Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp2 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Genetic variability and multivariate analysis of fruit yield and quality traits in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) genotypes

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.15134
Submitted
21 April 2026
Published
24-06-2026

Abstract

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) is an important vegetable crop esteemed for its nutritional and antioxidant attributes, playing a crucial role in human health and food security. The current study was undertaken to assess the extent of genetic variability among three-jointed and seven-jointless pedicle tomato genotypes for fruit and quality traits and to identify superior genotypes for crop improvement programmes. The experiment was conducted using a completely randomised design (CRD) with 3 replications and significant differences were observed among genotypes for most traits, indicating ample scope for selection. The jointless pedicel genotype EC605094 exhibited superior performance for fruit size, fruit weight, firmness and juice yield, whereas New Jointless recorded higher antioxidant traits, including lycopene, β-carotene and ascorbic acid contents. Among the jointed pedicel varieties, Kashi Chayan showed desirable fruit quality traits, particularly for juice yield and carotenoid content. The analysis of genetic variability revealed substantial genotypic and phenotypic coefficients of variation for fruit weight. Fruit weight exhibited high heritability and significant genetic advance as a percent of the mean, indicating the prevalence of additive gene action and the efficacy of direct selection. Correlation analysis demonstrated a strong interrelationship among fruit size, weight and quality traits. Principal component analysis (PCA) identified four components responsible for 86.39 % of the total variation, with PC1 contributing 34.77 %. The identified superior jointed and jointless pedicel genotypes may serve as valuable parental lines for future tomato hybridisation programmes targeting higher yield and nutritional quality.

References

  1. 1. FAOSTAT. Food and Agricultural Organization of United Nations; 2024. https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL
  2. 2. Dawid J. The role of tomato products for human health (Solanum lycopersicum)—A review. J Health Med Nurs. 2016;33:66–74.
  3. 3. Tiwari JK, Behera TK, Rai N, Yerasu SR, Singh MK, Singh PM. Tomato breeding for processing in India: Current status and prospects. Vegetable Sci. 2022;49(2):123–32.
  4. 4. Umar M, Zubairu A, Hamisu H, Mohammed I, Oko J, Abdulkarim I, et al. Evaluation of phytochemical and in vitro antimicrobial effects of Solanum lycopersicum Linn. (Tomato) on oral thrush and human cariogenic pathogens. J Adv Med Pharm Sci. 2016;11(4):1–9. https://doi.org/10.9734/JAMPS/2016/28025
  5. 5. Dorais M, Ehret DL, Papadopoulos AP. Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) health components: from the seed to the consumer. Phytochem Rev. 2008;7(2):231–50.
  6. 6. Martí R, Roselló S, Cebolla-Cornejo J. Tomato as a source of carotenoids and polyphenols targeted to cancer prevention. Cancers. 2016;8(6):58.
  7. 7. Frusciante L, Carli P, Ercolano MR, Pernice R, Di Matteo A, Fogliano V, et al. Antioxidant nutritional quality of tomato. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2007;51(5):609–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/mnfr.200600158
  8. 8. Sies H. Oxidative stress: oxidants and antioxidants. Exp Physiol. 1997;82(2):291–5.
  9. 9. Liu S, Yang D, Yu L, Aluo Z, Zhang Z, Qi Y, et al. Effects of lycopene on skeletal muscle-fiber type and high-fat diet-induced oxidative stress. J Nutr Biochem. 2021;87:108523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnutbio.2020.108523
  10. 10. Dai XY, Li XW, Zhu SY, Li MZ, Zhao Y, Talukder M, et al. Lycopene ameliorates di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate-induced pyroptosis in spleen via suppression of classic caspase-1/NLRP3 pathway. J Agric Food Chem. 2021;69(4):1291–9. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.0c06534
  11. 11. Liu H, Liu J, Liu Z, Wang Q, Liu J, Feng D, et al. Lycopene reduces cholesterol absorption and prevents atherosclerosis in ApoE–/– Mice by Downregulating HNF-1α and NPC1L1 Expression. J Agric Food Chem. 2021;69(35):10114–20. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.1c03160
  12. 12. Assar EA, Vidalle MC, Chopra M, Hafizi S. Lycopene acts through inhibition of IκB kinase to suppress NF-κB signaling in human prostate and breast cancer cells. Tumor Biol. 2016;37(7):9375–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13277-016-4846-7
  13. 13. Shamna K, Poyil M. Vegetables that heal: The magic of red colour vegetables on breast cancer. Ann Phytomed. 2023;12(1):15–22. https://doi.org/10.54085/ap.2023.12.1.3
  14. 14. Rao AV, Young GL, Rao LG. Lycopene and tomatoes in human nutrition and health. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2018.
  15. 15. Raffo A, Leonardi C, Fogliano V, Ambrosino P, Salucci M, Gennaro L, et al. Nutritional value of cherry tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum cv. Naomi F1) harvested at different ripening stages. J Agric Food Chem. 2002;50(22):6550–6. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf020315t
  16. 16. Vats S, Bansal R, Rana N, Kumawat S, Bhatt V, Jadhav P, et al. Unexplored nutritive potential of tomato to combat global malnutrition. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2022;62(4):1003–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2020.1823815
  17. 17. D'Aquino S, Mistriotis A, Briassoulis D, Di Lorenzo ML, Malinconico M, Palma A. Influence of modified atmosphere packaging on postharvest quality of cherry tomatoes held at 20°C. Postharvest Biol Technol. 2016;115:103–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2015.12.008
  18. 18. Tigist M, Workneh TS, Woldetsadik K. Effects of variety on the quality of tomato stored under ambient conditions. J Food Sci Technol. 2013;50(3):477–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0378-0
  19. 19. Ranganna S. Handbook of analysis and quality control for fruits and vegetables. 2nd ed. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Co Ltd; 1986. p. 9–10.
  20. 20. Jayaraman J. Laboratory manual in biochemistry. New Delhi: Wiley Eastern Ltd; 1981.
  21. 21. Sadasivam S, Balasubramanian T. Practical manual in biochemistry. Coimbatore: Tamil Nadu Agricultural University; 1987. p. 14.
  22. 22. Suh DH, Jung ES, Lee GM, Lee CH. Distinguishing six edible berries based on metabolic pathway and bioactivity correlations by non-targeted metabolite profiling. Front Plant Sci. 2018;9:1462. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.00632
  23. 23. Mohammed M, Wilson LA, Gomes PI. Postharvest sensory and physiochemical attributes of processing and nonprocessing tomato cultivars. J Food Qual. 1999;22(2):167–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4557.1999.tb00545.x
  24. 24. Lemanowicz M, Krukowski A. Comparisons of qualitative and quantitative issues in the fruit supply industries in The Netherlands, Poland, Greece and Spain. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol. 2009;84(6):13–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2009.11512584
  25. 25. Gopinath P, Parsad R, Joseph B, Adarsh V. GRAPES: General RShiny based analysis platform empowered by statistics. J Open Source Softw. 2021;6(63):3437. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.03437
  26. 26. Saini R, Sidhu A, Singh D, Kumar A. Studies on genetic diversity in growth, yield and quality traits in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). J Hortic Sci. 2013;8(1):21–4.
  27. 27. Chattopadhyay T, Hazra P, Akhtar S, Maurya D, Mukherjee A, Roy S. Skin colour, carotenogenesis and chlorophyll degradation mutant alleles: genetic orchestration behind the fruit colour variation in tomato. Plant Cell Rep. 2021;40(5):767–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00299-020-02628-6
  28. 28. Ali Q, Erkan M, Jan I. Morphological and agronomic characterization of tomato under field conditions. Pure Appl Biol. 2017;6(3):1021–9.
  29. 29. Kaushik S, Tomar D, Dixit A. Genetics of fruit yield and its’ contributing characters in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). J Agric Biotechnol Sustain Dev. 2011;3(10):209.
  30. 30. Aoun AB, Lechiheb B, Benyahya L, Ferchichi A. Evaluation of fruit quality traits of traditional varieties of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) grown in Tunisia. Afr J Food Sci. 2013;7(10):350–4.
  31. 31. Tasisa J, Belew D, Bantte K, Gebreselassie W. Variability, heritability and genetic advance in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) genotypes in West Shoa, Ethiopia. Am-Eurasian J Agric Environ Sci. 2011;11(1):87–94.
  32. 32. Manna M, Paul A. Studies on genetic variability and characters association of fruit quality parameters in tomato. HortFlora Res Spectr. 2012;1(4):339–43.
  33. 33. Stevens MA, Kader AA, Albright-Holton M, Algazi M. Genotypic variation for flavor and composition in fresh market tomatoes. J Am Soc Hortic Sci. 1977;102(5):680–9. https://doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.102.6.680
  34. 34. Reddy PSK, Yerasu SR, Reddy PSS, Tiwari JK, Rai N. Profiling of antioxidants and metabolite pigments in diverse tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) genotypes. Ann Phytomed. 2024;13(2):640–52. https://doi.org/10.54085/ap.2024.13.2.63
  35. 35. Debnath A, Kumar R, Prasad S, Sharma N. Genetic variation and character association study among morphological and biochemical traits of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) genotypes. Biosc Biotech Res Comm. 2021;16(1):69–75.
  36. 36. Reddy PSK, Muthulakshmi S, Reddy PSS. Influence of environmental factors, growing conditions and seasonal variations on vegetative, yield and quality characters of cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) varieties. Indian J Ecol. 2023;50(5):1695–700.
  37. 37. Gadi J, Seyie K, Shah P, Imam Z. Genetic diversity assessment of winged bean [Psophocarpus tetragonolobus (L.) DC.] genotypes. J Adv Biol Biotechnol. 2025;28(2):673–80. https://doi.org/10.9734/jabb/2025/v28i230807
  38. 38. Erskine W. Heritability and combining ability of vegetative and phenological characters of winged beans (Psophocarpus tetragonolobus (L.) DC). J Agric Sci. 1981;96(3):503–8. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600036580
  39. 39. Mohamadali A, Madalageri M. Analysis of genetic variability for seed yield and its component characters in winged bean [Psophocarpus tetragonolobus (L.) DC]. Legume Res. 2007;30(4):290–1. https://doi.org/10.18805/lr.v30i4.748
  40. 40. Popoola JO, Bello OA, Obembe OO. Phenotypic intraspecific variability among some accessions of drumstick (Moringa oleifera Lam.). Can J Pure Appl Sci. 2016;10(1):3681–93.
  41. 41. Kumar M, Dudi B. Study of correlation for yield and quality characters in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). Electron J Plant Breed. 2011;2(3):453–60.
  42. 42. Pavan M, Gangaprasad S, Adivappar N. Genetic variability, trait inter-relationships, third and fourth degree statistics based genetics for fruit quality and yield traits governing shelf life in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Plant Genet Resour. 2022;20(5):366–75. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479262122000460
  43. 43. Prakash MO, Vijay B. Principal component and cluster analysis of indigenous tomato genotypes based on morphological indicators. Res J Biotechnol. 2017;12(7):50–8.
  44. 44. Sobratee N, Workneh TS. Evaluation of chemical, biochemical and microbiological quality in tomato using multivariate analysis. Int J Food Eng. 2015;11(2):173–84. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijfe-2014-0201
  45. 45. Suárez MH, Méndez EP, Galdón BR, Rodríguez ER, Romero CD. Influence of agronomic variables on quality of tomato fruits. Agric Sci. 2011;2(4):424–31. https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2011.24055
  46. 46. Rodrigues MHP, Kupski L, Souza TD, Arias JLO, D'Oca MM, Furlong EB. Relations between nutrients and bioactive compounds of commercial tomato varieties by the Principal Component Analysis. Food Sci Technol. 2022;42:e60020. https://doi.org/10.1590/fst.60020
  47. 47. Glogovac S, Takač A, Tepić A, Šumić Z, Gvozdanović-Varga J, Červenski J, et al. Principal component analysis of tomato genotypes based on some morphological and biochemical quality indicators. Ratar Povrt. 2012;49(3):296–301. https://doi.org/10.5937/ratpov49-1171
  48. 48. Raza B, Hameed A, Saleem MY. Fruit nutritional composition, antioxidant and biochemical profiling of diverse tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) genetic resource. Front Plant Sci. 2022;13:1035163. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1035163

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.