| Literature DB >> 34220904 |
Junwen Wang1, Jing Zhang1, Jing Li1, Mohammed Mujitaba Dawuda2, Basharat Ali3, Yue Wu1, Jihua Yu1,4, Zhongqi Tang1, Jian Lyu1, Xuemei Xiao1, Linli Hu1, Jianming Xie1.
Abstract
5-Aminolevulinic acid (ALA) plays an important role in plant growth and development. It can also be used to enhance crop resistance to environmental stresses and improve the color and internal quality of fruits. However, there are limited reports regarding the effects of ALA on tomato fruit color and its regulatory mechanisms. Therefore, in this study, the effects of exogenous ALA on the quality and coloration of tomato fruits were examined. Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum "Yuanwei No. 1") fruit surfaces were treated with different concentrations of ALA (0, 100, and 200 mg⋅L-1) on the 24th day after fruit setting (mature green fruit stage), and the content of soluble sugar, titratable acid, soluble protein, vitamin C, and total free amino acids, as well as amino acid components, intermediates of lycopene synthetic and metabolic pathways, and ALA metabolic pathway derivatives were determined during fruit ripening. The relative expression levels of genes involved in lycopene synthesis and metabolism and those involved in ALA metabolism were also analyzed. The results indicated that exogenous ALA (200 mg⋅L-1) increased the contents of soluble sugars, soluble proteins, total free amino acids, and vitamin C as well as 11 kinds of amino acid components in tomato fruits and reduced the content of titratable acids, thus improving the quality of tomato fruits harvested 4 days earlier than those of the control plants. In addition, exogenous ALA markedly improved carotenoid biosynthesis by upregulating the gene expression levels of geranylgeranyl diphosphate synthase, phytoene synthase 1, phytoene desaturase, and lycopene β-cyclase. Furthermore, exogenous ALA inhibited chlorophyll synthesis by downregulating the genes expression levels of Mg-chelatase and protochlorophyllide oxidoreductase. These findings suggest that supplementation with 200 mg⋅L-1 ALA not only enhances the nutritional quality and color of the fruit but also promotes early fruit maturation in tomato.Entities:
Keywords: 5-aminolevulinic acid; coloration; internal quality; lycopene synthesis; tomato fruit
Year: 2021 PMID: 34220904 PMCID: PMC8243651 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2021.683868
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Primer sequences and GenBank accession numbers of the geranylgeranyl diphosphate synthase (GGPPS), PSY1, phytoene desaturase (PDS), lycopene β-cyclase (LCY-B), CHLH, POR, and ACTIN gene sequences.
| NM_001366706.1 | CTGCCTGTGCCTTAGAGATGGTTC | CCTCGTCGAGTTGTGTCATCATCC | |
| NM_001247883.2 | GCTGGAAGGGTGACCGATAAATGG | GTCACGCCTTTCTCTGCCTCATC | |
| NM_001247166.2 | CGAGGTCGTCTTCTTTGGGAACTG | CAATCTTCTGGTCGTGGCATGGG | |
| NM_001247297.2 | GAGTCGTTGGAATCGGTGGTACAG | CAACAGGAGCCGCAGCTAGTG | |
| XM_004236562.4 | GTGCTGGCATGATGGAGAAGAGG | GAGGTTCTGAACGAGGTTGGTTGG | |
| NM_001317974.1 | TGGACCTCGCCTCTCTTGACAG | CAGCAGCATTAGCAACCAACACG | |
| NM_001330119.1 | TTGTGTTGGACTCTGGTGATGGTG | GACGGAGAATGGCATGTGGAAGG |
FIGURE 1The effects different concentrations of 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) on the soluble sugar, soluble solid content, and firmness of tomato fruit. (A) Soluble sugar content; (B) Soluble solid content; and (C) Firmness of tomato fruits at 24th–40th day after fruit setting under different treatments. Vertical bars represent mean ± SE from three independent replicates and the different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05).
FIGURE 2The effects of ALA on morphology and skin color parameters of tomato fruits. (A) The fruit morphology; (B) the a∗ value; (C) the b∗ value; (D) the lightness; and (E) the hue angle of tomato fruits skin at 24th–40th day after fruit setting under different treatments. The data presented represent mean ± SE from three independent replicates and the different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05).
Effects of ALA on the soluble sugar, titratable acid, soluble protein, total free amino acid, and vitamin C contents of tomato fruits.
| Soluble sugar (g⋅100 g–1 FW) | Control | 2.27 ± 0.07 a | 2.54 ± 0.09 b | 3.15 ± 0.03 c | 3.93 ± 0.09 c | 4.35 ± 0.04 b | 4.50 ± 0.09 b |
| ALA100 | 2.39 ± 0.05 a | 2.89 ± 0.10 a | 3.39 ± 0.05 b | 4.20 ± 0.05 b | 4.57 ± 0.03 b | ||
| ALA200 | 2.35 ± 0.06 a | 3.05 ± 0.11 a | 3.68 ± 0.09 a | 4.47 ± 0.05 a | 4.92 ± 0.10 a | ||
| Titratable acid (g⋅100 g–1 FW) | Control | 1.10 ± 0.05 a | 1.02 ± 0.04 a | 1.19 ± 0.02 a | 1.33 ± 0.04 a | 1.20 ± 0.01 a | 1.04 ± 0.03 b |
| ALA100 | 1.05 ± 0.01 a | 0.99 ± 0.03 a | 1.15 ± 0.04 a | 1.25 ± 0.00 ab | 1.10 ± 0.02 ab | ||
| ALA200 | 1.09 ± 0.04 a | 1.04 ± 0.03 a | 1.16 ± 0.02 a | 1.19 ± 0.02 b | 0.98 ± 0.05 b | ||
| Soluble protein (mg⋅g–1 FW) | Control | 0.16 ± 0.008 a | 0.20 ± 0.008 b | 0.49 ± 0.01 c | 0.68 ± 0.015 c | 0.91 ± 0.03 b | 1.15 ± 0.028 a |
| ALA100 | 0.17 ± 0.012 a | 0.22 ± 0.007 b | 0.60 ± 0.014 b | 0.75 ± 0.016 b | 1.14 ± 0.015 a | ||
| ALA200 | 0.16 ± 0.011 a | 0.27 ± 0.011 a | 0.70 ± 0.011 a | 0.90 ± 0.014 a | 1.22 ± 0.025 a | ||
| Total free amino acid (mg⋅100 g–1 FW) | Control | 12.44 ± 0.25 a | 12.66 ± 0.56 b | 14.64 ± 0.20 c | 19.36 ± 0.42 b | 21.56 ± 0.45 c | 23.43 ± 0.31 b |
| ALA100 | 12.71 ± 0.15 a | 14.86 ± 0.38 a | 17.11 ± 0.33 b | 20.35 ± 0.44 b | 23.10 ± 0.36 b | ||
| ALA200 | 12.49 ± 0.67 a | 14.91 ± 0.29 a | 18.21 ± 0.34 a | 21.89 ± 0.24 a | 25.74 ± 0.57 a | ||
| Vitamin C (mg⋅100 g–1 FW) | Control | 5.54 ± 0.26 a | 6.34 ± 0.32 b | 7.10 ± 0.26 b | 7.94 ± 0.29 b | 9.95 ± 0.44 c | 11.37 ± 0.25 b |
| ALA100 | 5.82 ± 0.47 a | 7.11 ± 0.23 ab | 8.07 ± 0.25 a | 8.71 ± 0.34 b | 11.74 ± 0.36 b | ||
| ALA200 | 6.12 ± 0.34 a | 7.58 ± 0.05 a | 8.37 ± 0.12 a | 10.44 ± 0.28 a | 13.02 ± 0.13 a | ||
FIGURE 3Heat map of the effects of ALA on amino acid components in tomato fruit. Min-Max normalization method was used to standardize the data (Mohamad and Usman, 2013). The color block represents the relative value of amino acid components in the corresponding position.
FIGURE 4The effects of ALA on the intermediates in lycopene synthesis and metabolic pathway. (A) Lycopene content; (B) the phytoene content; (C) the β-carotene content; and (D) the lutein content of tomato fruits at 24th–44th day after fruit setting under different treatments. The 44th day after fruit setting data of the control group and the 40th day after fruit setting data of other treatments were analyzed by analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) to separate its significance. Vertical bars represent mean ± SE from three independent replicates and the different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05).
FIGURE 5Relative expression levels of key genes involved in lycopene synthesis and metabolism pathway. (A) Relative expression of GGPPS, encoding geranylgeranyl diphosphate synthase; (B) relative expression of PSY1, encoding phytoene synthase; (C) relative expression of PDS, encoding phytoene desaturase; and (D) relative expression of LCY-B, encoding lycopene β-cyclase. Vertical bars represent mean ± SE from three independent replicates and the different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05). The control group was used as reference at each sampling time point.
FIGURE 6The effects of ALA on endogenous derivatives of ALA metabolic pathway. (A) Endogenous ALA content; (B) Proto? content; (C) Mg-Proto? content; (D) Pchlide content; (E) Chl a content; and (F) Chl b content of tomato fruits at 24th–44th day after fruit setting. The 44th day after fruit setting data of the control group and the 40th day after fruit setting data of other treatments were analyzed by ANOVA to separate its significance. Vertical bars represent mean ± SE from three independent replicates and the different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05).
FIGURE 7Relative expression of genes involved in ALA metabolic pathway. (A) Relative expression of CHLH, encoding Mg-chelatase; (B) relative expression of POR, encoding protochlorophyllide oxidoreductase. Vertical bars represent mean ± SE from three independent replicates and the different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05). The control group was used as reference at each sampling time point.