Next Article in Journal
Isolation of Bacillus velezensis from Silage and Its Effect on Aerobic Stability and In Vitro Methane Production of Whole-Plant Corn Silage
Previous Article in Journal
Temporal and Spatial Variation of Agricultural and Pastoral Production in the Eastern Section of the Agro-Pastoral Transitional Zone in Northern China
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effect of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis on the Development of the Canary Island Tomato Variety “Manzana Negra” under Abiotic Stress Conditions

by
Alexis Hernández-Dorta
1,
María del Carmen Jaizme-Vega
1 and
Domingo Ríos-Mesa
2,3,*
1
Plant Protection Department, Instituto Canario de Investigaciones Agrarias, 38270 San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
2
Agricultural and Rural Engineering Department, Universidad de La Laguna, Ctra. de Geneto 2, 38071 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
3
Center for the Conservation of Agricultural Biodiversity of Tenerife, Cabildo Insular de Tenerife, Calle Mandillo Tejera, 8, 38004 Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Tenerife, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2024, 14(6), 828; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14060828
Submission received: 13 April 2024 / Revised: 19 May 2024 / Accepted: 20 May 2024 / Published: 25 May 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Production)

Abstract

:
Tomato production in the Canary Islands has significantly decreased in recent years due to the presence of parasites and pathogens, poor-quality irrigation water, lack of infrastructure modernization, and increased competition. To address this issue, local varieties with better agro-climatic adaptation and organoleptic characteristics have been cultivated. These varieties show their maximum potential under an agro-ecological cultivation system, where the beneficial micro-organisms of the rhizosphere (in general) and mycorrhizal fungi (in particular) have a positive influence on their development, especially when the plants are subjected to biotic or abiotic stresses. Irrigation water in Canary Islands tomato cultivation comes from groundwater sources with moderate levels of sodium and chlorides or sodium and bicarbonates. This study evaluated the response of mycorrizal plants of the local tomato variety “Manzana Negra” under abiotic stress conditions due to the presence of chlorides and bicarbonates. Two tests were carried out with mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal plants. In the first one, 0, 75, and 150 mM NaCl solutions were applied. In the second, the nutrient solution was enriched with sodium bicarbonate at doses of 0, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, and 12.5 mM. Presence of native mycorrhizae improved the growth and nutrition of plants affected by irrigation with saline and alkaline water containing chloride and sodium carbonate. Symbiosis produced statistically significant increases in all plant-development-related variables (stem length and diameter; fresh and dry weight) in all bicarbonate concentrations. However, the results with the application of sodium chloride do not seem to indicate a positive interaction in most of the analytical parameters at 150 mM NaCl concentration. The mycorrhizal inoculation with local fungi can be interesting in the production of seedlings of this tomato variety in situations of moderate salinity, especially under bicarbonate stress conditions.

1. Introduction

The Canary Island archipelago, made up of eight islands, is located off the north-west coast of Africa, between latitudes 27°37′ and 29°25′ N and longitudes 13°20′ and 18°10′ W (Figure 1). Since the end of the 19th century, tomato cultivation has been important for the economy of the islands. The tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) is well adapted to the islands’ soil and climatic conditions, which has made it an important part of the archipelago’s economy and a characteristic element of the landscape and culture. As a result, cultivation increased until production reached over 300,000 tonnes at the end of the 20th century. Since then, there has been a gradual decline in production, mainly due to the salinisation and desertification of the land, the increase in pests and diseases, and the cultivation of other, more competitive crops [1].
Of the processes responsible for soil degradation in the Canary Islands, salinisation and sodification affect 20% of the territory [2]. This is not only due to natural causes; irrigated agriculture has aggravated the situation through the indiscriminate use of very low-quality saline water. In many cases, this is the only water available, owing to the continuous overexploitation of aquifers, which has led to marine intrusion in coastal wells [3].
The mobility of salts and sodium in soil is high, making them susceptible to removal by excess water, a process known as salt washing. In the Canary Islands, traditional irrigation systems that used large volumes of water and rainfall facilitated flushing, which solved the problems of salinisation and sodification. However, the use of high-frequency localized irrigation systems, which use very low water volumes, does not facilitate the removal of salts from the surface horizons of the soil. Instead, it only relocates them, leading to a concealed salinization of agricultural soils in the medium term [3].
The groundwater in the Canary Islands is classified into three types: sodium chloride, sodium bicarbonate, and calcium-magnesium bicarbonate [3]. Groundwater extracted from wells is typically found in the arid coastal areas of Lanzarote, Fuerteventura, South Tenerife, and Gran Canaria. The largest tomato-producing areas in the Canary Islands are in Gran Canaria, where the groundwater contains sodium chloride. The quality of the water in galleries is better, but it is bicarbonated. The water is either sodic when the aquifer saturates alkaline rocks such as phonolites and ignimbrites or calcic and magnesic when it saturates basaltic rocks.
In areas with an optimal climate for tomato cultivation, salinity is a serious problem, not only for establishing new plantations but also for maintaining high production levels [4]. Although tomatoes are generally moderately tolerant to salinity, there are considerable differences between cultivars when there is an excess of salt in the soil. This can affect vegetative growth. Indeed, it can result in a reduction in the length and dry weight of the stems, as well as the fresh and dry weight of the roots [5,6] and the number and size of the fruits [7,8,9]. It has also been found that the addition of bicarbonate and sodium chloride in irrigation water produces more negative effects than sodium chloride alone [10]. The decrease in biomass observed when plants are irrigated with bicarbonate may be attributed to the high pH resulting from the dissolution of bicarbonate ions. This high pH level may negatively impact nutrient uptake [11,12].
The ability of arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi to enhance plant tolerance to abiotic stress conditions has been widely acknowledged [5,6,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]. Manipulating these fungi in sustainable agricultural systems can be crucial for improving soil quality and crop productivity under unfavourable soil and climatic conditions [13]. Several authors have highlighted the ability of AM fungi to increase crop tolerance to soil salinity, decrease agricultural productivity losses, and generally benefit agricultural production [14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]. In the case of tomatoes, numerous studies have demonstrated the potential of AM fungi to provide plants with greater resistance to salt stress in arid and semi-arid regions. This can lead to improved plant nutrition and growth and, therefore, better yields and productivity, as it allows the size and efficiency of the roots, the leaf area index, and the low biomass to adapt in drought conditions and improves photosynthetic efficiency, stomatal conductance, and leaf water relations in saline conditions [5,6,9,16,23,24,25,26,27,28,29].
This study aims to evaluate the effects of the local arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Funneliformis mosseae on a traditional Canary Island tomato variety “Manzana Negra” under abiotic stress caused by high concentrations of sodium chloride and sodium bicarbonate in the soils of the Canary Islands.

2. Materials and Methods

Two trials with increasing salt concentrations, one with sodium chloride and the other with sodium bicarbonate, were carried out on mycorrhizal tomato plants under controlled growing conditions.

2.1. Plant Material: Host Plant

Both experiments used the “Alajeró” entry of the traditional Canary Island tomato variety “Manzana Negra” (Table 1) from the collection of the Centro de Conservación de la Biodiversidad Agrícola de Tenerife (CCBAT, Bank Code ESP0172), an organic unit of the Cabildo Insular de Tenerife [30]. The seeds were previously disinfected in a 0.5% sodium hypochlorite solution for one minute and then rinsed with sterile distilled water.

2.2. Substrate and Containers, Inoculation, and Growing Conditions in the Semi-Fertilised Phase

2.2.1. Substrate and Containers

The substrate used was a mixture of corrected blond peat TKS1-Instant (Sphaghum-Torf® Klasmann-Deilmann GMBH, Geeste, Germany), fine black picón (volcanic ash), and soil with low P content, in a 1:1:1 ratio. The substrate, whose physical–chemical characteristics can be found in Table 2, was previously sifted through a 5 mm sieve and disinfected in a steam autoclave for 1 h for three consecutive days. The characteristics of the water used for irrigation are shown in Table 3. The seedlings were grown in rigid expanded polystyrene (EPS) multipot trays with 15 cells of 300 cm3 volume each, without a bottom.

2.2.2. Inoculation

The plants were inoculated with a mixture of rhizospheric soil and sorghum roots (Sorghum bicolor var. sudanense) colonised by the arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungus Funneliformis mosseae ‘raw inoculum’. The inoculum had a 72% colonisation rate and a richness of 100 spores per 100 g of soil. This was achieved by filling each alveolus of the multipots 2/3 full with substrate, adding 12 cm3 of crude inoculum to each alveolus, and then topping up with substrate. The plants were inoculated with mycorrhizal fungi during sowing. Non-mycorrhized plants were sown by filling each multipot alveolus completely with substrate. In both cases, the seeds were buried to the same depths using forceps.

2.2.3. Growing Conditions in the Seedbed

The trials were conducted under semi-controlled conditions in a mesh greenhouse with a polycarbonate cover. Irrigation was carried out according to the water requirements of the crop and Hewit nutrient solution was used as fertiliser [31].

2.3. Experimental Conditions Specific to Each Test

The experimental conditions and details of each of the experiments are given below.

2.3.1. Trial 1: Effect of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis on Sodium Chloride Stress

At the end of the seedling phase, which lasted six weeks, eight randomly selected seedlings per treatment were separated to check their growth and the degree of mycorrhizal colonisation (pre-experiment lifting) (Figure 2).

Experimental Design

The trial comprised a full factorial design with two factors—mycorrhiza (AM and Control) and sodium chloride (0 mM, 75 mM and 150 mM)—resulting in six treatments. A total of 270 seeds were sown, with half inoculated with a local AM fungus, Funneliformis mosseae (AM), and the other half left without inoculum. The sodium chloride factor was applied using 0, 75, and 150 mM NaCl solutions. The solutions were made with irrigation water, with the 0 mM dose consisting of irrigation water without added NaCl. This was performed depending on the salt treatment.

Substrate and Containers in the Experimental Phase

After the seedling phase, 42 seedlings per treatment were selected and transplanted into 17 cm diameter pots with a capacity of 2 L. The substrate used on this occasion was a previously washed mixture of fine black picón (volcanic ash) and soil with a low P content, in a 1:1 ratio, sifted through a 1 mm sieve.

Growing Conditions in the Experimental Phase

A weekly treatment with Bacillus thuringiensis was used to prevent damage by the Tuta absoluta moth and a treatment with wettable sulphur (Rubigán 0.5 cc/L) was applied to prevent powdery mildew attacks. The plants were kept under the same irrigation and phytosanitary conditions for three weeks to ensure their adequate development. From that point onwards, salt treatments were conducted by irrigating with salt solutions at the indicated concentrations three times a week. Four weeks later, the second lifting was performed, where eight seedlings per treatment were randomly selected as the experimental unit, with each unit consisting of one plant.

2.3.2. Trial 2: Effect of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis on Stress Caused by Sodium Bicarbonate

At the end of the five-week seedling phase, we randomly selected eight seedlings per treatment to assess their growth and degree of mycorrhizal colonization. This was performed using the rooted seedlings prior to the experiment, as shown in Figure 3.

Experimental Design

The experimental design comprised a full factorial with two factors—mycorrhiza (AM and Control) and sodium bicarbonate (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM)—resulting in a total of 12 treatments. For this, 240 seeds were sown, half of them inoculated with a local AM fungus, Funneliformis mosseae (AM), and the other half without inoculum. Sodium bicarbonate was applied to irrigation water at concentrations of 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM (with 0 mM being the control group).

Substrate and Containers in the Experimental Phase

After the seedling phase, 20 seedlings per treatment were selected and transplanted into 17 cm diameter pots with a capacity of 2 L. The substrate used was the same as that in the previous experiment.

Growing Conditions in the Experimental Phase

A weekly treatment with Bacillus thuringiensis was used to prevent damage by the Tuta absoluta moth and a treatment with wettable sulphur (Rubigán 0.5 cc/L) was applied to prevent powdery mildew attacks. To ensure adequate development of the plants, they remained under the same irrigation and phytosanitary treatment conditions as those described above for the seedbed for three weeks. After that, bicarbonate treatments were started, which consisted of irrigation with the sodium bicarbonate solutions at the concentrations previously indicated, three times a week. Nine weeks later, the seedlings were lifted, separating 12 randomly selected seedlings per treatment, where the experimental unit consisted of one plant.

Experimental Variables

After the seedling stage, ten seedlings per treatment were randomly selected to assess their development and degree of mycorrhizal colonization prior to the experiment. The following parameters were measured:
-
Fresh and dry weights of the aerial part and of the root system (g). To determine the dry matter, it was dried in a hot air oven at 70 °C until constant weights were achieved.
-
Plant length (cm).
-
The presence of mycorrhizal fungus was determined by calculating the percentage of colonisation using the Phillips and Hayman technique [32], which was modified by Koske and Gemma [33]. To determine the percentage of colonisation, 10 pieces of 1 cm length of stained root were observed under a microscope following the technique of Brundrett et al. [34].
-
The relative mycorrhizal dependence (RMD) [35] is a numerical expression of the degree to which plants require mycorrhization to achieve maximum growth or yield at a given fertility level. The formula proposed by Plenchette et al. [36] was used to calculate RMD.
-
The relative water content (RWC) was calculated as a percentage using the method of Barrs and Weatherley [37]. A leaf lobe was taken from each plant, previously weighed, and placed in a falcon tube on a piece of cotton wool saturated with distilled water so that the cut part touched the cotton wool. The samples were kept in a refrigerator at 4 °C for 24 h. Each leaf piece was weighed again to determine the turgid weight and then dried in an oven at 70 °C to determine the dry weight. Finally, the relative water content was determined using the formula: [(initial weight − dry weight)/(turgid weight − dry weight)] × 100.
-
The relative electrolyte loss (REL) (%) was determined using the method described by Verslues et al. [38]. To achieve this, one leaf lobe of each plant, which had been previously weighed, was placed in a falcon tube containing 30 mL of milli-Q water. The electrical conductivity of the water was measured prior to immersion. After 24 h at room temperature, the electrical conductivity of each sample was measured. The samples were autoclaved to release all the electrolytes present in the lobe. After cooling, the electrical conductivity was measured again using the formula: [(initial EC − EC water mili-Q)/(final EC − EC water mili-Q)] × 100.
-
The concentration of photosynthetic pigments (mg cm2) was determined by extracting eight leaf discs from each plant using a punch of known diameter. The discs were then placed in glass tubes containing 4 mL of pure acetone extractant and left for 24 h at 4 °C. To find out which was the best extractant, a previous study was carried out with all those used by Lichtenthaler [39], obtaining pure acetone as the best extractant in the case of the traditional tomato variety ‘Manzano negro’. Therefore, the absorbance was then measured at the 3 wavelengths corresponding to pure acetone (λ1 = 661.6; λ2 = 644.8; λ3 = 470). The concentration of photosynthetic pigments (mg cm2) was determined by extracting eight leaf discs from each plant using a punch of known diameter. The discs were then placed in glass tubes containing 4 mL of pure acetone extractant and left for 24 h at 4 °C. The concentrations of chlorophyll a (Ca), chlorophyll b (Cb), chlorophyll a + b (Ca+b), and carotenes were calculated using the formulae described for this extractant [39]. In detail, the formulas used were:
Ca = 11.24A661.6 − 2.04A644.8;
Cb = 20.13A644.8 − 4.19A661.6;
Ca+b = 7.05A661.6 − 18.09A644.8;
Carotenes = (1000A470 − 1.9Ca − 63.14Cb)/214.
The data presented refer to cm2 of leaf area.
-
The leaf nutrient content (mg g−1) was also determined. P, Na, K, Ca, Mg, and Fe were analysed via mineralisation through incineration of the leaves at 450 °C and extraction with hot dilute hydrochloric acid. P was determined through colourimetry on the Technicon AAII Auto-analyser (SEAL Analitical, Rijen, The Netherlands) by forming the vanadomolybdophosphoric acid complex. Na, K, Ca, Mg, and Fe were determined through atomic absorption spectrophotometry using specific lamps for each element. Potentiometric titration was used to determine the water-soluble chlorides. The determination of N was carried out through wet mineralisation and colorimetric detection of the formation of the ammonium salicylate complex in the Technicon AAII Autoanalyser.
-
The electrical conductivity of the substrate was determined in saturated paste extract (dS.m−1).

2.4. Analysis of the Data

Statistical analysis was conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS v.17) for Microsoft Windows™. Homoscedasticity was assessed using Levene’s test, and normality was assessed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Shapiro–Wilk tests. The statistical tests performed included multifactorial analysis using the General Linear Model and single-factor analysis by comparing groups using analysis of variance (Student’s t-test and ANOVA). If significant differences were found, means were compared using post hoc analysis. In cases where the normality and homoscedasticity requirements were not met, a comparison between groups was performed using non-parametric Kruskal–Wallis analysis. As mycorrhizal colonisation is expressed as a percentage, the arc-sine transformation ((×/100)1/2) was applied to meet the parametric requirements of normality.

3. Results

3.1. Effect of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis on Salt Stress

The pre-experiment survey revealed that plants inoculated with AM fungi exhibited mycorrhizal colonisation in their roots. Additionally, a significant increase in seedling development was observed, as evidenced by the length and weight of both the aerial and root parts of the mycorrhizal plants in comparison to the control group. These plants also demonstrated high levels of mycorrhizal dependence.
At the end of the trial, the electrical conductivity (EC) of the substrate significantly increased with the application of more concentrated doses of salt, regardless of the presence or absence of AM fungi on the plants (see Figure 4). The substrate was observed to have been salinized by the irrigation water used (EC 0.79 dS.m−1), as it originally had an EC of 0.38 dS.m−1. By the end of the experiment, the mean values had reached 2.2 dS.m−1. In the 75 mM and 150 mM NaCl treatments, the electrical conductivity (EC) was 14.2 and 24.9 dS.m−1, respectively. This occurred regardless of the presence of arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi.
Table 4 shows that the local mycorrhizal fungus led to a significant increase in development, while the applied salt concentrations caused a decrease. The interaction between both factors was only statistically significant for aerial length and total length.
The length of the aerial parts of the mycorrhizal plants increased significantly in the 0 and 75 mM NaCl treatments compared to non-mycorrhizal plants. However, there was no significant increase when subjected to high salt concentrations (150 mM) (see Figure 5). Root length was significantly affected by increasing salt concentration in the solution, regardless of the presence of mycorrhizal fungus. At the mean dose of salt applied (75 mM), the stem diameter of mycorrhizal plants increased significantly. However, as the dose of NaCl applied increased, it decreased significantly.
In all salt treatments studied, mycorrhizal fungi demonstrated a statistically significant increase in plant biomass, both in terms of fresh and dry weight. However, this effect was not observed at 150 mM NaCl (refer to Figure 6).
The level of mycorrhizal colonisation increased linearly with the amount of salt applied. However, the relative mycorrhizal dependence was higher in the medium salinity treatment and decreased in the 150 mM NaCl treatment (Figure 7). This result demonstrates the effectiveness of the symbiosis at 75 mM added salt and its loss at 150 mM, despite greater colonisation.
In terms of the macronutrient content of the aerial part of the plants, the treatments demonstrated a statistically significant positive effect of mycorrhization on the uptake of nitrogen and potassium but not on phosphorus (see Figure 8).
Leaf Na and Cl content increased significantly with increasing amounts of these elements (Figure 9), with no effect of AM fungi. g−1.
The physiological parameters show significant differences in response to the salt dose added; however, differences due to mycorrhization of the plants were found only for relative water content and relative electrolyte loss (Table 5). Relative water content shows a significant decrease at any of the applied salt levels compared to the treatment with no salt added (0 mM) for both mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal plants.
The concentrations of the photosynthetic pigments (chlorophyll A, chlorophyll B, chlorophyll A + B, and carotenes) were affected with significant differences with increasing salt dosage (Table 5).
No significant differences were found in the relative water content (RWC) and relative electrolyte loss (REL) at the different doses tested, except for the RWC at the dose of 75 mM salt. The results obtained are not conclusive to establish a relationship between these two rates and the different applied doses of NaCl (Figure 10).

3.2. Effect of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis on Bicarbonate Stress

The pre-experimental survey showed the presence of symbiosis in the plants inoculated with AM fungi. A significant increase in the development of the mycorrhizal seedlings was also observed, as reflected in the length of the aerial part as well as in the fresh and dry weights of the aerial part.
The final evaluation of the experiment showed that the symbiosis produced a statistically significant increase in the variables related to plant development. The application of sodium bicarbonate showed a statistically significant effect on these parameters. There was no interaction between the two factors on these parameters.
The length of the aerial part was significantly longer for mycorrhizal plants (Figure 11) regardless of the dose of bicarbonate applied. The opposite effect was found for root length where increasing doses of bicarbonate applied produced an increase in this parameter (Figure 12), regardless of the establishment of symbiosis (Table 6).
The fresh and dry weights of the aerial part were significantly higher in mycorrhizal plants in all salt treatments applied (Figure 13 shows the data corresponding to dry weight). The mycorrhizal plants did not show any differences between the sodium bicarbonate treatments, but the plants with roots showed a statistically significant decrease in fresh and dry weight compared to the plants without bicarbonate (0 mM NaHCO3 treatment), which shows the protective effect of the symbiosis (Figure 13).
The most striking effect produced by the application of sodium bicarbonate on the development of tomato plants of the Manzano Negro variety was a significant increase in plant diameter (Figure 14).
Mycorrhizal colonisation decreased significantly with increasing bicarbonate dose, while its relative mycorrhizal dependency was maintained at the different bicarbonate concentrations (Figure 15).
In this trial, the symbiosis did not have a statistically significant effect on the foliar nutrient content of the plants, except for the 7.5 mM NaHCO3 dose. At this dose, the nitrogen content was statistically significantly higher, while the phosphorus content was statistically significantly lower (Figure 16).

4. Discussion

4.1. Effect of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis on Salt Stress

The effect of AM fungi against increasing doses of salt on tomato plants is confirmed in this work, which shows an increase in developmental parameters, as described by other authors [5,9,26,27,28,29,40], though it is lower in the roots than in the aerial biomass of the plants [5,9,26,27]. However, Al-Karaki, Al-Karaki et al., and Liu et al. [28,29,40] observed that these benefits disappeared at high doses of NaCl, which also agrees with our results.
Copeman et al. [41] found a linear increase in mycorrhizal colonisation as the amount of salt applied to tomato plants increased, being more evident at EC between 2 and 5 dS.m−1, similar to the results obtained in this experiment. In contrast, other authors found the opposite effect, observing greater colonisation in the treatment with no salt applied [5,26,28,29].
The mineral nutrient content of plant tissues was found to decrease as the electrical conductivity of the substrate increased, as demonstrated by Evelin et al. [42], mainly for P, as it is immobilised with Ca, Mg, and Zn ions [42]. The results of this work confirm that AM fungi have a positive effect on nutrient uptake [43,44,45].
Contrary to the findings of other authors in other crops [46,47], mycorrhization did not increase Cl uptake with increasing dose. The higher concentration of Cl in the substrate justifies the greater accumulation of Cl in mycorrhizal plants observed by the authors, as it leads to an increase in the translocation of this element to the mycorrhizal plants, occurring simultaneously with the carbon exchange between the fungus and the plant. In contrast, the opposite effect was observed by [48], where the symbiosis resulted in a decrease in Cl uptake.
The relative water content of mycorrhizal ‘Manzana Negra’ tomato plants was higher than non-mycorrhizal ones, in agreement with the numerous results showing that mycorrhizal plants maintain a higher water content compared to non-mycorrhizal ones [49,50,51]. This is because AM fungi improve root hydraulic conductivity, maintain a lower osmotic potential due to solute accumulation, and have a higher turgor potential, which makes mycorrhizal plants use water more efficiently than non-mycorrhizal plants [51].
Relative electrolyte loss was clearly affected by the salt treatments, increasing significantly for both mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal plants. In contrast, the effect of AM fungi was detrimental at the dose of 150 mM NaCl added, where the relative electrolyte loss increased significantly. However, several authors [14,52,53] working with maize (Zea mays), pole beans (Cajanus cajan), and peppers (Capsicum sp.) observed a significant decrease in the relative permeability of electrolytes in mycorrhized plants. This is because AM fungi allow plants to maintain higher electrolyte concentrations while maintaining the integrity and stability of the membranes, which they achieve by increasing P uptake and increasing antioxidant production [52]. The results obtained at the dose of 150 mM of added salt are probably because, at this salt level, the AM fungus we used are not effective, as previously mentioned for other parameters.
The observed decrease in the concentration of photosynthetic pigments (chlorophyll A, chlorophyll B, chlorophyll A + B, and carotenes) with increasing salt dosage is likely due to the suppression of specific enzymes responsible for the synthesis of photosynthetic pigments at high salinities [54]. In addition, reduced uptake of nutrients (such as Mg) required for chlorophyll biosynthesis also reduces photosynthetic pigment content in salinity-stressed plants [42]. However, AM fungi usually cause an increase in photosynthetic pigments under such conditions [55] due to the suppression of the negative effects caused by salinity [43]; although, in our study, the benefit of AM fungi was only found in chlorophyll B content in plants without added salt (0 mM).

4.2. Effect of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis on Bicarbonate Stress

Similar to the findings of other studies [30], an increase in the dose of bicarbonate applied resulted in a decrease in developmental parameters. This effect may be due to an increase in substrate pH, which can inhibit plant metabolic processes and/or reduce root activity and growth [56], as well as decrease nutrient solubility [12].
The benefits of mycorrhizal symbiosis for plants under bicarbonate stress have been previously described by Cartmill et al. [25]. Similar to our findings, they found no significant interaction between the factors ‘mycorrhizal effect’ and ‘applied bicarbonate’.
High pH levels cause an increase in root cell size in both epidermis and cortex, as well as an increase in intracellular space [57]. This could explain the larger plant diameters with increasing NaHCO3 concentration.
According to previous work by [58,59], the increase in bicarbonate dose in this experiment resulted in a statistically significant decrease in mycorrhizal colonisation. The authors suggest that this may be due to the toxic effect of high pH levels on mycorrhizal fungi.
The relative mycorrhizal dependence recorded in this work was maintained at different bicarbonate concentrations. However, Cartmill et al. [25] found an increase in mycorrhizal dependence up to a dose of 2.5 mM of added bicarbonate, subsequently decreasing with higher concentrations.
A significant decrease in leaf N and P content with increasing bicarbonate dosage was observed by Cartmill et al. [25], which they attributed to immobilisation caused by the increase in substrate pH resulting from the incorporation of bicarbonate ions. As for the effect of the AM fungi, they showed that the leaf concentrations of N, P, K, and Na were significantly higher in the mycorrhizal plants. However, none of these effects were observed in our experiment, except for the 7.5 NaHCO3 dose, which increased foliar N.
In order to explore in the future use of the fungus Funneliformis mosseae in the cultivation of the traditional variety “Manzana Negra” in the Canary Islands, it is necessary to evaluate the effect of the fungus on production under real cultivation conditions and the advantages of mycorrhizal inoculation in the presence of pathogenic nematodes.

5. Conclusions

Inoculation with the AM fungus Funneliformis mosseae improved the general development of plants of the Alajeró entry of the local Canary Island tomato variety “Manzana negra” under moderate salt stress produced by sodium chloride (75 mM NaCl). However, high salt concentrations (150 mM NaCl) reduce the effectiveness of inoculation with AM fungi.
The benefits of mycorrhizal symbiosis were also observed in tomato plants subjected to bicarbonate stress, with a general increase in development and biomass at all doses of bicarbonate applied.
The results show the general suitability of mycorrhizal inoculation for the cultivation of this tomato variety in situations of moderate salinity and especially under bicarbonate stress conditions.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, A.H.-D., M.d.C.J.-V. and D.R.-M. methodology, A.H.-D., M.d.C.J.-V. and D.R.-M. validation, M.d.C.J.-V. and D.R.-M. formal analysis, A.H.-D., M.d.C.J.-V. and D.R.-M. investigation A.H.-D.; resources, M.d.C.J.-V.; data curation, A.H.-D.; writing—original draft preparation, A.H.-D., M.d.C.J.-V. and D.R.-M.; writing—review and editing, D.R.-M.; visualisation, M.d.C.J.-V. and D.R.-M.; supervision, M.d.C.J.-V. and D.R.-M.; project administration, M.d.C.J.-V. funding acquisition, M.d.C.J.-V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research work has received funds to finance the award of a pre-doctoral grant within the programme of aid for the Training of Research Staff of the FPI-INIA Sub-programme within the framework of the National Plan for Scientific Research, Development and Technological Innovation 2008–2011 of the National Institute for Agricultural and Food Research and Technology (INIA). Furthermore, this work has been carried out within the framework of the research project of the National Institute of Agricultural Research of Spain (INIA) “Improvement of the production and quality of traditional tomato varieties through the application of mycorrhizal fungi, under different cultivation systems” RTA2011-00110-00-00.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the entire laboratory and field team of the Canarian Institute for Agricultural Research (ICIA). The authors would like to thank the people in charge of the Centro de Conservación de la Biodiversidad Agrícola staff for their assistance in the sample of tomatoes collection.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Cáceres-Hernández, J.J.; Godenau, D.; González-Gómez, J.I.; Martín-Rodríguez, G.; Ramos-Henríquez, J.M. Tomate canario de exportación: Una evaluación de costes. Inf. Tec. Ecón. Agrar. 2018, 114, 280–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Guerra, J. Evaluación de la Degradación de los Suelos Naturales de la Isla de Tenerife. Secuencias Edáficas Evolutivas y Regresivas. Ph.D. Thesis, Departamento de Edafología y Geología, Universidad de La Laguna, La Laguna, Spain, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  3. Vargas, G.E. Salinización Inducida en los Suelos Agrícolas de Canarias: Caracterización y Prognosis. Ph.D. Thesis, Departamento de Edafología y Geología, Universidad de La Laguna, La Laguna, Spain, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  4. Cuartero, J.; Fernández-Muñoz, R. Tomato and salinity. Sci. Hortic. 1998, 78, 83–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Abdel Latef, A.A.H.; Chaoxing, H. Effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on growth, mineral nutrition, antioxidant enzymes activity and fruit yield of tomato grown under salinity stress. Sci. Hortic. 2011, 127, 228–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Basak, H.; Demir, K.; Kasim, R.; Okay, F.Y. The effect of endo-mycorrhiza (VAM) treatment on growth of tomato seedling grown under saline conditions. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2011, 6, 2532–2538. [Google Scholar]
  7. Dorais, M.; Papadopoulos, A.; Gosselin, A. Influence of electric conductivity management on greenhouse tomato yield and fruit quality. Agronomie 2001, 21, 367–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhang, P.; Senge, M.; Dai, Y. Effects of salinity stress on growth, yield, fruit quality and water use efficiency of tomato under hydroponics system. Rev. Agric. Sci. 2016, 4, 46–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sellitto, V.M.; Golubkina, N.A.; Pietrantonio, L.; Cozzolino, E.; Cuciniello, A.; Cenvinzo, V.; Caruso, G. Tomato yield, quality, mineral composition and antioxidants as affected by beneficial microorganisms under soil salinity induced by balanced nutrient solutions. Agriculture 2019, 9, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Navarro, J.; Martínez, V.; Carvajal, M. Ammonium, bicarbonate and calcium effects on tomato plants grown under saline conditions. Plant Sci. Int. J. Exp. Plant Biol. 2000, 157, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Pearce, R.C.; Li, Y.M.; Bush, L.P. Calcium and bicarbonate effects on the growth and nutrient uptake of burley tobacco seedlings: Float system. J. Plant Nutr. 1999, 22, 1079–1090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Pearce, R.C.; Li, Y.M.; Bush, L.P. Calcium and bicarbonate effects on the growth and nutrient uptake of burley tobacco seedlings: Hydroponic. J. Plant Nutr. 1999, 22, 1069–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Gianinazzi, S.; Gollotte, A.; Binet, M.N.; van Tuinen, D.; Redecker, D.; Wipf, D. Agroecology: The key role of arbuscular mycorrhizas in ecosystem services. Mycorrhiza 2010, 20, 519–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Kaya, C.; Ashraf, M.; Sonmez, O.; Aydemir, S.; Tuna, A.L.; Cullu, M.A. The influence of arbuscular mycorrhizal colonisation on key growth parameters and fruit yield of pepper plants grown at high salinity. Sci. Hortic. 2009, 121, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ruiz-Lozano, J.M.; Porcel, R.; Azcón, C.; Aroca, R. Regulation by arbuscular mycorrhizae of the integrated physiological response to salinity in plants: New challenges in physiological and molecular studies. J. Exp. Bot. 2012, 63, 4033–4044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Estrada, B.; Aroca, R.; Barea, J.M.; Ruiz-Lozano, J.M. Native arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi isolated from a saline habitat improved maize antioxidant systems and plant tolerance to salinity. Plant Sci. Int. J. Exp. Plant Biol. 2013, 201–202, 42–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Estrada, B.; Aroca, R.; Maathuis, F.J.M.; Barea, J.M.; Ruiz-Lozano, J.M. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi native from a Mediterranean saline area enhance maize tolerance to salinity through improved ion homeostasis. Plant Cell Environ. 2013, 36, 1771–1782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Rillig, M.C.; Aguilar-Trigueros, C.A.; Camenzind, T.; Cavagnaro, T.R.; Degrune, F.; Hohmann, P.; Lammel, D.R.; Mansour, I.; Roy, J.; Marcel, G.A.; et al. Why farmers should manage the arbuscular mycorrhizal simbiosis. New Phytol. 2019, 222, 1171–1175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Bennett, A.E.; Groten, F. The Costs and Benefits of Plant–Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungal Interactions. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2022, 73, 649–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Chandrasekaran, M.; Boopathi, T.; Manivannan, P. Comprehensive Assessment of Ameliorative Effects of AMF in Alleviating Abiotic Stress in Tomato Plants. J. Fungi 2021, 7, 303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Latef, A.A.H.A.; Hashem, A.; Rasool, S.; Abd_Allah, E.F.; Alqarawi, A.A.; Egamberdieva, D.; Jan, S.; Anjum, N.A.; Ahmad, P. Arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis and abiotic stress in plants: A review. J. Plant Biol. 2016, 59, 407–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Wahab, A.; Muhammad, M.; Munir, A.; Abdi, G.; Zaman, W.; Ayaz, A.; Khizar, C.; Reddy, S.P.P. Role of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi in Regulating Growth, Enhancing Productivity, and Potentially Influencing Ecosystems under Abiotic and Biotic Stresses. Plants 2023, 12, 3102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ruiz-Lozano, J.M.; Azcón, R. Symbiotic efficiency and infectivity of an autochthonous arbuscular mycorrhizal Glomus sp. from saline soils and Glomus deserticola under salinity. Mycorrhiza 2000, 10, 137–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Al-Karaki, G.N.; Hammad, R. Mycorrhizal influence on fruit yield and mineral content of tomato grown under salt stress. J. Plant Nutr. 2001, 24, 1311–1323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Cartmill, A.D.; Alarcón, A.; Valdez-Aguilar, L.A. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi enhance tolerance of Rosa multiflora cv. Burr to bicarbonate in irrigation water. J. Plant Nutr. 2007, 30, 1517–1540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hajiboland, R.; Aliasgharzadeh, N.; Laiegh, S.F.; Poschenrieder, C. Colonization with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi improves salinity tolerance of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) plants. Plant Soil 2010, 331, 313–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Gomez-Bellot, M.J.; Lorente, B.; Nortes, P.; Ortuño, M.F.; Sánchez-Blanco, M.J.; Alarcón, J.J. Effect of mixed substrate with different mycorrhizal fungi concentrations on the physiological and productive response of three varieties of tomato. Sci. Hortic. 2021, 283, 110040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Al-Karaki, G.N. Growth of mycorrhizal tomato and mineral acquisition under salt stress. Mycorrhiza 2000, 10, 51–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Al-Karaki, G.N.; Hammad, R.; Rusan, M. Response of two tomato cultivars differing in salt tolerance to inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi under salt stress. Mycorrhiza 2001, 11, 43–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Amador, L.; Santos, B.; Ríos, D. Variedades Tradicionales de Tomates de Canarias; CULTESA: Tenerife, Spain, 2012; pp. 1–233. [Google Scholar]
  31. Hewitt, E.J. Sand and Water Culture Methods Used in the Study of Plant Nutrition; Technical communication 22; Farnham Royal Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux: Bucks, PA, USA, 1952. [Google Scholar]
  32. Phillips, J.M.; Hayman, D.S. Improved procedures for clearing roots and staining parasitic and vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi for rapid assessment of infection. Trans. Br. Mycol. Soc. 1970, 55, 158–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Koske, R.E.; Gemma, J.N. A modified procedure for staining roots to detect VA mycorrhizas. Mycol. Res. 1989, 92, 486–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Brundrett, M.C.; Piché, Y.; Peterson, R.L. A developmental study of the early stages in vesicular–arbuscular mycorrhiza formation. Can. J. Bot. 1985, 63, 184–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Gerdermann, J.V. Vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizae. In The Development and Function of Root; Torrey, J.G., Clarkson, D.T., Eds.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1975; pp. 575–591. [Google Scholar]
  36. Plenchette, C.; Fortin, A.; Furlan, V. Growth response of several plant species to mycorrhiza in a soil of moderate P-fertility: I. Mycorrhizae dependency under field conditions. Plant Soil 1983, 70, 199–209. [Google Scholar]
  37. Barrs, H.D.; Weatherley, P.E. A Re-Examination of the Relative Turgidity Techniques for Estimating Water Deficits in Leaves. Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 1962, 15, 413–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Verslues, P.E.; Agarwal, M.; Katiyar-Agarwal, S.; Zhu, J.H.; Zhu, J.K. Methods and concepts in quantifying resistance to drought, saltand freezing, abiotic stresses that affect plant water status. Plant J. 2006, 45, 523–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lichtenthaler, H.K. Chlorophylls and Carotenoids Pigments of Photosynthetic Biomembranes. Methods Enzymol. 1987, 148, 350–382. [Google Scholar]
  40. Liu, M.; Li, Q.; Ding, W.; Dong, L.; Deng, M.; Chen, J.; Tian, X.; Hashem, A.; Al Arjani, A.F.; Alenazi, M.M.; et al. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi inoculation impacts expression of aquaporins and salt overly sensitive genes and enhances tolerance of salt stress in tomato. Chem. Biol. Technol. Agric. 2023, 10, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Copeman, R.H.; Martin, C.A.; Stutz, J.C. Tomato growth in response to salinity and mycorrhizal fungi from saline or nonsaline soils. Hortscience 1996, 31, 341–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Evelin, H.; Kapoor, R.; Giri, B. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in alleviation of salt stress: A review. Ann. Bot. 2009, 104, 1263–1280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Giri, B.; Kapoor, R.; Mukerji, K.G. Improved tolerance of Acacia nilotica to salt stress by arbuscular mycorrhiza. Glomus fasciculatum may be partly related to elevated K/Na ratios in root and shoot tissues. Microb. Ecol. 2007, 54, 753–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Huang, J.C.; Lai, W.A.; Singh, S.; Hameed, A.; Young, C.C. Response of mycorrhizal hybrid tomato cultivars under saline stress. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2013, 13, 469–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Garcia, K.; Zimmermann, S.D. The role of mycorrhizal associations in plant potassium nutrition. Front. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 91299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Buwalda, J.G.; Stribley, D.P.; Tinker, P.B. Increased uptake of bromide and chloride by plants infected with vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizas. New Phytol. 1983, 93, 217–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Graham, J.H.; Syvertsen, J.P. Influence of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhiza on the hydraulic conductivity of roots of two citrus rootstocks. New Phytol. 1984, 97, 277–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zuccarini, P.; Okurowska, P. Effects of mycorrhizal colonization and fertilization on growth and photosynthesis of sweet basil under salt stress. J. Plant Nutr. 2008, 31, 497–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Colla, G.; Rouphael, Y.; Cardarelli, M.; Tullio, M.; Rivera, C.M.; Rea, E. Alleviation of salt stress by arbuscular mycorrhizal in zucchini plants grown at low and high phosphorus concentration. Biol. Fertil. Soils 2008, 44, 501–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Jahromi, F.; Aroca, R.; Porcel, R.; Ruiz-Lozano, J.M. Influence of salinity on the in vitro development of Glomus intraradices and on the in vivo physiological and molecular responses of mycorrhizal lettuce plants. Microb. Ecol. 2008, 55, 45–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Sheng, M.; Tang, M.; Chen, H.; Yang, B.; Zhang, F.; Huang, Y. Influence of arbuscular mycorrhizae on photosynthesis and water status of maize plants under salt stress. Mycorrhiza 2008, 18, 287–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Feng, G.; Zhang, F.S.; Li, X.L.; Tian, C.Y.; Tang, C.; Rengel, Z. Improved tolerance of maize plants to salt stress by arbuscular mycorrhiza is related to higher accumulation of soluble sugars in roots. Mycorrhiza 2002, 12, 185–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Garg, N.; Manchanda, G. Effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal inoculation on salt-induced nodule senescence in Cajanus cajan (pigeonpea). J. Plant Growth Regul. 2008, 27, 115–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Murkute, A.A.; Sharma, S.; Singh, S.K. Studies on salt stress tolerance of citrus rootstock genotypes with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Hortic. Sci. 2006, 33, 70–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Giri, B.; Mukerji, K.G. Mycorrhizal inoculant alleviates salt stress in Sesbania aegyptiaca and Sesbania grandiflora under field conditions: Evidence for reduced sodium and improved magnesium uptake. Mycorrhiza 2004, 14, 307–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Alhendawi, R.A.; Römheld, V.; Kirkby, E.A.; Marschner, H. Influence of increasing bicarbonate concentrations on plant growth, organic acid accumulation in roots and iron uptake by barley, sorghum, and maize. J. Plant Nutr. 1997, 20, 1731–1753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Tang, C.; Kuo, J.; Longnecker, N.E.; Thompson, C.J.; Robson, A.D. High pH causes disintegration of the root surface in Lupinus angustifolius L. Ann. Bot. 1993, 71, 201–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Medeiros, C.A.B.; Clark, R.B.; Ellis, J.R. Growth and nutrient uptake of sorghum cultivated with vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhiza isolates at varying pH. Mycorrhiza 1994, 4, 185–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. van Aarle, I.M.; Olsson, P.A.; Söderström, B. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi respond to the substrate pH of their extraradical mycelium by altered growth and root colonization. New Phytol. 2002, 155, 173–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Location of the Canary Islands.
Figure 1. Location of the Canary Islands.
Agriculture 14 00828 g001
Figure 2. Chronogram of the experiment with NaCl showing the stages of the seedbed, transplanting, and the salt stress phase.
Figure 2. Chronogram of the experiment with NaCl showing the stages of the seedbed, transplanting, and the salt stress phase.
Agriculture 14 00828 g002
Figure 3. Timeline of the NaHCO3 experiment showing the stages of seedling, transplanting, and the bicarbonate stress phase.
Figure 3. Timeline of the NaHCO3 experiment showing the stages of seedling, transplanting, and the bicarbonate stress phase.
Agriculture 14 00828 g003
Figure 4. Electrical conductivity of the substrate in mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaCl tested (0 mM, 75 mM and 150 mM). Significant differences between the doses of sodium chloride applied for each mycorrhizal treatment (Control and AM) are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 4. Electrical conductivity of the substrate in mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaCl tested (0 mM, 75 mM and 150 mM). Significant differences between the doses of sodium chloride applied for each mycorrhizal treatment (Control and AM) are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g004
Figure 5. Aerial part length of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaCl tested (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal and control plants for each salt dose are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 5. Aerial part length of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaCl tested (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal and control plants for each salt dose are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g005
Figure 6. Aerial and root dry weight of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (C) plants at the tested NaCl doses (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal plants and controls for each salt dose are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 6. Aerial and root dry weight of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (C) plants at the tested NaCl doses (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal plants and controls for each salt dose are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g006
Figure 7. Relative mycorrhizal dependence (RMD) and mycorrhizal colonisation (Coloniz) at the NaCl doses tested (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences in mycorrhizal colonisation are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 7. Relative mycorrhizal dependence (RMD) and mycorrhizal colonisation (Coloniz) at the NaCl doses tested (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences in mycorrhizal colonisation are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g007
Figure 8. Values of foliar N and K (top) and P (bottom) contents in mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the tested NaCl doses (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal and control plants for each salt dose are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 8. Values of foliar N and K (top) and P (bottom) contents in mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the tested NaCl doses (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal and control plants for each salt dose are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g008
Figure 9. Values of leaf Na and Cl contents in mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaCl tested (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal and control plants for each salt dose are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 9. Values of leaf Na and Cl contents in mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaCl tested (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal and control plants for each salt dose are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g009
Figure 10. Relative water content (RWC) and relative electrolyte loss (REL) values in mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants at the tested NaCl doses (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal and control plants for each salt dose are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 10. Relative water content (RWC) and relative electrolyte loss (REL) values in mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants at the tested NaCl doses (0 mM, 75 mM, and 150 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal and control plants for each salt dose are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g010
Figure 11. Length of the aerial part of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaHCO3 tested (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal and control plants for each dose of NaHCO3 applied are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 11. Length of the aerial part of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaHCO3 tested (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal and control plants for each dose of NaHCO3 applied are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g011
Figure 12. Root length of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaHCO3 tested (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences between the doses of bicarbonate applied for each mycorrhizal treatment (Control and AM) are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 12. Root length of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaHCO3 tested (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences between the doses of bicarbonate applied for each mycorrhizal treatment (Control and AM) are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g012
Figure 13. Aerial and root dry weight of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (C) plants, at the NaHCO3 doses tested (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal plants and controls for each dose of NaHCO3 applied are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 13. Aerial and root dry weight of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (C) plants, at the NaHCO3 doses tested (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences between mycorrhizal plants and controls for each dose of NaHCO3 applied are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g013
Figure 14. Diameter of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaHCO3 tested (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences between the doses of bicarbonate applied for each mycorrhizal treatment (Control and AM) are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 14. Diameter of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaHCO3 tested (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences between the doses of bicarbonate applied for each mycorrhizal treatment (Control and AM) are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g014
Figure 15. Relative mycorrhizal dependence (RMD) and mycorrhizal colonisation (Coloniz) at the tested NaHCO3 doses (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences in mycorrhizal colonisation are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 15. Relative mycorrhizal dependence (RMD) and mycorrhizal colonisation (Coloniz) at the tested NaHCO3 doses (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences in mycorrhizal colonisation are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g015
Figure 16. Values of leaf contents in N and Mg (top) and P and Na (bottom) in mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaHCO3 tested (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences in each dose of NaHCO3 applied are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Figure 16. Values of leaf contents in N and Mg (top) and P and Na (bottom) in mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (Control) plants, at the doses of NaHCO3 tested (0 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, 7.5 mM, 10 mM, and 12.5 mM). Significant differences in each dose of NaHCO3 applied are shown with different letters (p < 0.05).
Agriculture 14 00828 g016
Table 1. Characteristics of the traditional tomato variety Manzana Negra [30].
Table 1. Characteristics of the traditional tomato variety Manzana Negra [30].
Code BankVarietal TypeOriginGrowthShape of the FruitAverage Fruit Weight (g)Greenback Intensity
CCBAT 01899MarmandeAlajeró
La Gomera
Semi-determinedFlattened
slightly
200–210Slight
Table 2. Physico-chemical properties of the substrate used in the tests.
Table 2. Physico-chemical properties of the substrate used in the tests.
General Prop.Exchangeable CationsNutrientsSoil Solution Cations and Ions
pH7.14CIC (cmolc Kg−1)28.80P (ppm)14.51Ca (meq L−1)1.73CO3 (meq L−1)0.00
CEC (dS.m−1)0.38Ca (cmolc Kg−1)11.93Fe (ppm)7.15Mg (meq L−1)0.82HCO3 (meq L−1)0.46
OM (%)0.73Mg (cmolc Kg−1)5.78Mn (ppm)4.10Na (meq L−1)1.49Cl (meq L−1)0.65
Na (cmolc Kg−1)1.09Zn (ppm)15.45K (meq L−1)0.16S-SO4 (meq L−1)2.55
K (cmolc Kg−1)1.69Cu (ppm)0.52 N-NO3 (meq L−1)8.93
N (ppm)525.84
OM: organic matter; CEC: cation exchange capacity; cmolc Kg−1: centimoles of load per kilogram of soil.
Table 3. Chemical properties of water used for irrigation.
Table 3. Chemical properties of water used for irrigation.
General PropertiesCations PresentIons Present
pH8.67Ca (meq L−1)1.73CO3 (meq L−1)0.00
CEC (dS.m−1)0.79Mg (meq L−1)0.82HCO3 (meq L−1)0.46
Na (meq L−1)1.49Cl (meq L−1)0.65
K (meq L−1)0.16S-SO4 (meq L−1)2.55
N-NO3 (meq L−1)8.93
Table 4. F-value of ANOVA analysis of aerial, root, and total length; stem diameter; fresh and dry weight; and aerial, root, and total weight, explained using the factors ‘mycorrhiza (AM)’ and ‘sodium chloride (NaCl)’.
Table 4. F-value of ANOVA analysis of aerial, root, and total length; stem diameter; fresh and dry weight; and aerial, root, and total weight, explained using the factors ‘mycorrhiza (AM)’ and ‘sodium chloride (NaCl)’.
Length (cm)Diám.Fresh Weight (g)Dry Weight (g)
AerialRootTotalAerialRootTotalAerialRootTotal
AM7.31 **0.00 (ns)23.52 ***8.56 **9.95 **6.27 *10.64 **9.23 **5.82 *10.21 **
NaCl8.72 ***8.89 ***17.95 ***27.09 ***4.58 *35.76 ***7.86 **12.60 ***22.24 ***15.67 ***
AM × NaCl9.57 ***0.95 (ns)3.98 *0.79 (ns)1.32 (ns)0.94 (ns)1.37 (ns)1.10 (ns)1.11 (ns)1.17 (ns)
AM: mycorrhizal inoculation; NaCl: dose of NaCl applied; ns: not significant. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
Table 5. F-value of ANOVA analysis of relative water content (RWC), relative electrolyte loss (REL), and photosynthetic pigments (Chlorophyll A (Chlor A), Chlorophyll B (Chlor B), Chlorophyll A and B (Chlor AB), and Carotenes), explained by the factors ‘mycorrhizae (AM)’ and ‘sodium chloride (NaCl)’.
Table 5. F-value of ANOVA analysis of relative water content (RWC), relative electrolyte loss (REL), and photosynthetic pigments (Chlorophyll A (Chlor A), Chlorophyll B (Chlor B), Chlorophyll A and B (Chlor AB), and Carotenes), explained by the factors ‘mycorrhizae (AM)’ and ‘sodium chloride (NaCl)’.
RWCRELChlor AChlor BChlor ABCarotenos
AM8.86 **6.46 *0.88 (ns)9.61 **0.98 (ns)3.614
NaCl23.20 ***171.88 ***233.05 ***187.68 ***573.95 ***103.16 ***
AM × NaCl0.26 (ns)0.591 (ns)11.09 ***3.41 *13.18 ***1.13 (ns)
AM: mycorrhizal inoculation; NaCl: dose of NaCl applied; ns: not significant. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
Table 6. F-value of ANOVA analysis of aerial, root, and total length; stem diameter; aerial, root, and total fresh weight; and aerial, root, and total dry weight, explained by the factors ‘mycorrhiza (AM)’ and ‘sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3)’.
Table 6. F-value of ANOVA analysis of aerial, root, and total length; stem diameter; aerial, root, and total fresh weight; and aerial, root, and total dry weight, explained by the factors ‘mycorrhiza (AM)’ and ‘sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3)’.
Length (cm)Diam.Fresh Weight (g)Dry Weight (g)
AerialRootTotalAerialRootTotalAerialRootTotal
AM99.58 ***0.55 (ns)88.21 ***2.99 (ns)94.83 ***31.02 ***100.8 ***110.6 ***10.98 **107.1 ***
NaHCO30.97 (ns)7.48 ***0.66 (ns)11.01 ***3.16 *13.40 ***4.46 **3.34 **4.06 **3.92 **
AM × NaHCO31.15 (ns)1.30 (ns)1.54 (ns)0.46 (ns)1.12 (ns)1.641.01 (ns)1.33 (ns)0.71 (ns)1.17 (ns)
AM: mycorrhizal inoculation; NaHCO3: dose of NaHCO3 applied; ns: not significant * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hernández-Dorta, A.; Jaizme-Vega, M.d.C.; Ríos-Mesa, D. Effect of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis on the Development of the Canary Island Tomato Variety “Manzana Negra” under Abiotic Stress Conditions. Agriculture 2024, 14, 828. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14060828

AMA Style

Hernández-Dorta A, Jaizme-Vega MdC, Ríos-Mesa D. Effect of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis on the Development of the Canary Island Tomato Variety “Manzana Negra” under Abiotic Stress Conditions. Agriculture. 2024; 14(6):828. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14060828

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hernández-Dorta, Alexis, María del Carmen Jaizme-Vega, and Domingo Ríos-Mesa. 2024. "Effect of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis on the Development of the Canary Island Tomato Variety “Manzana Negra” under Abiotic Stress Conditions" Agriculture 14, no. 6: 828. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14060828

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop