Heterosis in Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) for Yield and Yield Component Traits

Main Article Content

Desalegn Negasa Soresa
Gomathi Nayagam
Netsanet Bacha
Zerihun Jaleta


Estimates of heterosis for F1 hybrids over mid and better parent were computed for traits that showed significant differences between genotypes on analysis of variance. Heterosis for yield components and yield was studied using 8x8 half diallel cross in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). The heterosis for yield was generally accompanied by heterosis for yield components. Heterosis for marketable fruit yield per plant ranged from (-63.4%) (P3xP8) to (33.8%) (P6xP8) and (-62.5%) (P3xP8) to (52.6%) (P5xP7), for mid parent and better parent respectively. Significant heterosis over better and mid-parent was observed for all the traits.  Best parent and Mid-parent heterosis (MPH) was highest  and in desirable direction for number of marketable fruit per plant  (29.3%; 29.2%)  in crosses ( P3xP6 for both ) and pericarp thickness  (46.3%; 57.6%) in crosses (P2xP6 and P4xP8), number of fruit cluster per plant (32.8%; 35.9%) in cross (P3xP6 for both), individual fruit weight (36.1%; 41.2%) in cross (P2xP8, P3xP5) and fruit diameter (28.4%; 28.3%) in cross (P3xP5; P2xP6), fruit length (23.07%; 20.4%)  in cross (P2xP6 for both). Out of 28 F1 crosses, positive and desirable heterosis by 10 crosses over better parent and 17 crosses over mid-parent were observed for total fruit density in tomato. An important heterosis both in heterobeltiosis and mid-parent was recorded in marketable fruit yield in ton per hectare. From all the crosses, seven crosses revealed positive from which three crosses are the most important P2xP7 (31%),  P3xP5 (20%) and P3xP6 (54%) in better parent heterosis. Similarly for mid-parent heterosis, only ten crosses out of 28 reveled positive while the rest 18 crosses showed the undesirable direction for marketable fruit yield indicating majority of the hybrids exhibited unfavorable heterotic response and only a few hybrids could be considered for selection.

Solanum lycopersicum L., heterosis, yield and yield components, marketable fruit

Article Details

How to Cite
Soresa, D. N., Nayagam, G., Bacha, N., & Jaleta, Z. (2020). Heterosis in Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) for Yield and Yield Component Traits. Advances in Research, 21(9), 141-152. https://doi.org/10.9734/air/2020/v21i930242
Original Research Article


Kaushik SK, Tomar DS, Dixit AK. Genetics of fruit yield and it's contributing characters in tomato (Solanum lycopersicom). Journal of Agricultural Biotechnology and Sustainable Development. 2011;3:209.

Allard RW. Principles of Plant Breeding, John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, USA; 1960.

Hedrick UP, Booth NO. Mendelian characters in tomato. Proceedings of American Society Horticulture Science. 1968;5:19-24.

Choudhary B, Punia RS, Sangha HS. Manifestation of hybrid vigour in F1 and its correlation in F2 generation of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill). Indian J. Horticulture. 1965;22:52-59.

Yordanov M. Heterosis in tomato. Theoetical and Appl. Genetics. 1983;6: 189-219.

Lemma D. Tomato research experience and production prospects. Research Report-Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization, No. 2002;43.

Griffing B. Concept of general and specific combining ability in relation to diallel crossing system. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences. 1956b;9(4):463-493.

Jiregna Tasisa. Field, greenhouse and detached leaf evaluation of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) genotypes for late blight resistance. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2014;10(2):76-80.

Steel RGD, Torrie JH. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. A Biological Approach. McGraw Hill Book Co., New York; 1980.

SAS Institute, Inc. SAS/STAT user's guide. Version 9.2, 4th Edition. Cary, NC; 2008.

Falconer DS, Mackay TFC. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, (4th Ed.).Longman, Essex, England; 1996.

Panse VG, Sukhatme PV. Statistical Methods for Agricultural Workers, ICAR Publication, New Delhi. 1961;145.

Farzane A, Nemati H, Arouiee H, Kakhki AM. Estimate of heterosis and combining ability of some morphological characters in tomato transplants (Lycopersicon esculentum M.). International Journal of Farming and Allied Sciences. 2013;2:290-295.

Kumar R, Srivastava K, Singh NP, Vasistha NK, Singh RK, Singh MK. Combining ability analysis for yield and quality traits in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Journal of Agricultural Science. 2013;5:213-218.

Singh RK, Chaudhary BD. Biometrical Methods in Quantitative Genetic Analysis. Revised Edition. New Delhi: Kalyani; 1979.

Thakur BR, Singh RK, Nelson P. Quality attributes of processed tomato products: A review. Food Res. Int. 1996;12:375–401.

Yustiana. Combining Ability and Heterotic Group Analysis of Several Tropical Maize Inbred Lines from PT. BISI International, Tbk’s Collections. Thesis. Bogor Agricultural University. 2013; 115.

Joshi A, Thakur MC. Exploitation of heterosis for yield and yield contributing traits in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). Progressive Horticulture. 2003;35: 64-68.

Yadav SK, Singh BK, DK Baranwal SS. Solankey.Genetic study of heterosis for yield and quality components in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). African Journal of Agricultural Research. 2013;8:5585-5591.745–754.

Saleem MY, Asghar M, Iqbal Q, Rahman A and Akram M. Diallel analysis of yield and some yield components in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Pak. J. Bot. 2013;45:1247-1250.

Hannan MM, Biswas MM, Ahmed MB, Hossain M and Islam R. Combining ability analysis of yield and yield components in tomato (Solanum lycopersicumMill). Turk. J. Bot. 2007b;31:559-563.

Ahmad S, Quamruzzaman AKM, Islam MR. Estimation of heterosis in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Bangladesh J. Agri. Res. 2011;36(3):521-527.

Williams W. Heterosis and genetics of complex characters. Nature. 1959;184: 528-530.

Aruna S, Veeraragavathatham D. Correlation among yield and yield component traits in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). South Indian Hort. 1996;45(1&2):7-9.

Kumar S, Banerjee MK, Partap PS. Studies on heterosis for various characters in tomato. Haryana J. Hort. Sci. 1995;24(1):54-60.

Devi H, Rattan RS, Thakur MC. Heterosis in tomato. The Horticulture J. 1994;7(2):125-132.

Gul R, Rahman HU, Khalil IH, Shah SMA, Ghafoor A. Estimate of heterosis in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Bangladesh J. Agri. Res. 2011;36(3):521-527.

Chattopadhyay A, Paul A. Studies on heterosis for different fruit quality parameters in tomato. Int. J. Agri. Environ; 2012.

Kalloo G. Genetic improvement of tomato. Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.

Singh SP, Thakur MC, Pathania NK. Reciprocal cross differences and combining ability studies for some quantitative traits in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) under mid hill conditions of Western Himalayas. Asian Journal of Horticulture. 2010;5(1):172-176.

Kumar R, Singh NP, Singh MK. A Study on Heterosis in Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) for Yield and its Component Traits, International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706. 2017;6(7): 1318-1325.

Quadir M, Hickey M, Boulton A, Hoogers R. Accumulation of total soluble solids in processing tomatoes. ActaHortic. 2006;724:97-102

Leonard S, Pangborn RM, Luh' BS. The pH problem in canned tomatoes. Food Technol. 1959; 13:418-419.

FAO. Food and Agricultural Organization annual report. May 25. 2020; 2020.