It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Cytokinin and gibberellic acid (GA) are growth regulators used to increase berry size in seedless grapes and it is of interest to understand their effects on the phenylpropanoid pathway and on ripening processes. GA3 and synthetic cytokinin forchlorfenuron (N-(2-chloro-4-pyridyl)-N′-phenylurea, CPPU) and their combination were applied to 6 mm diameter fruitlets of ‘Sable Seedless’, and berries were sampled 51 and 70 days (d) following application. All treatments increased berry size and delayed sugar accumulation and acid degradation with a stronger effect of CPPU. CPPU, but not GA, reduced berry color and the levels of anthocyanins. While CPPU reduced the levels of anthocyanins by more than 50%, the combined treatment of GA+CPPU reduced the levels by about 25% at 51 d. CPPU treatment had minor effects on flavonols content but increased the levels of monomeric flavan-3-ols by more than two-fold. Phloroglucinol analysis using HPLC showed that proanthocyanidin content was significantly increased by CPPU, whereas mean degree of polymerization was reduced from 26 to 19. Volatile analysis by GC-MS showed changes in composition with CPPU or GA treatment with potential impact on flavor. RNA-seq analysis showed that GA had a minor overall effect on the transcriptome whereas CPPU had pronounced effects on gene expression at both 51 and 70 d. Comparing the control and CPPU at similar Brix of ca. 19.7°, a reduced expression of stilbene synthases (STSs) including their regulators MYB14 and MYB15, and other phenylpropanoid-related genes was observed in CPPU-treated grapes. Overall, our study shows that CPPU had a major influence on the phenylpropanoid pathway and affected multiple ripening-related processes.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details




1 Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, Department of Postharvest Science, Rishon LeZion, Israel (GRID:grid.410498.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 0465 9329); University of California, Department of Viticulture and Enology, Davis, USA (GRID:grid.27860.3b) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9684)
2 Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, Department of Postharvest Science, Rishon LeZion, Israel (GRID:grid.410498.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 0465 9329)
3 Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, Department of Plant Pathology, Rishon LeZion, Israel (GRID:grid.410498.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 0465 9329)
4 University of California, Department of Viticulture and Enology, Davis, USA (GRID:grid.27860.3b) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9684); University of California, Food Safety and Measurement Facility, Davis, USA (GRID:grid.27860.3b) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9684)
5 University of California, Department of Viticulture and Enology, Davis, USA (GRID:grid.27860.3b) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9684)