VOL.4.NO.1.indd Journal of Tropical Crop Science Vol. 4 No. 1, February 2017 www.j-tropical-crops.com 32 Mohammad Wahyu Sautomo, Muhamad Syukur Evaluation of Progress Selection of F2 - F6 Population, A Cross between Two Lowland Tomato Genotypes Mohammad Wahyu Sautomo, Muhamad Syukur* Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, Bogor Agricultural University, Jalan Meranti, IPB Darmaga Campus, West Java, Indonesia 16680 *Coresponding author, email:mhsyukur@gmail.com Abstract One of the parameters that can be measured from the activities of selection is progress selection. The population of a plant which has been selected is expected to be good against a derivative of a crop which was selected. The aim of this research is to study the results of progress selection varieties superior of tomato plants down the generations in the population F2 005001 until F6 005001-4-1-12-3 with a standard tomato cultivar, “Ratna”. The result showed that the selected genotypes have shown improvements over the standard cutivar in terms of weight per fruit, fruit weight per plant, the number of fruits per plant, fruit thickness and the age of harvested plants in the population F2-005001 until F6 005001-4-1-12-3. The mean against the character being observed in the population F2 005001 until F6 005001-4-1-12-3 indicated that the result is better if compared with both parents, P1 (SSH-5 ) and P2 (Intan) and the standard cultivar “Ratna”. The value of heritability a wider sense indicate its value being on each character of being selected, while the value of heritability in a more narrow sense showed a low value on every character. The value of progress against character selection of weights per fruit, the weight of the fruit per plant, the number of fruit per plant, thick fl esh fruit and the age of harvest showed increased slow progress in a genotype F2 005001 followed by a period of rapid progress in a genotype F4 005001-4-1 and very slow in a genotype F6 005001-4-1-12-3. Keywords: progress selection, population, genotype, mean, heritability Introduction Production of tomatoes, Solanum lycopersicum, in 2010-2011 increased by 7% from 891,616 tons (2010) to 954,046 tons (2011) with productivity average of 16.65 tons per ha (Dirjenhorti, 2012). National demand for tomatoes consistently increases every year, so many superior varieties are developed which are able to produce high production. High productivity is one of the major breeding objectives (Hidayat et al., 1997). However, with the limitations of high environmental factors conducive to tomato growing, high yielding varieties of tomatoes were developed that are able to adapt in lowland with high productivity. One of the stages in the assembling of superior varieties of tomatoes is by selection, a process of separation of plants from a mixed population based on the appearance of certain characters (Arif, 2008). The purpose of selection is to select particular desired phenotypes to obtain a better genotype (Wahdina, 2004). There are two forms of selection for character enhancement, namely the selection between the existing population to enhance the desired character, and selection in the population to create new varieties, resulting in the off spring of the crosses usually consisting of segregation (Syukur et al., 2012). Evaluation of the selection between the existing populations is conducted to determine the response of a population selection to the expected characters. One of the measurable parameters of the selection activity is the progress of selection. The estimates of selection progress will depend largely on the value of heritability, the standard intersection of selected populations, and the intensity of selection (Mejaya et al., 2010). Selected crop populations are expected to provide better results for derivatives of selected plants. Heritability value is the ratio of genotype with the total amount of phenotypes. Generally, narrow sense of heritability gets much attention because the additive eff ect of each allele is inherited from the elder to its derivatives (Memen et al., 2007). In this study, evaluation of selected characters is expected to get good selection progress. This study aims to study the progress of selection of superior varieties of tomato plants between generations in the population F2 - F6 with the “Ratna” variety as the comparing variety. Journal of Tropical Crop Science Vol. 4 No. 1, February 2017 www.j-tropical-crops.com 33Evaluation of Progress Selection of F2 - F6 Population, A Cross .......... Materials and Methods The research was conducted at the Leuwikopo experimental station and Plant Breeding Education Laboratory of Agronomy and Horticulture Department, Bogor Agricultural University, Indonesia, from December 2013 until April 2014. The materials used in this research were tomato parents SSH-5 (40 plants), tomato parents Intan (40 plants), and fi ve generations of selfi ng derivatives (F2 005001) (100 plants), the third derivative (F3 005001-4) (100 plants), the fourth derivative (F4 005001-4-1) (100 plants), the fi fth derivative (F5 005001-4-1 -12) (100 plants), and the sixth derivative (F6 005001-4-1-12-3) (100 plants). Two seeds of tomato were planted per hole on seedling trays containing media soil mixture and manure (1:1 v/v). Gandasil D at the rate of 2 g.L-1 was applied in a liquid form. Watering was conducted twice a day, morning and afternoon. Land clearing was done before it was prepared and leveled after which the land was then divided into seven plots for each varieties tested. The size of each bed was 1 m x 5 m with 80 cm as the distance between beds. Fertilizers were applied after planting with half dose 50 kg N per ha (5 g Urea per plant), 100 kg P2O5 per ha (16 g TSP per plant) and 120 kg K2O per ha (20 g KCl per plant) (Harjadi and Sunaryono, 1989). Plant pest and disease control were conducted twice a week using Mancozeb 80% or Propinep 70% (2 g.l-1), Profenofos (2 ml.L-1) and Dicofol (2 ml.L-1). Harvesting was conducted when the fruit skin were yellow reddish in colour. Results and Discussion Harvest Age Heritability values are referred to as low if less than 20%, medium if between 20-50% and high if the value is more than 50% (Sujiprihati et al., 2003). The width sense of heritability value character of tomato harvest age was in the medium range of 40.66 to 54.03%, while the narrow sense of heritability was in the low range of 6.24 to 15.13% (Table 5). Based on the additive ratio contained in Table 1, it is known that the value of the additive variety of harvest age characters is low. The low variety of additives aff ecting the age of harvest suggests that selection done in the early generations did not provide much genotype progress. A study by Arif et al. (2012) showed thatthe width sense of heritability value in the character of harvest age is in the medium-high range, while heritability in the narrow sense is in the low range. Our fi ndings are in line with this study, where the width sense of heritability was in the medium range and narrow sense of heritability was in the low range. The mean value of the harvest age character decreases from the genotype F2 005001 - F6 005001-4-1-12-3 which was in the range of 67 to 65 DAP. The decline in the mean values on the character of harvest age indicated that there was a great selection of progress from the parents to the progenies. Idris et al. (2011) reported that there was a positive correlation between harvest age of maize and seed weight per ear. Our study had shown a similar result where increasing harvest age in each genotype aff ects the weight increase per fruit in each genotype. The addition of harvested lifespan had an enormous impact on the opportunities for plants to accumulate more organic matter and photosynthates in the fruit ripening process. Weight of Fruit per Plant Heritability value of the broad mean of fruit weight character per plant was in the medium range of 18.75 to 61.24%. A high heritability value is caused by a relatively homogenous environment (Arifi n, 2008), The low heritability value in the F3 005001-4 genotype (18.75%) was infl uenced by environmental factors Table 1. Component variety (?) and heritability of tomato harvest age Population Harvest age Range (days) Mean (days) Diversity h2bs (%) h 2 ns (%) a ratio P1 (SSH-5) 65 – 76 70.25 13.69 P2 (Intan) 55 – 64 57.93 5.55 F2 005001 58 – 75 65.43 16.48 41.64 6.24 0.15 F3 005001-4 58 – 75 66.81 19.50 50.68 8.96 0.18 F4 005001-4-1 56 – 75 63.14 16.21 40.66 16.94 0.42 F5 005001-4-1-12 56 – 73 67.48 16.70 42.42 16.11 0.38 F6 005001-4-1-12-3 56 – 79 65.29 20.93 54.03 15.13* 0.28 “Ratna” 57 – 73 62.60 11.78 Note : * = Based on extrapolation of the additive ratio Journal of Tropical Crop Science Vol. 4 No. 1, February 2017 www.j-tropical-crops.com 34 Mohammad Wahyu Sautomo, Muhamad Syukur (Table 2), including pest and diseases. The severe pest and disease attack occurredd in the population of F3 005001-4 had directly aff ected the fruit yield per plant. Table 2. Various components and heritability of fruit weight per tomato plant Population Fruit weight per plant Range (g) Mean (g) Diversity h2bs (%) h 2 ns (%) a ratio P1 (SSH-5) 30.05 - 63.25 49.23 151.55 P2 (Intan) 54.42 - 805.53 309.28 53996.48 F2 005001 89.28 - 1023.23 231.53 35557.66 23.86 11.09 0.46 F3 005001-4 83.17 - 768.35 235.22 33322.38 18.75 17.96 0.96 F4 005001-4-1 94.7 - 1276.53 389.80 69841.74 61.24 29.54 0.48 F5 005001-4-1-12 69.86 - 975.02 430.46 56990.66 52.29 24.24 0.46 F6 005001-4-1-12-3 384.76 - 1193.03 806.15 40090.63 32.47 14.29* 0.44 “Ratna” 23.27 - 1257.83 434.25 108786.46 Note : * = Based on extrapolation of additive ratio The narrow sense of heritability value of character of fruit weight per plant was in the low range of 11.09 to 29.54%. According to Masruroh et al. (2009), the value of heritability in the narrow sense indicates the magnitude of additive infl uence on phenotype appearance. A narrow sense of heritability value indicated a low proportion of additive variance (Table 2). This was less favorable in the selection process because of the low possibility to improve fruit weight per plant. The Number of Fruits per Plant The width sense of heritability value of the character of the number of fruit was in the medium range of 44.32 to 51.95%, except in the genotype F3 005001- 4 which is in the low range of 10.16% (Table 3). The narrow sense of heritability value of the number of fruit was in the low range of 7.4 to 26.33%. The low value of heritablitas in genotype F3 005001-4 was caused by pest and disease attack resulting in a decrease in population hence infl uenced the value of genotype varieties. Based on the results on the number of fruits per plant it can be seen that the highest variety of values was in the genotype F2 005001 (51.95%) (Table 3) whereas the value of the highest narrow sense of heritability is in the genotype F4 005001-4-1 (26.33%). According to Gaswanto et al. (2009) the narrow sense of heritability becomes more important in an inheritance to its derivatives due to the diversity caused by the role of the additive gene as part of the total genetic diversity. The higher narrow sense of heritability value of the genotype F4 005001-4-1 indicated the eff ect of higher additive varieties so that the nature of the number of fruits will be inherited from the off spring of the crosses occurring in the F4 005001-4-1 generation. Thickness of Fruit Flesh The width sense of heritability value of the thickness of the fruit fl esh was in the medium range of 24.64 Table 3. Various components and heritability of the number of fruits per plant Population The number of fruit per plant Range (fuits) Mean (fuits) Diversity h 2 bs (%) h 2 ns (%) a ratio P1 (SSH-5) 2 – 12 3.75 9.94 P2 (Intan) 3 – 31 11.78 52.54 F2 005001 2 – 43 11.25 65.01 51.95 13.55 0.26 F3 005001-4 3 – 26 11.38 34.78 10.16 7.40 0.73 F4 005001-4-1 6 – 36 16.20 59.07 47.11 26.33 0.56 F5 005001-4-1-12 8 – 40 19.00 56.11 44.32 19.64 0.44 F6 005001-4-1-12-3 10 – 41 26.29 58.15 46.27 14.81* 0.32 “Ratna” 2 – 45 18.24 135.13 Note : * = Based on extrapolation of additive ratio Journal of Tropical Crop Science Vol. 4 No. 1, February 2017 www.j-tropical-crops.com 35Evaluation of Progress Selection of F2 - F6 Population, A Cross .......... to 55.88%, while the narrow sense of heritability value was in the low range of 8.18 to 14.96% (Table 4). Based on the thickness and heritability of tomato fl esh (Table 4), the highest mean value of heritability was in F4 005001-4-1 genotype (55.88%) and the lowest value was in F6 006001-4-1-12-3 genotype (24.64%). The highest narrow sense of heritability value is in the genotype F3 005001-4 (14.96%). This indicated that eff ective selection was performed on the F4 005001-4-1 generation. However, in the fi nal population of the F6 005001-4-1-12-3 genotype the selection was not eff ective. Weight per Fruit The width sense of heritability value of the character of weight per fruit was in the medium range of 29.28 to 39.60%, in the genotype F2 005001- F5 005001- 4-1-12. However heritability decreased to as low as 19.18% in the genotype F6 005001-4-1-12-3 (Table 5) while the narrow sense of heritability value of weight character per fruit was in the low range of 11.72 to 26.63%. A similar study on chilly by Syukur (2012) indicated a high weight per fruit. However, the results of this study are somewhat diff erent and it is thought to be due to diff erences in population and the methods employed. The value of heritability shows the eff ectiveness of selection of a character. According to Arifi n (2008) heritability estimates are used as a fi rst step in the selection work of segregated populations. The low diversity value of the genotype F6 005001-4-1-12- 3 shows that selection of weight per fruit in the F6 generation will result in a low selection progress. According to Arif et al. (2012) the narrow sense of heritability in approaching the width sense of heritability shows that the proportion of the additive diversity is greater than the dominant diversity. This is in accordance with the additive ratio (Table 1), which shows a high diversity of additives compared to the dominant. Progress Selection Progress selection is a value that becomes the parameter of success on the selection of a population. In simple terms the progress of selection is the Table 4. The thickness of tomato fl esh and its heritability Population Thickness of fruit fl esh Range (mm) Mean (mm) Diversity h2bs (%) h 2 ns (%) a ratio P1 (SSH-5) 0.96 - 4.03 2.17 0.72 P2 (Intan) 0.90 - 4.03 2.32 0.36 F2 005001 1.50 - 4.83 3.04 0.76 28.86 8.92 0.31 F3 005001-4 2.04 - 5.45 3.08 0.84 35.95 14.96 0.42 F4 005001-4-1 2.11 - 5.95 3.81 1.22 55.88 8.69 0.16 F5 005001-4-1-12 2.57 - 6.15 4.50 0.80 32.89 8.18 0.25 F6 005001-4-1-12-3 3.19 - 6.98 5.37 0.72 24.64 8.62* 0.35 “Ratna” 1.51 - 7.02 4.59 1.55 Note : * = Based on extrapolation of additive ratio Table 5. Various components and heritability weights per tomato fruit Population Weight per fruit Range (g) Mean (g) Variation h2bs (%) h 2 ns (%) a ratio P1 (SSH-5) 15.03 - 59.09 25.09 9.95 P2 (Intan) 18.13 - 50.52 32.66 81.90 F2 005001 6.98 - 40.41 20.15 76.03 39.60 11.72 0.30 F3 005001-4 10.40 - 43.62 20.49 70.01 34.40 19.13 0.56 F4 005001-4-1 20.35 - 48.37 31.95 69.69 34.11 26.4 0.77 F5 005001-4-1-12 24.24 - 64.18 35.72 64.94 29.28 21.63 0.74 F6 005001-4-1-12-3 36.44 - 66.62 48.87 56.82 19.18 13.43* 0.70 “Ratna” 12.21 - 55.73 29.18 100.12 Note : * = Based on extrapolation of additive ratio Journal of Tropical Crop Science Vol. 4 No. 1, February 2017 www.j-tropical-crops.com 36 Mohammad Wahyu Sautomo, Muhamad Syukur diff erence between the mean of the descendants of the selection with the median selection of the population (Gratitude et al., 2012). The value of selection of weight per fruit, weight of fruit per plant, number of fruits per plant, fruit fl esh thickness and plant harvest age showed a slow increase in genotype F2 005001 followed by a period of rapid advancement in genotype F4 005001-4-1, and progressively slowed down in genotype F6 005001-4-1-12-3. This is in line with Zulfarosda et al. (2012) where the weight of fruit per grain, fruit weight per plot, fl owering age, and harvest age of ten tomato genotypes tested had slow selection progress. Susiana (2006) demonstrated that most chili characters had high genetic expectation values except for fl owering age, harvest age, marketable fruit weight and thick bark of fruit having low genetic progress value (0%). The age of tomato harvest showed the decline of the days of each generation with values from 0.45 to 1.48 (Table 6). This means that each generation experiences an acceleration of harvest time between 0.45 days to 1.48 days after planting. Graph of the mean age of harvest (Figure 1) shows the average yield of harvest age of each generation was between the second harvest age of P1 (SSH-5) which has a long harvesting age character with P2 (Intan) Table 6. Progress of selection of tomato yield characters Population Harvest age Fruit weight per plant Fruit number per plant S Gm Gt S Gm Gt S Gm Gt F2 005001 -4.56 -0.28 -0.45 231.80 25.70 36.80 13.75 1.86 1.92 F3 005001-4 -4.81 -0.43 -0.70 156.80 28.16 57.69 7.62 0.56 0.77 F4 005001-4-1 -4.94 -0.84 -1.20 381.11 112.58 137.40 12.70 3.34 3.56 F5 005001-4-1-12 -6.03 -0.97 -1.16 312.70 75.79 101.83 13.00 2.55 2.59 F6 005001-4-1-12-3 -5.89 -1.08 -1.48 260.31 37.19 50.34 11.41 1.69 1.99 Note : Gm = Progress selection based on diff erential selection; Gt = Progress selection based on theory ( i =1.76) which had the character of harvest age. In the study of Barmawi et al. (2013) the value of the genetic progress of the harvest age is low suggesting that there was a slow progress in the selection in every generation of selection. Estimated progress of selection will be highly dependent on the heritability value, standard intersection of selected population and the selection intensity (Mejaya et al., 2010). The comparison of selection progress using the diff erence between the selected middle value and the middle of the initial population (diff erential selection) using the selection intensity has a small diff erence, where the value of selection progress using diff erential selection always has lower value than the value of selection progress by using intensity of selection (Table 6 and Table 7). This was because the diff erential selection used had not been standardized for the deviation, so the diff erence of the units in comparing the selection power of two or more characters could not be used diff erential magnitude of selection. Quantitative characters are infl uenced by many genes whose infl uence is cumulative (Murti et al., 2015). The value of selection of weight per fruit, the weight of fruit per plant and the number of fruit Figure 1. The mean values of harvest age of tomato from population F2-F6 and both parents. Journal of Tropical Crop Science Vol. 4 No. 1, February 2017 www.j-tropical-crops.com 37Evaluation of Progress Selection of F2 - F6 Population, A Cross .......... per plant had the highest selection progress on the genotype F4 005001-4-1 and decreased in the next generation. In contrast to the progress of selection on the thickness of fruit fl esh and fruit harvest age, the highest thickness of the fl esh was observed on the genotype F3 005001-4 with a value of 0.22 indicating a progressively diff erential selection and 0.24 was progressively selection with the intensity of selection (Table 7). While the highest selection of fruit harvest age on genotype F6 005001-4-1-12-3 with a value of 1.08 in progress diff erential selection and 1.48 in progress selection with the intensity of selection (Table 7). Fruit weight per plant with cycles of 36.80 to 137.40 (Table 6). This means that each generation contains additional fruit per plant with an added value of 36.80 grams per plant up to 137.40 grams per plant. Graph of the median fruit-per-plant value (Figure 2) shows an improvement in the larger F6 005001-4-1-12-3 genotype compared to both parents P1 (SSH-5) and P2 (Intan), and the genotype of each generation. In the study of Idris et al. (2011) fruit weight per plant is positively correlated with the weight per fruit, so the increase in fruit weight per fruit could potentially increase yield. There was an increased progress of high selection of fruit weight per plant on genotype F4 005001-4-1 and genotype F5 005001-4-1-12 (Table 6). This is due to the mean value and narrow sense of heritability value that infl uenced the selection of a population. On the other hand, the additive ratio level in the F3 005001-4 genotype of 0.96 (Table 2) gives a greater impact on subsequent generations, so the selection of the F3 005001-4 genotype provides higher upgrades in the next generation. The number of fruits per plant shows the progress of selection of each cycle with values from 0.77 to 3.56 (Table 6). This means that each generation has an additional number of fruits per plant with an additional value of 0.77 fruits up to 3.56 fruits per plant. Graph of the mean value of the number of fruits per plant (Figure 3) shows an increase in the number of fruits per generation with the genotype F6 005001-4-1-12-3 showing the highest number of fruits when compared with both parents ie P1 (SSH-5) fruit per plant is very low and P2 (Intan), as well as the genotype of each generation. The parental crossover of P1 (SSH-5) had a low number of fruits per plant compared to the P2 (Intan) parent which yielded a high number of fruits per plant producing saplings that inherit the number of fruits per plant with average yields between the two ages in genotype F2 005001 (Figure 3). This shows that the infl uence of P2 (Intan) is stronger than P1 (SSH- 5). Therefore it is possible that the gene P2 (Intan) is dominant for the character of the number of fruits Table 7. Progress of selection of advanced tomato yield characters Population Thickness of fruit fl esh Weight per fruit S Gm Gt S Gm Gt F2 005001 1.20 0.11 0.14 13.17 1.54 1.80 F3 005001-4 1.49 0.22 0.24 12.10 2.32 2.82 F4 005001-4-1 1.58 0.14 0.17 11.63 3.07 3.88 F5 005001-4-1-12 1.32 0.11 0.13 12.18 2.64 3.07 F6 005001-4-1-12-3 1.06 0.09 0.13 8.81 1.18 1.78 Note : Gm = Progress selection based on diff erential selection; Gt = Progress selection based on theory (i =1.76) Figure 2. The mean values of fruit weight per plant of population F2-F6 and both parents Journal of Tropical Crop Science Vol. 4 No. 1, February 2017 www.j-tropical-crops.com 38 Mohammad Wahyu Sautomo, Muhamad Syukur per plant. The results of research by Masruroh et al. (2009) showed that the number of fruit on the tomato crossing LV6123 X LV5152 fully infl uenced the action of additive gene. The existence of additive gene action provides an increase in the number of fruit per plant that occurs after the best population selection. The thickness of the tomato fl esh shows a progress in the selection of each cycle with values from 0.13 to 0.24 (Table 7). This means that every generation had increased thickness in fruit fl esh with an additional value of 0.13 to 0.24 mm per generation of selection. Graph of mean value of thickness of fruits fl esh (Figure 4) shows an increase in the thickness of fruit fl esh of each generation with genotype F6 005001-4- 1-12-3 having the largest fruit thickness as compared to the two parents namely P1 (SSH-5) which has thin fl esh and P2 (Intan) with character of medium fl esh thickness. The weight per fruit shows the progress of selection of each cycle with the values of 1.78 to 3.88 (Table 7). Each generation had an average weight per fruit ranging from 1.78 grams to as high as 3.88 grams per fruit in the genotype F4 005001-4-1. The weight character per fruit is one of the most important selection criteria that correlated with other characters and showed the potential outcomes (Zulfarosda et al., 2012). Graph of weight mean value per fruit (Figure 1) shows a selection progress on genotype F6 005001- 4-1-12-3 which has the biggest weight per fruit when compared to both parents P1 (SSH-5) and P2 (Intan), as well as the genotype of each generation. Increased progress of low weight selection per fruit was shown in genotype F2 005001 and F3 005001-4 when compared to both parents (Figure 5). This is consistent with the data in Table 1 where there is a modest advancement of mean values on the genotype F2 005001 and F3 005001-4. The low advancement of mean values in this initial genotype was due to the high value of variance indicating high levels of heterozygosity compared with the fi nal genotype. The high genetic diversity of early generations in a population indicated that selection can be performed on the desired variables according to the purpose of plant breeding activities performed (Susiana, 2006). The result of the t-test was conducted on population F6 005001-4-1-12-3 as genotype of selection result Figure 3. The mean values of the number of fruits per plant of population F2-F6 and the two parents Figure 4. The mean values of the tomato fl esh thickness of population F2-F6 and both parents Figure 5. The mean values of weight per fruit of the F2-F6 population and the two parents Journal of Tropical Crop Science Vol. 4 No. 1, February 2017 www.j-tropical-crops.com 39Evaluation of Progress Selection of F2 - F6 Population, A Cross .......... with “Ratna” as varieties of comparison on weight per fruit, fruit weight per plant and number of fruit Table 8. Test the t-student tomato yield characters of population F6 005001-4-1-12-3 agains t the standard cultivar “Ratna” Populasi Average fruit weight (g) Fruit weight per plant (g) Number of fruits per plant Fruit fl esh thicnkess (mm) Harvest age (day) F6 005001-4-1-12-3 48.87 ± 7.54 806.15 ± 200.23 26.29 ± 7.63 5.37 ± 0.85 65 ± 5 “Ratna” 29.18 ± 10.01 434.25 ± 329.83 18.24 ± 11.62 4.59 ± 1.24 63 ± 3 T-test 10.09* 6.09* 3.79* 3.45ns 3.65ns Prob > |t| 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 Note : * = signifi cantly diff erent to “Ratna”; ns = not signifi cantly diff erent from “Ratna” per plant there is a real diff erence (Table 8). This result demonstrated that the weight character per fruit, the weight of the fruit per plant and the number of fruits per plant F6 005001-4-1-12-3 has a better value compared to the standard cultivar “Ratna”. However t-test results was conducted on population F6 005001-4-1-12-3 with “Ratna” on the thickness of fruit fl esh and harvest age showed no signifi cant diff erence. This is due to the low selection progress in harvest age and fl esh thickness as well as the good character of the “Ratna” variety that has a thick fruit fl esh that is large and the age of the shorter harvest. The selection improvement of thick character of fruit fl esh and harvest age did not show tangible results when compared with “Ratna”. The characters that have low selection progress, generally indicated that the character was a quantitative that was controlled by many genes (Komariah and Amalia 2012). Conclusion The result of this research demonstrated that there were progress of selection on character of weight per fruit, fruit weight per plant, number of fruit per plant, fruit fl esh thickness and plant harvest age in population F2-005001 to F6 005001-4-1-12-3. The mean values of the characters observed in the population F2 005001 - F6 005001-4-1-12-3 showed better results when compared to both P1 (SSH-5) and P2 (Intan) parents, and to the standard cultivar “Ratna”. The width sense of heritability value indicates the current value of each selected characterwhile the narrow sense of heritability value indicated a low value on each character. The value of selection of weight per fruit, weight of fruit per plant, number of fruits per plant, thickness of fruit fl esh and harvest age showed a slow increasd in the genotype F2 005001 and followed by a period of rapid advancement in genotype F4 005001-4-1 and progressively slowed down in the genotype F6 005001-4-1-12-3. References Arif, A.B. (2008). Seleksi in vitro untuk ketenggangan terhadap alumunium pada empat varietas jagung Thesis. Institut Pertanian Bogor, Indonesia Arif, A.B., Sujiprihati, S., and Syukur, M. (2012). Estimation of several genetic parameter on quantitative characters of hybridization between big and curly chilli (Capsicum annuum L.). Jurnal Agronomi Indonesia 40,119-124. Arifi n, Z. (2008). Deskripsi sifat agronomik berdasarkan seleksi genotipe tanaman kedelai dengan metode multivariat. Thesis. Universitas Islam Madura Pamekasan, Indonesia. Barmawi, M., Yushardi, A., and Sa’diyah, N. (2013). Daya waris dan harapan kemajuan seleksi karakter agronomi kedelai generasi F2 hasil persilangan antara yellow bean dan taichung. Jurnal Agrotek Tropika 1, 20-24. Direktorat Jenderal Hortikultura. (2012). Produksi Sayuran Indonesia 2007-2011. http:// hortikultura.deptan.go.id. [March 7, 2013]. Gaswanto, R., Gunaeni, N., and Duriat, A.S. (2009). Seleksi tanaman tomat berdasarkan ketahanan pasif dan aktif terhadap CMV. Jurnal Hortikultura 19, 377-385. Harjadi, S.S., and Sunaryono, H. (1989). “Dasar- Dasar Hortikultura”. IPB Press. Hidayat, A., Duriat, A.S., Djaya, B., Purwati, E., Suryaningsih, E., Marpaung, L., Ameriana, M., Nurtika, N., Gunawan, O.S., Soetiarto, T.A., et al. (1997). “Teknologi Produksi Tomat”. Balai Penelitian Tanaman Sayuran, Bandung. Idris, Yakop, U.M., and Farida, N. (2011). Kemajuan seleksi massa pada jagung kultivar lokal kebo setelah satu siklus seleksi dalam pertanaman tumpangsari dengan kacang tanah. Crop Agro Journal of Tropical Crop Science Vol. 4 No. 1, February 2017 www.j-tropical-crops.com 40 Mohammad Wahyu Sautomo, Muhamad Syukur 4, 37-42. Komariah, A., and Amalia, L. (2012). Heritability and genetic gain of anthocyanin content, water content, thickness of fruit skin, lignin content of fruit skin, and pepper plant resistance to anthracnose. Bionatura 1, 1-14. Masruroh, F.M., Nasrullah, and Murti, R.H. (2009). Analysis of mean generations of crossing between LV 6123 and LV 5152 tomato lines. Agrivita 31, 166-177. Mejaya, M.J., Azrai, M., and Iriany, R.N. (2010). “Jagung: Teknik Produksi dan Pengembangan”. Balai Penelitian Tanaman Serealia, Maros. Murti, R.H., Kurniawati, T., and Nasrullah. (2015). Pola pewarisan karakter buah tomat. Zuriat. 15, 140-149. Sujiprihati, S., Saleh, G.H., and Ali, E.S. (2003). Heritability, performance and correlation studies on single cross hybrids of tropical maize. Asian Journal of Plant Science. 2, 51- 57. Susiana, E. (2006). Pendugaan nilai heritabilitas, variabilitas dan evaluasi kemajuan genetik beberapa karakter agronomi genotipe cabai (Capsicum annuum L.) F4. Thesis. Institut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor. Syukur, M., Sujiprihati, S., and Yunianti, R. (2012). “Teknik Pemuliaan Tanaman”. Penebar Swadaya, Jakarta. Wahdina. (2004). Evaluasi kemajuan seleksi generasi F3 dan F4 persilangan kedelai varietas Slamet X GH-09. Thesis. Institut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor. Zulfarosda, R., Kendirini, N., and Respatijarti. (2012). Potensi hasil sepuluh genotip tomat (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) di Karangploso Malang. Jurnal Produksi Tanaman 1, 450-455.