Table 5.
Biochemical responses of different tomato genotypes under Cd stress conditions in the presence and absence of oak biomass pretreated with sodium hydroxide.
| Traits | Karazi | Sirin | Sewi Qaladze | Super |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proline content (μg g −1) | 1595.28 ± 106.73 b | 1767.42 ± 99.82 a | 1357.76 ± 54.84 c | 1317.08 ± 45.48 d |
| Soluble sugar content (μg g −1) | 822.18 ± 44.81 a | 724.34 ± 18.39 b | 441.42 ± 14.54 d | 496.56 ± 7.46 c |
| Total phenolic content (μg g −1) | 420.37 ± 19.13 a | 381.49 ± 11.43 b | 350.27 ± 1.88 d | 363.45 ± 16.19 c |
| Antioxidant activity (μg g −1) | 1016.52 ± 38.57 a | 990.27 ± 32.12 b | 921.35 ± 6.43 c | 857.84 ± 6.28 d |
| Guaiacol peroxidase (units min −1 g −1) | 0.31 ± 0.05 a | 0.32 ± 0.06 a | 0.26 ± 0.03 b | 0.22 ± 0.05 c |
| Catalase (units min −1 g −1) | 137.64 ± 13.66 b | 150.37 ± 23.13 a | 130.36 ± 9.28 c | 104.52 ± 10.02 d |
Letters in the same row with different meanings indicate statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.01) using Duncan’s new multiple range test.The trait index (%) ± standard error was used to present the value. The numbers illustrate an average of three independent estimates.