<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OALibJ</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Access Library Journal</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2333-9705</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/oalib.1106830</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OALibJ-107614</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Biomedical&amp;Life Sciences</subject><subject> Business&amp;Economics</subject><subject> Chemistry&amp;Materials Science</subject><subject> Computer Science&amp;Communications</subject><subject> Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject><subject> Engineering</subject><subject> Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject><subject> Physics&amp;Mathematics</subject><subject> Social Sciences&amp;Humanities</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Nutrient Composition, Antioxidant Components and Ascorbic Acid Content Response of Pepper Fruit (Capsicum annuum L.) Cultivars Grown under Salt Stress
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hand</surname><given-names>Mathias Julien</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Nono</surname><given-names>Giles Vivien</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Tonfack</surname><given-names>Libert Brice</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Taffouo</surname><given-names>Victor Désiré</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Youmbi</surname><given-names>Emmanuel</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Department of Biology Science, Faculty of Science, University of Maroua, Maroua, Cameroon</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Unit of Physiology and Plant Improvement, Laboratory of Biotechnology and Environment, Department of Biology and Plant Physiology, Faculty of Science, University of Yaoundé I, Yaoundé, Cameroon</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, University of Douala, Douala, Cameroon</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>03</day><month>03</month><year>2021</year></pub-date><volume>08</volume><issue>03</issue><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>20</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>17,</day>	<month>September</month>	<year>2020</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>2,</day>	<month>March</month>	<year>2021</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>5,</day>	<month>March</month>	<year>2021</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  
    Salinity stress occurs due to the accumulation of high levels of salts in soil, which ultimately leads to the impairment of plant growth and crop loss. Stress tolerance-inducing compounds have a remarkable ability to improve growth and minimize the effects of salinity stress without negatively affecting the environment by controlling the activities in plants. The pots were arranged in a complete randomized design with one plant per pot and four replicates per treatment and carried out in 2017 and 2018 to study the influence of four levels of NaCl (0, 50, 100 and 200 mM) on the antioxidant, ascorbic acid, organic and inorganic compounds of three pepper fruits cultivars (“Granada”, “Goliath” and “Nobili”) at mature stage. The results obtained showed that salinity decreased the mineral content, relative water content, and agro-morphological parameters of pepper fruit. This decrease was accompanied by a significant increase of Na, soluble proteins, proline content, fructose, glucose and antioxidants, including total phenolics and flavonoids, and reduced ascorbic acid and β-carotene content. However, a varietal difference response to salt stress was observed between the studied varieties. Indeed, the variety Granada is characterized by their vigour in absence as in the presence of salt. Under the studied salinity level there was an enhancement of health-promoting compounds (phenolic compounds, flavonoids, and soluble sugar) synthesis in pepper fruits, with significant changes in other quality parameters. “Granada” was more tolerant and stable in physiological, biochemical and agro-morphological traits suggesting that it could be grown in salt-affected soils. 
  
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Agro-Morphological Parameters</kwd><kwd> Antioxidant</kwd><kwd> Ions Distribution</kwd><kwd> Organic Compound</kwd><kwd> Salinity</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Salinity is one of the most important environmental factors that affect the distribution and abundance of plant species. Soil salinization occurs mainly in two ways: high evaporation relative to precipitation in association with weak leaching in soils, and salt accumulation as a result of the use of saline water [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref1">1</xref>] . It is estimated that about 50% of the world’s land will be saline by the middle of the 21<sup>st</sup> century [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref2">2</xref>] . Globally, 20% of irrigated land and 2.1% of dry land agriculture suffers from the salt problem and NaCl is the predominant salt causing salinization [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref3">3</xref>] . Salinity adversely affects germination, growth, physiology and productivity by reducing the ability of plants to take up water causing foliage damage and even death of the plants, imbalance in osmotic potential; ionic equilibrium and nutrient uptake [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref4">4</xref>] . Further, it facilitates severe ion toxicity by depositing high concentration of Na+ which causes membrane disorganization, inhibition of cell division and expansion. The influence of salinity and mineral nutrient solution, on productivity, photosynthesis and growth has been studied in different plants [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref5">5</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref6">6</xref>] . It stated that high levels of Na+ inhibit K, Ca and Mg in leaves, which results in a K/Na antagonism and net photosynthesis is affected strongly by NaCl conditions, which is related directly to the closure of stomata as to low intercellular CO<sub>2</sub> levels [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref7">7</xref>] . To develop saline zones and/or the zones having only brackish water resources, it is important to select tolerant varieties. Salinity imposes stress conditions on crop plants, affects growth and chemical contents and has been shown to limit pepper yield [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref8">8</xref>] . Salt stress severely inhibits plant growth for two reasons: firstly due to an osmotic or water-deficit effect of salinity and secondly due to a salt-specific or ion excess effect of NaCl. Soils with high levels of salinity have a low water potential zone; consequently, it is difficult for the plant to absorb water and nutrients. In other words saline soils expose plants to osmotic stress [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref9">9</xref>] . One of the most important consequences of osmotic stress on plants is the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in large amounts that followed by oxidative damages, the degradation of proteins, lipids, pigments, and DNA [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref10">10</xref>] . Plants growing in saline conditions take up harmful ions, especially Na<sup>+</sup> and Cl<sup>−</sup> ions. Accumulation of Na<sup>+</sup> and Cl<sup>−</sup> ions in large amounts is toxic for the cell, and compounds osmotic stress [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref9">9</xref>] . These ions disrupt membrane integrity, cell metabolism, enzyme structure, cell growth, and photosynthesis [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref11">11</xref>] . Although plants have a variety of ways of withstanding the stress, significant loss of yield occurs [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref12">12</xref>] . Salt stress is known to negatively affect plant growth at all developmental stages, but sensitivity varies greatly at different stages [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref13">13</xref>] . Crop production in saline areas largely depends on successful germination, seedling emergence and establishment and efficient reproductive phase [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref13">13</xref>] . Moreover, as environmental stress it may have a strong influence on the concentration of bioactive compounds of vegetables [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref14">14</xref>] . Meanwhile, there is an increasing need to produce enough food for the world’s growing population [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref1">1</xref>] . In order to address these challenges to the world’s food security, the engineering of plants to create species that tolerate salinity has been considered as a promising strategy.</p><p>Pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) is an important agricultural crop, not only because of its economic importance, but also for the nutritional value of its fruits; it is an excellent source of natural colors, vitamin C and antioxidant compounds important for human health [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref15">15</xref>] . Pepper is a moderately sensitive to salt stress [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref16">16</xref>] , and it is grown under protected glasshouse conditions in temperate regions and in the open field under warm Mediterranean climates. Salinity imposes stress conditions on crop plants [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref17">17</xref>] and affects growth and chemical contents and has been shown to limit pepper yield [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref8">8</xref>] . Salt stress severely inhibits plant growth for two reasons: first by an osmotic or water-deficit effect of salinity and second by a salt-specific or ion excess effect of NaCl. Moreover, plants subject to salinity stress conditions produce cytotoxic activated oxygen that can seriously disrupt normal metabolism, through oxidative damage of lipids, proteins, and nucleic acids [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref18">18</xref>] . To defend against such oxidants, plants have evolved specific protective mechanisms, involving antioxidant molecules and enzymes that protect against the potentially-cytotoxic species of activated oxygen. In case of high salinity, oxidative stress occurs due to closure of stomata, interruption of photosynthetic electron transport and disruption of cellular membrane integrity and antioxidative defense systems of plants start work against oxidative damage. The antioxidants include non-enzymatic ones, such as vitamin E, vitamin C, glutathione and carotenoid (β-carotene and zeaxanthin), and enzymes such as superoxide dismutase and catalase [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref19">19</xref>] .</p><p>The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of NaCl treatment on nutrient composition, antioxidant components, ascorbic acid content, and agro-morphological parameters of three varieties of pepper fruit (Capsicum annuum L.) in order to better understand their differences on salt stress tolerance and select tolerant varieties which could be cultivated in arid, semi-arid and coastal saline soils.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Materials and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Plant Materials</title><p>Pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) is especially productive in warm and dry climates than C. frutescens which can tolerate most climates. It also displays a greater resistance to disease and insects, especially to the tobacco mosaic virus. Capsaicinoids chemicals and antioxidants such as caroteno&#239;ds provide the distinctive tastes in C. annuun variants. The fruit are berries that may be green, yellow or red when ripe. The mature green stage is ideal to acquire maximum pungency due to capsaicinoids, whereas peppers at red ripe stage are best sources of ascorbic acid and dried fruits contain higher levels of total carotenoids [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref20">20</xref>] . Hot peppers are used in medicine as well as food in Africa. Seeds of three pepper cultivars (“Granada”, “Goliath” and “Nobili”), provided by the breeding program of the Agronomic Institute for Research and Development of Cameroon were used in the study. These varieties were chosen for their socio-economic rank and resistance to the tobacco mosaic virus.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Plant Growth Conditions and Salt Treatments</title><p>The present work was performed in the greenhouse of the Faculty of Science at University of Douala, Cameroon, from September 2017 to August 2018. The seeds were surface sterilized with 3% sodium hypochlorite for 20 min and washed four times with deionized water. One-month-old pepper seedlings were transplanted into 10-L plastic pots filled with 5 kg of sterilized sand. The pots were arranged in a complete randomized design with one plant per pot and four replicates per treatment. All plants were fertilized daily with a modified nutrient solution (in g∙L<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>): 150 g Ca(NO<sub>3</sub>)<sub>2</sub>, 70 g KNO<sub>3</sub>, 15 g Fe-EDTA, 0.14 g KH<sub>2</sub>PO<sub>4</sub>, 1.60 g K<sub>2</sub>SO<sub>4</sub>, 11 g MgSO<sub>4</sub>, 2.5 g CaSO<sub>4</sub>, 1.18 g MnSO<sub>4</sub>, 0.16 g ZnSO<sub>4</sub>, 3.10 g H<sub>3</sub>BO<sub>4</sub>, 0.17 g CuSO<sub>4</sub> and 0.08 g MoO<sub>3</sub> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref21">21</xref>] . The pH of the nutrient solution was adjusted to 7.0 by adding HNO<sub>3</sub> 0.1 mM. For the determination of physiological and biochemical responses of pepper cultivars to salt stress, each cultivar was subjected to 0 (control), 50, 100 and 200 mM NaCl. Plants were watered with deionized water every morning. The daily amounts of water added to the pots were the same for all treatments. Throughout the growth period, average day/night temperatures in the greenhouse were 26˚C/20˚C and the relative air humidity averaged 68.5%.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Plant Measurements</title><p>Plant samples were harvested after 4 months culture under salt stress, fruits were collected. The tissues (fruits) were dried for 24 h at 105˚C [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref22">22</xref>] . The dry samples were weighted. Ninety days after sowing, samples from each treatment were collected to determine agro-morphological characters (number of fruit per plant, fresh fruit weight of fruit, dry fruit weight, thickness of fruit, fruit length, fruit diameter), organic components (total soluble proteins, proline, fructose, glucose), inorganic components (Na, K, Ca, Mg, P, S, Zn, Cu, Mn, Fe content, K/Na, Ca/Na, Mg/Na), relative water content, antioxidant levels (total flavonoid content, total phenolic content, ascorbic acid, β-carotene content) in three pepper fruit cultivars.</p><p>Agromorphological characters</p><p>90 days after transplanting, the fresh fruit weight (FFW) and dry fruit weight (DFW) were determined. The number of fruit per plant, the fruit length and diameter were measured [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref23">23</xref>] .</p><p>Total soluble proteins</p><p>Protein content was determined by Bradford’s method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref24">24</xref>] . Briefly, appropriate volume (from 0 - 100 &#181;l) of sample was aliquoted into a tube and the total volume was adjusted to 100 &#181;l with distilled water. A 1 ml of Bradford working solution was added to each sample well. Then the mixture was thoroughly mixed by vortex mixer. After left for 2 min, the absorbance was read at 595 nm. The standard curve was established by replacing the sample portions in the tubes with proper serial dilutions of bovine serum albumin.</p><p>Free proline</p><p>Free proline was determined in 95% ethanol extracts from fruits. Samples of 0.5 g of tissues freshly harvested were crushed in 5 ml 95% (v/v) ethanol. The insoluble fraction of the extract was washed twice with 5 ml of 70% ethanol. All soluble fractions were centrifuged at 3500 &#215; g for 10 min. The supernatants were collected and stored at 4˚C for proline determination [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref25">25</xref>] . The free proline content was measured [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref26">26</xref>] .</p><p>Total soluble sugar</p><p>Glucose and fructose were extracted from pepper fruit homogenate aliquots according to the protocol described in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref27">27</xref>] , and then quantified enzymatically [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref28">28</xref>] .</p><p>Minerals</p><p>P, K, Ca, Mg, S and Na contents in the fruit tissue of the plants were evaluated in dry, ground, and digested samples in a CEM microwave oven [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref29">29</xref>] . P was determined by colorimetry; sodium and potassium by flame photometry; copper determination was carried out by means of mass spectrometry with source of plasma connected by induction (ICP-MS), by means of a Hewlett Packard 4500 series; calcium and magnesium by atomic absorption spectrometry and sulfur by turbidimetry of barium sulfate [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref30">30</xref>] . Iron, zinc and manganese contents were determined by method reported in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref31">31</xref>] . Fruit of pepper was dry ashed at 450˚C for 2 hours and digested on heat cave with 10 ml HNO<sub>3</sub> 1 M. The solution was filtrated and adjusted at 100 ml with HNO<sub>3</sub> at 1/100 and analyzed with an atomic absorption spectrophotometer (Rayleigh, WFX-100).</p><p>Relative water content</p><p>The relative water content (RWC) in fruits was recorded according to the formula as follows: RWC = (FFW − FDW)/(TW − FDW) &#215; 100, where FFW is fresh weight, FDW is dry weight, and TW is turgid weight [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref32">32</xref>] .</p><p>Total flavonoid content</p><p>FLA content of crude extract was determined by the aluminium chloride colorimetric method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref33">33</xref>] . 50 &#181;L of crude extract (1 mg/mL ethanol) were made up to 1 mL with methanol, mixed with 4 mL of distilled water and then 0.3 mL of 5% NaNO<sub>2</sub> solution; 0.3 mL of 10% AlCl<sub>3</sub> solution was added after 5 min of incubation, and the mixture was allowed to stand for 6 min. Then, 2 mL of 1 mol/L NaOH solution were added, and the final volume of the mixture was brought to 10 mL with double-distilled water. The mixture was allowed to stand for 15 min, and absorbance was recorded on spectrophotometer (Pharmaspec UV-1700 model) at 510 nm wavelength. FLA content was calculated from a rutin calibration curve, and the result was expressed as g rutin equivalent per g dry weight.</p><p>Total phenolic content</p><p>TP content of the extract was determined by the Folin Ciocalteu method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref34">34</xref>] . Subsamples (1 g) of fresh fruits were ground at 4˚C in 3 mL of 0.1 N HCl. After incubation to 4˚C for 20 min, the homogenate was centrifuged at 6000 g for 40 min. The supernatant was collected, the pellet re-suspended in 3 mL of 0.1 N HCl and centrifuged as previously. The two supernatant are mixed and constitute the crude extract of soluble phenol. The reaction mixture containing 15 &#181;L of extract, 100 &#181;L Folin-Ciocalteu reagents, 0.5 mL of 20% Na<sub>2</sub>CO<sub>3</sub> was incubated at 40˚C for 20 min and absorbance read at 720 nm wavelength with a spectrophotometer (Pharmaspec UV-1700 model). A standard curve was established using chlorogenic acid. TP content was expressed as mg g-1 fresh weight.</p><p>Ascorbic acid content</p><p>For estimation of ascorbic acid content (ASA), 1 g of frozen fruit tissues was homogenised in 5 mL of ice-cold 6% m-phosphoric acid (pH 2.8) containing 1 mM EDTA [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref35">35</xref>] . The homogenate was centrifuged at 20,000 &#215; g for 15 min at 4˚C. The supernatant was filtered through a 30-&#181;m syringe filter, and 50 &#181;L of the filtrate was analyzed using an HPLC system (PerkinElmer series 200 LC and UV/VIS detector 200 LC, USA) equipped with a 5-&#181;m column (Spheri-5 RP-18; 220 &#215; 4.6 mm; Brownlee) and UV detection at 245 nm with 1.0 mL/min water (pH 2.2) as the mobile phase, run isocratically [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref36">36</xref>] .</p><p>&#223;-carotene content</p><p>β-carotene was extracted by grinding fruit tissues in a solution of 100% acetone containing CaCO<sub>3</sub> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref37">37</xref>] . The extracts were centrifuged at 16,000 &#215; g for 10 min, and 20 &#181;L of the resulting supernatants were used for HPLC analysis, as described by [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref38">38</xref>] using the previously mentioned HPLC system. Solvent A (acetonitrile, methanol, Tris-HCl buffer 0.1 M, pH 8.0, 72:8:3) was run isocratically from 0 to 4 min followed by a 2.5 min linear gradient to 100% solvent B (methanol, hexane, 4:1) at a flow rate of 2 mL/min. The detector was set at 440 nm for the integration of peak areas after calibration with the external standard.</p><p>Experimental design and statistical analysis</p><p>The experiment was conducted as a factorial completely randomized design with four NaCl treatments and three cultivars in four replications. Data are presented in term of mean (&#177;standard deviation). All data were statistically analysed using Statistica (version 9, Tulsa, OK, USA) and first subjected to analyses of variance (ANOVA). Statistical differences between treatment means were established using the Fisher LSD test at p &lt; 0.05.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results and Discussion</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Agro-Morphological Parameters</title><p>According to findings in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>, salt stress at 100 and 200 mM NaCl caused significant decreases in NF, FFW, FDW, TF, FL and FD. The lowest values of these traits were recorded with salt stressed plants at 200 mM concentration, followed by 100 mM. In “Granada”, “Goliath” and “Nobili” there was a gradual decrease in the fruit length and diameter per plant following the increase in NaCl salinity. The cultivar “Granada” presented the higher FL 18.86 cm for control and 14.84 cm at 200 mM NaCl and “Goliath” present higher FD, 8.84 to 6.37 cm, when applying the highest of NaCl (200 mM) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>). The NF decreased linearly with the increase in the salinity, with significant effect on both cultivars (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>). The NF of the cultivar “Goliath”, 11.41 to 6.89, were higher than those of the cultivar “Nobili”, 10.28 to 7.68 and “Granada”, 9.81 to 7.23, when applying the highest of NaCl (200 mM). The cultivar “Granada” showed higher FFW, varied within a range of 45.55 to 37.81 g respectively to control and 200 mM NaCl (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>). These results were directly related to FDW, which decreased with increasing salinity (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>). The TF losses of the cultivars reached 30.06% in</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Eﬀect of salinity on some agro-morphological parameters of pepper fruit (Fruit Length, Fruit Diameter, Number of Fruit, Thickness of Fruit, Fresh Fruit Weight and Fruit Dry Weight) at the mature stage (90 DAP)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Cultivar</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Treatment (mM NaCl)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Fruit Length (cm)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Fruit Diameter (cm)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number of Fruit</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Fresh Fruit Weight (g)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Dry Fruit Weight (g)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Thickness of Fruit (mm)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Granada</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.86 &#177; 0.14<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.98 &#177; 0.09<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.82 &#177; 0.18<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45.55 &#177; 2.25<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.03 &#177; 0.07<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.82 &#177; 0.07<sup>ab </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.89 &#177; 0.18<sup>ab </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.54 &#177; 0.11<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.22 &#177; 0.19<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >43.81 &#177; 2.30<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.15 &#177; 0.04<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.78 &#177; 0.08<sup>ab </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.12 &#177; 0.15<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.77 &#177; 0.08<sup>bc </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.38 &#177; 0.15<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39.74 &#177; 2.01<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.88 &#177; 0.03<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.32 &#177; 0.06<sup>b </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.84 &#177; 0.11<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.08 &#177; 0.12<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.93 &#177; 0.21<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37.81 &#177; 1.88<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.61 &#177; 0.04<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.07 &#177; 0.07<sup>b </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Nobili</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.68 &#177; 0.09<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.16 &#177; 0.13<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.62 &#177; 0.22<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37.67 &#177; 1.92<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.74 &#177; 0.05<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.27 &#177; 0.18<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.16 &#177; 0.08<sup>bc </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.87 &#177; 0.15<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.09 &#177; 0.23<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32.32 &#177; 1.89<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.04 &#177; 0.07<sup>ab </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.66 &#177; 0.16<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.64 &#177; 0.07<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.83 &#177; 0.18<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.63 &#177; 0.21<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.22 &#177; 1.99<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.05 &#177; 0.08<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.15 &#177; 0.09<sup>ab </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.88 &#177; 0.10<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.29 &#177; 0.21<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.68 &#177; 0.24<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.43 &#177; 1.49<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.92 &#177; 0.04<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.91 &#177; 0.11<sup>b </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Goliath</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.77 &#177; 0.11<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.84 &#177; 0.07<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.41 &#177; 0.2<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.27 &#177; 1.87<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.38 &#177; 0.07<sup>ab </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.78 &#177; 0.14<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.93 &#177; 0.08<sup>de </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.96 &#177; 0.09<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.23 &#177; 0.19<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.89 &#177; 1.66<sup> </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.81 &#177; 0.02<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.89 &#177; 0.06<sup>ab </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.77 &#177; 0.07<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.11 &#177; 0.12<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.81 &#177; 0.18<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25.65 &#177; 1.27<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.93 &#177; 0.01<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.04 &#177; 0.09<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.88 &#177; 0.06<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.37 &#177; 0.11<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.89 &#177; 0.20<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20.33 &#177; 1.09<sup>f </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.73 &#177; 0.02<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.60 &#177; 0.10<sup>ab </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="8"  >Two way ANOVA results</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Cultivar (C)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >**</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Salt treatment (S)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >**</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Interaction C X S</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Values shown are means (n = 10) &#177; SD; within columns, means followed by different letter are significantly different (p &lt; 0.05). **, * significant at 1% and 5% probability levels, respectively, NS not significant.</p><p>“Granada”, 32.46% in “Nobili” and 28.02% in “Goliath” under the highest NaCl (200 mM). Under salinity stress of 200 mM, the best results of NF, FFW, FDW, FL and FD were recorded with “Nobili”, followed by “Granada” and “Goliath”. Similar results were also reported for tomato [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref39">39</xref>] and strawberry [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref40">40</xref>] grown in saline soil. In contrast, several authors reported that FDW significantly increased under saline conditions in a number of horticultural crop species including tomato [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref41">41</xref>] and cucumber [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref42">42</xref>] . The reductions of NF, FFW, FDW, TF, FL, FD under salt conditions are possibly due to the adverse impacts of salinity on the growth characteristics and physiological processes such as water uptake, photosynthesis, flowering, and fruition formation, which led to diminished yields. Accordingly, the highest level of salt (200 mM NaCl) was adversely more effective than the lowest one (50 mM NaCl). The same trends of salt stress were previously described in faba bean [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref43">43</xref>] and strawberry plants [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref44">44</xref>] . Pulp thickness and firmness of pepper fruit are an important variable affecting pepper quality, since it guarantees better postharvest conservation and prevents injury by manipulation. High salinity, above 200 mM NaCl, tended to decrease pulp thickness and fruit firmness. Firmness in pepper fruit has been related to the level of calcium in the fruit [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref45">45</xref>] . Thus, salinity could reduce fruit pulp thickness and firmness by reducing the availability of calcium in the fruit.</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Organic Compounds</title><p>The presence of NaCl resulted in a significant increase in GLU, FRU, SP and PRO contents in fruit of all cultivars compared to untreated plants, thereby playing a major role as osmotic adjustment (Figures 1(a)-(d)). The concentration of free sugars is one of the components along with organic acids that determine fruit flavor attributed to sweetness of pepper fruit. Both FRU and GLU composition differed by level of NaCl and varieties. The level of fructose across all samples was higher than that of GLU (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(c) and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(d)). The contents of FRU and GLU across varieties were higher in pepper produced at 0 mM NaCl in “Granada” and “Nobili”, at 200 mM “Granada” than those of “Goliath” and other level of NaCl. SP content in plants increased significantly under salt stress in all cultivars compared to untreated plants (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(b)). These increases were 49.71% in “Granada”, 68.55% in “Nobili” and 70.23% in “Goliath” at 200 mM NaCl in comparison with the control plants. The proline content had markedly accumulated in sweet pepper fruits; the highest concentration was recorded with a salinity at 200 mM NaCl (47.64% in “Granada”, 86.29% in “Nobili” and 100.18% in “Goliath” in comparison to the control plants (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(a)). The salt tolerant “Granada” accumulated the highest amount of all osmolytes followed by the moderately tolerant “Nobili” and the salt-sensitive “Goliath”. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref46">46</xref>] observed an increase in protein content when increasing salt concentration. The plants under salinity condition change their metabolism to overcome the changed environmental condition. According to the SP content decreased on account of salinity stress, one of the mechanisms affected by salt stress</p><p>in plants was protein synthesis [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref47">47</xref>] . Proline, which is an amino acid is one such organic solute that plays a major role in this osmotic adjustment [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref48">48</xref>] . Proline is one of well-known osmoprotectants and its accumulation is widely observed in various organisms under salt stress. The amino-acid may play a role in protecting membranes and proteins against adverse effects of higher concentrations of inorganic ions and temperature extremes. Salinity treatments caused the increased PRO content in pepper plant [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref48">48</xref>] . One mechanisms utilized by the plants for overcoming the salt stress effects might be via accumulation of compatible osmolytes, such as proline and soluble sugar. Great diversity of free sugars within the Capsicum chinense gene pool [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref49">49</xref>] . [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref50">50</xref>] confirmed that tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum. Pepe), total fruit sugar content increased with increased salinity; sucrose played a main role in the regulation of the root osmotic potential followed by K, GLU and Na this agree with the results [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref51">51</xref>] . The reduction of sugars content in pepper fruit with salinity could be due to this increase in fruit respiration. The accumulation of osmolyte compounds is often proposed as a solution to overcoming the negative consequences of water deficits in crop production which has been proposed as an adaptive mechanism for drought and salt tolerance. Indeed, osmolyte accumulation in plant cell results in a decrease of the cell osmotic potential and help in the maintenance of water absorption and cell turgor pressure, which might contribute to sustaining physiological processes, such as stomatal opening, photosynthesis and expansion growth [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref52">52</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Antioxidant Compound</title><p>NaCl effect on fruits TF, TP, CA and ASA concentrations is shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>. A significant increase (p &lt; 0.05) was observed for TF and TP at 100 and 200 mM NaCl in “Granada” and “Nobili” and 50 mM NaCl in “Goliath”. These increases for TF were 30.72% in “Granada”, 46.59% in “Nobili” and 71.06% in “Goliath”; and 42.89% in “Granada”, 52.74% in “Nobili” and 63.13% in “Goliath” for TP under the highest NaCl (200 mM) in comparison with the control (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>(a) and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>(b)). Salt effect resulted in a significant decrease for ASA and CA (p &lt; 0.05). The decreases for ASA were 79.83% in “Granada”, 82.71% in “Nobili” and 82.58% in “Goliath”; and 27.87% in “Granada”, 30.60% in “Nobili” and 31.45% in “Goliath” for CA under the highest NaCl (200 mM) in comparison with the control (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>(c) and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>(d)). In other vegetables such as amaranth species, [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref53">53</xref>] observed a decrease of ascorbic acid content with increase of salt concentration. Salinity decreased the ASA content of pepper fruits, and this effect was dependent on the maturity stage [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref54">54</xref>] . In addition, the possibility for a plant to limit salt accumulation within its tissues triggers differences in the intensity of salinity stress perceived by the plant. Furthermore, it is well known that ASA is an important component of several fruits (tomato, pepper, and strawberry) that reacts with singlet oxygen and other free radicals and suppresses peroxidation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref55">55</xref>] . In tomato fruits, the increase of ascorbic acid contents</p><p>under salt stress was reported [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref41">41</xref>] . Carotenoids are widely known as powerful natural antioxidants that act as the most efficient singlet oxygen quenchers in vitro among common carotenoids ( [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref56">56</xref>] ). In agreement with these data, [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref57">57</xref>] showed that CA in tomato fruit was significantly decreased under salt stress. Thus, under the prevailing experimental conditions the decrease in CA contents may relate to the decrease in photosynthetic processes under salinity. A possible explanation would be that salinity may inhibit or upregulate the biosynthetic pathway of carotenoids via inhibition of the genes encoding enzymes related to β-carotene [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref58">58</xref>] . Salt stress caused an inhibition in the expression of the gene encoded for lycopene β-cyclase, the enzyme that converts lycopene to beta carotene [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref59">59</xref>] . The results on phenol contents are in conformity with the findings in pepper [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref54">54</xref>] and tomato fruits [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref60">60</xref>] , while it contrasts with those of [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref61">61</xref>] in other tomato varieties. In addition, [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref62">62</xref>] reported that adding NaCl to the nutrient solution did not affect phytonutrients such as ﬂavonoids (quercetin). It is well known that anthocyanins are members of the ﬂavonoid class of plant secondary metabolites that are not usually synthesised in tomato fruits [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref63">63</xref>] . The increased synthesis of TP, TF contents under saline conditions may reflect some kind of defense against stress conditions since salt stress was accompanied by increased production of reactive oxygen species [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref64">64</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s3_4"><title>3.4. Fruit Relative Water Content</title><p>Fruit RWC of pepper cultivars at different salinity levels is depicted in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>. There are significant differences between cultivars. A significant decrease in RWC was found at high salinity level (200 mM) in all cultivars compared with control. This decrease may be due to the reduction in water uptake [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref65">65</xref>] and/or its harmful effect on cell wall structure [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref66">66</xref>] . The ameliorative effects of these treatments on RWC could be due to the increase in osmoregulators, as well as to osmotic adjustment in plant cells [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref67">67</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref68">68</xref>] . So, increasing NaCl salinity concentration tended to reduce the absorption of water leading to a drop in water content, the inhibitory effect of NaCl on growth parameters could be attributed to the osmotic effect of NaCl salinity, in addition, the changes in water status under NaCl stress may cause a reduction in meristem activity as well as cell elongation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref48">48</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s3_5"><title>3.5. Minerals</title><p>Pepper fruit contains many essential minerals. Most minerals showed variation among the 03 pepper varieties at the different levels of NaCl. Salt treatments differently affected the fruit contents of P, Na, Mg, Ca, S, Fe, Cu, Zn and Mn, depending on the genotype (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(a) and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(b)). The main effect of NaCl on fruit Na concentrations of plants under salt stress showed significant increases as compared to control plants (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(a)). The highest Na concentrations (11.22 mg on 100 g) were detected in “Goliath” cultivar while the lowest (10.62 mg on 100 g) were recorded in “Granada” at 200 mM NaCl (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(a)). In this study, K, Ca, P, Mn, S, Cu, Fe, Zn and Mg concentrations were significantly reduced with increasing salinity in all cultivars (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(a) and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(b)). K is the most abundant mineral, followed by P, Mg, Ca, S, Fe, Cu, Zn and Mn. The levels of each mineral across four levels of NaCl showed a high (significant) variation, indicating these compounds are strongly influenced by salinity. The Ca, Mg, Na, Cu, Fe, P, S, Zn, Mn, K content decreased significantly between 100 and 200 mM NaCl in “Granada” and “Nobili” cultivars and 50 mM NaCl in “Goliath” cultivar (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(a) and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(b)). According to the analysis of variance</p><table-wrap-group id="2"><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> (A) Effect of salt stress on ions concentrations (mg on 100 g of fresh weight) of pepper fruit cultivars at mature stage (90 DAP); (b) Effect of salt stress on ions concentrations ((&#181;g on 100 g of fresh weight) of pepper fruit cultivars at mature stage (90 DAP)</title></caption><table-wrap id="2_1"><caption><title> (b)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Cultivar</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Treatment (mM NaCl)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Na</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >K</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Ca</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Mg</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >P</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >S</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Granada</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.88 &#177; 0.01<sup>bc </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >263.71 &#177; 2.43<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.89 &#177; 0.21<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.81 &#177; 0.34<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36.81 &#177; 0.39<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.39 &#177; 0.31<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.37 &#177; 0.04<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >257.57 &#177; 2.47<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.97 &#177; 0.23<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.12 &#177; 0.37<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32.34 &#177; 0.41<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.86 &#177; 0.29<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.14 &#177; 0.07<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >222.72 &#177; 2.49<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.39 &#177; 0.19<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.99 &#177; 0.24<sup>ab </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.33 &#177; 0.44<sup>bc </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.53 &#177; 0.25<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.62 &#177; 0.08<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >201.26 &#177; 1.83<sup>f </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.77 &#177; 0.25<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.30 &#177; 0.42<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28.59 &#177; 0.42<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.63 &#177; 0.23<sup>b </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Nobili</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.39 &#177; 0.03<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >243.19 &#177; 2.39<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.27 &#177; 0125<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.57 &#177; 0.39<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33.53 &#177; 0.38<sup>ab </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.69 &#177; 0.19<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.46 &#177; 0.05<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >221.47 &#177; 2.42<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.82 &#177; 0.26<sup>ab </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.19 &#177; 0.36<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34.80 &#177; 0.36<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.31 &#177; 0.18<sup>ab </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.80 &#177; 0.06<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >205.79 &#177; 3.44<sup>f </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.43 &#177; 0.19<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.82 &#177; 0.41<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.09 &#177; 0.32<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.62 &#177; 0.21<sup>b </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.88 &#177; 0.09<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >190.15 &#177; 2.51<sup>g </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.93 &#177; 0.22<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.91 &#177; 0.39<sup>bc </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.15 &#177; 0.38<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.35 &#177; 0.18<sup>b </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Goliath</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.15 &#177; 0.10<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >251.81 &#177; 2.42<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.81 &#177; 0.19<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.94 &#177; 0.37<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >30.26 &#177; 0.42<sup>bc </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.90 &#177; 0.23<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.41 &#177; 0.08<sup>ab </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >218.53 &#177; 1.44<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.26 &#177; 0.21<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.92 &#177; 0.29<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.42 &#177; 0.44<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.92 &#177; 0.22<sup>b </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.64 &#177; 0.07<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >192.45 &#177; 2.47<sup>g </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.88 &#177; 0.26<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.28 &#177; 0.24<sup>bc </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.77 &#177; 0.41<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.41 &#177; 0.21<sup>b </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.22 &#177; 0.09<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >187.68 &#177; 1.54<sup>h </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.27 &#177; 0.23<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.12 &#177; 0.28<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.20 &#177; 0.39<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.67 &#177; 0.19<sup>bc </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="8"  >Two way ANOVA results</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Cultivar (C)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Salt treatment (S)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >**</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Interaction C X S</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="2_2"><caption><title></title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Cultivar</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Treatment (mM NaCl)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Mn</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Cu</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Fe</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >K/Na</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Ca/Na</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Mg/Na</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Granada</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >201.1 &#177; 4.21<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >141.31 &#177; 3.28<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >887.66 &#177; 5.27<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >572.22 &#177; 2.99<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >54.03<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.64<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.44<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >198.91 &#177; 3.49<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >125.23 &#177; 3.09<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >855.32 &#177; 4.88<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >537.52 &#177; 3.02<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47.96<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.60<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.81<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >158.84 &#177; 3.38<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >111.12 &#177; 2.89<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >818.21 &#177; 5.52<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >511.23 &#177; 3.33<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.36<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.39<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.71<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >139.71 &#177; 3.66<sup>g </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >107.09 &#177; 3.02<sup>f </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >790.33 &#177; 3.29<sup>f </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >499.93 &#177; 3.71<sup>h </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.95<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.11<sup>ab </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.06<sup>b </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Nobili</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >177.48 &#177; 4.09<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >140.25 &#177; 3.13<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >801.27 &#177; 3.67<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >558.02 &#177; 2.96<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45.11<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.46<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.88<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >163.26 &#177; 4.27<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >133.20 &#177; 2.33<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >788.04 &#177; 4.21<sup>g </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >524.71 &#177; 3.02<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34.28<sup> </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.67<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.50<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >128.87 &#177; 4.11<sup>h </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >127.11 &#177; 2.67<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >735.19 &#177; 4.44<sup>h </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >501.88 &#177; 3.66<sup>g </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.38<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.29<sup>ab </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.45<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >120.73 &#177; 3.21<sup>i </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >110.08 &#177; 3.01<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >709.81 &#177; 3.89<sup>j </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >488.05 &#177; 3.43<sup>i </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.47<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.91<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.01<sup>b </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Goliath</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >180.91 &#177; 4.55<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >145.29 &#177; 3.29<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >813.40 &#177; 4.10<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >537.79 &#177; 3.61<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >48.89<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.48<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.90<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >157.75 &#177; 3.89<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >133.11 &#177; 2.58<sup>c </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >761.11 &#177; 3.77<sup>h </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >509.72 &#177; 3.80<sup>f </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.49<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.38<sup>a </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.60<sup>a </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >143.61 &#177; 3.30<sup>f </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >112.26 &#177; 2.17<sup>e </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >723.78 &#177; 3.22<sup>i </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >480.69 &#177; 2.76<sup>j </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.96<sup>d </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.92<sup>b </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.06<sup>b </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >129.71 &#177; 2.99<sup>h </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >101.07 &#177; 2.15<sup>g </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >694.25 &#177; 3.19<sup>k </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >444.58 &#177; 2.88<sup>k </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.72<sup>de </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.73<sup>bc </sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.72<sup>bc </sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="9"  >Two way ANOVA results</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Cultivar (C)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Salt treatment (S)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >**</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >**</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Interaction C X S</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NS</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></table-wrap-group><p>Values shown are means (n = 5) &#177; SD; within columns, means followed by different letter are significantly different (p &lt; 0.05). **, * significant at 1% and 5% probability levels, respectively, NS not significant.</p><p>Values shown are means (n = 5) &#177; SD; within columns, means followed by different letter are significantly different (p &lt; 0.05). **, * significant at 1% and 5% probability levels, respectively, NS not significant.</p><p>of the mineral nutrient contents in the sweet pepper fruits, the interaction of the NaCl with the cultivars affected their Ca, P, Zn, Fe, Mn, S, K, Na and Mg contents (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(a) and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(b)). The cultivars factor had a significant effect for all evaluated nutrients. The fruit K/Na, Ca/Na and Mg/Na ratios were found to be significantly highest in “Granada” and lowest in “Goliath” (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(b)). The content of K, Ca and Mg<sup> </sup>in Zea mays plant decreased significantly under salinity stress, compared with control [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref69">69</xref>] . The deleterious effects of salinity on plant growth are associated with low water potential of the root medium which causes a water deficit within the plant; toxic effects of ions mainly Na<sup>+</sup> and Cl<sup>-</sup>; nutritional imbalance caused by reduced nutrient (K, S, P, Mg, Cu, Fe, Ca, Mn and Zn) uptake and/or transport to the shoot. Salinity mainly causes both hyper-osmotic stress and hyper-ionic toxic effects and the consequence can be plant demise [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref70">70</xref>] . The contents of K in the fruit tissues decreased with increasing salinity for all varieties, confirming the effect of salt stress by the high concentration of Na [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref71">71</xref>] . Potassium may play a role in the synthesis of endogenous plant hormones [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref72">72</xref>] . Despite its obvious importance, the low mobility of Ca<sup>2+</sup> make the rates of its uptake and distribution limiting processes for many key plant functions. Furthermore, the general lack of recognition of the limiting role of Ca<sup>2+</sup> is due in part to the fact that some important plant functions are controlled by changes in very small physiologically active pools of Ca<sup>2+</sup> within the cytoplasm. As such, whole-leaf Ca<sup>2+</sup> levels might not reflect any potential limitations [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref73">73</xref>] . [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref74">74</xref>] found that the P content in tomato (Lycopersicon peruvianum L.) plant decreased was increased NaCl at 150 mM. Decreased P contents due to increasing salinity were caused probably by the high levels of the Cl ion, which can have antagonistic interactions with phosphorus [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref75">75</xref>] , however, there is no clear evidence of the interaction between salinity and changes in P absorption [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref71">71</xref>] . Salt stress significantly increased the sodium content of pepper fruit. In agreement with these data, several authors reported that salt stress induced the accumulation of Na<sup>+</sup> in pepper fruit, and this may also result in an enhancement of oxidative parameters [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref41">41</xref>] . In this study, K, Ca, Cu, Mn, Fe, Zn, S and Mg concentrations were significantly reduced with increasing salinity in all cultivars. It has been reported that salinity affects plant physiology through changes of water and ionic status in the cells because of ionic imbalance due to excessive accumulation of Na and Cl and reduced uptake of other mineral nutrients, such as K, Ca and Mg [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref70">70</xref>] . This could be also attributed to the competition of Na with the uptake K, Ca, Mg resulting in a K/Na, Ca/Na and Mg/Na antagonism [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref76">76</xref>] . The fruit K/Na, Ca/Na and Mg/Na ratios were found to be significantly highest in “Granada” and lowest in “Goliath” (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>(b)). The relationship between the degree to which plant tolerate salt stress and their capacity to maintain a high leaf ratio K/Na has been noted by several authors [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref77">77</xref>] . The levels of each mineral across levels of NaCl showed a high (significant) variation, indicating these compounds are strongly influenced by salinity. Previous studies have shown that amounts of minerals in pepper fruit depend on the ripening stage, agricultural practices, genotype and environmental factors [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref78">78</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.107614-ref79">79</xref>] .</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Conclusion and Recommendations</title><p>Salinity negatively affects pepper organic and inorganic compounds, antioxidant activity and ASA content and yield, while improving fruit quality. Results from this investigation show that mineral nutrients, agro-morphological, osmolytes and antioxidant compounds to salt stress response among pepper varieties exist. The results obtained show that, the increasing within twelve weeks of treatment doses of NaCl, inhibited all agro-morphological parameters, acid ascorbic, β-carotene and inorganic compound (Cu, P, Mn, S, Fe, K, Zn, Ca and Mg) in fruit from 50 mM NaCl for Goliath variety and from 100 to 200 mM NaCl, for Granada and Nobili varieties and the total flavonoid, phenolic, fructose, glucose, proline, soluble protein and Na+ significant accumulation in the fruits. The good behaviour of Granada variety in the face of salinity can be considered for their use to better enhance the Sahelian and coastal areas.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>The authors thank Dr. ADAMOU and Dr. FOKOM of the Biotechnology Center of Nkolbisson for their excellent technical assistance. This work was not financing.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Julien, H.M., Vivien, N.G., Brice, T.L., D&#233;sir&#233;, T.V. and Emmanuel, Y. (2021) Nutrient Composition, Antioxidant Components and Ascorbic Acid Content Response of Pepper Fruit (Capsicum annuum L.) Cultivars Grown under Salt Stress. Open Access Library Journal, 8: e6830. https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1106830</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Abbreviations</title><p>Calcium-Ca; β-carotene-CA; chlorophyll-CHL; days after planting-DAP; flavonoids-FLA; magnesium-Mg; Ascorbic acid-ASA; fructose-FRU; glucose-GLU; number of ripe fruit per plant-NF; fruit length-FL; fruit diameter-FD; sodium-Na; zin-Zn; iron-Ir; Manganese-Mn; sulfate-S; phosphorus-P; potassium-K; proline-PRO; relative water content-RWC; fruit dry weight-FDW; fruit fresh weight-FFW; thickness of fruit-TF soluble proteins-SP; total free amino acids content-FAA; copper-Cu; iron-Fe; total phenolic-TP; total soluble sugars-SS</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.107614-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pérez-Lopez, A.J., Lope-Nicolas, J.M., Nunez-Delicado, E., Amor, F.M. and Carbonell-Barrachina, A.A. (2007) Effect of Agricultural Practices on Color, Carotenoids Composition and Minerals Contents of Sweet Pepper, cv. Almuden. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 55, 8158-8164. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf071534n</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Guil-Guerrero, J.L., Martinez-Guirado, C., Rebolloso-Fuentes, M.M. and Carrique-Pérez, A. (2006) Nutrient Composition and Antioxydant Activity of 10 Pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) Varieties. European Food Research and Technology, 224, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-006-0281-5</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Al-Karaki, G.N. (2000) Growth, Water Use Efficiency, and Sodium and Potassium Acquisition by Tomato Cultivars Grown under Salt Stress. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 23, 1-8. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1080/01904160009381992</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hosseini, G. and Thengane, R.J. (2007) Salinity Tolerance in Cotton (Gossipium hirsutum L.) Genotypes. International Journal of Botany, 3, 48-55.  
https://doi.org/10.3923/ijb.2007.48.55</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hajiaghaei-Kamrani, M. and Hosseinniya, H. (2013) Effect of Salinity on Nutrient Uptake in Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) in Hydroponic System. International Journal of Agronomy and Plant Production, 4, 2729-2733.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Soltani Nezhad, F., Ehsanpour, A.A. and Hosseini, S.M. (2011) Effect of Salt Stress on Acid Phosphatase Activity and Phosphorus Content of lycopersicon peruvianum L. under in Vitro Culture. Malaysian Applied Biology, 40, 7-11.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">McLaughlin, S.B. and Wimmer, R. (1999) Transley Review No. 104: Calcium Physiology Terrestrial Ecosystem Processes. New Phytologist, 142, 373-417.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-8137.1999.00420.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Haeder, H.E. and Beringer, H. (1981) Influence of Potassium Nutrition and Water Stress on the Content of Abscisic Acid in Grains and Flag Leaves of Wheat during Grain Development. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 32, 552-556.  
https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740320605</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dorais, M., Turcotte, G., Papadopoulos, A.P., Hao, X. and Gosselin, A. (2000) Control of Tomato Fruit Quality and Flavour by EC and Water Management. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 18-21.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Di Mascio, P., Kaiser, S. and Sies, H. (1989) Lycopene as the Most Efficient Biological Carotenoid Single Oxygen Quencher. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 274, 532-538. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9861(89)90467-0</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dorais, M., Ehret, D.L. and Papadopoulos, A.P. (2008) Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) Health Components, from the Seed to the Consumer. Phytochemistry Reviews, 7, 231-250. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1007/s11101-007-9085-x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Navarro, J.M., Flores, P., Garrido, C. and Martínez, V. (2006) Changes in Antioxidant Compounds Content in Different Ripening Stages of Pepper Fruits Affected by Salinity. Food Chemistry, 96, 66-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.01.057</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ratnakar, A. and Rai, A. (2013) Effect of NaCl Salinity on β-Carotene, Thiamine, Riboflavin and Ascorbic Acid Contents in the Leaves of Amaranthus polygamous L. var. Pusa Kirti. Journal of Stress Physiology &amp; Biochemistry, 9, 187-192.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Blum, A. (1996) Crop Responses to Drought and the Interpretation of Adaptation. Plant Growth Regulation, 20, 135-148. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00024010</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Eisa, S.S. and Ali, S.H. (2003) Biochemical, Physiological and Morphological Responses of Sugar Beet to Salinization.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zhang, P., Senge, M., Yoshiyama, K., Ito, K., Dai, Y. and Zhang, F. (2017) Effects of Low Salinity Stress on Growth, Yield and Water Use Efficiency of Tomato under Soilless Cultivation. Transactions of the Japanese Society of Irrigation, Drainage and Rural Engineering, 85, I_15-I_21.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Jarret, R.L., Berke, T., Baldwin, E.A. and Antonious, G.F. (2009) Variability for Free Sugars and Organic Acids in Capsicum chinense. Chemistry &amp; Biodiversity, 6, 138-145.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1002/cbdv.200800046</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Chookhampaeng</surname><given-names> S. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2011</year>)<article-title>The Effect of Salt Stress on Growth, Chlorophyll Content Proline Content and Antioxidative Enzymes of Pepper (Capsicum Annuum L.) Seedling</article-title><source> European Journal of Scientific Research</source><volume> 49</volume>,<fpage> 103</fpage>-<lpage>109</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ebrahimian, E. and Bybordi, A. (2012) Effect of Salinity, Salicylic Acid, Silicium and Ascorbic Acid on Lipid Peroxidation, Antioxidant Enzyme Activity and Fatty Acid Content of Sunflower. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 7, 3685-3694.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kapoor, K. and Srivastava, A. (2010) Assessment of Salinity Tolerance of Vinga mungo var. Pu-19 Using ex Vitro and in Vitro Methods. Asian Journal of Biotechnology, 2, 73-85. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.3923/ajbkr.2010.73.85</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Belakbir, A., Rulz, J.M. and Romero, L. (1998) Yield and Fruit Quality of Pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) in Response to Bioregulators. HortScience, 33, 85-87.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.33.1.85</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yildirim, E., Karlidag, H. and Turan, M. (2009) Mitigation of Salt Stress in Strawberry by Foliar K, Ca and Mg Nutrient Supply. Plant, Soil and Environment, 55, 213-221. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.17221/383-PSE</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Abdul Qados, A.M.S. (2011) Effect of Salt Stress on Plant Growth and Metabolism of Bean Plant (Vicia faba L.). Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, 10, 7-15. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2010.06.002</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chartzoulakis, K.S. (1992) Effects of NaCl Salinity on, Germination, Growth and Yield of Greenhouse Cucumber. Journal of Horticultural Science, 67, 115-119.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1080/00221589.1992.11516227</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gautier, H., Lopez-Lauri, F., Massot, C., Murshed, R., Marty, I., Grasselly, D., Keller, C., Sallanon, H. and Genard, M. (2010) Impact of Ripening and Salinity on Tomato Fruit Ascorbate Content and Enzymatic Activities Related to Ascorbate Recycling. Functional Plant Science and Biotechnology, 4, 66-75.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Khayyat, M., Tafazoli, E., Eshghi, S., Rahemi, M. and Rajaee, S. (2007) Salinity, Supplementary Calcium and Potassium Effects on Fruit Yield and Quality of Strawberry (Fragaria ananassa Duch.). American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural &amp; Environmental Sciences, 2, 539-544.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Saeed, R. and Ahmad, R. (2009) Vegetative Growth of tomato as Affected by the Application of Organic Mulch and Gypsum under Saline Rhizosphere. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 41, 3093-3105.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gilmore, A.M. and Yamamoto, H.Y. (1991) Linear Models Relating Xanthophylls and Lumen Acidity to Non-Photochemical Fluorescence Quenching. Evidence That Antheraxanthin Explains Zeaxanthin-Independent Quenching. Photosynthesis Research, 35, 67-78. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02185412</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Jung, S. (2004) Variation in Antioxidant Metabolism of Young and Mature Leaves of Arabidopsis thaliana Subjected to Drought. Plant Science, 166, 459-466.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2003.10.012</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gahler, S., Otto, K. and Bohm, V. (2003) Alterations of Vitamin C, Total Phenolics, and Antioxidant Capacity as Affected by Processing Tomatoes to Different Products. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 51, 7962-7968.  
https://doi.org/10.1021/jf034743q</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gossett, D.R., Millhollon, E.P. and Lucas, M.C. (1994) Antioxidant Response to NaCI Stress in Salt-Tolerant and Salt-Sensitive Cultivars of Cotton. Crop Science, 34, 706-714. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1994.0011183X003400030020x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Marigo</surname><given-names> G. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1973</year>)<article-title>On a Fractionation Method and Estimation of the Phenolic Compounds in Plants</article-title><source> Analysis</source><volume> 2</volume>,<fpage> 106</fpage>-<lpage>110</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chang, C.C., Yang, M.H., Wen, H.M. and Chern, J.C. (2002) Estimation of Total Flavonoid Content in Propolis by Two Complementary Colorimetric Methods. Journal of Food Drug Analysis, 10, 178-182.  
https://doi.org/10.38212/2224-6614.2748</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sánchez, F.J., de Andrés, E.F., Tenorio, J.L. and Ayerbe, L. (2004) Growth of Epicotyls, Turgor Maintenance and Osmotic Adjustment in Pea Plants (Pisum sativum L.) Subjected to Water Stress. Field Crops Research, 86, 81-90.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4290(03)00121-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pauwels, J.M., Van Ranst, E., Verloo, M. and Mvondo, Z.A. (1992) Analysis Methods of Major Plants Elements. Pedology Laboratory Manual: Methods of Plants and Soil Analysis. Stock Management Equipment of Worms and Chemical Equipment. Publica Agricol. 28, AGCD, Brussels.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Malavolta, E., Vitti, G.C. and Oliveira, S.A. (1997) Avalia&amp;atilde;o do estado nutricional das plantas: princípios e aplica&amp;otilde;es. 2nd Edition, POTAFOS, Piracicaba, SP, 319 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Abreu, C.A., et al. (1995) Compara&amp;atilde;o de métodos de análise para avaliar a disponibilidade de metais emsolos. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo, Campinas, 19, 463-468.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Thalmann, M., Pazmino, D., Seung, D., Horrer, D., Nigro, A. and Meier, T. (2016) Regulation of Leaf Starch Degradation by Abscisic Acid Is Important for Osmotic Stress Tolerance in Plants. The Plant Cell, 28, 1860-1878.  
https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.16.00143</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Hostettler, C., K&amp;ouml;lling, K., Santelia, D., Streb, S., K&amp;ouml;tting, O. and Zeeman, S.C. (2011) Analysis of Starch Metabolism in Chloroplasts. In: Jarvis, R., Ed., Methods in Molecular Biology, Vol. 775, Humana Press, Totowa, NJ, 387-410.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-61779-237-3_21</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Paquin, R. and Lechasseur, P. (1979) Observations on Measurement Method of Free Proline in Extracts from Plants. Canadian Journal of Botany, 57, 1851-1854.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1139/b79-233</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Irigoyen, J.J., Emerich, D.W. and Sanchez-Diaz, M. (1992) Water Stress Induced Changes in Concentrations of Proline and Total Soluble Sugars in Nodulated Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) Plants. Physiologia Plantarum, 84, 55-60.  
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1992.tb08764.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bradford, M.M. (1976) A Rapid and Sensitive Method for the Quantitation of Microgram Quantities of Proteins Utilizing the Principle of Protein-Dye Binding. Analytical Biochemistry, 72, 248-254.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(76)90527-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Adedeji, O., Taiwo, K.A., Akanbi, C.T. and Ajani, R. (2006) Physiochemical Properties of Four Tomato Cultivars Growing in Nigeria. Journal of Food Process Engineering, 30, 79-86. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4549.2005.00049.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Taffouo, V.D., Djiotie, N.L., Kenne, M., Din, N., Priso, J.R., Dibong, S. and Akoa, A. (2008) Effect of Salt Stress on Physiological and Agronomic Characterstics of Three Tropical Cucurbit Species. Journal of Applied Biosciences, 10, 434-441.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hoagland, D.R. and Arnon, D.I. (1950) The Water Culture Method for Growing Plants without Soil. University of California, Baltimore, USA.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Iqbal, Q., Amjad, M., Asi, M.R. and Arino, A. (2013) Characterization of Capsaicinoids and Antioxidant in Hot Pepper as Influenced by Hybrid and Harvesting Stage. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, 68, 358-363.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11130-013-0386-5</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Whittington, J. and Smith, F.A. (1992) Calcium-Salinity Interactions Affect ion Transport in Chara corallina. Plant, Cell &amp; Environment, 15, 727-733.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.1992.tb01015.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Abbaspour</surname><given-names> H. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2012</year>)<article-title>Effects of Salt Stress on Lipid Peroxidation, Antioxidative Enzymes and Proline Accumulation in Pistachio Plants</article-title><source> Journal of Medicinal Plants Research</source><volume> 6</volume>,<fpage> 526</fpage>-<lpage>529</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hajer, A.S., Malibari, A.A., Al-Zahrani, H.S. and Almaghrabi, O.A. (2006) Responses of Three Tomato Cultivars to Sea Water Salinity 1. Effect of Salinity on the Seedling Growth. African Journal of Biotechnology, 5, 855-861.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lee, S.K.D. (2006) Hot Pepper Response to Interactive Effects of Salinity and Boron. Plant, Soil and Environment, 52, 227-233. https://doi.org/10.17221/3433-PSE</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Howard, L.R., Talcott, S.T., Brenes, C.S. and Villalon, B. (2000) Changes in Phytochemical and Antioxidant Activity of Selected Pepper Cultivars (Capsicum spp.) as Influenced by Maturity. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 48, 1713-1720.  
https://doi.org/10.1021/jf990916t</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Prasad, S.M., Parihar, P. and Singh, V.P. (2014) Effect of Salt Stress on Nutritional Value of Vegetables. Biochemistry and Pharmacology, 3, 1000e160.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-0501.1000e160</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Akinci, I.E., Akinci, S., Yilmaz, K. and Dikici, H. (2004) Response of Eggplant Varieties (Solanum melongena) to Salinity in Germination and Seedling Stages. New Zealand. Journal of Crop Horticultural Science, 32, 193-200.  
https://doi.org/10.1080/01140671.2004.9514296</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Deinlein, U., Stephan, A.B., Horie, T., Luo, W., Xu, G. and Schroeder, J.I. (2014) Plant Salt-Tolerance Mechanisms. Trends in Plant Science, 19, 371-379.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2014.02.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ghosh, D. and Xu, J. (2014) Abiotic Stress Responses in Plant Roots: A Proteomics Perspective. Frontiers in Plant Science, 5, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00006</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Das, K. and Roychoudhury, A. (2014) Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) and Response of Antioxidants as ROS-Scavengers during Environmental Stress in Plants. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 2, 53. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2014.00053</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Agarwal, P.K., Shukla, P.S., Gupta, K. and Jha, B. (2013) Bioengineering for Salinity Tolerance in Plants: State of the Art. Molecular Biotechnology, 54, 102-123.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1007/s12033-012-9538-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Paridam, A.K. and Das, A.B. (2005) Salt Tolerance and Salinity Effects on Plants: A Review. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 60, 324-349.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2004.06.010</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Turan, M.A., Turkmen, N. and Taban, N. (2007) Effect of NaCl on Stomacal Resistance and Proline, Chlorophyll, Na, Cl and K Concentrations of Lentil Plants. Journal of Agronomy, 6, 378-381. https://doi.org/10.3923/ja.2007.378.381</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Taffouo, V.D., Wamba, F.O., Youmbi, E., Nono, G.N. and Akoa, A. (2010) Growth, Yield, Water Status and Ionic Distribution Response of Three Bambara Groundnut (Vigna subterranean L. verdc.) Landraces Grown under Saline Conditions. International Journal of Botany, 6, 53-58. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.3923/ijb.2010.53.58</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Li, N., Chen, S., Zhou, X., Li, C., Shao, J., Wang, R., Fritz, E. and Hüttemannn Polle, A. (2008) Effect of NaCl on Photosynthesis, Salt Accumulation, and Compartmentation in Two Mangrove Species, Kandelia candel and Bruguiera gymnorrhiza. Aquatic Botany, 88, 303-310. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquabot.2007.12.003</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Niu, X., Bressan, R.A., Hasegwa, P.M. and Pardo, J.M. (1995) Ion Homeostasis in NaCl Stress Environments. Plant Physiology, 109, 735-742.  
https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.109.3.735</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Munns, R. and Tester, M. (2008) Mechanisms of Salinity Tolerance. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 59, 651-681.  
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607.092911</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mahajan, S. and Tuteja, N. (2005) Cold, Salinity and Drought Stresses: An Overview. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 444, 139-158.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abb.2005.10.018</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Singh, A. (2015) Soil Salinization and Waterlogging: A Threat to Environment and Agricultural Sustainability. Ecological Indicators, 57, 128-130.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.04.027</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Duman, F. (2012) Uptake of Mineral Elements during Abiotic Stress. In: Hamad, P. and Prasad, M.N.V., Eds., Abiotic Stress Response in Plants, Springer, New York, 267-282. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0634-1_15</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hasegawa, P.M., Bressan, R.A., Zhu, J.K. and Bohnert, H.J. (2000) Plant Cellular and Molecular Responses to High Salinity. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology, 51, 463-499.  
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.51.1.463</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bassuony, F.M., Hassanein, R.A., Baraka, D.M. and Khalil, R.R. (2008) Physiological Effects of Nicotinamide and Ascorbic Acid on Zea mays Plant Grown under Salinity Stress II—Changes in Nitrogen Constituents, Protein Profiles, Protease Enzyme and Certain Inorganic Cations. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 2, 350-359.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hafez, E., Omara, A.E.D. and Ahmed, A. (2019) The Coupling Effects of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria and Salicylic Acid on Physiological Modifications, Yield Traits, and Productivity of Wheat under Water Deficient Conditions. Agronomy, 9, 524. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9090524</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kasim, W., AboKassem, E. and Ragab, G. (2017) Ameliorative Effect of Yeast Extract, IAA and Green-Synthesized Nano Zinc Oxide on the Growth of Cu-Stressed Vicia faba Seedlings. Egyptian Journal of Botany, 57, 1-16.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Abdelaal, K.A.A., Hafez, Y.M., El-Afry, M.M., Tantawy, D. and Alshaal, T. (2018) Effect of Some Osmoregulators on Photosynthesis, Lipid Peroxidation, Antioxidative Capacity, and Productivity of Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) under Water Deficit Stress. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25, 30199-30211.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3023-x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Parvin, K., Hasanuzzaman, M., Bhuyan, M.H.M.B., Nahar, K., Mohsin, S.M. and Fujita, M. (2019) Comparative Physiological and Biochemical Changes in Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) under Salt Stress and Recovery: Role of Antioxidant Defense and Glyoxalase Systems. Antioxidants, 8, 350.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox8090350</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rezazadeh, A., Ghasemnezhad, A., Barani, M. and Telmadarrehei, T. (2012) Effect of Salinity on Phenolic Composition and Antioxidant Activity of Artichoke (Cynara scolymus L.) Leaves. Research Journal of Medicinal Plants, 6, 245-252.  
https://doi.org/10.3923/rjmp.2012.245.252</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mes, P.J., Boches, P. and Myers, J.R. (2008) Characterization of Tomatoes Expressing Anthocyanin in the Fruit. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 133, 262-269. https://doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.133.2.262</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Shi, J., Le, Maguer, M. and Bryan, M. (2002) Functional Foods: Biochemical and Processing Aspects. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Maggio, A., De Pascale, S., Fagnano, M. and Barbieri, G. (2007) Can Salt Stress-Induced Physiological Responses Protect Tomato Crops from Ozone Damages in Mediterranean Environments? European Journal of Agronomy, 26, 454-461.  
&lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2007.01.004</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Krauss, S., Schnitzler, W., Grassmann, J. and Woltike, M. (2006) The Influence of Different Electrical Conductivity Values in a Simplified Recirculating Soilless System on Inner and Outer Fruit Quality Characteristics of Tomato. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 54, 441-448. &lt;br /&gt;https://doi.org/10.1021/jf051930a</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Babu, M.A., Singh, D. and Gothandam, K.M. (2011) Effect of Salt Stress on Expression of Carotenoid Pathway Genes in Tomato. Journal of Stress Physiology &amp; Biochemistry, 7, 87-94.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.107614-ref79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dumas, Y., Dadomo, M., Di Lucca, G. and Grolier, P. (2003) Effects of Environmental Factors and Agricultural Techniques on Antioxidant Content of Tomatoes. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 83, 369-382.  
https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.1370</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>