Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal, 2023, Vol. (15) No. 1: 18-25 

 

ISSN: 2073-9524 

eISSN: 2310-8746 

 

18 
 

Evaluation of Triple Hybrids of Tomato Crop 

(Lycopersicon esculantum. Mill) Derived from Individual 

Hybrids and Some Pure line  

Aziz Mahdi Abd Al-Shammari
 1

, Abdul Rasool Hamed Hussain Al Obaidi
 2

 

1,2
Department of Horticulture and Landscape Design, College of Agriculture, University of 

Diyala, Iraq. 
2
Corresponding author: rasoolmaster236@gmail.com 

Article history:  

Received: 7 October 2022 

Accepted: 28 November 2022 

Published: 30 June 2023 

Abstract 

The study was during which the seeds of triple hybrids were produced by 

deriving individual hybrids by introducing 6 strains into the half-diallel cross-

breeding program, resulting 15 genotypes. In the second season the hybrid seeds 

were planted Individuals with two strains for the purpose of developing triple 

hybrids. During the third season, all 48 genotypes were planted according to the 

randomized complete block design with three replications, service operations 

were conducted for the crop from irrigation, fertilization, weeding and control 

whenever needed. The result showed that the triple hybrid (3×1) b was 

significantly superior to all genotypes for the plant height reached 140.66 cm, and 

for the number of leaves per plant, the triple hybrid (2×1) b had the highest 

number of leaves over all the genotypes, which scored 137.9 leaf
-1

. For the 

number of fruits and plant yield, the triple hybrid (6×5) a showed significant 

superiority over all the genotypes within the experiment by recording 43.20 fruits 

of the plant
-1

 and 7.921 kg of the plant
-1

, respectively and the superiority of the 

triple hybrids (6×2) b and (5×4) a significantly over the rest of the compounds with 

the highest percentage of carbohydrates amounting to 10.363% and 10.325%, 

respectively, while the hybrids (6×5) a, (3×2) a, (3×1) a and (5×4) a recorded the 

highest Significant values of sugars were 16.993%, 16.880%, 16.833% and 

16.813%, respectively. 

Keywords: triple 

crosses, half-diallel 

cross, strains, cross 

breeding, Solanum 

Lycopersicon L. 

 

https://dx.doi.org/10.52951/dasj.23150103 

This article is open-access under the CC BY 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Introduction 

Tomato Solanum Lycopersicon L. is a 

common cultivated species that belongs to 

the family Solanaceae. It is a herbaceous 

plant with double chromosomal self-

pollination (2n = 24). It is considered one of 

the most common vegetable crops in the 

world including Iraq, because of its high 

nutritional value as it is considered a main 

and protective food for its content of 

nutrients and antioxidants. Oxidation, 

vitamins such as C and E nutrients such as 

calcium and contains some pigments such as 

carotene, lycopene and some phenolic 

compounds (Al-Mfargy, 2017; Erika et al., 

2020). The tomato is domestic to the 
regions of Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Colombia 

and Chile it grows in a variety of 

environments from dry areas to wet areas, as 

well as growing in different soils according 

to its original habitat. Plant molecular 

(Tasisa, et al., 2012). The low production 

per unit area in the world and in our country 

in particular it has become imperative for 

plant breeders to search for means through 

which production can be increased and 

improved in quantity and quality traits as the 

number of fruits, total yield, hardness, 

carbohydrates and sugars. Any forms the 

basis of any breeding program that aims to 

develop hybrid varieties. Studies indicate 

that interest in research activity in the field 

of tomato breeding and its improvement to 

produce seeds of hybrid varieties began in 

1944 and 1945, as Powers produced several 

hybrids of tomato with the aim of explaining 

the phenomenon of hybrid strength in it and 

mailto:rasoolmaster236@gmail.com
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6144-4313
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7746-4714
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6144-4313
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7746-4714


Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal, 2023, Vol. (15) No. 1: 18-25 

19 
 

then rolled Studies with the aim of obtaining 

superior hybrids since that date and to the 

present day, so we find that plant breeders 

have been interested in producing hybrids 

by testing the best genetically heterogeneous 

strains or varieties in order to obtain the 

phenomenon of hybrid vigor to produce 

hybrids that are superior to the widely 

cultivated varieties in one or more traits. 

(Kumar, 2015; Kulus, 2022). 

Cross-crossing is one of the most 

efficient breeding methods for selecting 

hybrids produced in the early stages or in 

later generations in breeding programs, 

based on knowledge of the type of gene 

action that controls the inheritance of the 

trait (Kherwa, 2017). There are three mating 

designs in plant breeding studies: diallel, 

half diallel and line × tester (Al-Shammari 

and Hamdi, 2021). The genetic divergence 

between the parents is a useful indicator of 

the performance of the crosses. 

Heterozygosity is more influential than 

homozygosity and many studies have 

confirmed the existence of a positive 

association between the genetic divergence 

of the parents and the high performance of 

the crosses (Liu et al., 2002). The aim of this 

study is to derive triple crosses by cross-

crossing and evaluate them in comparison 

with one of the crosses adopted in the 

environmental conditions of the region and 

the possibility of adopting it locally, 

estimating the genetic parameters and the 

strength of the hybrid and then choosing the 

best crosses that can be adopted locally. 

Materials and Methods 

The study was conducted the 

Department of Horticulture and Landscape 

Design in the College of Agriculture, 

University of Diyala. The experiment 

included three seasons. All of the crop 

service work, including irrigation, irrigation, 

fertilizing and removing the bush, as needed 

Soil samples were taken and analyzed for 

the purpose of diagnosing the percentage of 

mineral elements in them as shown in Table 

1, for the purpose of producing individual 

hybrids (F1) was carried out by the half 

dialle method between these parents 

according to Griffing methods (1956), 

which resulted in 15 crosses using each Cap 

strain and in one direction, after extracting 

the seeds individual hybrids from the hybrid 

fruits, a part of the seeds of each hybrid and 

the seeds of the two lines Fr and Marb were 

planted in the greenhouse of the Department 

of Horticulture and Landscaping in the 

college (the strain Fr was encoded with the 

symbol a and the strain Marb with the 

symbol b), as shown in Tables 2, 3. The 

width of each terrace is 2 m. The first 

terrace was planted with the seeds of the two 

lines (Fr and Marb) while the other three 

terraces were planted with individual hybrid 

seeds. The pollination was carried out as the 

two strains (lines) Fr and Marb were used as 

parents and individual hybrids as mothers. 

Individual hybrids, and fruits reached 

red maturity they were picked from each 

cross individually then their seeds were 

carefully extracted and placed inside paper 

wrappers on which all the requirements of 

the hybridization process were recorded. 

During the third season, the 30 hybrids were 

planted with their parents in addition to a 

hybrid BobcatIt is a local hybrid with good 

productivity and resistance to many diseases 

and environmental conditions within the 

country. After the seedlings reached the 

seedling stage. Parents (pure lines) were 

obtained from tomatoes by importing them 

from the Tomato Genetics Center at the 

University of California - Davis, USA 

(Tomato Genetics Resource Center {TGRC} 

at UCD). 6 genotypes were entered into the 

half cross-crossing program to produce 

single crosses and two were used as parents 

to derive triple crosses. 

 

 

 

 



Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal, 2023, Vol. (15) No. 1: 18-25 

20 
 

Table 1. Some physical and chemical properties of field soil 
l Vw eVbaulaVahc t hvbtauvahuawtavual Vw eVbaulaVahc t hvbtauvahuawtavua

lVbhvtah ValE1:1hltvwhvaxav{a6.5avuactn tahar vvbta6.8a
-1

na na

1:1:1a7.55a--aE hl3a232a

y
b
 
v
{

- r
 
v
b
a

l
Vb
r
b
t
vu

a

Na53.2a
-1

rna na

 
l
aV
a

 
b
1
 
t 
vl
tu

a

  tva252a

Pa39.2auaVva452a

Ka242.2aEV {a322a

Bulk density for depth      

0.3-3ma

1.36a
-3

mnahr
a

ebancvarlauvwtb 

yabVvah 1 hav{a

25a%a

a laVavbzvwtba aVv{aVl ra aVv{aVl ra laVavbzvwtbaa

 

acclimatization and hardening operations 

were carried out to relieve the shock of the 

seedling inside the open field then the 

seedlings were transferred and planted 

inside the field exposed on March 2020, 

2021 as it was planted on terraces with a 

width of 1.20 m and a length of 4.8 m at a 

rate of 10 plants per experimental unit, and 

the distance between one plant and another 

is 40 cm. With three replications according 

to the design of the complete pedestrian 

sectors (RCBD). Tape tubes were used for 

the purpose of irrigation. All agricultural 

service operations for the tomato crop were 

carried out, including irrigation, weeding, 

and fertilization control whenever needed. 

Homogeneously for all experimental units.

 
Table 2. Breeds used in breeding for the production of camels 

Name Usageapure line Pure Font Number 

Half cross multiplicationaRosea1a

Half cross multiplicationaRed P.ta2a

Half cross multiplicationaNepala3a

Half cross multiplicationaAmish Pa 4a

Half cross multiplicationaC. C. Orangea5a

Half cross multiplicationaT.  115a6a

Triple multiplicationaFr 7a

Triple multiplicationaMarb 8a

 

 

Table 3. Triple crosses derived from individual crosses from pure lines 

m tea

(e)a

rtaaa(. )adsetbb 

1 tbtvua

2e×1a2 ×1a2×1a

3e×1a3 ×1a3×1a

4e×1a4 ×1a4×1a

5e×1a5 ×1a5×1a

6e×1a6 ×1a6×1a

3e×2a3 ×2a3×2a

4e×2a4 ×2a4×2a

5e×2a5 ×2a5×2a

6e×2a6 ×2a6×2a

4e×3a4 ×3a4×3a

5e×3a5 ×3a5×3a

6e×3a6 ×3a6×3a

5e×4a5 ×4a5×4a

6e×4a6 ×4a6×4a

6e×5a6 ×5a6×5a



Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal, 2023, Vol. (15) No. 1: 18-25 

21 
 

Studied traits 

Measurements were taken on a random 

sample of five plants in the experimental 

unit and for each replicate, the average was 

taken. The studied traits included the 

following: 

Plant height (cm) 

It was measured at the end of the growing 

season from the surface of the soil to the top 

of the plant for five plants within the 

experimental unit and the average was 

taken. (Ipgri, 1996). 
 

Total number of leaves (leaf plant
-1

) 

The total leaves of all experimental unit 

plants were counted at the end of the season 

and then the average was extracted (Ipgri, 

1996). 

 

Number of fruits per plant (fruit plant
-1

) 

The number of fruits in the experimental 

unit was cumulatively calculated from the 

beginning of the harvest until the end of the 

growing season and divided by the number 

of plants in the experimental unit according 

to the following equation: 

Number of fruits (fruit plant
-1

) = Number 

of fruits / Number of plant 

Plant yield (kg plant
-1

) 

The cumulative yield was recorded from the 

beginning of the harvest until the last 

harvest for each experimental unit and then 

divided by the number of plants in one 

experimental unit. 

 

Estimation of Carbohydrates and Total 

Sugars in Juice (%) 

Concentration from the Standard Score x 

Concentration (Ranganna, 1977). 

Carbohydrates and Total Sugars in Juice 

(%) = Concentration from standr 

curve*focus / the volume of juice taken * 

10000 

 

Statistical analysis 

The method included the analysis of triple 

crosses according to the Randomized 

Complete Blocks Design (RCBD) in order to 

test the significance of the difference 

between the genotypes. Data (parents triple 

crosses and common standard cross Bobcat) 

were entered and the averages were 

compared using the least significant 

difference at the probability level of 0.05 

and using the excel program, then the data 

were analyzed statistically using SAS 

program and the data were compared 

according to tukey test at a probability level 

of 0.05, as the test was conducted regardless 

of the significance of F. As shown in Table 

4. (Dean et al. 2017). 

Table 4. Analysis of variance of the genotypes (parents, haploid hybrids, triple crosses and standard cross 

Bobcat) for the studied traits 

Error Genotype Replication S.O.V 

94 47 2 
df 

traits 

16.71 454.6
** 

448.0
 

plant height 

5.65 321.5
**

 300.0
 

number of leaves 

139.9 0.445
**

 245.0
 

number of fruits 

83.05 3209.5
**

 2959.9
 

plant yield 

0.044 8.783
**

 0.145
 

carbohydrates 

0.186 5.790
**

 5.035
 

sugars 

(**) and (*) are significant at 0.01 and 0.05 probability levels, respectively. 

 

Results and Discussion 

The analysis of variance of data the 

genotypes (parents, single hybrids, triple 

crosses and common commercial Bobcat 

hybrids) for the studied traits and it is noted 

in table 5 that the mean of the squares of the 

genotypes was significant for all studied, 

that the differences between (genetic 

structures) are due to genetic differences 

between them, so it is necessary to continue 

studying her genetic behavior for the 



Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal, 2023, Vol. (15) No. 1: 18-25 

22 
 

purpose of identifying the nature of the 

work of the genes that control the 

inheritance of the trait, and this is consistent 

with what was mentioned (Dharva et al., 

2018; Kande et al., 2019; Islam et al., 2022; 

Hamdi, 2022). 

 

Plant Height (cm) 

We note from the results presented in 

table 5 that the parents 3×1  and 6×2  were 

significantly superior in plant height by 

recording the best plant length of the two 

parents, which was 125.66 cm each, while 

the father 6×4  recorded the lowest plant 

height of 85.66 cm. As for the triple crosses, 

the hybrid (3×1) b And the hybrid (2×1) b 

were significantly superior to all the hybrids 

in plant height, they recorded 140.66 cm and 

138.66 cm, respectively, while the lowest 

plant height was 90.66 cm for each of the 

two hybrids (5×2) a and (5×4) b. 

Number of leaves (leaf
-1

) 

It was noticed from table 5  that the 

(parent)  3×2  and the father 4×2  were 

significantly superior to the rest of the 

fathers in the number of leaves per plant, as 

they recorded 135.2 leaves 
- 1

 for each, while 

the father Fr gave the lowest value of 90.00 

leaves plant 
- 1

, while the triple crosses 

showed the triple hybrid (2×1) b was 

significantly superior to all genotypes for 

the number of leaves per plant by recording 

a value of 137.9 leaf plant 
-1

, while the 

lowest value for this trait was 93.5 leaf 

plant
-1

 in hybrid (6×5) a. 

Number of fruits (fruit plant
-1

) 

Table no.5 shows that the parent 6×3  

significantly outperformed all fathers for the 

number of fruits per plant, it reached 37.20 

fruits. plant
-1

, while this value decreased to 

20.20 fruits. plant
-1

 when hybrid 6×2  and 

hybrid (6×5) a was significantly superior to 

the highest number of fruits per plant. On 

the rest of the hybrids, as well as the 

parents, as it reached 43.20 fruits. plant
-1

, 

while the hybrid (6×5) b was considered the 

lowest hybrid for the number of fruits per 

plant, as it swallowed 21.90 fruits.plant
-1

.
 

Plant yield (kg plant
-1

) 

The data in Table 5 indicated that there 

were significant differences between the 

genotypes in the plant yield, as the parent 
3×2  gave the highest yield of 5.747 kg plant

-

1
, while the parent 4×3  recorded the lowest 

yield among the parents amounting to 3.336 

kg plant
-1

 and the triple hybrid superiority. 

(6×5)  a was significantly on all genotypes of 

plant yield with a value of 7.921 kg plant
-1

, 

while plant yield decreased to 3.021 kg 

plant
-1

 for triple hybrid (4×3) b. 

Carbohydrate content of tomato juice 

(%) 

Through table (5) it was found that the 

parent or hybrid or genotype 3×1  was 

significantly superior to the highest 

percentage of carbohydrates in the fruits, 

which amounted to 9.843%, while the parent 

Marb recorded the lowest concentration of 

carbohydrates among the two fathers, which 

amounted to 5.133%, in contrast to the 

superiority of the triple crosses (6×2) b and 

(6×5) a and (5×4) a had the highest 

concentration of carbohydrates in the fruits, 

which amounted to 10.363%, 10.255% and 

10.325%, respectively, compared to the 

hybrid (3×2) a which gave the lowest value 

of 4.293%.. 

Table 5. The average values of parents and triple crosses for growth traits and tomato yield  

 wn tu 

% 

E telc{vt vbu 

% 

Plant 

Yield or  

  

number of fruits 

fruit plant
-1

 

Number of 

leaf 

 per plant  

plant height 

aacm 
Genotypes 

12.413
u  

5.683
tu  

3.763
u  

22.42
yz{  

92.2
r  

115.66
f 

Fr (a) 

13.433
t-q  

5.133
vw  

4.176
tl  

23.22
yz  

121.2
j  

110.63
g 

Marb (b) 

14.283
j-t

 9.426
b

 5.282
an

 34.22
e

 122.8
V

 92.66
p
 2×1  

15.913
eh

 9.843
e

 4.354
tl

 32.12
an

 113.7
v

 125.66
d
 3×1  

15.613
hvb

 6.463
Vrt

 5.173
ca

 31.82
n

 126.7
c

 115.64
f
 4×1  

13.943
 -t

 6.523
Vr

 3.818
u

 21.72
{|

 111.2
c

 110.66
g
 5×1  

14.573
 -n

 5.853
1qt

 4.446
rt

 25.72
vu

 112.4
n

 90.66
q
 6×1  



Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal, 2023, Vol. (15) No. 1: 18-25 

23 
 

14.343
a-V

 9.143
hv

 5.747
v

 25.12
vu  

135.22
b  

100.67
l
 3×2  

16.523
 e  

5.413
uv

 4.437
rt

 29.22
tl

 135.2
b

 105.66
j
 4×2  

14.723
n-a

 7.163
j

 5.255
aj

 31.42
n 

 118.2
y

 102.66
k
 5×2 

12.523
tu

 7.943
a

 4.141
1qt

 22.22
 -

 119.4
u

 125.66
d
 6×2  

15.253
v-c

 8.743
by

 3.336
wx

 24.92
b-

 122.8
V

 100.65
l
 4×3  

13.943
 -t

 9.473
h

 3.693
uv

 24.32
wx

 115.3
 

 90.67
q
 5×3  

16.223
eh

 6.883
j 

 5.431
n

 37.22
n

 114.2
h

 120.66
e
 6×3  

16.723
 

 8.223
nca

 4.922
j 

 22.82
yz{

 122.8
r

 108.67
h
 5×4  

14.943
b-a

 8.223
ca

 4.585
Vr

 26.22
tu

 119.7
t

 85.66
r
 6×4  

15.523
h-y

 8.253
ca

 4.814
j 

 29.22
tl

 121.9
t

 98.66
m
 6×5  

15.243
v-c  

6.713
 V  

4.912
j  

41.12
h  

125.3
  

100.66
l 

1×2a 

13.513
r-1  

6.273
l1q  

4.162
1t  

31.12
n V  

137.9
  

138.66
a 

1×2b 

16.833
  

8.723
by  

4.315
tl1  

38.22
yn  

121.7
l  

105.6
j 

1×3a 

14.172
j-r  

6.243
rtl  

3.829
u  

27.22
l1q  

125.8
j  

140.66
a 

1×3b 

12.723
tu  

5.133
vw  

3.292
x  

29.2
tl  

127.1
n  

100.66
l 

1×4a 

12.943
1-u  

6.123
l1q  

3.663
uv  

32.12
Vrt  

133.2
h  

105.66
j 

1×4b 

14.943
b-a  

8.323
nc  

4.433
t  

23.12
yz  

121.9
t  

110.63
g 

1×5a 

14.223
 -t  

6.523
Vr  

4.622
V  

32.42
 Vr  

122.4
q  

97.66
n 

1×5b 

14.833
y-a  

6.693
 V  

4.224
l1q  

29.62
rt  

115.4
|  

125.66
d 

1×6a 

17.113
  

5.993
l-t  

6.314
h  

32.42
 Vr  

118.6
w  

115.66
f 

1×6b 

16.882
  

4.293
y  

3.642
v  

34.82
c  

122.6
1  

95.62
o 

2×3a 

15.953
eh  

9.263
h  

3.822
u  

26.18
tu  

118.9
v  

97.66
n 

2×3b 

13.39
t-q  

8.913
vb  

6.224
h  

38.92
yb  

112.7
y  

110.64
g 

2×4a 

13.943
 -t  

5.713
tu  

5.252
aj  

33.12
a  

116.8
{  

108.66
h 

2×4b 

13.11
l-t  

5.823
qt  

5.515
yn  

42.12
hv  

126.5
a  

90.66
q 

2×5a 

16.253
eh  

6.743
 V  

4.934
j  

35.62
c  

121.9
t  

105.6
j 

2×5b 

12.833
qtu  

5.323
v  

7.21
e  

37.32
n  

134.2
e  

99.66
q 

2×6a 

13.813
Vrt  

12.363
  

5.822
v  

25.82
vu  

131.5
v  

110.62
g 

2×6b 

15.453
h-y  

8.193
nca  

5.644
by  

28.42
l  

119.7
t  

120.66
e 

3×4a 

13.513
r-1  

9.143
hv  

3.221
y  

22
.
2

 -  
117.3
z  

95.62
o 

3×4b 

16.463
 e  

8.443
yn  

4.355
tl  

25.82
 -  

118.5
x  

106.66
i 

3×5a 

15.723
hv  

9.823
e  

5.497
yn  

29.62
l  

116.8
{  

108.6
h 

3×5b 

15.513
h-y  

9.973
e  

4.822
  

27.2
{  

121.9
t  

127.66
c 

3×6a 

15.253
v-c  

4.773
x  

5.518
yn  

31.92
n  

128.5
y  

128.66
b 

3×6b 

16.813
  

12.325
  

5.754
vb  

23.42
xy  

127.1
n  

95.61
o 

4×5a 

18.553
Vrt  

6.163
tl1  

5.288
c  

25.22
uvw  

112.8
b  

90.65
q 

4×5b 

14.423
c-V  

5.713
tu  

5.492
yn  

39.52
vb  

99.6
  

108.6
h 

4×6a 

13.743
V-l  

6.993
j  

3.315
x  

24.42
wx  

121.3
a  

105.62
j 

4×6b 

16.963
  

10.255
a 

7.921
  

43.22
  

93.5
V  

100.66
l 

5×6a 

15.223
v-n  

8.713
by  

4.861
  

21.92
z{|  

112.8
b  

105.66
j 

5×6b 

11.423
v  

4.853
wx  

4.222
t  

22.62
yz{  

92.9
t  

85.66
r 

Bobcat 

 

Total sugars in tomato juice (%) 

parent 3×1  showed significant 

superiority in the percentage of sugars in 

tomato fruits, as it recorded a value of 

15.913%, while father Fr gave the lowest 

values with a percentage of 12.413%, and 

for triple crosses excelled with the highest 

values for sugars in fruits amounting to 

16.993%, 16.880% and 16.833% and 

16.813% for each of the hybrid (6×5) a 

(3×2) a, (3×1) a and (5×4) a, respectively, 

while this percentage reached its lowest 

value in the hybrid (4×1) a it amounted to 

12.723%. 

The results of table 5 showed that there 

were differences between the genotypes 

(parents, single crosses, triple crosses and 

standard hybrids (Bobcat) in growth and 

yield traits. This variance is mainly due to 

the variation and difference of their 
genotypes, which has an effect on their 

physiological ability and efficiency in 

converting the output of photosynthesis in 

favor of cell growth Its elongation and 



Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal, 2023, Vol. (15) No. 1: 18-25 

24 
 

division, and the vegetative and flowering 

growth indicators are almost directly 

governed by genetic factors and the 

influence of environmental factors that have 

an impact on the growth indicators of these 

genotypes (Alwan and Mazher 2015; 

Anuradha et al., 2021; Sinha et al., 2021; 

El-Sappah et al., 2022).  

It was also noted that there were significant 

differences between the genotypes (parents, 

single crosses, triple crosses and standard 

hybrid Bobcat) for the traits that were under 

study and that these differences were mainly 

caused by the difference in their genetic 

content since each combination of them 

expresses the trait to a significant degree in 

addition to the environmental impact. Which 

directly or indirectly affects these structures 

in ways that differ from one structure to 

another. These results agree with results 

(Murariu et al., 2021; Akhter et al., 2021; 

Athinodorou et al., 2021). 

Conclusion 

This study concludes from the previous 

results that most of the triple hybrids have 

outperformed the parents and the standard 

hybrid Bobcat for all the studied traits, as 

the triple hybrid (2×1) b for the number of 

leaves outperformed all the genotypes, and 

for sugars, the hybrid (3×1) a outperformed. 

Hybrid (6×5) a in terms of a number of fruit 

plant yield and percentage of sugars in fruit 

and hybrid (3×1) a showed superiority over 

all combinations for plant height trait, and 

sugars hybrid (3×2) a, reached the highest 

values for it either Hybrids (4×2) a, (6×2) a, 

(5×4) a, (4×1) a and (6×2) b were 

distinguished by the highest significant 

values for the characteristics of the 

proportion of carbohydrates in the fruit.  

Conflict of interest 

   The authors declare that they have no 

competing interests. 

Acknowledgment 

   Special thanks to the Department of 

Horticulture and Landscape Design, College 

of Agriculture, University of Diyala, as well 

as to the scientific assessors and staff of 

Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal. 

References 

Akhter, A., Nabi, A., Afroza, B., Nazir, N., 

Sofi, P. A., Indrabi, S. A., and Rashid, M. 

(2021). Evaluation of Cherry Tomato 

(Solanum lycopersicum L. var. 

cerasiforme) Genotypes for Yield and 

Quality Traits. Journal of Community 

Mobilization and Sustainable 

Development  16(1), 72-76.a 

Al-Mfargy, O. K., and Mazher, F. M. (2017). 

Effect of fertilizer type on quantitative 

and qualitative yield characters of tomato 

(lycopersecun esclantum mill.) and some 

estimate genetic parameters. Diyala 

Agricultural Sciences Journal, 7(1), 202-

216.a 

Al-Shammari, A. M. A., Hamdi, G. J., Al-

Mahdawi, M. A. S., and Mohammed, N. 

K. (2021). Genetic diversity analysis and 

DNA fingerprinting of tomato breeding 

lines using SSR markers.a 

Alwan, O. K., and Mazher, F. M. (2015). 

Effect of fertilizer type on quantitative 

and qualitative yield characters of tomato 

(lycopersecun esclantum mill.) and some 

estimate genetic parameters. Diyala 

Agricultural Sciences Journal, 7(1), 202-

216.a 

Anuradha, B., Saidaiah, P., Ravinder Reddy, 

K., and Harikishan Sudini, G. A. (2021). 

Mean performance of 40 genotypes in 

tomato (Solanum lycopersicum 

L.). International journal of chemical 

studies, 9(1), 279-283.a 

Athinodorou, F., Foukas, P., Tsaniklidis, G., 

Kotsiras, A., Chrysargyris, A., Delis, C. 

and Nikoloudakis, N. (2021). 

Morphological diversity, genetic 

characterization, and phytochemical 

assessment of the cypriot tomato 

germplasm. Plants, 10(8), 1698.a 

Dean A., Voss D. and Draguljić D. )2017(. 

Split-Plot Designs. In: Design and 



Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal, 2023, Vol. (15) No. 1: 18-25 

25 
 

Analysis of Experiments. Springer Texts 

in Statistics. Springer, Cham.  

Dharva, P. B., Patel, A. I., Vashi, J. M., and 

Chaudhari, B. N. (2018). Combining 

ability analysis for yield and yield 

attributing traits in tomato (Solanum 

lycopersicum L.). Int. J. Chem. 

Stud, 6(3), 2342-8.a 

El- Sappah, A.H., Islam, M.M., Rather, S.A., 

Li, J., Yan, K., Xianming, Z., Liang, Y. 

and Abbas, M. (2022). Identification of 

novelroot-knot nematode (Meloidogyne 

Incognita) resistant tomato genotypes. 

The Journal of Animal and Plant 
Sciences. 33(1),1-17. 

Erika, C., Griebel, S., Naumann, M., and 

Pawelzik, E. (2020). Biodiversity in 

tomatoes: Is it reflected in nutrient 

density and nutritional yields under 

organic outdoor production?. Frontiers in 

plant science, 11, 589692.a 

Griffing, B. (1956). A generalised treatment 

of the use of diallel crosses in quantitative 

inheritance. Heredity, 10(1), 31-50.a          

Hamdi, G. J. (2022). Estimate the genetic 

distance and genetic parameters of 

growth characteristics and yield of tomato 

using half diallel cross under water stress. 

PhD Thesis. University of Diyala, 
Baqubah, Iraq. 218 pp. 

Ipgri, (1996). Descriptors for tomato. 

(Lycopersicon Spp.) Interational Plant 
Gentic Resources. Institute, Rome, Italy. 

PP. 44. 

Islam, S., Hassan, L., and Hossain, M. A. 

(2022). Breeding Potential of Some 

Exotic Tomato Lines: A Combined Study 

of Morphological Variability, Genetic 

Divergence, and Association of 

Traits. Phyton, 91(1), 97.a 

Kandel, D. R., Bedre, R. H., Mandadi, K. K., 

Crosby, K., and Avila, C. A. (2019). 

Genetic diversity and population structure 

of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) 

germplasm developed by Texas AandM 

breeding programs. American Journal of 

Plant Sciences, 10(7), 1154-1180. 

aKherwa, R. S. (2017). Heterosis for fruit yield 

and quality traits of tomato (Solanum 

lycopersicum L.). Thesis. M.Sc. Bihar 

Agricultural University, Sabour. India. 

Kulus, D. (2022). Genetic Diversity for 

Breeding Tomato. In Cash Crops (pp. 

505-521). Springer, Cham.a 

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74926-

2_13 

Kumar, C. (2015). Heterosis and combining 

ability studies in diallel crosses of tomato 

(Solanum lycopersicum L.). Thesis, M.Sc. 
Banaras Hindu University, India. pp 168. 

Liu, X.a C., Ishiki, K. and Wang, W.X. 2002. 

Identification of AFLP markers favorable 

to heterosis in hybrid rice. Breed Sci. 52: 

201-206 (Cross Ref.) (ISI). 

Murariu, O. C., Brezeanu, C., Jităreanu, C. D., 

Robu, T., Irimia, L. M., Trofin, A. E., and 

Brezeanu, P. M. (2021). Functional 

quality of improved tomato genotypes 

grown in open field and in plastic tunnel 

under organic 

farming. Agriculture, 11(7), 609.a 

Ranganna, S. (1977). Manual of analysis of 

fruit and vegetable products. The 

McGraw Hill Publishing Company 

Limited – New Delhi, pp. 63. 

Sinha, A., Singh, P., Kumar, R., & Bhardwaj, 

A. (2022). Assessment of genetic 

diversity for yield and its attributing traits 

in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) 

genotypes for protected 

conditions. Indian Journal of Agricultural 

Research, 56(4), 480-484.a 

Tasisa, J., Belew, D., and Bantte, K. (2012). 

Genetic associations analysis among 

some traits of tomato (Lycopersicon 

esculentum Mill.) genotypes in West 

Showa, Ethiopia. International Journal of 
Plant Breeding and Genetics, 6(3), 129-

139.a 

https://doi.org/10.3923/ijpbg.2012.129.13

9  

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74926-2_13
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74926-2_13
https://doi.org/10.3923/ijpbg.2012.129.139
https://doi.org/10.3923/ijpbg.2012.129.139