In tomato, it was shown that the elongated fruit shape is specified mainly by four loci:
Ovate, Sun, Tri2.1/Dblk2.1 and
Fs8.1, with the first two segregating in some cultivars. However, it is the interaction between all the aforementioned loci that may control the fate of tomato fruit shape [
1].
Ovate in particular is one of the two major loci (
Sun is the other) responsible for the modulation of fruit shape, possibly determining the polarity of cell division early in floral development [
3]. Comparative mapping analysis has shown that the tomato
Ovate has orthologs in other Solanaceae species including pepper [
42]. In particular, [
43] suggest that there exists a small number of conserved QTLs that control fruit shape and size between tomato and pepper. They first identified a pepper fruit-shape QTL,
Fs 2.1, localized in the tomato
Ovate gene but having a comparatively lesser effect. More significantly however, they also identified a major fruit-weight QTL in pepper,
Fw 2.1, found to be encoded by or tightly linked to
Ovate [
43], suggesting that
Ovate may control fruit characteristics in pepper differently to tomato. The tight co-localization of tomato
Ovate gene with pepper QTLs for a number of loci related to fruit diameter and shape, suggests a strong synteny and close relationship between the genes that control cell division, elongation and polarity [
44]. For understanding fruit shape formation, we start in this work from
CaOvate and one of its targets, a
GA20ox1 gene designated as
CaGA20ox1.
The analysis of the
CaOvate genomic sequences obtained from the two cultivars studied showed that sequences differ in a SNP in the first exon of the gene, leading to a Threonine
Long - to - Serine
Round polymorphism in the resulting predicted amino-acid sequence. A C terminal DUF623 domain was identified on the predicted amino-acid CaOVATE sequence, a domain which exists in all AtOFPs and Solaneceaous OVATE proteins as well as in other uncharacterized proteins in other plants. This domain in
Arabidopsis, as shown for AtOFP1 and AtOFP5, was found to help the contact with the BELL and KNOX homeodomains, regulating their subcellular localization [
10] while in tomato it is the abolishment of this domain that causes the differences in fruit shape [
2]. The bioinformatics analysis of all DUF623 domain sequences from Pfam enabled their segregation into subfamilies (Figure ). The DUF623 domain of the CaOVATE was categorized in the same subfamily as other Solanaceous plants and the DUF623 domains of AtOFP7, AtOFP8 and AtOFP6. AtOFP7 was found to exhibit analogous function to AtOFP1, which is a known transcriptional repressor of
AtGA20ox1 [
5]. AtOFP1 is categorized in another subfamily along with other well characterized proteins such as AtOFP2, AtOFP3, AtOFP5 and an OVATE-like protein from rice. AtOFP5 was shown to be important for normal development and cell pattern in the
Arabidopsis embryo sac [
15]. The two subfamilies, the one with CaOVATE, AtOFP6, AtOFP7 and AtOFP8 and the other with AtOFP1, AtOFP2, AtOFP3 and AtOFP5, have a significant number of common amino-acids inside the domain. According to the specificity determining residues analysis, the two subfamilies have consistently differing amino-acids in positions 23 and 49 of the alignment (Figure ) but the possible similar functions between the OFPs such as AtOFP1 and AtOFP7 [
5] categorized in the two subfamilies may suggest that these changes do not alter the function of the domain, although they concern amino-acids that are not biochemically similar. In other words, it is possible that subfamilies 6 and 8 contain proteins acting similarly in plant growth and development, therefore placing our CaOVATE in a group of proteins that have been shown to participate in cell size and fruit shape determination in many plant species.
In tomato, what determines the shift from a round to a pear-shaped cultivar is a stop codon in the second exon of the
Ovate sequence that puts an end in the translation of the mRNA to protein in the pear-shaped cultivar [
2]. We were therefore unable to identify a similar mechanism in our two pepper cultivars.
We then examine whether different quantitative expression levels exist between the two pepper cultivars. The expression analysis of
CaOvate showed there is a timing difference in the expression of the gene between the two pepper cultivars of different fruit shape, with cv. "Round" exhibiting a delay accompanied by increased expression compared to cv. "Long" (Figure ). More specifically, in cv. "Round", the peak of
CaOvate expression is observed after anthesis, in 5 DAA developing fruits. This is similar to tomato TA496, a round-fruited cultivar, in which the highest expression of
Ovate was detected also after anthesis in a developing fruit of 4 DAA [
2]. In cv. "Long" however, the peak of
CaOvate expression is observed before anthesis as in tomato's cv. Yellow Pear (TA503), the final pear-shaped fruit of which is already evident in ovaries before anthesis when
Ovate expression reaches its highest level. After anthesis of cv. Yellow Pear,
Ovate expression drops sharply as also observed in pepper cv. "Long" [
2]. These results may suggest that our two pepper cultivars exhibit quantity and timing differences in
CaOvate expression which affect fruit shape. Finally, in tomato, the difference in the transcript levels of
Ovate between the two cultivars with the different fruit shape is likely attributed to a 16-bp indel in the 5' upstream region [
2]; in the pepper cultivars examined here no such difference was observed in the sequences of the 5' upstream region.
Silencing of
CaOvate through VIGS in small plantlets of cv. "Round", resulted in plant that was further analyzed due to the altered phenotype exhibited in all of its fruits. More specifically, the fruits that this plant produced were more oblong and varied compared to the cultivar's typical round shape according to phenotypic measurements (Figure ). At 16.5 weeks after infiltration, by which time there were several fruits with changed phenotype on this particular plant, 5 DAA developing fruit was analyzed initially for the presence of TRV transcripts. It was shown that at the time of sampling, TRV1 but not TRV2 transcripts were detected, although both transcripts were detected a few weeks earlier in the same plant. This difference in detecting the viral transcripts throughout the organs and tissues of the infiltrated plant is likely attributed to the fact that only small RNAs produced by the viral transcripts travel inside the infiltrated plant. In the mock treated plants, i.e. plants treated only with TRV1 and TRV2 empty vectors, neither viral transcripts were detected, a finding in agreement with previous ones by [
45] attributed to the relatively minimal infection speed of the TRV1 and TRV2 constructs in fully developed plants. Next, the expression level of the endogenous
CaOvate gene was assessed through RT-PCR, and a statistically significant down-regulation of about 75% compared to the wild type 5 DAA fruit was detected. It is possible then that this down-regulation of
CaOvate is involved in the alteration of the shape of fruits in cv. "Round" adopting a more elongated shape, consistent with previous findings describing
Ovate as a growth suppressor [
2]. In other words, the down-regulation of
CaOvate accompanied by an increase in expression of its possible target,
CaGA20ox1, are potentially the promoters of growth and thus fruit elongation in pepper. We should note that the silencing of the DUF623 domain through the application of the VIGS technique might have led to the silencing of other genes encoding for proteins that contain the domain in pepper (if any).