Skip to main content
. 2019 Dec 31;226(2):460–475. doi: 10.1111/nph.16362

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Comparison of changes in pigment production and quantitative reverse transcription (qRT)‐PCR assay of genes involved in pigment accumulation in wild‐type (WT) and RIPENING INHIBITOR (RIN)‐deficient tomato fruits. (a) Carotenoid content of WT and RIN‐CRISPR measured by HPLC (average of three biological replicates). (b) qRT‐PCR of gene transcripts involved in carotenoids biosynthesis (average of three biological replicates). Relative transcript levels are expressed relative to the tomato ACTIN gene internal control, expressed as 2‐ΔΔCt (Livak and Schmittgen, 2001). 1‐d‐deoxyxylulose 5‐phosphate synthase (DXS1); geranylgeranyl pyrophosphate synthases (GGPS2); phytoene synthases 1 (PSY1); phytoene desaturase (PDS); zeta‐carotene desaturase (ZDS); carotene isomerase (CRTISO); non‐heme hydroxylases (SlBCH2/CHY); zeaxanthin epoxidase (ZEP). The error bars represent mean ± SD, the lowercase letters indicate significant difference at P = 0.05. Genes identified as having low level of transcripts by RNA‐Seq (Li et al., 2018) were not measured.