The risks of success in quality vegetable markets: Possible genetic erosion in Marmande tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicum L.) and consumer dissatisfaction

Scientia Horticulturae

Volumn 130, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 78-84

  Casals, Joan ^a   Pascual, Laura ^b   Cañizares, Joaquín ^b   Cebolla Cornejo, Jaime ^b   Casañas, Francesc ^a   Nuez, Fernando ^b  

^a UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE CATALUNYA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE VALÈNCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

AFLP; Fruit morphology; Intra landrace diversity; Sensory profile; Solanum lycopersicum L.

Indexed keywords

AGRONOMY; FOOD MARKET; FOOD QUALITY; FRUIT; FRUIT PRODUCTION; GENETIC VARIATION; MORPHOLOGY; POLYMORPHISM; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSORY SYSTEM; SPECIES DIVERSITY;

SPAIN;

LYCOPERSICON ESCULENTUM; PERA; SOLANUM;

EID: 79961172643     PISSN: 03044238     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2011.06.013     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Abegaz E.G., Tandon K.S., Scott J.W., Baldwin E.A., Shewfelt R.L. Partitioning taste from aromatic flavor notes of fresh tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) to develop predictive models as a function of volatile and nonvolatile components. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2004, 34:227-235.
2. Archak S., Karihaloo J.L., Jain A. RAPD markers reveal narrowing genetic base of Indian tomato cultivars. Curr. Sci. 2002, 82(9):1139-1143.
3. Baldwin E.A., Scott J.W., Einstein M.A., Malundo T.M.M., Carr B.T., Shewfelt R.L., Tandon K.S. Relationship between sensory and instrumental analysis for tomato flavor. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 1998, 123:906-915.
4. Bruhn C.M., Feldman N., Garlitz C., Harwood J., Ivans E., Marshall M., Riley A., Thurber D., Williamson E. Consumer perceptions of quality - apricots, cantaloupes, peaches, pears, strawberries, and tomatoes. J. Food Qual. 1991, 14:187-195.
5. Carelli B.P., Gerald L.T.S., Grazziotin F.G., Echeverrigaray S. Genetic diversity among Brazilian cultivars and landraces of tomato Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. revealed by RAPD markers. Gen. Resour. Crop Evol. 2006, 53:395-400.
6. Casals J., Bosch L., Casañas F., Cebolla J., Nuez J. Montgrí, a cultivar within the Montserrat tomato type. Hortscience 2010, 45:1885-1886.
7. Causse M., Damidaux R., Rousselle P. Traditional and enhanced breeding for quality traits in tomato. Genetic Improvement of Solanaceous Crops. Volume 2: Tomato 2007, 153-192. Science Publishers, New Hampshire. M.K. Razdan, A.K. Mattoo (Eds.).
8. Davies J.N. Changes in non-volatile organic acids of tomato fruit during ripening. J. Sci. Food. Agric. 1966, 17:396-400.
9. Davies J.N. Non-volatile organic acids of differently coloured areas of walls of blotchy ripened tomatoes. J. Sci. Food. Agric. 1966, 17:400-403.
10. Davies J.N., Kempton R.J. Changes in individual sugars of tomato fruit during ripening. J. Sci. Food Agric. 1975, 26:1103-1110.
11. Dellaporta S.J., Wood J., Hicks J.B. A plant DNA mini preparation: version II. Plant. Mol. Biol. Rep. 1983, 1:19-21.
12. Ercolano M.R., Carli P., Soria A., Cascone A., Fogliano V., Frusciante L., Barone A. Biochemical, sensorial and genomic profiling of traditional Italian tomato varieties. Euphytica 2008, 164:571-582.
13. Garcia-Martinez S., Andreani L., Garcia-Gusano M., Geuna F., Ruiz J.J. Evaluation of amplified fragment length polymorphism and simple sequence repeats for tomato germplasm fingerprinting: utility for grouping closely related traditional cultivars. Genome 2006, 49:648-656.
14. Hongsoongnern P., Chambers E. A lexicon for texture and flavor characteristics of fresh and processed tomatoes. J. Sens. Stud. 2008, 23:583-599.
15. IPGRI (International Plant Genetic Resources Institute) Descriptors for Tomato (Lycopersicon sp.) 1996, IPGRI, Roma, Italy.
16. ISO (International Organization for Standardization) Sensory Analysis - General Guidance for the Design of Test Rooms (Ref. ISO 8589) 1998, ISO, Genova, Italy.
17. Kader A.A. Flavor quality of fruits and vegetables. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2008, 88:1863-1868.
18. Malundo T.M.M., Shewfelt R.L., Scott J.W. Flavor quality of fresh tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) as affected by sugar and acid levels. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 1995, 6:103-110.
19. Mantel N.A. The detection of disease clustering and a generalised regression approach. Cancer Res. 1967, 27:209-220.
20. Mazzucato A., Papa R., Bitocchi E., Mosconi P., Nanni L., Negri V., Picarella M.E., Siligato F., Soressi G.P., Tiranti B., Veronesi F. Genetic diversity, structure and marker-trait associations in a collection of Italian tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) landraces. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2008, 116:657-669.
21. Mazzucato A., Ficcadenti N., Caioni M., Mosconi P., Piccinini E., Sanampudi V.R.R., Sestili S., Ferrari V. Genetic diversity and distinctiveness in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) landraces: the Italian case study of 'A pera Abruzzese'. Sci. Hortic. 2010, 125:55-62.
22. Muñoz-Falcón J.E., Prohens J., Vilanova S., Ribas F., Castro A., Nuez F. Distinguishing a protected geographical indication vegetable (Almagro eggplant) from closely related varieties with selected morphological traits and molecular markers. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2008, 89:320-328.
23. Park Y.H., West M.A.L., St Clair D.A. Evaluation of AFLPs for germplasm fingerprinting and assessment of genetic diversity in cultivars of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.). Genome 2004, 47:510-518.
24. Rick C.M., Holle M. Andean Lycpopersicon esculentum var. cerasiforme genetic-variation and its evolutionary significance. Econ. Bot. 1990, 44:69-78.
25. Romero del Castillo R.R., Valero J., Casanas F., Costell E. Training, validation and maintenance of a panel to evaluate the texture of dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). J. Sens. Stud. 2008, 23:303-319.
26. Ruiz J.J., Alonso A., Garcia-Martinez S., Valero M., Blasco P., Ruiz-Bevia F. Quantitative analysis of flavour volatiles detects differences among closely related traditional cultivars of tomato. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2005, 85:54-60.
27. Sánchez E., Sifres A., Casañas F., Nuez F. The endangered future of organoleptically prestigious European landraces: Ganxet bean (Phasoleus vulgaris L.) as an example of a crop originating in the Americas. Gen. Resour. Crop Evol. 2007, 55:45-52.
28. SAS Institute Inc. SAS/STAT® User's Guide, Version 8 1999, SAS Institue Inc., Cary, NC, USA.
29. Sinesio F., Moneta E., Peparaio M. Sensory characteristics of traditional field grown tomato genotypes in Southern Italy. J. Food Qual. 2007, 30:878-895.
30. Stevens M.A., Kader A.A., Albright M. Potential for increasing tomato flavor via increased sugar and acid content. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 1979, 104:40-42.
31. Stevens M.A., Rick C.M. Genetics and breeding. The Tomato Crop 1986, 35-109. Chapman and Hall Ltd., London, Great Britain. J.G. Atherton, J. Rudich (Eds.).
32. Tam S.M., Mhiri C., Vogelaar A., Kerkveld M., Pearce S.R., Grandbastien M.A. Comparative analyses of genetic diversities within tomato and pepper collections detected by retrotransposon-based SSAP. AFLP and SSR. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2005, 110:819-831.
33. Tanksley S.D. The genetic, developmental, and molecular bases of fruit size and shape variation in tomato. Plant Cell 2004, 16:S181-S189.
34. Terzopoulos P.J., Bebeli P.J. DNA and morphological diversity of selected Greek tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) landraces. Sci. Hortic. 2008, 116:354-361.
35. Terzopoulos P.J., Bebeli P.J. Phenotypic diversity in Greek tomato (Solanum lycopesicon L.) landraces. Sci. Hortic. 2010, 126:138-144.
36. Williams C.E., St Clair D.A. Phenetic relationships and levels of variability detected by restriction-fragment-length-polymorphism and random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis of cultivated and wild accessions of Lycopersicon esculentum. Genome 1993, 36:619-630.
37. Yi S.S., Jatoi S.A., Fujimura T., Yamanaka S., Watanabe J., Watanabe K.N. Potential loss of unique genetic diversity in tomato landraces by genetic colonization of modern cultivars at a non-center of origin. Plant Breed. 2008, 127:189-196.