Skip to main content
. 2020 Mar 5;71(12):3450–3462. doi: 10.1093/jxb/eraa114

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5.

Reproductive development was dramatically altered in SlbHLH95-OE lines. (a, b) Delayed flowering of SlbHLH95-OE plants compared with the WT. DAG, days after germination. The white bars represent 5 cm. (c, d) Reduced fruit set in SlbHLH95-OE plants. (e) Altered fruit shape in SlbHLH95-OE plants. The white bars represent 1 cm. (f) Fruit shape index as the ratio of length to width in three representative independent lines. (g) Fruit shape triangle as the ratio of proximal end width to distal end width in three representative independent lines. (h) Distribution of fruit weight in WT and SlbHLH95-OE lines. n=60 fruits in WT and transgenic lines. (i) Seed number per fruit in WT and SlbHLH95-OE lines. n=60 fruits in WT and transgenic lines. Values are means ±SD. Statistical significance determined by Student’s t-test: *0.01<P<0.05; **0.001<P<0.01; ***P<0.001.