TABLE 3.
Effect of bacterial (BHU-AV3) inoculation on ion and proline content in different tomato plant tissues under salt stress conditions.
| Treatments |
Na+ (mg/g DW) |
K+ (mg/g DW) |
Na+/K+ |
Proline (μg/g FW) |
||||
| Root | Leaf | Root | Leaf | Root | Leaf | Root | Leaf | |
| T1 | 6.1 ± 0.7c | 3.3 ± 0.4c | 10.7 ± 0.5a | 8.7 ± 0.6a | 0.5 ± 0.2c | 0.3 ± 0.01c | 87.0 ± 3.2c | 45.0 ± 2.6c |
| T2 | 17.7 ± 1.2a | 11.8 ± 0.8a | 5.0 ± 0.3c | 3.2 ± 0.7c | 3.5 ± 0.6a | 3.6 ± 0.8a | 131.0 ± 4.3b | 114.0 ± 4.1a |
| T3 | 5.8 ± 0.6c | 3.6 ± 0.6c | 11.5 ± 1.0a | 9.5 ± 0.5a | 0.5 ± 0.2c | 0.3 ± 0.01c | 83.0 ± 2.4c | 42.0 ± 3.1c |
| T4 | 13.1 ± 1.9b | 7.6 ± 1.2b | 8.1 ± 0.6b | 7.0 ± 0.9b | 1.6 ± 0.5b | 1.0 ±0.2b | 184.0 ± 3.5a | 83.0 ±5.2b |
T1, control; T2, salt (NaCl); T3, bacterial (BHU-AV3) inoculation; and T4, bacterial inoculation + salt. Values represent the mean ± SD, n = 3. Different superscript letters in the same column are significantly different (p = 0.05, DMRT analysis was carried out).