Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2018 Jul 2;23(7):1605. doi: 10.3390/molecules23071605

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© 2018 by the authors.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

PMC Copyright notice

Relative transcript abundance of genes involved in wax biosynthesis in tomato plants treated with or without melatonin. (A) KCS1; (B) TTS1; (C) CER3; (D) LTP1. Results were presented as fold change relative to control plants sprayed with distilled water. The relative transcript abundance was determined by quantitative real-time PCR. At the five-leaf stage, tomato plants were sprayed either with 100 μM melatonin or distilled water one time a day on three consecutive days, and then, plants were deprived of water for 10 days. Leaf samples were collected from different groups of plants at Day 10 following water deprivation. The values presented are the means ± SDs (n = 3). Different letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05 among treatments.

Relative transcript abundance of genes involved in wax biosynthesis in tomato plants treated with or without melatonin. (A) KCS1; (B) TTS1; (C) CER3; (D) LTP1. Results were presented as fold change relative to control plants sprayed with distilled water. The relative transcript abundance was determined by quantitative real-time PCR. At the five-leaf stage, tomato plants were sprayed either with 100 μM melatonin or distilled water one time a day on three consecutive days, and then, plants were deprived of water for 10 days. Leaf samples were collected from different groups of plants at Day 10 following water deprivation. The values presented are the means ± SDs (n = 3). Different letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05 among treatments.