Skip to main content
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses

New Research In

Physical Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Applied Mathematics
  • Applied Physical Sciences
  • Astronomy
  • Computer Sciences
  • Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences
  • Engineering
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Mathematics
  • Statistics

Social Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Economic Sciences
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Political Sciences
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Social Sciences

Biological Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Anthropology
  • Applied Biological Sciences
  • Biochemistry
  • Biophysics and Computational Biology
  • Cell Biology
  • Developmental Biology
  • Ecology
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Evolution
  • Genetics
  • Immunology and Inflammation
  • Medical Sciences
  • Microbiology
  • Neuroscience
  • Pharmacology
  • Physiology
  • Plant Biology
  • Population Biology
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Sustainability Science
  • Systems Biology
Research Article

Evaluation of transgenic tomato plants expressing an additional phytoene synthase in a fruit-specific manner

Paul D. Fraser, Susanne Romer, Cathie A. Shipton, Philippa B. Mills, Joy W. Kiano, Norihiko Misawa, Rachel G. Drake, Wolfgang Schuch, and Peter M. Bramley
PNAS January 22, 2002 99 (2) 1092-1097; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.241374598
Paul D. Fraser
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Susanne Romer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cathie A. Shipton
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Philippa B. Mills
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joy W. Kiano
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Norihiko Misawa
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rachel G. Drake
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Wolfgang Schuch
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Peter M. Bramley
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  1. Edited by Rodney B. Croteau, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, and approved October 3, 2001 (received for review July 19, 2001)

  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Phytoene synthase from the bacterium Erwinia uredovora (crtB) has been overexpressed in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. cv. Ailsa Craig). Fruit-specific expression was achieved by using the tomato polygalacturonase promoter, and the CRTB protein was targeted to the chromoplast by the tomato phytoene synthase-1 transit sequence. Total fruit carotenoids of primary transformants (T0) were 2–4-fold higher than the controls, whereas phytoene, lycopene, β-carotene, and lutein levels were increased 2.4-, 1.8-, and 2.2-fold, respectively. The biosynthetically related isoprenoids, tocopherols plastoquinone and ubiquinone, were unaffected by changes in carotenoid levels. The progeny (T1 and T2 generations) inherited both the transgene and phenotype. Determination of enzyme activity and Western blot analysis revealed that the CRTB protein was plastid-located and catalytically active, with 5–10-fold elevations in total phytoene synthase activity. Metabolic control analysis suggests that the presence of an additional phytoene synthase reduces the regulatory effect of this step over the carotenoid pathway. The activities of other enzymes in the pathway (isopentenyl diphosphate isomerase, geranylgeranyl diphosphate synthase, and incorporation of isopentenyl diphosphate into phytoene) were not significantly altered by the presence of the bacterial phytoene synthase.

  • carotenoids‖metabolic engineering

Fruits and vegetables contain an array of phytochemicals that contribute to good health and are often termed “functional foods” (1). Epidemiological and human supplementation studies suggest that carotenoids such as lycopene and β-carotene (pro-vitamin A) reduce the onset of chronic diseases such as coronary heart disease (2), certain cancers (e.g., prostate) (3), and age-related macular degeneration (4). Tomato fruit and its processed products are the principal dietary sources of lycopene and are also useful for their β-carotene contents. Therefore, the elevation of carotenoid biosynthesis in plants, especially the tomato, by genetic manipulation should increase the lycopene and β-carotene levels and hence improve the nutritional quality of the crop.

Carotenoids in plants are isoprenoids formed via the mevalonate-independent pathway (5), which is responsible for isopentenyl diphosphate (IPP) synthesis in the plastid. Geranylgeranyl diphosphate (GGPP), derived from the ubiquitous isoprenoid pathway, is the precursor of carotenoids as well as tocopherols and phylloquinone (Fig. 1). The conversion of GGPP to phytoene is the first committed step in carotenoid biosynthesis, catalyzed by the enzyme phytoene synthase (Fig. 1). The next two enzymes (phytoene and ζ-carotene desaturases) desaturate phytoene and ζ-carotene, respectively. The product of ζ-carotene desaturase is lycopene, which is responsible for the characteristic red color of ripe tomato fruit. It can undergo cyclization to either β- or α-carotenes followed by hydroxylation to yield xanthophylls such as lutein.

Figure 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1

Summary of carotenoid biosynthesis. The enzymes are numbered 1, IPP isomerase; 2, GGPP; 3, crtB; 4, phytoene desaturase; 5, ζ-carotene desaturase; 6, lycopene β-cyclase; 7, lycopene ɛ-cyclase; 8, β-carotene hydroxylase; and 9, ɛ-hydroxylase. DMAPP, dimethylallyl diphosphate; GPP, geranyl diphosphate; FPP, farnesyl diphosphate; CRTB, crtB from E. uredovora.

Lycopene accumulation arises during tomato fruit ripening as a consequence of reduced lycopene cyclization (6, 7) and the presence of a ripening enhanced phytoene synthase 1 (PSY-1) (6, 8). We have shown that the constitutive expression of Psy-1 in transgenic tomato resulted in a number of pleiotrophic effects (9), including dwarfism caused by the diversion of GGPP from gibberellin formation (10). Most recently, the elevation of β-carotene content in tomato fruit has been achieved by the constitutive expression of phytoene desaturase from the bacterium Erwinia uredovora (crtI) (11) and lycopene cyclase (crtL-β) from Arabidopsis thaliana (12). Several examples of other genetic manipulations of carotenogenesis in plants have been reported. For example, in rice endosperm, low levels of β-carotene have been produced by concurrent expression of the Narcissus pseudonarcissus phytoene synthase, Escherichia uredovora crtI and N. pseudonarcissus lycopene β-cyclase (13). The most dramatic (50-fold increase) of carotenoid synthesis has been achieved in Brassica napus by the seed-specific expression of the E. uredovora phytoene synthase (crtB) (14).

The present article describes the elevation of lycopene in tomato fruit by the genetic manipulation of carotenoid biosynthesis using the fruit-specific expression of a bacterial phytoene synthase (crtB from E. uredovora). Characterization of the transgenic plants has evaluated the consequences of such an approach on the elevation of carotenoids.

Materials and Methods

Plants and Bacteria.

Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. cv. Ailsa Craig was the wild-type tomato line used. Plants were grown in the glasshouse under supplementary lighting. Agrobacterium tumefaciens strain LBA 4404 was used for transformation.

Transformation of Tomato Plants and A. tumefaciens.

A. tumefaciens-mediated transformation of tomato stem explants was carried out as described (15), using kanamycin resistance as a selection marker.

Construction of Transformation Vector.

The crtB gene (16) and Psy-1 modified transit sequence (ts) (17) were amplified by PCR. PCR products (crtB and ts-Psy-1) were Klenow-treated and gel-purified. The chimeric gene was then produced by PCR, using ts-Psy-1 and crtB as templates. The primers used were ts-Psy-1, 5′-TCG GAT CCA ATG AGC GTG GCA CTT-3′ and crtB, 3′-AGACA GGATCCTAGAGAGCGG GCG CCA GAG ATG-5′. The resulting product was cloned directly into the TA cloning vector pCRII (Invitrogen). The ts-Psy-1-crtB chimeric gene was removed from pCRII by BamHI digestion and cloned into the dephosphorylated BamHI site of the binary vector pRN2 [a pBIN derivative containing the polygalacturonase (PG) promoter] as shown in Fig. 2.

Figure 2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2

Structure of the pRN2 construct containing E. uredovora crtB. PG-5′, PG promoter; chromoplast transit sequence (CTS) modified from the L. esculentum Psy-1; crtBE.U, crtB from E. uredovora; and PG-3′, PG terminator.

Molecular Analysis.

PCR analysis was carried out by using DNA extracted from leaf material (200 mg) as described (11). DNA for Southern blotting was extracted in accordance with the nuclei lysis hexadecyl trimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) extraction method (18). Genomic DNA (20–30 μg) was digested with EcoRI or HindIII, fragments were separated on 0.8% (wt/vol) agarose gels, then blotted onto membranes and hybridized at 65°C overnight. Blots were probed with a PCR-derived nptII fragment. Northern blot analysis was performed according to ref. 19. Blots were hybridized with dCTP-labeled gene fragments, crtB BamHI fragments from pRN2, the 1.6-kb pTOM5 cDNA (20), the 1.3-kb EcoRI fragment of phytoene desaturase (Pds) cDNA (21), and GGPP synthase as detailed (22). Analysis of gene expression by reverse transcription–PCR was carried out as described (23). The oligonucleotides for amplification of crtB and the exogenous control (rat transthyretin) were 5′-GATGCTCTACGCCTGGTG-3′ (upstream) and 5′-CGATTGCCCAGGCGGAAC-3′ (downstream), and 5′-AGTCCTGGATGCTGTCCGAG-3′ (upstream) and 5′-CATGGAATGGGGAAATGCCAAG-3′ (downstream), respectively.

Preparation of Subcellular Fractions from Tomato Fruit.

Crude plastid fractions were prepared in 50 mM Tris⋅HCl (pH 8.0) containing 0.4 M sucrose, 1 mM EDTA, and 1 mM DTT as described (6). Typically, pericarp tissue from 3 to 4 ripening tomatoes was used.

Preparation of Protein Extracts for SDS/PAGE.

Proteins were extracted from lyophilized tissue (10 mg) with 10% trichloroacetic acid (TCA) in 80% (vol/vol) acetone containing 1 mM DTT (5 vol). After a 30-min incubation at −20°C the precipitate was pelleted by centrifugation at 12,000 × g for 5min at 4°C. The pellet was resuspended in 80% (vol/vol) acetone containing 1 mM DTT at −20°C for a further 30 min. The pelleted material was resuspended in SDS/PAGE sample buffer (24) containing DTT. Samples for SDS/PAGE were prepared from subcellular samples by first precipitating proteins using the method described in ref. 25.

Immunodetection by Western Blot Analysis.

Proteins were separated by SDS/PAGE (24) on a 12.5% gel electrophoresed for 1.5 h at a constant current of 30 mA. Proteins were transferred onto poly(vinylidene difluoride) (PVDF) membranes, and immunodetection of CRTB was carried out as described (6). Molecular weights were determined by comparison with colored standards (14–200 kDa; Amersham Pharmacia).

Extraction, Analysis, and Determination Isoprenoids.

The method used to analyze and quantify carotenoids and isoprenoids is detailed in ref. 26. Typically, 2–3 fruit per plant were cut in half, seeds were removed, and tissue was frozen completely at −80°C for at least 3 h. The lyophilized tissue (100 mg) was biscuit dry and became a fine powder when ground in a mortar and pestle. HPLC separations were performed on a C30 reverse-phase column (250 × 4.6 mm) purchased from YMC, Wilmington, NC. The mobile phases used were methanol (A), water/methanol (20/80 by vol) containing 0.2% ammonium acetate (B), and tert-methyl butyl ether (C). The gradient used was 95% A/5% B isocratically for 12 min, a step to 80% A/5% B/15% C at 12 min, followed by a linear gradient to 30% A/5% B/65% C by 30 min.

Enzyme Assays.

Enzyme activities were determined as described (26). In brief, incubations were buffered with 0.4 M Tris⋅HCl (pH 8.0) containing 1 mM DTT, 4 mM MgCl2, 6 mM MnCl2, 3 mM ATP, 0.1% (wt/vol) Tween 60, 1 mM potassium fluoride, and the substrate in a total volume of 150 μl. The substrates used were 0.5μCi [1-14C]IPP [56 mCi/mmol, purchased from Amersham plc (Little Chalfont, Buckinghamshire, U.K.) for the determination of IPP isomerase activity], [1-14C]IPP (0.5μC), and 2 mM dimethylallyl diphosphate for GGPP synthase and [3H]GGPP (15 mCi/mmol, American Radiolabeled Chemicals, St. Louis) for phytoene synthase. Extracts (200 μl) were mixed with the cofactor-containing buffer. IPP isomerase assays were carried out for 1 h at 28°C. After incubation, methanol (200 μl) was added, and acid hydrolysis was performed by treatment with conc. HCl (25% final vol) for 1 h at 37°C. The prenyl alcohol derivatives were then extracted with diethyl ether (500 μl × 2). An aliquot of the hyperphase was removed, and the radioactivity present was determined by liquid scintillation counting. To determine incorporation of [14C]IPP into prenyl phosphates and phytoene modifications were necessary. First, incubations were performed for at least 5 h. Nonpolar radiolabeled reaction products (including phytoene) were extracted from incubation mixtures by partitioning with chloroform (500 μl × 2). The remaining aqueous phase was then subjected to acid hydrolysis, and prenyl alcohol derivatives were extracted as described previously. The radiolabeled prenyl derivatives and phytoene formed during the incubations were separated by using the procedures described in ref. 27, with the exception that prenyl alcohols were routinely separated on reverse-phase silica TLC plates developed in methanol/dH2O (95:5). The Rf values for dimethylallyl alcohol (DMA-OH), geranyl alcohol (G-OH), farnesol (F-OH), and geranylgeranyl alcohol (GG-OH) were 0.15, 0.3, 0.42, and 0.64, respectively. GGPP synthase assays and analysis of radiolabeled products formed were carried out as described for IPP isomerase. Phytoene synthase assays were performed in a similar manner to IPP isomerase, and GGPP synthase was performed as detailed in ref. 27. Phytoene was identified by co-chromatography with authentic standards (28). Phytoene desaturase and lycopene cyclase was assayed as described (6).

Other Determinations.

Protein levels were estimated as described (29), after precipitation (25). Determination of radioactivity by liquid scintillation counting was carried out according to ref. 30. Reverse transcription–PCR products were quantified as band intensities by using the Ultraviolet Products gel documentation system grab-it (Cambridge, U.K.).

Metabolic Control Analysis.

Flux control coefficients (CJi/Ei) were calculated as described (31, 32), the latter being especially applicable to transgenic plants. The deviation index (D) for the change in metabolic flux in response to a change in phytoene synthase activity was calculated as D = (δJ/δX) × Xr/Jr, where δJ = Jr − Jo and δX = Xr − Xo in which Xo and Xr are total carotenoid concentrations in wild-type and transgenic lines, respectively, and Jo and Jr are the corresponding metabolic fluxes (33).

Results

Genetic Analysis of crtB Transformants.

After selection on the basis of kanamycin resistance, 27 transgenic plants were regenerated. Southern blot analysis, using the nptII gene, indicated that 51% of the plants contained a single insert, whereas 26% and 22% possessed two or more inserts, respectively. Based on visual observations, the growth and development of the crtB transgenic plants was virtually identical to the wild type, although in some cases increased pigmentation within the internal fruit tissue was observed. Some 33% of the plants yielded fruit that contained up to 50% more carotenoid, 38% showed no change (±8% of the control), whereas in 29% of the population the carotenoid content was lower (<10–30% of the control). Three single-insert crtB homozygous plants showing a range of increased pigmentation (designated B-1, B-3, and B-4) were generated based on kanamycin germination and Southern blot analysis.

crtB Gene Expression and Immunodetection of CRTB Protein.

Neither the crtB transcript nor the CRTB protein was detectable in flower, leaf, or stem tissue (data not shown). During fruit development and ripening, crtB transcripts were first observed at the mature green stage, increasing 2.5-fold at the breaker stage, and then decreasing by 40% in ripe [5–8 days post breaker (dpb)] fruit. crtB transcripts could not be detected in overripe (18–20 dpb) fruit. CRTB protein was not detectable in immature and mature green fruit. At the onset of ripening, the CRTB protein was detected at very low levels, and as ripening proceeded, CRTB protein levels increased 9- and 12-fold in ripe and overripe fruit, respectively (Fig. 3).

Figure 3
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3

Production of CRTB protein during fruit development and ripening. IM, immature green; MG, mature green; B, breaker; R, ripe; OR, overripe. The crtB line used was B3–15 (T1, second generation). Ten micrograms of protein per sample was applied. The molecular weight of CRTB was 35 kDa.

Analysis of the Carotenoids and Isoprenoids.

The profile of isoprenoids present in ripe fruit from the T0 crtB transgenic lines was identical to the wild type (26). No novel isoprenoids were found.

Studies were performed to determine the inter- and intraplant variation in fruit carotenoids. From three genetically identical plants, six ripe (7 dpb) fruit per plant were sampled. The variation in the total carotenoid content between fruit was 9 ± 3% (n = 18) and individual carotenoids 10 ± 4.5% (n = 18). The carotenoid composition of crtB transgenic and wild-type leaf tissue and fruit were determined at the mature, breaker, ripe, and overripe fruit stages. No significant differences were found in mature green and breaker fruit or leaf tissue. Ripe crtB fruit, however, showed increases in phytoene, lycopene, β-carotene, and total carotenoids (Table 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Carotenoid content of ripe tomato fruit from selected lines transformed with the E. uredovora phytoene synthase crtB gene

The phytoene content of the crtB transgenic lines showed the greatest increase (1.6–3.1-fold) above wild type (Table 1). Besides phytoene, lycopene and β-carotene were also increased 1.8–2.1-fold and 1.6–2.7-fold, respectively, compared with the wild type (Table 1). The lutein content was unchanged with the exception of 3 lines (B-3, B-4, and B-5), which also possessed the greatest increases in total carotenoids. Typically, lutein levels in these lines were increased 1.6-fold. Less abundant tomato carotenoids such as phytofluene and ζ-carotene content were elevated 2.5- and 1.6-fold, respectively, in most of the crtB transgenics. Typically, the qualitative composition of carotenoids in the transgenic fruit was very similar to that found in wild-type ripe fruit. For example, the proportion of lycopene in crtB lines and wild type was 86 ± 4% (n = 6) and 91 ± 3% (n = 3), respectively; phytoene, 3.2 ± 0.3% (n = 3) and 2.0 ± 0.1% (n = 3); β-carotene, 13.2 ± 1% (n = 5) and 11 ± 2% (n = 3); and lutein, 0.5 ± 0.3% (n = 5) and 0.5 ± 0.2% (n = 3).

Homozygous lines were generated from three crtB T0 lines, two showing increased total (B-3 and B-4) carotenoid content and the other (B-1) an unchanged level of total carotenoids but increased phytoene and β-carotene content (Table 1). Azygous plants in the T1 (second generation) and T2 (third generation) generations showed similar carotenoid contents to the wild type. Homozygotes from B-1, B-3, and B-4 inherited the phenotype observed in the T0 generation in further generations (B-1 and B-4 second generation and B3 line third generation). The B-1 and B-4 second generations were sampled at 7 dpb. Interestingly, they indicate greater increases in β-carotene at this stage of ripening. Lycopene levels increased more dramatically as ripening proceeded (e.g., 10 dpb onwards), correlating with CRTB protein levels.

The same geometric isomers of carotenoids were found in the azygous and transgenic fruit. In the case of lycopene, 13-cis, 9-cis, 5-cis (6% in total), and all-trans isomers were detected. Tocopherol and quinone levels were unaffected by changes in the carotenoid content.

Phytoene Synthase Enzyme Activity and Gene Expression.

(i) Subcellular location of phytoene synthase.

Western blot analysis of crude tissue and purified plastid extracts determined the molecular weight (MW) of the immunoreactive CRTB protein to be 35.9 ± 2.8 kDa (n = 4), compared with the predicted MW of CRTB without the Psy-1 transit sequence of 35.6 kDa (Fig. 3B). Phytoene synthase activity was mainly (77 ± 4% of the total activity) present in the plastid fractions (Table 2). Plastid fractions from the crtB lines contained about 4-fold more activity compared with the azygous control; activity in the nonplastid fractions was also increased in the crtB and azygous lines (Table 2). However, as a proportion of the total activity present in both nonplastid and plastid, both the crtB and azygous total activity is similar 22 and 24%, respectively, indicating that intact plastid recovery is similar in both preparations enabling reliable comparisons to be made. A comparison of the phytoene synthase activities and CRTB in the subplastidic fractions suggested that a greater proportion of the CRTB protein was membrane-associated in the crtB plastids. The membrane activity could be solubilized with strong ionic buffer or mild detergent.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2

Phytoene synthase activity in subcellular fractions prepared from ripening tomato fruit

(ii) Activity and gene expression in transgenic lines.

All 3 homozygous lines (B-1, B-3, and B-4) showed increases in phytoene synthase activity, ranging from 6- to14-fold (Table 3). The expression levels of Psy-1 in the crtB transgenics compared with the azygous control were unaltered (control 1.0 ± 0.2 and crtB 1.0 ± 0.1, relative amounts), and PSY-1 levels were unaffected by the presence of CRTB (data not shown).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3

Comparison of crtB RNA and protein levels, phytoene synthase activity, end products, flux control coefficients, and deviation indices among crtB lines

Activities of Other Isoprenoid Enzymes.

IPP isomerase and GGPP synthase enzyme activities were unchanged (Table 4). When the incorporation of 14C-IPP and 14C-IPP and dimethylallyl diphosphate into prenyl phosphates and phytoene were determined, only small increases in phytoene were found (Table 4). The relative amounts of the intermediates GPP, farnesyl diphosphate (FPP), and GGPP in ripe fruit were very similar in the crtB and control lines (data not shown).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4

Comparison between crtB and control lines, enzyme activities involved in the formation of phytoene, and the incorporation of [14C]IPP and [14C]IPP + DMAPP into phytoene

Flux Coefficients.

The values for GGPP synthase, phytoene synthase, phytoene desaturase, and lycopene cyclase in control fruit were 0.1 ± 0.02, 0.36 ± 0.03, 0.1 ± 0.03, and 0.07 ± 0.01 (n = 3), respectively. The coefficient for phytoene synthase was reduced in transgenic fruit (Table 3).

Discussion

The stable inheritance of the Erwinia crtB gene in tomato and its spatial and temporal expression in ripening fruit (Fig. 3) has led to an increase in fruit carotenoids of some 1.6-fold (Table 1). No qualitative differences, nor change to the isomers of the unsaturated carotenes such as lycopene (13-cis, 9-cis, and all-trans) were detected. The small amount of variation between individual fruit (<10%) suggests that increases above 1.2-fold are genuine elevations and not a consequence of biological variation. Nutritionally, the crtB transgenic lines not only possess higher levels of the antioxidant lycopene but also the content of β-carotene has been elevated, so that a typical crtB fruit can provide virtually all of the recommended daily allowance (RDA) of provitamin A. In comparison with high carotenoid-containing tomatoes from conventional breeding programs, the crtB lines are comparable to the high pigment (hp-1) mutant, which has increased lycopene (1.8-fold) and β-carotene (2.0) (33).

Previous attempts to increase phytoene synthesis in transgenic tomatoes to increase carotenoid levels yielded unintended pleiotrophic effects. For example, reduced levels of carotenoids have been caused by cosuppression and gene silencing (9), as well as dwarfism as a result of metabolic perturbations, specifically in the GGPP content of green fruit (10). In the present study, the use of a bacterial phytoene synthase with <35% homology to the endogenous tomato phytoene synthases circumvented cosuppression and gene silencing. The use of the PG promoter enabled expression of the crtB gene in a ripening-specific manner. Temporal expression has avoided dwarfism and unscheduled pigmentation (10), presumably because the larger pool of GGPP in ripening fruit (8-fold more than in green tissue) could be utilized for phytoene formation without limiting the amounts needed for associated isoprenoid pathways such as gibberellin formation.

Both CRTB protein levels and carotenoids increase throughout ripening (Fig. 3, Table 1), indicating that CRTB remains active and that the turnover of carotenoids is probably low in ripe fruit. The timing of crtB expression under PG control is similar to Psy-1 expression found in earlier studies (6, 7). Thus, the expression of crtB is synchronized with the endogenous fruit-specific Psy-1. Biochemical characterization of the crtB transgenic lines has shown that the Psy-1 target sequence is an effective tool for chromoplast localization of CRTB, which is located in an active form within the plastid (Table 2). Interestingly, some activity was found in the cytoplasm in both control and transgenic lines, although this may be caused by the rupture of plastids during isolation.

Increased transcript levels and enzyme activity of phytoene synthase-1 during fruit ripening have led to its assignment as the key step in the synthesis of tomato fruit carotenoids (6, 7). An approach to analyzing the influence of an enzyme on a pathway involves the determination of flux control coefficients. These determinations define the ratio between the fractional change in flux and the fractional change in enzyme activity. The sum of all of the flux control coefficients in a metabolic pathway is theoretically 1. The closer an individual flux control coefficient is to 1, the more important that enzyme is in regulating the pathway. Determination of flux control coefficients in the crtB fruit indicates that phytoene synthase has a value that is 3-fold greater than other enzymes in the pathway, supporting previous evidence that phytoene synthase is the most influential step in the pathway. Regulatory sites in starch and sucrose formation, i.e., ADP glucose-pyrophosphorylase and sucrose-phosphate, respectively, have been shown to have flux control coefficients between 0.2–0.45 (31), similar to that determined for phytoene synthase (0.36). In the transgenic fruit, however, the coefficient for phytoene synthase was significantly reduced (Table 3). The change is reflected by the negative deviation indices, which show that the additional phytoene synthase reduces the influence of phytoene synthesis on pathway flux. Therefore, despite phytoene synthase enzyme activity being substantially elevated in crtB fruit (Table 2), there was only a moderate increase in the total carotenoid content and no linear correlation between protein levels and enzyme activity, or enzyme activity and total carotenoid levels (Tables 1 and 2; Fig. 3). Metabolic engineering aimed at quantitative increases of products has focused on manipulating the enzyme with the greatest regulatory influence over pathway flux. The present data suggest that this is not the most appropriate strategy in all cases and that several steps may need to be targeted simultaneously.

The largest increases in carotenoids of transgenic plants have been reported for plant tissues with either low basal levels of carotenoids [e.g., canola seeds, a 50-fold increase (14)] or carotenoid-free tissue [e.g., rice (13)]. In high-yielding carotenoid plants, proportional increases have been less dramatic. For example, in carrot root increases of 2-fold were obtained (34). The increases in crtB tomato fruit (1.6–2.0-fold; about 200 μg/g of fresh weight) are comparable with carrot. It would seem, therefore, that high carotenoid-containing tissues are less amenable to genetic manipulation of the pathway. However, although overexpression in high-yielding carotenoid tissues may not result in dramatic increases in total content, compositional changes have been significant.

Several possibilities for this finding can be postulated. In ripe tomato fruit, carotenoid storage mechanisms could already be saturated, thus limiting further increases. However, mutant tomato lines such as old gold crimson (Ogc) have carotenoid levels greater than those in crtB fruit [e.g., Ogc 6,250 ± 1,569 μg/g of dry weight (DW) compared with 4,333 ± 1,976 μg/g of DW for crtB]. The increase in PSY activity in the transgenic fruit (Table 2) has shifted the regulatory step from PSY to a later enzyme (Table 4), as indicated by the accumulation of phytoene in the fruit (Table 1). Compensation by other enzymes in the pathway can arise, as found previously after expression of a bacterial phytoene desaturase (CRTI) in tomato (11), but this seems not to be the case in the crtB fruit. The activities of earlier enzymes leading to the formation of phytoene have also not changed (Table 4). It is possible that the additional phytoene produced in the transgenic fruit cannot be accessed by phytoene desaturase, especially as the major increase of CRTB is on plastid membranes, rather than in the stroma (Table 2). Such metabolite channeling has been reported for phytoene formation in tomato (23).

In summary, we have shown that the ripening-specific expression of a bacterial phytoene synthase can overcome previous unintended pleiotrophic effects and elevate nutritionally important carotenoids in ripe tomato fruit. The changes in flux coefficients have revealed a shift in the regulatory step of carotenogenesis, which has important implications on future metabolic engineering strategies.

Acknowledgments

We thank Chris Gerrish (Royal Halloway, Univ. of London) for technical assistance and Karen Bacon (Syngenta) for excellent horticultural support. Syngenta is gratefully acknowledged for the provision of greenhouse space. Financial support was principally from the European Community BIOTECH Program (no. B102 CT-930400, as part of the project of Technological Priority 1993–1996).

Footnotes

    • ↵† Present address: Fakultat fur Biologie, Universitat Konstanz, D-78434 Konstanz, Germany.

    • ↵** To whom reprint requests should be addressed. E-mail: p.bramley{at}rhul.ac.uk.

    • This paper was submitted directly (Track II) to the PNAS office.

    • ‖ Present address: Biochemistry Unit, Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London, United Kingdom.

    Abbreviations

    crtB,
    phytoene synthase;
    dpb,
    days post breaker;
    GGPP,
    geranylgeranyl diphosphate;
    IPP,
    isopentenyl diphosphate;
    PG,
    polygalacturonase;
    Psy-1,
    phytoene synthase 1;
    T0,
    primary transformants;
    ts,
    transit sequence
    • Received July 19, 2001.
    • Copyright © 2002, The National Academy of Sciences

    References

    1. ↵
      1. Grusak M,
      2. DellaPenna D
      (1999) Annu Rev Physiol Plant Mol Biol 50:133–161.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    2. ↵
      1. Barton-Duell P
      (1995) Endocrinologist 5:347–356.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    3. ↵
      1. Giovannucci E
      (1999) J Natl Cancer Inst 91:317–331, pmid:10050865.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    4. ↵
      1. Seddon J M,
      2. Ajani U A,
      3. Speruto R D,
      4. Hiller R,
      5. Blair N,
      6. Burton T C,
      7. Farber M D,
      8. Gragoudas E S,
      9. Haller J,
      10. Miller D T,
      11. et al.
      (1994) J Am J Med Assoc 272:1413–1420.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    5. ↵
      1. Lichtenthaler H K
      (1999) Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 50:47–65, pmid:15012203.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    6. ↵
      1. Fraser P D,
      2. Truesdale M,
      3. Bird C R,
      4. Schuch W,
      5. Bramley P M
      (1994) Plant Physiol 105:405–413, pmid:12232210.
      OpenUrlAbstract
    7. ↵
      1. Ronen G,
      2. Cohen M,
      3. Zamir D,
      4. Hirschberg J
      (1999) Plant J 17:341–351, pmid:10205893.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    8. ↵
      1. Fray R,
      2. Grierson D
      (1993) Plant Mol Biol 22:589–602, pmid:8343597.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    9. ↵
      1. Truesdale M R
      (1994) Ph.D. thesis (Univ. of London).
    10. ↵
      1. Fray R G,
      2. Wallace A,
      3. Fraser P D,
      4. Valero D,
      5. Hedden P,
      6. Bramley P M,
      7. Grierson D
      (1995) Plant J 8:693–701.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    11. ↵
      1. Romer S,
      2. Fraser P D,
      3. Kiano J W,
      4. Shipton C A,
      5. Misawa N,
      6. Schuch W,
      7. Bramley P M
      (2000) Nat Biotechnol 18:666–669, pmid:10835607.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    12. ↵
      1. Rosati C,
      2. Aquilani R,
      3. Dharmapuri S,
      4. Pallara P,
      5. Marusic C,
      6. Tavazza R,
      7. Bouvier F,
      8. Camara B,
      9. Giuliano G
      (2000) Plant J 24:413–419, pmid:11069713.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    13. ↵
      1. Ye X,
      2. Al-Babili S,
      3. Kloti A,
      4. Zhang J,
      5. Lucca P,
      6. Beyer P,
      7. Potrykus I
      (2000) Science 287:303–305, pmid:10634784.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    14. ↵
      1. Shewmaker C K,
      2. Sheehy J A,
      3. Daley M,
      4. Colburn S,
      5. Yang Ke D
      (1999) Plant J 20:401–412, pmid:10607293.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    15. ↵
      1. Bird C R,
      2. Smith C J S,
      3. Ray J A,
      4. Moureau P,
      5. Bevan M W,
      6. Bird A S,
      7. Hughes S,
      8. Morris P C,
      9. Grierson D,
      10. Schuch W
      (1988) Plant Mol Biol 11:651–662.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    16. ↵
      1. Neudert U,
      2. Martinez-Ferez I M,
      3. Fraser P D,
      4. Sandmann G
      (1998) Biochim Biophys Acta 1392:51–58, pmid:9593819.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    17. ↵
      Schuch, W., Drake, R. D. & Bird, C. R. (1996) U.S. Patent W097/46690.
    18. ↵
      1. Sambrook J,
      2. Fritsch E F,
      3. Maniatis T
      (1989) Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual (Cold Spring Harbor Lab. Press, Plainview, New York).
    19. ↵
      1. Kuntz M,
      2. Romer S,
      3. Suire C,
      4. Hugueney P,
      5. Weil J H,
      6. Schantz R,
      7. Camara B
      (1992) Plant J 2:25–34, pmid:1303794.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    20. ↵
      1. Maudinas B,
      2. Holdsworth M,
      3. Slater A,
      4. Knapp J,
      5. Bird C R,
      6. Schuch W,
      7. Grierson D
      (1987) Plant Cell Environ 10:177–184.
      OpenUrl
    21. ↵
      1. Pecker I,
      2. Chamovitz D,
      3. Linden H,
      4. Sandmann G,
      5. Hirschberg J
      (1992) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 9:4962–4966.
      OpenUrl
    22. ↵
      1. Romer S,
      2. Hugueney P,
      3. Bouvier F,
      4. Camara B,
      5. Kuntz M
      (1993) Biochem Biophys Res Commun 196:1414–1421, pmid:8250898.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    23. ↵
      1. Fraser P D,
      2. Kiano J W,
      3. Truesdale M R,
      4. Schuch W,
      5. Bramley P M
      (1999) Plant Mol Biol 40:687–698, pmid:10480392.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    24. ↵
      1. Laemmli U K
      (1970) Nature (London) 227:680–685, pmid:5432063.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    25. ↵
      1. Wessel D,
      2. Flugge U I
      (1984) Anal Biochem 118:197–203.
      OpenUrl
    26. ↵
      1. Fraser P D,
      2. Pinto M E S,
      3. Holloway D E,
      4. Bramley P M
      (2000) Plant J 24:551–558, pmid:11115136.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    27. ↵
      1. Fraser P D,
      2. Schuch W,
      3. Bramley P M
      (2000) Planta 211:361–369, pmid:10987554.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    28. ↵
      1. Fraser P D,
      2. De las Rivas J,
      3. Mackenzie A,
      4. Bramley P M
      (1991) Phytochemistry 30:3971–3976.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    29. ↵
      1. Bradford M M
      (1976) Anal Biochem 247:942–950.
      OpenUrl
    30. ↵
      1. Crook M A,
      2. Johnson P
      1. Bramley P M,
      2. Davies B H,
      3. Rees A F
      (1973) in Liquid Scintillation Counting, eds Crook M A, Johnson P(Heyden, London), 3, pp 76–85.
      OpenUrl
    31. ↵
      1. Stitt M,
      2. Sonnewald U
      (1995) Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 46:341–368.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    32. ↵
      1. Thomas S,
      2. Fell D A
      (1998) Adv Enzyme Regul 38:65–85, pmid:9762347.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    33. ↵
      1. Harris W M,
      2. Spurr A R
      (1969) Am J Bot 56:369–379.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    34. ↵
      Hauptmann, R., Eschenfeldt, W. H., English, J. & Brinkhaus, F. L. (1997) U.S. Patent 5,618,988.
    PreviousNext
    Back to top
    Article Alerts
    Email Article

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Evaluation of transgenic tomato plants expressing an additional phytoene synthase in a fruit-specific manner
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Citation Tools
    Evaluation of transgenic tomato plants expressing an additional phytoene synthase in a fruit-specific manner
    Paul D. Fraser, Susanne Romer, Cathie A. Shipton, Philippa B. Mills, Joy W. Kiano, Norihiko Misawa, Rachel G. Drake, Wolfgang Schuch, Peter M. Bramley
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jan 2002, 99 (2) 1092-1097; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.241374598

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    Request Permissions
    Share
    Evaluation of transgenic tomato plants expressing an additional phytoene synthase in a fruit-specific manner
    Paul D. Fraser, Susanne Romer, Cathie A. Shipton, Philippa B. Mills, Joy W. Kiano, Norihiko Misawa, Rachel G. Drake, Wolfgang Schuch, Peter M. Bramley
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jan 2002, 99 (2) 1092-1097; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.241374598
    Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Mendeley logo Mendeley
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 99 (2)
    Table of Contents

    Submit

    Sign up for Article Alerts

    Jump to section

    • Article
      • Abstract
      • Materials and Methods
      • Results
      • Discussion
      • Acknowledgments
      • Footnotes
      • Abbreviations
      • References
    • Figures & SI
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF

    You May Also be Interested in

    Surgeons hands during surgery
    Inner Workings: Advances in infectious disease treatment promise to expand the pool of donor organs
    Despite myriad challenges, clinicians see room for progress.
    Image credit: Shutterstock/David Tadevosian.
    Setting sun over a sun-baked dirt landscape
    Core Concept: Popular integrated assessment climate policy models have key caveats
    Better explicating the strengths and shortcomings of these models will help refine projections and improve transparency in the years ahead.
    Image credit: Witsawat.S.
    Double helix
    Journal Club: Noncoding DNA shown to underlie function, cause limb malformations
    Using CRISPR, researchers showed that a region some used to label “junk DNA” has a major role in a rare genetic disorder.
    Image credit: Nathan Devery.
    Steamboat Geyser eruption.
    Eruption of Steamboat Geyser
    Mara Reed and Michael Manga explore why Yellowstone's Steamboat Geyser resumed erupting in 2018.
    Listen
    Past PodcastsSubscribe
    Birds nestling on tree branches
    Parent–offspring conflict in songbird fledging
    Some songbird parents might improve their own fitness by manipulating their offspring into leaving the nest early, at the cost of fledgling survival, a study finds.
    Image credit: Gil Eckrich (photographer).

    Similar Articles

    Site Logo
    Powered by HighWire
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • RSS Feeds
    • Email Alerts

    Articles

    • Current Issue
    • Special Feature Articles – Most Recent
    • List of Issues

    PNAS Portals

    • Anthropology
    • Chemistry
    • Classics
    • Front Matter
    • Physics
    • Sustainability Science
    • Teaching Resources

    Information

    • Authors
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewers
    • Librarians
    • Press
    • Site Map
    • PNAS Updates

    Feedback    Privacy/Legal

    Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490