato under Late Planting Conditions. Combining Ability Analysis Involving" rin, nor" and" alc" Alleles in Tomato under Late Planting Conditions. 2007:1000-9.
• ¹⁵
  Garg N, Cheema DS. Genotype× Environment interactions for shelf life and yield attributes in tomato hybrids heterozygous at rin, nor, or alc Loci. J. Crop Improv. 2008 May 20;22(1):17-30.
• ¹⁶
  Kitagawa M, Ito H, Shiina T, Nakamura N, Inakuma T, Kasumi T, et al. Characterization of tomato fruit ripening and analysis of gene expression in F1 hybrids of the ripening inhibitor (rin) mutant. Physiol. Plant. 2005 Mar;123(3):331-8.
• ¹⁷
  McGlasson WB, Sumeghy JB, Morris LL, McBride RL, Best DJ, Tigchelaar EC. Yield and evaluation of F1 tomato hybrids incorporating the non-ripening nor gene. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 1983;23(120):106-12.
• ¹⁸
  Mutschler MA, Wolfe DW, Cobb ED, Yourstone KS. Tomato fruit quality and shelf life in hybrids heterozygous for the alc ripening mutant. HortScience. 1992 Apr 1;27(4):352-5.
• ¹⁹
  Kopeliovitch E, Mizrahi Y, Rabinowitch HD, Kedar N. Effect of the fruit- ripening mutant genes rin and nor on the flavor of tomato fruit. J. Am. Soc.Hortic. Sci.1979a;107:361-4.
• ²⁰
  Kopeliovitch E, Rabinowitch HD, Mizrahi Y, Kedar N. The potential of ripening mutants for extending the storage life of the tomato fruit. Euphytica. 1979b Feb;28:99-104.
• ²¹
  Kempthorne. An Introduction to Genetic Statistics. John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York; 1957; 545 p.
• ²²
  Anonymous. Package of Practices for Cultivation of Vegetables. Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana2020;1p.
• ²³
  Sheoran OP, Tonk DS, Kaushik LS, Hasija RC, Pannu RS. Statistical software package for agricultural research workers. Recent advances in information theory, statistics & computer applications by DS Hooda & RC Hasija Department of Mathematics Statistics, CCS HAU, Hisar. 1998:139-43.
• ²⁴
  Kaushik P, Dhaliwal MS, Jindal SK, Srivastava A, Tyagi V, Brar NS, et al.Heterosis and leaf curl virus resistance in rainy season tomato under North Indian conditions. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2015 Jul 16;10(29):2763-72.
• ²⁵
  Khan A, Jindal SK. Exploiting yield potential in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) through heterosis breeding. Plant Gene Trait. 2016;7(8):1-7.
• ²⁶
  Tamta S, Singh JP. Heterosis in tomato for growth and yield traits. Int. J. Veg. Sci. 2018 Mar 4;24(2):169-79.
• ²⁷
  Salim MM, Rashid MH, Ali MR, Akter L. Studies on character improvement in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) by heterosis. Asian Plant Res J. 2019;2(3):1-2.
• ²⁸
  Karak C, Hazra P. Manifestation of heterosis for different fruit characters in F1 hybrids of tomato. J.Pharmacogn.Phytochem. 2020;9(5):2082-5.
• ²⁹
  Avdikos ID, Nteve GM, Apostolopoulou A, Tagiakas R, Mylonas I, Xynias IN, et al. Analysis of re-heterosis for yield and fruit quality in restructured hybrids, generated from crossings among tomato recombinant lines. Agronomy. 2021 Apr 22;11(5):822.
• ³⁰
  Garg N, Cheema DS, Chawla N. Manifestation of heterosis for fruit yield, quality and shelf-life in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) hybrids incorporating rin, nor or alc alleles in main-and late-seasons of north Indian plains. Veg. Sci. 2013;40(1):28-33.

• Funding:

  This research received no external funding.

• Supplementary material:

  This article contains supplementary material. Available in: https://www.documentador.pr.gov.br/documentador/pub.do?action=d&uuid=@gtf-escriba-tecpar@dce0c89f-85c7-44e9-bcfb-8bb112b09643

Edited by

Editor-in-Chief:

Bill Jorge Costa

Associate Editor:

Marcos Pileggi

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  27 Nov 2023
• Date of issue
  2023

History

• Received
  20 Feb 2023
• Accepted
  10 Apr 2023