| Literature DB >> 32987747 |
Ramona Schubert1, Stephanie Werner1,2, Hillary Cirka3, Philipp Rödel3, Yudelsy Tandron Moya4, Hans-Peter Mock4, Imke Hutter3, Gotthard Kunze4, Bettina Hause1.
Abstract
Industrialized tomato production faces a decrease in flavors and nutritional value due to conventional breeding. Moreover,Entities:
Keywords: BRIX value; arbuscular mycorrhiza; carotenoids; free amino acids; fruit quality; hydroponic cultivation; phosphate; tomato; transcript profiling (RNAseq); yield
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32987747 PMCID: PMC7582891 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21197029
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Effect of Pi-availability on formation of arbuscular mycorrhiza (AM) and yield. (a) Mycorrhization rate of roots of cv. Brioso inoculated with Rhizophagus irregularis and fertilized with 10 mL Long Ashton fertilizer containing 2.7, 6.7 or 10.7 mM Pi twice a week. Roots were harvested 17 weeks after inoculation. Shown are mean values ± SD (n = 3). Different letters indicate significant differences tested by 1-factorial ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD-test with p < 0.05. (b) Yield and number of fruits per plant of cv. Brioso under different fertilizer regimes. Plants were grown for 8 months and fertilized via drip irrigation using Long Ashton fertilizer containing 13.3 or 10.0 mM phosphate. Shown are mean values ± SD (n = 4).
Figure 2Mycorrhization of tomato plants (cv. Picolino/Maxifour) under producer-like conditions. (a) Cultivation set-up at INOQ GmbH (August 2019) using “Hawita special mix” as substrate and fertilization with 180 µM P2O5 (YaraTera/White fertilizer). (b,c) Ink-stained roots from mycorrhizal plants at the end of cultivation period showing fungal hyphae and arbuscules. Bars represent 100 µm. (d) Development of AM intensity (M%), (e) AM frequency (F%) and (f) arbuscule frequency (A%) in the root systems of eight single plants inoculated with R. irregularis. (g) Development of arbuscule abundance in mycorrhizal parts of root fragments (a%) of eight single plants inoculated with R. irregularis. For (d–g) time is given as weeks after inoculation.
Figure 3Heatmap showing hierarchal clustering of differentially expressed genes (DEGs). Clustering was performed using log10 (FPKM+1)-values of DEGs between green (gr) and red fruits of mycorrhizal (AM) and non-mycorrhizal (c) plants (n = 4, p < 0.05). Colors visualize column-scaled Z-score from low (blue) to high (red) gene expression.
Expression level of selected DEGs in green fruits of mycorrhizal (+AM) and non-mycorrhizal (−AM) plants.
| Gene Name 1 | Solyc No | −AM | +AM | Log2FC | −AM | +AM | Log2FC | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FPKM | FPKM | rEx 2 | SE | rEx 2 | SE | ||||
|
|
| 0.081 | 41.328 | 9.0 | 0.0019 | 0.0018 | 0.6899 | 0.6234 | 8.5 |
|
|
| 0.038 | 5.033 | 7.0 | 0.0371 | 0.0075 | 0.1357 | 0.1027 | 1.9 |
|
|
| 0.138 | 16.656 | 6.9 | 0.0011 | 0.0011 | 0.1695 | 0.0890 | 7.2 |
|
|
| 0.054 | 5.674 | 6.7 | 0.0008 | 0.0008 | 0.1121 | 0.1007 | 7.2 |
|
|
| 0.127 | 11.423 | 6.5 | 0.0015 | 0.0015 | 0.2108 | 0.1842 | 7.2 |
|
|
| 0.019 | 1.173 | 5.9 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0147 | 0.0112 | ∞ |
|
|
| 0.051 | 2.819 | 5.8 | 0.0009 | 0.0009 | 0.0571 | 0.0389 | 6.0 |
|
|
| 0.177 | 6.867 | 5.3 | 0.0059 | 0.0037 | 0.2590 | 0.1765 | 5.5 |
|
|
| 0.007 | 0.278 | 5.3 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0112 | 0.0057 | ∞ |
|
|
| 0.139 | 4.944 | 5.2 | 0.0017 | 0.0007 | 0.0548 | 0.0402 | 5.0 |
|
|
| 0.467 | 13.981 | 4.9 | 0.0060 | 0.0024 | 0.2046 | 0.1108 | 5.1 |
|
|
| 0.042 | 0.766 | 4.2 | 0.0004 | 0.0004 | 0.0076 | 0.0046 | 4.3 |
|
|
| 0.050 | 0.896 | 4.2 | 0.0002 | 0.0002 | 0.0130 | 0.0068 | 5.8 |
|
|
| 0.162 | 2.715 | 4.1 | 0.0007 | 0.0007 | 0.0233 | 0.0109 | 5.0 |
|
|
| 10.087 | 4.424 | −1.2 | 0.0271 | 0.0077 | 0.0108 | 0.0023 | −1.3 |
1 DEGs were selected according to RNAseq analysis. RNAseq data are presented by fragments per kilobase of exon per million reads mapped (FPKM) values given as means (n = 4) and log2 fold changes (FC); 2 validation done using RT-qPCR analysis is shown as relative expression (rel. expr.) in relation to SlTIP41 including the respective standard error (SE). Students t-test with p ≤ 0.05 done for RT-qPCR results showed no significant differences.
Figure 4BRIX values of red fruits of non-mycorrhizal and mycorrhizal plants. BRIX was determined as a percentage of solids, temperature compensated (TC). Boxplots show medians (cross bar), 25–75% interquartile range (boxes) and data distribution (error bars). Students t-tests revealed no significant differences between both data sets (p = 0.08, n = 8).
Contents of selected carotenoids in fruits from non-mycorrhizal and mycorrhizal plants.
| Carotenoid 1 | Green Fruits | Red Fruits | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| −AM | +AM | −AM | +AM | |
| Lutein | 3.08 ± 0.46 | 3.44 ± 0.48 | 1.27 ± 0.41 | 1.22 ± 0.24 |
| Zeaxanthin | 4.36 ± 1.41 | 5.86 ± 1.19 | n.d. | n.d. |
| Lycopene | n.d. | n.d. | 2.87 ± 0.71 | 4.22 ± 1.97 |
| ß-Carotene | 0.63 ± 0.14 | 0.62 ± 0.19 | 7.10 ± 1.09 | 9.23 ± 2.15 |
1 Levels of carotenoids were determined by HPLC and are given as ng·mg−1 dry weight. Data are presented as means ± SD and did not show significant differences between fruits from non-mycorrhizal (−AM) and mycorrhizal (+AM) plants.
Figure 5Levels of amino acids in green (a) and red (b) fruits of non-mycorrhizal and mycorrhizal tomato plants. Amino acids were determined by HPLC using methanol extracts from freeze-dried material. Note that there are no significant differences in the contents of any amino acids in green fruits, whereas all levels except that of proline were increased in red fruits upon mycorrhization of plants. Data are given as means ± SE (n = 8). * marks significant differences (p < 0.05) between fruits from non-mycorrhizal and mycorrhizal plants according to 1-factorial ANOVA including Bonferroni correction.