Physiological relationships among physical, sensory, and morphological attributes of texture in tomato fruits

Journal of Experimental Botany

Volumn 58, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 1915-1925

  Chaïb, Jamila ^a,b   Devaux, Marie Françoise ^c   Grotte, Marie Ghislaine ^a   Robini, Karine ^d   Causse, Mathilde ^b   Lahaye, Marc ^c   Marty, Isabelle ^a  

^a UMR A 408 INRA University of Avignon   (France)

^b Researches Center of Avignon   (France)

^c INRA   (France)

^d Maison de l'Alimentation   (France)

Author keywords

Firmness; Fruit; Genetic background; Juiciness; Mealiness; Near isogenic lines (NILs); Quantitative trait locus (QTL); Ripening; Solanum lycopersicum; Texture

Indexed keywords

ELASTICITY; GENETIC ENGINEERING; RHEOLOGY; TEXTURES;

FIRMNESS; GENETIC BACKGROUND; JUICINESS; MEALINESS; NEAR ISOGENIC LINES (NIL); QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS (QTL); RIPENING; SOLANUM LYCOPERSICUM;

FRUITS;

ARTICLE; FRUIT; GENETICS; HISTOLOGY; PHENOTYPE; PHYSIOLOGY; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS; TOMATO;

FRUIT; LYCOPERSICON ESCULENTUM; PHENOTYPE; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCI;

LYCOPERSICON ESCULENTUM; SOLANUM;

EID: 34547653776     PISSN: 00220957     EISSN: 14602431     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erm046     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Abbott JA. 2004. Textural quality assessment for fresh fruits and vegetables. Quality of Fresh and Processed Foods 542, 265-279.
2. Alexander L, Grierson D. 2002. Ethylene biosynthesis and action in tomato: a model for climacteric fruit ripening. Journal of Experimental Botany 53, 2039-2055.
3. Barrett DM, Garcia E, Wayne JE. 1998. Textural modification of processing tomatoes. CRC Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 38, 173-258.
4. Bernacchi D, Beck-Bunn T, Emmatty D, et al. 1998. Advanced backcross QTL analysis of tomato. II. Evaluation of near-isogenic lines carrying single-donor introgressions for desirable wild QTL-alleles derived from Lycopersicon hirsutum and L. pimpinellifolium. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 97, 170-180.
5. Brummell DA. 2006. Cell wall disassembly in ripening fruit. Functional Plant Biology 33, 103-119.
6. Brummell DA, Harpster MH. 2001. Cell wall metabolism in fruit softening and quality and its manipulation in transgenic plants. Plant Molecular Biology 47, 311-340.
7. Causse M, Buret M, Robini K, Verschave P. 2003. Inheritance of nutritional and sensory quality traits in fresh market tomato and relation to consumer preferences. Journal of Food Science 68, 2342-2350.
8. Causse M, Saliba-Colombani V, Lecomte L, Duffe P, Rousselle P, Buret M. 2002. QTL analysis of fruit quality in fresh market tomato: a few chromosome regions control the variation of sensory and instrumental traits. Journal of Experimental Botany 53, 2089-2098.
9. Chaïb J, Lecomte L, Buret M, Causse M. 2006. Stability over genetic backgrounds, generations and years of quantitative trait locus (QTLs) for organoleptic quality in tomato. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 112, 934-944.
10. Chambroy Y, Souty M, Jacquemin G, Gomez RM, Audergon JM. 1995. Research on the suitability of modified atmosphere packaging for shelf-life and quality improvement of apricot fruit. Acta Horticulturae 384, 633-638.
11. Cheniclet C, Rong WY, Causse M, Frangne N, Bolling L, Carde JP, Renaudin JP. 2005. Cell expansion and endoreduplication show a large genetic variability in pericarp and contribute strongly to tomato fruit growth. Plant Physiology 139, 1984-1994.
12. Crookes PR, Grierson D. 1983. Ultrastructure of tomato fruit ripening and the role of polygalacturonase isoenzymes in cell wall degradation. Plant Physiology 72, 1088-1093.
13. Devaux MF, Barakat A, Robert P, Bouchet B, Guillon F, Navez B, Lahaye M. 2005. Mechanical breakdown and cell wall structure of mealy tomato pericarp tissue. Postharvest Biology and Technology 37, 209-221.
14. Doganlar S, Frary A, Ku HM, Tanksley SD. 2002. Mapping quantitative trait loci in inbred backcross lines of Lycopersicon pimpinellifolium (LA1589). Genome 45, 1189-1202.
15. Duprat F, Roudot F, Grotte-Nicolas M, Roudot AC. 1991. Fruit inhomogeneity. Sciences des Aliments 11, 613-626.
16. Frary A, Doganlar S, Frampton A, Fulton T, Uhlig J, Yates H, Tanksley S. 2003. Fine mapping of quantitative trait loci for improved fruit characteristics from Lycopersicon chmielewskii chromosome 1. Genome 46, 235-243.
17. Fry SC, Smith RC, Renwick KF, Martin DJ, Hodge SK, Matthews KJ. 1992. Xyloglucan endotransglycosylase, a new wall-loosening enzyme-activity from plants. Biochemical Journal 282, 821-828.
18. Fulton TM, Grandillo S, Beck-Bunn T, Fridman E, Frampton A, Lopez J, Petiard V, Uhlig J, Zamir D, Tanksley SD. 2000. Advanced backcross QTL analysis of a Lycopersicon esculentumxLycopersicon parviflorum cross. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 100, 1025-1042.
19. Hallett IC, MacRae EA, Wegrzyn TF. 1992. Changes in kiwifruit cell wall ultrastructure and cell packing during postharvest ripening. International Journal of Plant Sciences 153, 49-60.
20. Harker FR, Redgwell RJ, Hallett IC, Murray SH, Carter G. 1997. Texture of fresh fruit. Horticultural Reviews 20, 121-224.
21. Koch JL, Nevins DJ. 1989. Tomato fruit cell wall. I. Use of purified tomato polygalacturonase and pectinmethylesterase to identify developmental changes in pectins. Plant Physiology 91, 816-822.
22. Lecomte L, Duffé P, Buret M, Servin B, Hospital F, Causse M. 2004. Marker-assisted introgression of five QTLs controlling fruit quality traits into three tomato lines revealed interactions between QTLs and genetic backgrounds. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 109, 658-668.
23. Liebhard R, Kellerhals M, Pfammatter W, Jertmini M, Gessler C. 2003. Mapping quantitative physiological traits in apple (Malusxdomestica Borkh.). Plant Molecular Biology 52, 511-526.
24. Redgwell RJ, Fischer M. 2002. Fruit texture, cell wall metabolism and consumer perceptions. In: Knee M, ed. Fruit quality and its biological basis. Oxford: Blackwell, 46-88.
25. Saliba-Colombani V, Causse M, Langlois D, Philouze J, Buret M. 2001. Genetic analysis of organoleptic quality in fresh market tomato. 1. Mapping QTLs for physical and chemical traits. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 102, 259-272.
26. Serrano-Megias M, Lopez-Nicolas JM. 2006. Application of agglomerative hierarchical clustering to identify consumer tomato preferences: influence of physicochemical and sensory characteristics on consumer response. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 86, 493-499.
27. Seymour GB, Manning K, Eriksson EM, Popovich AH, King GJ. 2002. Genetic identification and genomic organization of factors affecting fruit texture. Journal of Experimental Botany 53, 2065-2071.
28. Soille P. 2003. Morphological image analysis. Principles and applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
29. Splus. 1993. Splus guide to statistical and mathematical analyses. Seattle, Washington.
30. Szczesniak AS. 2002. Texture is a sensory property. Food Quality and Preference 13, 215-225.
31. Waldron KW, Parker ML, Smith AC. 2003. Plant cell walls and food quality. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety 2, 101-119.