Figure 6.

CsFUL1^A Inhibited Expression of CsSUP in Cucumber.

(A) CsSUP expression in ovaries 4 d before anthesis from A-OX-29, C-OX-26, A-RNAi-15, and A-RNAi-16 plants. Three independent samples from different plants were used for expression analysis. Values are means ± se. V/C, empty vector/control plants.

(B) CsFUL1^A and CsFUL1^C bound to CArG-box containing fragments of CsSUP in a Y1H assay, while the type II MADS-box protein CsCUM10 did not. Interaction of IND-AD with the PID-E box as a positive control and the empty AD and PID-E box as a negative control. AD, activation domain; E, exon; P, promoter.

(C) GUS activities after transient coexpression of ProCsSUP:GUS and Pro35S:CsFUL1^A. Four independent transfection experiments were performed. Values are means ± se.

(D) ChIP-PCR showing the in vivo binding of CsFUL1^A and CsFUL1^C to the CsSUP promoter. The asterisk indicates a significant difference between the CsFUL1^A allele and CsFUL1^C allele. Three biological replicates were performed. Values are means ± se.

(E) Positive correlation of CsSUP expression with fruit length. Green and orange bars indicate fruit length and CsSUP expression, respectively. Three independent samples were used for expression analysis. Values are means ± se (n = 4 fruits from different transgenic lines).

(F) Representative images of fruit in control and CsSUP-RNAi lines. Bars = 2 cm.

(G) CsSUP expression was significantly reduced in different CsSUP-RNAi lines. Three independent samples from different plants were used for expression analysis. Values are means ± se. V/C, empty vector/control plants.

(H) Fruit length at 10 DAA decreased in CsSUP-RNAi lines. Values are means ± se (n = 4 fruits from different transgenic lines). V/C, empty vector/control plants.

(I) Transverse sections of the fruit pericarp at maturity. Bars = 200 µm. V/C, empty vector/control plants.

(J) Cell area in the fruit pericarp in CsSUP-RNAi lines. Values are means ± se (n = 3 pericarps from different fruits). V/C, empty vector/control plants.

Significance analysis was conducted with the two-tailed Student's t tests (*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01).