Skip to content
naulon

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 23, 2026.

Molecular regulation of fruit ripening

Sonia Osorio, Federico Scossa, Alisdair R. Fernie

Frontiers in Plant Science · 2013

doi:10.3389/fpls.2013.00198

Abstract

Fruit ripening is a highly coordinated developmental process that coincides with seed maturation. The ripening process is regulated by thousands of genes that control progressive softening and/or lignification of pericarp layers, accumulation of sugars, acids, pigments, and release of volatiles. Key to crop improvement is a deeper understanding of the processes underlying fruit ripening. In tomato, mutations blocking the transition to ripe fruits have provided insights into the role of ethylene and its associated molecular networks involved in the control of ripening. However, the role of other plant hormones is still poorly understood. In this review, we describe how plant hormones, transcription factors, and epigenetic changes are intimately related to provide a tight control of the ripening process. Recent findings from comparative genomics and system biology approaches are discussed.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 23, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

Fruits are a distinctive characteristic of Angiosperms. They occur today in a wide variety of forms and types. The ancestral fruit, dry and dehiscent, probably emerged in the early Cretaceous period; fleshy fruits appeared later in the Cretaceous or early Tertiary. The diversification of fruits from a dry dehiscent form to a fleshy drupe or berry, correlated with the rise of vertebrates, main agents of seed dispersal. The maturation of fruits is a complex and highly coordinated developmental process. In fleshy fruits, ripening results in the production of succulent, flavorful, and soft pericarp that attract animals and facilitate seed dispersal. In addition to softening, fruits normally exhibit increased accumulation of sugars, acids, pigments, and volatiles that increase interest and palatability to animals. Moreover, fruits are an important source of supplementary diet, providing minerals, vitamins, fibers, and antioxidants for humans. From an agronomical point of view, nutritional value, flavor, processing qualities, and shelf-life determine the quality of fruits.

The main changes associated with ripening include color (loss of green color and increase in non-photosynthetic pigments that vary depending on species and cultivar), firmness (softening by cell wall degrading activities and alterations in cuticle properties), taste (increase in sugar and decline in organic acids), and flavor (production of volatile compounds providing the characteristic aroma).

Analytical tools that allow comprehensive phenotyping at the level of transcriptome, proteome, and metabolome facilitate an overview of the metabolic network; whilst network analysis is beginning to yield a detailed understanding of the systems regulation underlying fruit development.

HORMONAL AND TRANSCRIPTIONAL REGULATION DURING RIPENING

Fruits are generally classified into two physiological groups, climacteric and non-climacteric, according to their respiratory activity and associated ethylene biosynthesis profiles during ripening. Ethylene synthesis in climacteric fruits such as tomato, apple, and banana, is essential for normal fruit ripening and blocking either synthesis or perception of this hormone prevents ripening.

Efforts to uncover the transcriptional regulation underlying carpel and fruit development were first focused on the dry dehiscent siliques of the model plant Arabidopsis. These studies clarified the role of several MADS-box transcription factors in tissue specification and mechanism of dehiscence. Among these, the redundant SHATTERPROOF 1/2 genes (SHP, members of the AGAMOUS subfamily) specified valve margin identity in the silique: when mutated, fruits became indehiscent. However, despite the striking anatomical differences between dry and fleshy fruits, subsequent studies, primarily focused on tomato, have shown the involvement in ripening regulation of several orthologs of those MADS-box genes previously characterized in Arabidopsis. It is now clear that a part of the regulatory networks underlying fruit development have been conserved during the evolution of fleshy fruits.

A number of important advances in our understanding of mechanisms that regulate ripening have also come from the characterization of monogenic tomato mutants, including ripening-inhibitor (rin), non-ripening (nor), colorless non-ripening (Cnr), green-ripe (Gr), green flesh (gf), high pigment 1 (hp1), high pigment 2 (hp2), and never-ripe (Nr;;;;;;; ). The rin mutant encodes a partially deleted MADS-box protein of the SEPALLATA clade (SEP4; ), whereas Cnr is an epigenetic change which alters the promoter methylation of SQUAMOSA promoter binding (SPB) protein. NOR is a member of the NAC-domain transcription factor family. A recent study in which the transcriptome, proteome, and targeted metabolite analysis were combined during development and ripening of nor and rin mutants, has helped to refine the ethylene-regulated expression of downstream genes and added to our knowledge the role of this hormone in both protein- and metabolite regulation in tomato ripening. This data supported the view that nor and rin act together in a cascade to control ripening and also suggested that nor has a more global effect on ethylene/ripening-related gene expression than rin, which indicates that nor likely operates upstream of rin. Recently, using a combined approach based on chromatin immunoprecipitation and transcriptome analysis, it was provided evidence that RIN interacts with the promoters of more than 200 genes, modulating the expression of its targets by activation or repression. RIN target genes are major regulators of ripening control, such as CNR and NOR, or belong to well-known pathways active during the transition from green to ripe fruits (e.g., carotenoid accumulation, chlorophyll breakdown, ethylene synthesis and perception; ).

Fruits such as strawberry, citrus, and grape have been classified as non-climacteric, based on the lack of the respiratory burst and on the low endogenous production of ethylene compared to standard climacteric fruits. In pepper fruits, some cultivars seem to be ethylene-insensitive, while others pepper cultivars treated with exogenous ethylene were able to stimulate the expression of ripening-specific genes.

In strawberry, which has emerged as a prime model of non-climacteric fruit ripening, ethylene is relatively high in green fruits, decreases in white fruits, and finally increases again at the red stage of ripening. Interestingly, this last increase is accompanied by an enhanced respiration rate that resembles the one that occurs in climacteric fruits at the onset of ripening. For better understanding the function of ethylene during strawberry ripening, different approaches have been used. External application of ethylene caused the down-regulation of several cell wall-related genes, such as β-galactosidase, pectin methylesterase, or β-xylosidase, while the expression of other genes such as expansin, FaEXP2 was ethylene-insensitive. Recent studies at transcriptomic and metabolomic levels in transgenic strawberry fruits with decreased ethylene sensitivity indicates that ethylene action is required for normal fruit development, acting differently in the two parts of strawberry fruit, achenes and receptacle (Merchante et al., unpublished data). These results show that, although not as relevant as in climacteric fruits, ethylene may nevertheless play a role in strawberry fruit ripening.

Recent comparative transcriptome and metabolome studies during the maturation processes of climacteric and non-climacteric fruits (tomato and pepper, respectively) suggest that both species have similar ethylene-mediated signaling components. In pepper, the regulation of these genes is, however, clearly different and may reflect altered ethylene sensitivity or regulators other than ethylene than in tomato. Unlike the situation described in tomato the ethylene biosynthesis genes, aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid (ACC) synthase, and ACC oxidase, are not induced in pepper. However, genes downstream of ethylene perception, such as cell wall-related genes, ethylene response factor 3 (ERF3), and carotenoid biosynthesis genes, are up-regulated during pepper fruit ripening. Other commonly regulated genes between climacteric and non-climacteric fruits have been described. In strawberry, a SEPALLATA gene (SEP1/2; MADS-box) is needed for normal development and ripening. Similarly, in banana, which is classified as a climacteric fruit, the MADS-box SEP3 gene also displays ripening-related expression. In apple, MADS2 gene expression is also associated with fruit firmness, whereas in bilberry fruit, the SQUAMOSA MADS-box ortholog of the TDR4 gene in tomato, has a role in regulation of anthocyanin biosynthesis (; see Figure 1).

Current knowledge about the role of hormones – other than ethylene – in the development and ripening of climacteric and non-climacteric fruits is limited. In tomato, pepper, banana, muskmelon, and strawberry, the most abundant free auxin, indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), has been reported to decline prior to the onset of ripening; this reduction was accompanied by an increase of its conjugated form (IAA-Asp; ). The conjugation reaction is catalyzed by the IAA-amino synthase gene (GH3). In tomato, 15 members of GH3 gene family have been described, but only for two of them is the pattern of expression associated with ripening. Tomato fruits overexpressing the pepper GH3 gene show anticipation of ripening, which is in agreement with the view that the ratio between IAA and its AA-conjugated form, rather than the level of IAA itself, may contribute to the temporal regulation of ripening. In non-climacteric fruits, no single growth regulator appears to play a positive role analogous to that played by ethylene, but it has been observed that auxin can negatively control the ripening of some non-climacteric fruits. In strawberry, it has been shown that the expression of many ripening-specific genes can be down-regulated by treatments with an exogenous auxin. Also in grape auxin seems to play a negative role in the regulation of ripening with synthetic auxin treatments delaying the expression of a number of ripening-related genes.

As a consequence of the prominent role of auxin in the development and ripening of some non-climacteric fruits, little attention has been paid to possible roles of other plant hormones, such as gibberellins (GAs). However, in strawberry, it has been reported that external application of GA3 to ripening fruits caused a significant delay in the development of the red color and modified the expression of genes involved in cell enlargement and cell wall disassembly.

In plants, the phytohormone abscisic acid (ABA) is known to be involved in various aspects of plant growth, development, and responses to environmental stresses. ABA promotes sugar accumulation in fleshy fruits and plays a role in the regulation of climacteric and non-climacteric fruit ripening. In tomato, the suppression of the gene that catalyzes the first step in ABA biosynthesis (NCED1, 9-cis-epoxycarotenoid dioxygenase), results in the down-regulation of some ripening-related cell wall genes, such as polygalacturonase and pectinmethylesterase, as well as an increase in firmness and longer shelf-life. Similarly, reduction of NCED expression correlates with retardation of ripening in strawberry. ABA is considered a ripening-inducer in strawberry and grape fruits. The mechanisms of ABA signaling is not known, however, in grape, analysis of the GH3 promoter identified ABRE-like elements, which may indicate that the ABA/auxin content ratio is related to the initiation of ripening.

In recent years, the level of understanding of the molecular events at the transcriptional, biochemical, hormonal, and metabolite levels underlying ripening in climacteric and non-climacteric fruits has increased considerable (see Figures 1 and 2). However, we still poorly understand the developmental switch that occurs in hormone responsiveness during the transition from immature to ripe fruits. To date, most published studies of transcriptional and metabolic regulation are of relatively low resolution at both spatial and temporal levels and are furthermore restricted in coverage of various cell molecular entities. However, new emerging technologies as well as improved statistical tools allow us to further refine our analytical ability in order to cope with issues as subcellular compartmentation and contrasting behavior of different cell types. Additionally, the availability of high quality fruit genome sequence data will aid our understanding about the genetic regulation of fruit development and ripening.

EPIGENETIC REMODELING DURING RIPENING

Epigenetic regulation of gene expression (inheritance without an alteration in the primary DNA sequence) is increasingly recognized as mechanism for modulating genome activity. Naturally occurring epigenetic changes at a single gene locus in plants can result in heritable morphological variation without alteration of the underlying DNA sequence. DNA methylation is one form of epigenetic regulation. It is involved in transcriptional regulation, stress responses and furthermore plays a major role in protecting the genome integrity against the activity of transposable elements (TEs) and other repetitive sequence.

In plants, DNA methylation occurs at cytosine residues in three different sequences (CG, CHG, and CHH, where H = A, C or T; ) and is set in place and maintained by different factors.

Analysis of epigenetic variation in Arabidopsis revealed that at least one-third of expressed genes are methylated in their coding region, and only 5% of genes are methylated within promoter regions. However, the promoter-methylated genes have a higher degree of tissue-specific expression.

The first survey of the frequency and distribution of cytosine methylation sites in tomato dates back to more than 20 years ago, when it was found that polymorphisms in cytosine methylation between two tomato species were relatively abundant and that methylation patterns were stably inherited, from parents to offspring, segregating in a Mendelian fashion. The presence of tissue-specific methylation patterns and the overall decrease of 5-mC frequency in developing tissues also led the authors to postulate variation of methylation status of selected alleles during plant development.

More recently, the impact of cytosine methylation on tomato fruit ripening has strikingly emerged in the definition of the molecular nature of the colorless non-ripening phenotype. The tomato non-ripening Cnr mutant fails to produce ripe berries; fruits exhibit green pericarps and do not respond to external applications of ethylene. The gene at the Cnr locus was identified as a SPB protein-like using positional cloning, but the non-ripening phenotype could not be attributed to any alteration in the coding gene sequence. Bisulfite sequencing of the Cnr mutant allele showed instead hypermethylation of cytosine in the region upstream the predicted ATG start site. This hypermethylation state correlated with a drastic reduction of Cnr gene expression. Therefore, the non-ripening phenotype was due to the heritable cytosine hypermethylation pattern of the region including the Cnr gene promoter. Additionally, in normal tomato fruit (cv. Liberto) development, the promoter of Cnr appears to be demethylated in a specific region just prior to the onset of ripening. This lead to the hypothesis that DNA methylation contributes to the regulation of fruit ripening.

Recent work by provides genome-wide insights into the link between the genetic program of fruit ripening and DNA methylation state. On the basis of the previous results on the nature of the Cnr (epi) mutation, the authors injected a chemical inhibitor of cytosine methylation, 5-azacytidine, directly in the locular spaces and columella of developing tomato fruits. The methylation inhibitor induced the formation of local ripe areas, red in appearance, where the expression of typical ripening-related genes (phytoene synthase 1 and polygalacturonase) was anticipated. Moreover, the Cnr promoter region was demethylated in red sectors with respect to green parts of the fruits, pointing at the demethylation of Cnr as the epigenetic signal sufficient to induce ripening. The authors then extended their views on the role of cytosine methylation reporting the full tomato methylome sequences of leaves, immature and ripe fruits, including the ripening-impaired mutants Cnr and rin. The sequencing of the entire epigenome revealed at least three important results: (i) in wild-type fruits, the degree of methylation of regions upstream the transcription start sites (TSS) decreased gradually along fruit development; (ii) this general decline was not observed for the fruits of the ripening-impaired mutants Cnr and rin, whose CG methylation levels were constantly higher at TSS and, for Cnr, also comparable to those observed in leaves; (iii) the promoters of typical ripening-related genes were gradually demethylated during development of wild-type fruits. Further evidences about the link between ripening and cytosine methylation came from the ChIP-Seq mapping of RIN binding sites during fruit development. The set of RIN targets included 292 genes with a known role in ripening. RIN binding sites were found to be adjacent or overlapping the methylation “hotspots” upstream the TSS. The analysis of methylation status of these regions showed that they were progressively demethylated during the transition from green to red ripe fruits; and this lower level of methylation correlated with higher transcript levels of RIN target genes. A previous study showed that the binding of RIN to a limited set of promoters was inhibited in the Cnr epimutant, indicating that promoter hypermethylation may prevent RIN binding. These three main findings, i.e., that: (i) local treatment of immature fruits with a DNA demethylating chemical accelerates ripening; (ii) promoters of ripening genes, which contain RIN binding sites, are gradually demethylated during ripening but remain stably hypermethylated in ripening-deficient mutants; (iii) RIN does not bind hypermethylated Cnr gene promoters (and, possibly, all hypermethylated promoters of its target genes), taken together, assign a key role to the epigenome structure and developmental dynamics in coordinating tomato fruit ripening. The global scenario presented so far also suggests that progressive demethylation of ripening-related gene promoters may be the necessary condition for binding of transcriptional regulators, thus triggering the accumulation of ripening-related transcripts. In normal fruit development, however, the mechanism inducing demethylation of promoters remains elusive, and further efforts are needed in this direction to uncover the “missing link.” Given the growing importance of epigenetic modifications in impacting fruit phenotypes, we envisage that, in the future, high-throughput sequencing technologies will allow routine screening of crop epigenomes, accelerating detection of epigenetic variation. We anticipate that screening epigenome structure and dynamics will coexist with the analysis of conventional genetic variation in future plant breeding strategies. Epigenetic-based crop improvement approaches may radically impact fruit quality traits, especially for those traits whose allelic variation has been reduced during domestication or recent intensive breeding pressure. As such future modeling work aimed at integrating epigenomic profiling and small RNA profiling alongside the more frequently used transcript, protein, enzyme, and metabolite profiling (as suggested in Figure 2) will allow far greater understanding of the complex dynamics underlying this tightly regulated biological process.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References 99

  1. 1.

    Alba R. Payton P. Fei Z. J. McQuinn R. Debbie P. Martin G. B. (2005 ). Transcriptome and selected metabolite analyses reveal multiple points of ethylene control during tomato fruit development. Plant Cell 17 2954–2965

    Not in our library10.1105/tpc.105.036053

  2. 2.

    Armitage A. M. (1989 ). Promotion of fruit ripening of ornamental peppers by ethephon. HortScience 24 962–964

    Not in our library

  3. 3.

    Barry C. S. Blume B. Bouzayen M. Cooper W. Hamilton A. J. Grierson D. (1996 ). Differential expression of the 1-amino-cyclopropane-1-carboxylate oxidase gene family of tomato. Plant J. 9 525–535

    Not in our library10.1046/j.1365-313x.1996.09040525.x

  4. 4.

    Barry C. S. Giovannoni J. J. (2006 ). Ripening in the tomato green-ripe mutant is inhibited by ectopic expression of a protein that disrupts ethylene signaling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103 7923–7928

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.0602319103

  5. 5.

    Barry C. S. McQuinn R. P. Chung M. Y. Besuden A. Giovannoni J. J. (2008 ). Amino acid substitutions in homologs of the STAY-GREEN protein are responsible for the green-flesh and chlorophyll retainer mutations of tomato and pepper. Plant Physiol. 147 179–187

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.108.118430

  6. 6.

    Bemer M. Karlova R. Ballester A. R. Tikunov Y. M. Bovy A. G. Wolters-Arts M. (2012 ). The tomato FRUITFULL homologs TDR4/FUL1 and MBP7/FUL2 regulate ethylene-independent aspects of fruit ripening. Plant Cell 24 4437–4451

    Not in our library10.1105/tpc.112.103283

  7. 7.

    Bottcher C. Keyzers R. A. Boss P. K. Davies C. (2010 ). Sequestration of auxin by the indole-3-acetic acid-amino synthase GH3-1 in grape berry (Vitis vinifera L.) and the proposed role of auxin conjugation during ripening. J. Exp. Bot. 61 3615–3625

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erq174

  8. 8.

    Bustamante C. A. Civello P. M. Martinez G. A. (2009 ). Cloning of the promoter region of beta-xylosidase (FaXyl1) gene and effect of plant growth regulators on the expression of FaXyl1 in strawberry fruit. Plant Sci. 177 49–56

    Not in our library10.1016/j.plantsci.2009.03.015

  9. 9.

    Caldana C. Fernie A. R. Willmitzer L. Steinhauser D. (2012 ). Unraveling retrograde signaling pathways: finding candidate signaling molecules via metabolomics and systems biology driven approaches. Front. Plant Sci. 3: 267.

    Not in our library10.3389/fpls.2012.00267

  10. 10.

    Carrari F. Baxter C. Usadel B. Urbanczyk-Wochniak E. Zanor M. I. Nunes-Nesi A. (2006 ). Integrated analysis of metabolite and transcript levels reveals the metabolic shifts that underlie tomato fruit development and highlight regulatory aspects of metabolic network behavior. Plant Physiol. 142 1380–1396

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.106.088534

  11. 11.

    Castillejo C. de la Fuente J. I. Iannetta P. Botella M. A. Valpuesta V. (2004 ). Pectin esterase gene family in strawberry fruit: study of FaPE1, a ripening-specific isoform. J. Exp. Bot. 55 909–918

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erh102

  12. 12.

    Cevik V. Ryder C. D. Popovich A. Manning K. King J. K. Seymour G. B. (2010 ). A FRUITFULL-like gene is associated with genetic variation for fruit flesh firmness in apple (Malus domestica Borkh.). Tree Genet. Genomes 6 271–279

    Not in our library10.1007/s11295-009-0247-4

  13. 13.

    Chai Y. M. Jia H. F. Li C. L. Dong Q. H. Shen Y. Y. (2011 ). FaPYR1 is involved in strawberry fruit ripening. J. Exp. Bot. 62 5079–5089

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/err207

  14. 14.

    Chan S. W. Henderson I. R. Jacobsen S. E. (2005 ). Gardening the genome: DNA methylation in Arabidopsis thaliana. Genetics 6 351–360

    Not in our library10.1038/nrg1601

  15. 15.

    Civello P. M. Powell A. L. Sabehat A. Bennett A. B. (1999 ). An expansin gene expressed in ripening strawberry fruit. Plant Physiol. 121 1273–1280

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.121.4.1273

  16. 16.

    Cokus S. J. Feng S. Zhang X. Chen Z. Merriman B. Haudenschild C. D. (2008 ). Shotgun bisulphite sequencing of the Arabidopsis genome reveals DNA methylation patterning. Nature 452 215–219

    Not in our library10.1038/nature06745

  17. 17.

    Coombe B. G. (1992 ). Research on development and ripening of the grape berry. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 43 101–111

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1755-0238.2000.tb00171.x

  18. 18.

    Cubas P. Vincent C. Coen E. (1999 ). An epigenetic mutation responsible for natural variation in floral symmetry. Nature 401 157–161

    Not in our library10.1038/43657

  19. 19.

    Davies C. Boss P. K. Robinson S. P. (1997 ). Treatment of grape berries, a nonclimacteric fruit with a synthetic auxin, retards ripening and alters the expression of developmentally regulated genes. Plant Physiol. 115 1155–1161

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.115.3.1155

  20. 20.

    de la Fuente J. I. Amaya I. Castillejo C. Sanchez-Sevilla J. F. Quesada M. A. Botella M. A. (2006 ). The strawberry gene FaGAST affects plant growth through inhibition of cell elongation. J. Exp. Bot. 57 2401–2411

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erj213

  21. 21.
  22. 22.

    Dinneny J. R. Weigel D. Yanofsky M. F. (2005 ). A genetic framework for fruit patterning in Arabidopsis thaliana. Development 132 4687–4697

    Not in our library10.1242/dev.02062

  23. 23.

    Elitzur T. Vrebalov J. Giovannoni J. J. Goldschmidt E. E. Friedman H. (2010 ). The regulation of MADS-box gene expression during ripening of banana and their regulatory interaction with ethylene. J. Exp. Bot. 61 1523–1535

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erq017

  24. 24.

    El-Kereamy A. Chervin C. Roustan J. P. Cheynier V. Souquet J. M. Moutounet M. (2003 ). Exogenous ethylene stimulates the long-term expression of genes related to anthocyanin biosynthesis in grape berries. Physiol. Plant. 119 175–182

    Not in our library10.1034/j.1399-3054.2003.00165.x

  25. 25.

    Enfissi E. M. Barneche F. Ahmed I. Lichtle C. Gerrish C. McQuinn R. P. (2010 ). Integrative transcript and metabolite analysis of nutritionally enhanced DE-ETIOLATED1 downregulated tomato fruit. Plant Cell 22 1190–1215

    Not in our library10.1105/tpc.110.073866

  26. 26.

    Eriksson O. Friis E. M. Lofgren P. (2000 ). Seed size, fruit size, and dispersal systems in angiosperms from the early cretaceous to the late tertiary. Am. Nat. 156 47–58

    Not in our library10.1086/303367

  27. 27.

    Fait A. Hanhineva K. Beleggia R. Dai N. Rogachev I. Nikiforova V. J. (2008 ). Reconfiguration of the achene and receptacle metabolic networks during strawberry fruit development. Plant Physiol. 148 730–750

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.108.120691

  28. 28.

    Ferrarese L. Trainotti L. Moretto P. deLaureto P. P. Rascio N. Casadoro G. (1995 ). Differential ethylene-inducible expression of cellulase in pepper plants. Plant Mol. Biol. 29 735–747

    Not in our library10.1007/bf00041164

  29. 29.

    Finkelstein R. R. Rock C. D. (2002 ). Abscisic acid biosynthesis and response. Arabidopsis Book 1:e0058

    Not in our library10.1199/tab.0058

  30. 30.

    Fujisawa M. Nakano T. Shima Y. Ito Y. (2013 ). A large-scale identification of direct targets of the tomato MADS Box transcription factor RIPENING INHIBITOR reveals the regulation of fruit ripening. Plant Cell 25 371–386

    Not in our library10.1105/tpc.112.108118

  31. 31.

    Giménez E. Pineda B. Capel J. Anton M. T. Atares A. Perez-Martin F. (2010 ). Functional analysis of the Arlequin mutant corroborates the essential role of the Arlequin/TAGL1 gene during reproductive development of tomato. PLoS ONE 5:e14427

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0014427

  32. 32.

    Giovannoni J. (2001 ). Molecular biology of fruit maturation and ripening. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 52 725–749

    Not in our library10.1146/annurev.arplant.52.1.725

  33. 33.

    Giovannoni J. J. (2007 ). Fruit ripening mutants yield insights into ripening control. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 10 283–289

    Not in our library10.1016/j.pbi.2007.04.008

  34. 34.

    Giovannoni J. J. Noensie E. N. Ruezinsky D. M. Lu X. Tracy S. L. Ganal M. W. (1995 ). Molecular genetic analysis of the ripening-inhibitor and non-ripening loci of tomato: a first step in genetic map-based cloning of fruit ripening genes. Mol. Gen. Genet. 248 195–206

    Not in our library10.1007/bf02190801

  35. 35.
  36. 36.

    Hamilton A. J. Lycett G. W. Grierson D. (1990 ). Antisense gene that inhibits synthesis of the hormone ethylene in transgenic plants. Nature 346 284–287

    Not in our library10.1038/346284a0

  37. 37.

    Harpster M. H. Lee K. Y. Dunsmuir P. (1997 ). Isolation and characterization of a gene encoding endo-beta-1,4-glucanase from pepper (Capsicum annuum L). Plant Mol. Biol. 33 47–59

    Not in our library10.1023/a:1005795028489

  38. 38.

    Hileman L. C. Sundstrom J. F. Litt A. Chen M. Shumba T. Irish V. F. (2006 ). Molecular and phylogenetic analyses of the MADS-box gene family in tomato. Mol. Biol. Evol. 23 2245–2258

    Not in our library10.1093/molbev/msl095

  39. 39.

    Himmelbach A. Yang Y. Grill E. (2003 ). Relay and control of abscisic acid signaling. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 6 470–479

    Not in our library10.1016/s1369-5266(03)00090-6

  40. 40.

    Hirayama T. Shinozaki K. (2007 ). Perception and transduction of abscisic acid signals: keys to the function of the versatile plant hormone ABA. Trends Plant Sci. 12 343–351

    Not in our library10.1016/j.tplants.2007.06.013

All 99 references

Cited by papers we hold 7

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.