4.1 Article

Fruit-specific over-expression of human S-adenosylmethionine decarboxylase gene results in polyamine accumulation and affects diverse aspects of tomato fruit development and quality

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER INDIA
DOI: 10.1007/s13562-013-0194-x

关键词

Tomato; Polyamines; S-adenosylmethionine decarboxylase; Ethylene; Fruit ripening; Transgenic plants

资金

  1. Department of Biotechnology (Govt. of India), New Delhi [BT/PR/2990/Agr/16/232/2002, BT/PR8657/PBD/16/738/2007]
  2. University Grants Commission-Special Assistance Programme
  3. Department of Science and Technology-FIST programme
  4. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polyamines (PAs) have been implicated in fruit ripening where they antagonize the action of ethylene: a ripening inducing phytohormone. S-adenosylmethionine decarboxylase (SAMDC) is a key enzyme involved biosynthesis of higher PAs- spermidine and spermine. Here, we report the genetic modification of tomato fruit ripening and quality by over-expressing human-SAMDC driven by fruit-specific promoter (2A11). The PA analysis of ripening fruits from these transgenics showed elevated PA levels in comparison to wild-type (WT). The increased levels of higher PAs are correlated with the accumulation of heterologous SAMDC transcripts in such fruits. Transgenic fruits exhibited reduced levels of ethylene (similar to 50 %) production, similar to 10 days delay in on-vine ripening and extended post-harvest storage of similar to 11 days as compared to the WT fruits. As a result, these fruits showed improvement in various ripening traits like enhanced lycopene, vitamin C and total soluble solid. In Lesam fruits, an up-regulated expression of SlySAMDC, SlyEXP1, SlyTBG4, SlyDXS 1 and SlyPSY 1 was observed, while ethylene biosynthesis genes were down-regulated. Here, we have demonstrated the important role of PAs in altering the molecular and biochemical processes underlying fruit ripening by interfering with the ethylene biosynthesis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据