INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue XI, November 2025  
Impact of Salinity Stress (NaCL) And AM Fungi on Growth and  
Yield of Onion (Allium Cepa L.)  
*Akshay A. Adsul1 and Subhash B. Pawar2  
1Research Scholar, Department of Botany, R.G. Bagdia Arts, S.B. Lakhotia Commerce and R. Bezongi  
Science College, Jalna, India, 431 203  
2Department of Botany, Assistant Professor, Sant Ramdas Arts and Science College, Ghansawangi, Dist.  
Jalna, 431 209  
*Corresponding Author  
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2025.1411000049  
Received: 10 November 2025; Accepted: 20 November 2025; Published: 08 December 2025  
ABSTRACT:  
In the twenty-first century, agriculture industry faces several critical challenges, including the need to enhance  
crop immunity, reduce the dependance on chemical fertilizers, synthetic pesticides and herbicides and most  
importantly, improve overall crop yield and quality. Onion is one of the significant crops which is widely  
cultivated in Maharashtra. Maharashtra produces around 8.6 million tons of onions annually. Onion is commonly  
used as an edible vegetable and essential role in everyday cooking. Nowadays it is important to increase quality  
and quantity of onion is the need of society. The am fungi significantly enhanced the yield and quality and  
quantity of crop. The aim of present study to understand the impact of salinity and AM fungi on production of  
Onion for this purpose we use arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungal species such as Acaulospora spinosa, Glomus  
fasciculatum, Glomus mosseae, and Gigaspora candida to increase the productivity of onion to examined how  
salt affects the growth of onion. The treated plots are compared with untreated plots. The treatments included  
onion crop with AM fungi with salt (NaCl) and crop without AM fungi with salt, to see how each group  
responded to salt stress.  
The experiment evaluated the effects of mycorrhizal fungi under NaCl-induced salinity on onion plants  
compared to non-mycorrhizal (non-AM) plants exposed to the same conditions. The findings revealed that non-  
AM plants exhibited significantly lower yields than those inoculated with AM fungi.  
The findings of study show positive effects of treatment on Onion crop showed consistently better growth than  
non-inoculated plants under all levels of salt stress. Increasing NaCl concentrations reduced leaves, roots,  
shoot/root length, and biomass, but AM-treated plants maintained significantly higher values. AM fungi notably  
improved bulb fresh and dry weight compared to plants without AM under the same salt levels. Overall, AM  
inoculation effectively mitigated the negative impact of salinity on onion plant growth.  
The present study was conducted during the period from October 2023 to January 2024. During the winter  
season, characterized by moderate daytime temperatures, distinctly cooler nights and low humidity.  
Keywords: Allium cepa L., Salt Stress, AM Fungi, Pesticides, Soil Analysis etc.  
INTRODUCTION  
The control of salinity in these studies was insufficient to precisely examine the relative salt tolerance of VAM  
and non-inoculated plants. However, in another study, salinity was precisely controlled and a significant VAM-  
salinity interaction was found (J. A. POSS, et.al, 1985). It is most widespread in arid, semi-arid, coastal regions  
and also irrigated lands because of low precipitation, high evaporation, drainage issues, and irrigation with saline  
waters. Similarly, the majority of cultivated areas are often threatened by drought stress (Pritee Singh, and Jai  
Gopal, 2019). Salinity is one of the most important abiotic stress factors limiting plant growth and productivity.  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 546  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue XI, November 2025  
Salinity affects almost every aspect of the physiology and biochemistry of plants and significantly reduces yield  
(Carmen BEINSAN et.al, 2015). To develop these procedures, we have to understand the anatomy,  
morphology, and physiology of yield formation of the crop being studied, particularly when salinity is added as  
another variable (Rafika Sta-Baba et.al, 2010). A primary response in plants affected by salt stress shows a  
decrease in plant water potential to a greater extent, resulting in degradation in water use efficiency, which leads  
to toxic damage and overall reduction in yield (B. P. Shinde and Neelima Singh, 2017). This could mostly  
occur due to soluble minerals found in irrigation water and the high fertilizer input from agricultural practices  
(Ashok Aggarwal et.al, 2012). This is primarily regulated by the supply of nutrients to the root system and  
increased transport by AMF. The growth of the plant &its biomass suffered a Setback under the salt stress. It  
may be the non-availability of nutrients and his expenditure of energy to contract the toxic effect of NaCl  
(SHINDE S.K et.al, 2013). Salinity in soil or water is of increasing importance to agriculture because it causes  
a stress condition to crop plants. Salt-affected soil is one of the serious abiotic stresses that cause reduced plant  
growth, development, and productivity worldwide the salt-affected soils occupy approximately 7% of the global  
land surface (J. Beltrano, et.al, 2013). Onion contributes significant nutritional value to the human diet has  
medicinal properties and is primarily consumed for their unique flavor and also the ability to enhance the flavor  
of other foods (M. A. Razzaque et.al, 2021). The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of drought  
and salt stress on four onion cultivars using both morphological and physiological parameters in the early growth  
phase and determine the differences between cultivars (F. HANCI and E. CEBECI,2015).AM fungi also  
provide their host plants with protection against environmental abiotic stresses (Neelakandan. M and  
Mahesh.V., 2016). High-salinity conditions adversely affect plant growth and photosynthesis as a result of  
elevated ethylene levels in roots, ionic imbalance, and hyperosmotic conditions (Ioanna Kakabouki et.al.2023).  
MATERIALS AND METHODS  
Study Area: The experiment conducted at the PG Research Laboratory, Department of Botany, J.E.S. College,  
Jalna, Tal. Jalna during the period From October 2023 to January 2024. During the winter season, characterized  
by moderate daytime temperatures, distinctly cooler nights and low humidity.  
Preparation of Pot Experiment: The experiment was established using 2×4 plastic trays, providing a uniform  
and controlled environment for seedling growth. study the effect of various salt concentrations on onion plants  
‘growth with and without the association of AM fungi. Forty-five days old onion plantlets transplanted in plastic  
tray filled with soil: sand (2:1v/v) mixture. The tray and soil: sand mixture was sterilized using silver nano  
hydrogen peroxide two days before transplantation  
Data Analysis The onion root, shoot, bulb fresh and dry weights were calculated. The bulb, the fresh weight of  
the bulb and dry weight was calculated and using a weighing balance and the air-drying method, the fresh and  
dry weights of the roots were determined. along with the shoot length measured.  
RESULTS  
Growth parameters like root length, Number of leaves, bulb weight, and shoot length per plant were recorded in  
control with mycorrhizal plants with NaCl. The onion plant was treated in the winter season with controlled  
NaCl, and AM Fungi with NaCl treatment ranged from Control to 25 mM, 50 mM, 75 mM, and 100 mM  
Concentration.  
The number of Leaves was substantially higher (13±1) in AM-inoculated plants without salt treatment,  
considered a control. One more control was kept without the AM inoculation and salt treatment, in which the  
number of leaves was reduced (12±0.577) compared to AM-inoculated plants. In 25 mM salt treatment, plants  
showed a significantly reduced number of leaves compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved several leaves (12±2) compared to non-inoculated plants (11±1.528). In 50 mM salt treatment, plants  
showed a significantly reduced number of leaves compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved several leaves (11±1) compared to non-inoculated plants (10±1). In 75 mM salt treatment, plants  
showed a significantly reduced number of leaves compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved several leaves (10±1) compared to non-inoculated plants (9±0). In 100 mM salt treatment, plants  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 547  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue XI, November 2025  
showed a significantly reduced number of leaves compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved several leaves (8±0.577) compared to non-inoculated plants (7±0.577).  
The number of roots was substantially higher (87±2) in AM-inoculated plants without salt treatment, considered  
a control. One more control was kept without the AM inoculation and salt treatment, in which the number of  
roots was reduced (83±4) compared to AM-inoculated plants. In 25 mM salt treatment, plants showed a  
significantly reduced number of roots compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved the  
Number of roots (82±2.517) compared to non-inoculated plants (78±3.215). In 50 mM salt treatment, plants  
showed a significantly reduced number of roots compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved the Number of roots (71±1.528) compared to non-inoculated plants (68±1). In 75 mM salt treatment,  
plants showed a significantly reduced number of roots compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved the Number of roots (67±4.583) compared to non-inoculated plants (61±2.082). In 100 mM salt  
treatment, plants showed a significantly reduced number of roots compared to control plants; however, the AM  
inoculation improved the Number of roots (63±2) compared to non-inoculated plants (57±4.583).  
Shoot length was substantially higher (58±8.888cm) in AM-inoculated plants without salt treatment, considered  
a control. One more control was kept without the AM inoculation and salt treatment, in which the shoot length  
was reduced (45.67±15.948cm) compared to AM-inoculated plants. In 25 mM salt treatment, plants showed  
significantly reduced shoot length compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved shoot  
length (59.33±2.173 cm) compared to non-inoculated plants (44.03±2.775 cm). In 50 mM salt treatment, plants  
showed significantly reduced shoot length compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved  
shoot length (51±4cm) compared to non-inoculated plants (39.67±4.163 cm). In 75 mM salt treatment, plants  
showed significantly reduced shoot length compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved  
shoot length (44.67±3.055cm) compared to non-inoculated plants (37.33±9.452 cm). In 100 mM salt treatment,  
plants showed significantly reduced shoot length compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved shoot length (39.83±1.893cm) compared to non-inoculated plants (36.05±4.093 cm).  
Root length was substantially higher (6.2±0.173 cm) in AM-inoculated plants without salt treatment, considered  
a control. One more control was kept without the AM inoculation and salt treatment, in which the root length  
was reduced (5.4±0.1cm) compared to AM-inoculated plants. In 25 mM salt treatment, plants showed  
significantly reduced root length compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved root length  
(5.53±0.306 cm) compared to non-inoculated plants (4.93±0.153 cm). In 50 mM salt treatment, plants showed  
significantly reduced root length compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved root length  
(4.13±0.153cm) compared to non-inoculated plants (4.7±0.2 cm). In 75 mM salt treatment, plants showed  
significantly reduced root length compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved root length  
(4.43±0.153cm) compared to non-inoculated plants (3.97±0.153 cm). In 100 mM salt treatment, plants showed  
significantly reduced root length compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved root length  
(4±0.1cm) compared to non-inoculated plants  
The shoot fresh weight was substantially higher (38.400±1.980) in AM-inoculated plants without salt treatment,  
considered a control. One more control was kept without the AM inoculation and salt treatment, in which the  
number of roots was reduced (35.090±2.430) compared to AM-inoculated plants. In 25 mM salt treatment, plants  
showed a significantly reduced number of roots compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved the Number of roots (33.570±1.884) compared to non-inoculated plants (29.080±1.878). In 50 mM  
salt treatment, plants showed a significantly reduced number of roots compared to control plants; however, the  
AM inoculation improved the Number of roots (34.650±2.048) compared to non-inoculated plants  
(25.390±2.382). In 75 mM salt treatment, plants showed a significantly reduced number of roots compared to  
control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved the Number of roots (33.270±1.528) compared to non-  
inoculated plants (26.270±0.901). In 100 mM salt treatment, plants showed a significantly reduced number of  
roots compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved the Number of roots (24.730±2.190)  
compared to non-inoculated plants (19.500±1.084).  
The shoot dry weight was substantially higher (6.40±0.487) in AM-inoculated plants without salt treatment,  
considered a control. One more control was kept without the AM inoculation and salt treatment, in which the  
number of roots was reduced (5.78±0.487) compared to AM-inoculated plants. In 25 mM salt treatment, plants  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 548  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue XI, November 2025  
showed a significantly reduced number of roots compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved the Number of roots (4.86±0.240) compared to non-inoculated plants (4.21±0.142). In 50 mM salt  
treatment, plants showed a significantly reduced number of roots compared to control plants; however, the AM  
inoculation improved the Number of roots (4.97±0.159) compared to non-inoculated plants (3.42±0.398). In 75  
mM salt treatment, plants showed a significantly reduced number of roots compared to control plants; however,  
the AM inoculation improved the Number of roots (2.52±0.157) compared to non-inoculated plants  
(2.11±0.116). In 100 mM salt treatment, plants showed a significantly reduced number of roots compared to  
control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved the Number of roots (2.20±0.070) compared to non-  
inoculated plants (1.54±0.102).  
Root fresh weight was substantially higher (1.110±0.113) in AM-inoculated plants without salt treatment,  
considered a control. One more control was kept without the AM inoculation and salt treatment, in which the  
Root fresh weight was reduced (0.560±0.070) compared to AM-inoculated plants. In 25 mM salt treatment,  
plants showed significantly reduced Root fresh weight compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved Root fresh weight (1.090±0.046) compared to non-inoculated plants (0.538±0.026). In 50 mM salt  
treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Root fresh weight compared to control plants; however, the AM  
inoculation improved Root fresh weight (0.980±0.025) compared to non-inoculated plants (0.535±0.015). In 75  
mM salt treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Root fresh weight compared to control plants; however,  
the AM inoculation improved Root fresh weight (0.890±0.031) compared to non-inoculated plants  
(0.467±0.015). In 100 mM salt treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Root fresh weight compared to  
control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved Root fresh weight (0.820±0.031) compared to non-  
inoculated plants (0.340±0.020).  
Root dry weight was substantially higher (0.467±0.010) in AM-inoculated plants without salt treatment,  
considered a control. One more control was kept without the AM inoculation and salt treatment, in which the  
Root dry weight was reduced (0.243±0.004) compared to AM-inoculated plants. In 25 mM salt treatment, plants  
showed significantly reduced Root dry weight compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved Root dry weight (0.276±0.002) compared to non-inoculated plants (0.223±0.005). In 50 mM salt  
treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Root dry weight compared to control plants; however, the AM  
inoculation improved Root dry weight (0.268±0.002) compared to non-inoculated plants (0.209±0.009). In 75  
mM salt treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Root dry weight compared to control plants; however,  
the AM inoculation improved Root dry weight (0.214±0.004) compared to non-inoculated plants (0.187±0.003).  
In 100 mM salt treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Root dry weight compared to control plants;  
however, the AM inoculation improved Root dry weight (0.156±0.005) compared to non-inoculated plants  
(0.139±0.005).  
Bulb fresh weight was substantially higher (98.10±1.844) in AM-inoculated plants without salt treatment,  
considered a control. One more control was kept without the AM inoculation and salt treatment, in which the  
Bulb fresh weight was reduced (93.08±2.004) compared to AM-inoculated plants. In 25 mM salt treatment,  
plants showed significantly reduced Bulb fresh weight compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved Bulb fresh weight (88.53±4.428) compared to non-inoculated plants (84.40±1.643). In 50 mM salt  
treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Bulb fresh weight compared to control plants; however, the AM  
inoculation improved Bulb fresh weight (79.12±1.768) compared to non-inoculated plants (73.67±0.452). In 75  
mM salt treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Bulb fresh weight compared to control plants; however,  
the AM inoculation improved Bulb fresh weight (61.55±1.261) compared to non-inoculated plants  
(58.76±1.858). In 100 mM salt treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Bulb fresh weight compared to  
control plants; however, the AM inoculation improved Bulb fresh weight (58.98±1.544) compared to non-  
inoculated plants (53.71±1.702).  
Bulb Dry weight was substantially higher (91.23±2.627) in AM-inoculated plants without salt treatment,  
considered a control. One more control was kept without the AM inoculation and salt treatment, in which the  
Bulb dry weight was reduced (83.20±1.195) compared to AM-inoculated plants. In 25 mM salt treatment, plants  
showed significantly reduced Bulb dry weight compared to control plants; however, the AM inoculation  
improved Bulb dry weight (79.33±3.836) compared to non-inoculated plants (75.60±0.422). In 50 mM salt  
treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Bulb dry weight compared to control plants; however, the AM  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 549  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue XI, November 2025  
inoculation improved Bulb dry weight (72.84±1.512) compared to non-inoculated plants (59.16±1.035). In 75  
mM salt treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Bulb dry weight compared to control plants; however,  
the AM inoculation improved Bulb dry weight (55.37±1.252) compared to non-inoculated plants (50.39±1.178).  
In 100 mM salt treatment, plants showed significantly reduced Bulb dry weight compared to control plants;  
however, the AM inoculation improved Bulb dry weight (45.61±1.139) compared to non-inoculated plants  
(44.61±2.254).  
Table No. 1-Effect of NaCl and AM fungi on the Number of Leaves and Number of Roots of onion crop.  
Treatments  
Number of Leaves  
12±0.577  
13±1  
Number of Roots  
83±4  
Control (NAM)  
Control (AM)  
25 mM (NAM)  
25 mM (AM)  
50 mM (NAM)  
50 mM (AM)  
75 mM (NAM)  
75 mM (AM)  
100 mM (NAM)  
100 mM (AM)  
87±2  
11±1.528  
12±2  
78±3.215  
82±2.517  
68±1  
10±1  
11±1  
71±1.528  
61±2.082  
67±4.583  
57±4.583  
63±2  
9±0  
10±1  
7±0.577  
8±0.577  
Each value is a mean of three replicates, ± standard deviation. Means followed by different letters in one column  
are significantly different.  
Table No. 2-Effect of NaCl with AM fungi on the Shoot Length and Root Length of onion crops.  
Treatments  
Shoot Length (cm)  
45.67±15.948  
58±8.888  
Root Length (cm)  
5.4±0.1  
Control (NAM)  
Control (AM)  
6.2±0.173  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 550  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue XI, November 2025  
25 mM (NAM)  
25 mM (AM)  
50 mM (NAM)  
50 mM (AM)  
75 mM (NAM)  
75 mM (AM)  
100 mM (NAM)  
100 mM (AM)  
44.03±2.775  
59.33±2.173  
39.67±4.163  
51±4  
4.93±0.153  
5.53±0.306  
4.13±0.153  
4.7±0.2  
37.33±9.452  
44.67±3.055  
36.5±4.093  
39.83±1.893  
3.97±0.153  
4.43±0.153  
3.43±0.208  
4±0.1  
Each value is a mean of three replicates, ± standard deviation. Means followed by different letters in one  
column are significantly different  
Table No. 3-Effect of NaCl with AM fungi on the Root Fresh Weight and Root Dry Weight of onion crop.  
Treatments  
Root Fresh wt. (gm)  
0.560±0.070  
1.110±0.113  
0.538±0.026  
1.090±0.046  
0.535±0.015  
0.980±0.025  
0.467±0.015  
Root Dry wt. (gm)  
0.243±0.004  
0.467±0.010  
0.223±0.005  
0.276±0.002  
0.209±0.009  
0.268±0.002  
0.187±0.003  
Control (NAM)  
Control (AM)  
25 mM (NAM)  
25 mM (AM)  
50 mM (NAM)  
50 mM (AM)  
75 mM (NAM)  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 551  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue XI, November 2025  
75 mM (AM)  
0.890±0.031  
0.340±0.020  
0.820±0.031  
0.214±0.004  
0.139±0.005  
0.156±0.005  
100 mM (NAM)  
100 mM (AM)  
Each value is a mean of three replicates, ± standard deviation. Means followed by different letters in one column  
are significantly different.  
Table No. 4-Effect of NaCl with AM fungi on the Bulb Fresh Weight and Bulb Dry Weight of onion crop.  
Treatments  
Bulb Fresh wt. (gm)  
93.08±2.004  
98.10±1.844  
84.40±1.643  
88.53±4.428  
73.67±0.452  
79.12±1.768  
58.76±1.858  
61.55±1.261  
53.71±1.702  
58.98±1.544  
Bulb Dry wt. (gm)  
83.20±1.195  
91.23±2.627  
75.60±0.422  
79.33±3.836  
59.16±1.035  
72.84±1.512  
50.39±1.178  
55.37±1.252  
44.68±2.254  
45.61±1.139  
Control (NAM)  
Control (AM)  
25 mM (NAM)  
25 mM (AM)  
50 mM (NAM)  
50 mM (AM)  
75 mM (NAM)  
75 mM (AM)  
100 mM (NAM)  
100 mM (AM)  
Each value is a mean of three replicates, ± standard deviation. Means followed by different letters in one column  
are significantly different.  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 552  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue XI, November 2025  
Table No. 5-Effect of NaCl with AM fungi on the Shoot Fresh Weight and Shoot Dry Weight of onion crop.  
Treatments  
Shoot Fresh wt. (gm)  
35.090±2.430  
38.400±1.980  
29.080±1.878  
33.570±1.884  
25.390±2.382  
34.650±2.048  
26.270±0.901  
33.270±1.528  
19.500±1.084  
24.730±2.190  
Soot Dry wt. (gm)  
5.78±0.487  
6.40±0.442  
4.21±0.142  
4.86±0.240  
3.42±0.398  
4.97±0.159  
2.11±0.116  
2.52±0.157  
1.54±0.102  
2.20±0.070  
Control (NAM)  
Control (AM)  
25 mM (NAM)  
25 mM (AM)  
50 mM (NAM)  
50 mM (AM)  
75 mM (NAM)  
75 mM (AM)  
100 mM (NAM)  
100 mM (AM)  
Each value is a mean of three replicates, ± standard deviation. Means followed by different letters in one column  
are significantly different.  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 553  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue XI, November 2025  
DISSCUSSION  
Onions inoculated with VAM and grown under saline P-deficient conditions showed increased growth and  
enhanced nutrient concentration and total ion uptake when compared to non-inoculated plants (J. A. POSS, et.al,  
1985). It is assumed that AMF has the potential to reduce the high application rate of fertilizer needed to produce  
high onion yield (Abdullahi R. and Sheriff, H. H., 2013). In our experiments cv.13 plants showed a significant  
decrease in growth in leaves, roots, and bulbs, but only after 50 mM NaCl, although they surprisingly recovered  
at 75 mM and 100 mM. The growth limitation effect in onions has been associated with limited water absorption  
in seedlings (Alireza Solouki et.al, 2023). The increase in bulb dry weight can be attributed to the increased  
plant photosynthetic rate achieved by VAM inoculation through increased leaf stomatal conductance as  
compared to non-inoculated plants resulting in more CO2 uptake (Z.M. Dar et.al, 2018).  
CONCLUSION  
The present study shows that AM Fungi significantly improves the growth and yield of onion (Allium cepa L.)  
under treated plots. AM fungi plants showed enhanced root development, greater biomass and improved nutrient  
uptake compared to non- treated plots. These benefits were more observed under NaCl stress, indicating the  
ability of AMF to mitigate the adverse effects of salinity. Overall, the study demonstrates that AM application  
is an effective, eco-friendly approach to improving onion productivity. By enhancing nutrient use efficiency and  
resilience to salinity, AMF can reduce reliance on chemical fertilizers and support sustainable agricultural  
practices.  
ACKNOWLEDGMENT  
I express my sincere gratitude to the honorable Principal of R.G. Bagdia Arts, S.B. Lakhotia Commerce and R.  
Bezongi Science College, Jalna and the Head of the Department of Botany, R.G. Bagdia Arts, S.B. Lakhotia  
Commerce and R. Bezongi Science College, Jalna and my Research Guide for their invaluable guidance,  
constructive suggestions, and consistent support throughout the course of this study. I also extend my thanks to  
my laboratory colleagues of R.G. Bagdia Arts, S.B. Lakhotia Commerce and R. Bezongi Science College, Jalna  
and to the farmers from the study area for their cooperation and assistance in data collection and laboratory work.  
Their contributions were integral to the successful completion of this research.  
REFERENCES  
1. Abdullahi R. and Sheriff, H. H. (2013), Effect of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and Chemical Fertilizer  
on Growth and Shoot Nutrients Content of Onion under Field Condition in Northern Sudan Savanna of  
Nigeria, IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science, e-ISSN: 2319-2380, p-ISSN: 2319-2372.  
Volume 3, Issue 5, PP 85-90.  
2. Alireza Solouki, Jose Angel Berna-Sicilia, Alberto Martinez-Alonso, Nidia Ortiz-Delvasto, Gloria  
B´arzana, Micaela Carvajal (2023), Onion plants (Allium cepa L.) react differently to salinity levels  
according to the regulation of aquaporins, Heliyon,9, e13815.  
3. Ashok Aggarwal, Nisha Kadian, Karishma, Neetu, Anju Tanwar and K.K. Gupta (2012), Arbuscular  
mycorrhizal symbiosis and alleviation of salinity stress, Journal of Applied and Natural Science 4 (1):  
144-155.  
4. B.P. Shinde and Neelima Singh (2017), Effect of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi on Growth Parameters  
of Sweet Corn under NaCl Salinity, International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences,  
SSN: 2319-7706 Volume 6 Number 2 (2017) pp. 1317-1325.  
5. Carmen Beinsan, Radu Sumalan, Sorin Vatca (2015), Influence of Salt Stress on Quality of some Onion  
(Allium cepa L.) Local Landraces, Bulletin USAMV series Agriculture 72(2), ISSN 1843-5386, DOI  
10.15835/baseman-agr: 11723.  
6. F. Hanci and E. Cebeci (2015), Comparison of Salinity and Drought Stress Effects on Some  
Morphological and Physiological Parameters in Onion (Allium Cepa L.) During Early Growth Phase,  
Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science, 21 (No 6), 1204-1210.  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 554  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue XI, November 2025  
7. Ioanna Kakabouki, Panteleimon Stavropoulos, Ioannis Roussis, Antonios Mavroeidi and Dimitrios  
Bilalis (2023), Contribution ofArbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi (AMF) in Improving the Growth and Yield  
Performances of Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) to Salinity Stress, Agronomy 2023, 13, 2416.  
8. J. A. Poss, E. Pond, J. A. Menge and W. M. Jarrell, (1985), Effect of salinity on mycorrhizal onion and  
tomato in soil with and without additional phosphate, Plant and Soil 88, 307 - 319.  
9. J. Beltrano, M. Ruscitti, M.C.Arango and M.Ronco, (2013), Effects of arbuscular mycorrhiza inoculation  
on plant growth, biological and physiological parameters and mineral nutrition in pepper grown under  
different salinity and p levels, Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition,13(1), 123-141.  
10. M. A. Razzaque, S. S. Zamil, M. M. Hasan and M. Siddika (2021), Effects of Salinity on Growth, Yield  
and Nutrients Content of Two Onion Cultivars, J. Sher-e-Bangla Agric. Univ., 12(1 & 2): 24-29.  
11. Neelakandan. M and Mahesh.V., (2016), Impact of Two Saline AM Fungi on Growth of Onion (Allium  
cepa L.), Global Journal for Research Analysis, Volume-5, Issue-1, ISSN No 2277 – 8160.  
12. Pritee Singh, and Jai Gopal (2019), Effect of water and salinity stress on germination and seedling  
characters in onion, Indian J. Hort. 76(2), 368-372.  
13. Rafika Sta-Baba, Mohamed Hachicha, Mohsen Mansour (2010), Response of Onion to Salinity, The  
African Journal of Plant Science and Biotechnology ©2010 Global Science Book, 4 (Special Issue 2), 7-  
12.  
14. Shinde S.K., Shinde B. P. and Patale S. W. (2013), The Alleviation of Salt Stress by The Activity of Am  
Fungi in Growth and Productivity of Onion (Allium Cepa L.) Plant, International Journal of Life Science  
and Pharma Research, ISSN 2250-0480, Vol 3/Issue 1.  
15. Z.M. Dar, A. Masood, M. Asif, and M.A. Malik (2018), Response of Onion to Inoculation with Vesicular  
Arbuscular Mycorrhiza and Phosphorus Solubilizing Bacteria under Varying Levels of Phosphorus,  
International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 7  
Number 02.  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 555