| Literature DB >> 30796303 |
Qunxian Deng1, Hui Xia1, Lijin Lin1, Jin Wang1, Lu Yuan1,2, Kangning Li1, Jinrong Zhang1,3, Xiulan Lv4, Dong Liang5.
Abstract
Anthocyanins are important components in skins of red table grapes and contribute to the berries appearance, a key quality characteristic for customers. In recent years, exogenous foliage fertilizers has been applied to grapevines to improve the pigmentation of the fruit. The present study examines the effect on a biostimulant (SUNRED) pre-véraison application in the accumulation of anthocyanins in 'Red Globe' grapes, and investigates the related changes in expression of key genes and their enzyme activities in the flavonoid pathways. Additionally, abscisic acid (S-ABA) was also applied to grapevines to evaluate the comparative effect of SUNRED. Our analyses showed that total anthocyanin contents increased in both SUNRED and S-ABA treated grapes; for S-ABA, a 1% dilution (A100) of the commercially available stock solution treatments represented the greatest effect on pigmentation; for SUNRED, a 0.1% dilution (S1000) was most effective. The anthocyanin contents increased by 1.16-fold and 1.4-fold after A100 and S1000 treatments, respectively. The gene expression analyses showed that almost all genes involved in the anthocyanin biosynthesis pathway up-regulated after A100 and S1000 treatments, suggesting that the increment in total anthocyanin content was attributed to the increased expression level of related genes. Moreover, the activities of phenylalanine ammonia-lyase (PAL), chalcone isomerase (CHI), UDP glucose: flavonoid 3-o-glucosyl transferase (UFGT) and dihydroflavonol 4-reductase (DFR), key enzymes for biosynthesis of anthocyanin, were increased by the exogenous treatments. Overall, our findings clearly demonstrate that application of exogenous biostimulant have a positive effect on the pigment characteristics of grape crop.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30796303 PMCID: PMC6385360 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-39455-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Primers used in this study.
| Gene | Sequence (5′ → 3′) | Accession number of reference genes deposited in NCBI |
|---|---|---|
|
| F:CCACTTCACATAGGAGAA | XM_002268696.3 |
|
| F:CTTGGGACTGGGAGATTC | AB015872.1 |
|
| F:TTGTGTTGGTTCCTCTTGTTC | NM_001281104.1 |
|
| F: CTTGGATCACCGTTCAACCT | X75965 |
| F: AAAACCTACGGCCCTCTCAT | AB213603 | |
| F: GAAGTTCGACTGGTTATTAACAAAGAT | DQ298201 | |
|
| F:TTGTAATGGTCAATGTGCC | X75964.1 |
|
| F: AGGGAAGGGAAAACAAGTAG | X75966 |
|
| F:TGCTACCTAAGGCGACTG | DQ513314.1 |
|
| F:TAGTCACCACTTCAAAAAGG | AB097923.1 |
|
| F:CTGGAGAGATGCTTATCG | AB097924.1 |
|
| F: CTATATGCTCGCTGCTGACG | CF203457.1 |
|
| F:CGTACAACTGGTTCGTATT | AY680701.1 |
Note: phenylalanine ammonia-lyase (PAL), chalcone synthase (CHS), chalcone isomerase (CHI), flavanone 3-hydroxylase (F3H), flavonoid 3′-hydroxylase (F3′H), flavonoid 3′5′-hydroxylase (F3′5′H), dihydroflavonol 4-reductase (DFR), anthocyanidin synthase (ANS), UDP glucose: flavonoid 3-o-glucosyl transferase (UFGT), myeloblastosis (MYB), actin (β-actin) and ubiquitin conjugating factor (UbiCF).
The net photosynthetic rate (Pn) and total chlorophyll content of fresh leaves and weight, soluble solids, titrable acidity of berries.
| Treatment | Total chlorophyll content (mg/g) | Berry weight (g) | Soluble solids °Brix (%) | Titratable acidity (%) | Solublesolids/Titatable acidity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A300 | 6.79 ± 0.49cd | 20.90 ± 0.23b | 13.45 ± 0.85d | 15.97 ± 0.63c | 0.50 ± 0.20a | 31.94 ± 0.21b |
| A200 | 8.27 ± 0.63bc | 21.02 ± 0.14b | 14.18 ± 1.01c | 15.33 ± 0.41e | 0.45 ± 0.08a | 34.07 ± 0.27b |
| A100 | 9.20 ± 0.09ab | 23.34 ± 0.09b | 14.82 ± 0.95b | 17.65 ± 0.33b | 0.40 ± 0.10a | 44.13 ± 0.24a |
| S1000 | 10.50 ± 1.01a | 30.04 ± 0.10a | 16.30 ± 0.67a | 18.00 ± 0.11a | 0.45 ± 0.19a | 40.00 ± 0.13a |
| S800 | 10.32 ± 0.59a | 22.48 ± 0.28b | 14.10 ± 0.79c | 16.72 ± 0.47b | 0.52 ± 0.33a | 32.15 ± 0.41b |
| S600 | 10.14 ± 0.99a | 21.81 ± 0.28b | 14.11 ± 0.58c | 15.60 ± 0.28d | 0.57 ± 0.16a | 32.15 ± 0.41b |
| Mock | 6.52 ± 0.53d | 18.62 ± 0.12c | 13.26 ± 0.92d | 15.25 ± 0.19e | 0.45 ± 0.12a | 33.89 ± 0.14b |
Different letters indicate significant differences according to Duncan’s multiple range test (P < 0.05).
Figure 1Total anthocyanin contents of berry skins after different treatments during berry development. The error bars represent Standard error (SE) (n = 3).
The parameter of colour characteristic of grape berries.
| Treatments | a* | b* | L* | C* | h° | CIRG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mock | 5.32 | 3.15 | 29.69 | 6.20 | 30.63 | 4.15c |
| A100 | 5.87 | 2.52 | 28.39 | 6.42 | 23.54 | 4.51b |
| S1000 | 6.20 | 2.24 | 27.70 | 6.62 | 20.60 | 4.69a |
Note: Different letters indicate significant differences according to Duncan’s multiple range test (P < 0.05).
Figure 2Effect of absicisic acid (ABA) and SUNRED on transcript levels of genes involved in anthocyanin biosynthesis pathways in the skin of berries. The error bars represent Standard error (SE) (n = 3).
Figure 3Effect of absicisic acid (ABA) and SUNRED on activity of the enzymes involved in anthocyanin biosynthesis in the skin of berries. The error bars represent Standard error (SE) (n = 3).