Effects of Comparative Metabolism on Tomato Fruit Quality under Different Levels of Root Restriction

In a soilless culture (perlite substrate), root restriction cannot only reduce production costs but also improve fruit quality. Therefore, this study used different levels of root restriction [T1: 0.5 L, T2: 4 L, nonrestriction treatment (CK): 35 L] on tomatoes to explore their impact on quality. Results showed that total soluble solids (TSS), glucose, fructose, and sucrose contents were increased, whereas L-tryptophan, L-tyrosine, and titratable acidity were decreased under two restriction treatments. Meanwhile, root restriction also promoted the accumulation of phenylalanine and proline. For lycopene and flavonoid biosynthesis (prunin, naringin, naringenin), the restriction groups were significantly higher than those in the control group. Overall, T1 and T2 treatment had a better effect than CK treatment. This study provided an idea for improving substrate use efficiency and tomato quality

Effect of Irrigation on Growth, Yield, and Chemical Composition of Two Green Bean Cultivars

A study was conducted in an environmentally controlled greenhouse to evaluate two green bean cultivars, ‘Bronco’ and ‘Paulista’, under three application volumes of irrigation water based on replacing 100, 80, and 60% of evapotranspiration (ET). The experiment was in a split-plot design with three replications, recording vegetative growth, yield, pod parameters, water use efficiency (WUE), and chemical content of pods. The results showed that there were no differences between 80% ET and 100% ET for most parameters. In addition, 80% of ET increased the pod yield and improved the pod parameters and chemical composition. Therefore, this irrigation treatment can increase green bean productivity and improve pod quality. Reducing water application from 100 to 60% of ET progressively increased WUE. The ‘Bronco’ cultivar had a higher plant height, pod yield, WUE, pod weight, pod diameter, and total fiber amount than ‘Paulista’, while the ‘Paulista’ cultivar was superior in total chlorophyll, number of pods per plant, pod length, P, Ca, Mg, Fe, Cu, protein, vitamin C, titratable acid, and soluble sugar

Comprehensive Transcriptome Reveals an Opposite Regulatory Effect of Plant Growth Retardants in Controlling Seedling Overgrowth between Roots and Shoots

Seedling overgrowth always develops in undernourished plants due to biotic or abiotic stresses, which significantly decrease the yield of crops and vegetables. It is known that the plant growth retardants paclobutrazol (PBZ) and chlormequat chloride (CCC) are the most commonly used chemicals in controlling seedling height in plants by regulating the gibberellin (GA) biosynthesis pathway. However, the exact molecular regulation mechanism remains largely unknown. This study performed a comprehensive transcriptome profile to identify significantly differentially expressed genes after adding CCC and PBZ to the water culture seedling raising system for the first time. According to the obviously restrained shoots and roots, the GA biosynthesis genes were significantly decreased, as well as the endogenous GA content being reduced. Intriguingly, the GA signaling pathway genes were affected in opposite ways, increasing in roots but decreasing in shoots, especially regarding the phytochrome interacting factor SlPIF1 and the downstream genes expansins (SlEXPs), which promote cell wall remodeling. Further study found that the most down-regulated genes SlEXPA5 and SlEXPA15 were expressed specifically in shoot tissue, performing the function of repressing elongation, while the up-regulated genes SlEXPB2 and SlEXPB8 were proven to be root-specific expressed genes, which may promote horizontal elongation in roots. This research reported the comprehensive transcriptome profiling of plant growth retardants in controlling seedling overgrowth and restraining GA biosynthesis through the regulation of the GA signaling-related genes SlPIF1 and SlEXPs, with an opposite expression pattern between roots and shoots

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field