Characterization of expression, and cloning, of -D-xylosidase and -L-arabinofuranosidase in developing and ripening tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) fruit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modifications to the cell wall of developing and ripening tomato fruit are mediated by cell wall-degrading enzymes, including a beta-d-xylosidase or alpha-l-arabinofuranosidase, which participate in the breakdown of xylans and/or arabinoxylans. The activity of both enzymes was highest during early fruit growth, before decreasing during later development and ripening. Two beta-d-xylosidase cDNAs, designated LeXYL1 and LeXYL2, and an alpha-l-arabinofuranosidase cDNA, designated LeARF1, were obtained. Accumulation of mRNAs for beta-d-xylosidase and alpha-l-arabinofuranosidase was examined during fruit development and ripening. LeARF1 and LeXYL2 genes were relatively highly expressed during fruit development and decreased after the onset of ripening. By contrast, LeXYL1 was not expressed during fruit development, but was expressed later, particularly during over-ripening. The expression of all three genes was also followed in ripening-impaired mutants, Nr, Nr2, nor, and rin of cv. Ailsa Craig fruit. LeXYL2 mRNA was detected in the ripe fruits of all the mutants and its abundance was similar to that in mature green wild-type fruit. By contrast, LEXYL1 mRNA was expressed only in the ripe fruits of the Nr mutant, suggesting that the two beta-d-xylosidase genes are subject to distinct regulatory control during fruit development and ripening. LeARF1 mRNA was detected in ripe fruits of Nr2, nor and rin, and not in ripe fruit of the Nr mutant. The accumulation of LeARF1 in ripe fruit was restored by 1-methylcyclopropene (1-MCP), an inhibitor of ethylene action, while 1-MCP had no effect on the expression of LeXYL1 or LeXYL2. This suggests that LeARF1 expression is subject to negative regulation by ethylene and that the two beta-d-xylosidase genes are independent of ethylene action.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".