Comparative physiological and metabolomic analyses reveal natural variations of tulip in response to storage temperatures
Three tulip cultivars were screened out with successful bloom after a short-term cold treatment, and the differential responses to postharvest cold treatment were analyzed between two contrasting tulip cultivars.
Tulip is one of the most important ornamental bulbous plants in the world. A precious precooling treatment during bulb postharvest is required for optimal floral stalk elongation and flower development in tulip. In this study, the naturally growing and flowering variations of tulip to storage temperatures were analyzed after long-term cold (LTC) and short-term cold (STC) treatments. Three cultivars were screened out with successful blooming after STC, which included ‘Dow Jones’ (DJ), ‘Van Eijk’ (VE) and ‘World’s Favourite’ (WF) (5 °C for 2 weeks). Comparative analysis revealed that DJ cultivar maintained normal and intact reproductive organs under STC condition, while the ‘Orange Emperor’ (OE) cultivar, which failed blooming after STC treatment, showed gradually destroyed reproductive organs under STC condition. In addition, the DJ cultivar accumulated lower ROS levels and higher antioxidant enzyme activities, as well as significantly higher contents of total primary metabolites than OE to maintain normal shoot growth and floral organ development under STC condition. The relative expression levels of genes involved in vernalization and/or flower time regulation in DJ were significantly higher than those in OE after STC treatment. This study provides new insights into understanding the underlying mechanism of natural variation of tulip cultivars during postharvest storage treatment.
KeywordsCold response Floral stalk elongation Flowering Metabolic profiling Natural variation Storage temperature
Tulip cv. Dow Jones
Flowering Locus K homology domain
Long-term cold treatment
Tulip vc. Orange Emperor
Short-term cold treatment
VERNALIZATION INSENSITIVE 3
SUPPERSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CONSTANS 1-like2
FLOWERING LOCUS T-like
This research was supported by Huazhong Agricultural University Scientific and Technological Self-innovation Foundation (Program nos. 2016QD026 and 2016RC010) and Project 2662018PY069 supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities. We thank Professor Jihong Liu (Huazhong Agricultural University) for kindly sharing qRT-PCR instrument. We appreciate the editor and reviewers for their comments and suggestions.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
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.
- Aung LH, Hertogh De (1968) Gibberellin-like substances in non-cold and cold treated tulip bulbs (Tulipa sp.). In: Wightman F, Setterfield G (eds) Biochemistry and physiology of plant growth substances. The Runge Press, Ottawa, pp 943–956Google Scholar
- De Hertogh AA, Le Nard M (1993) Tulipa. In: De Hertogh A, Le Nard M (eds) The physiology of flower bulbs: a comprehensive treatise of the physiology and utilization of ornamental flowering bulbous and tuberous plants. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 638–639Google Scholar
- Ferreira DA, Martins MCM, Cheavegatti-Gianotto A, Carneiro M, Amadeu RR, Wolf LD, Hoffmann HP, de Abreu LGF, Caldana C (2018) Metabolite profiles of Sugarcane Culm reveal the relationship among metabolism and axillary bud outgrowth in genetically related Sugarcane commercial cultivars. Front Plant Sci 9: 857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Le Moigne MA, Guérin V, Furet PM, Billard V, Lebrec A, Spíchal L, Roman H, Citerne S, Morvan-Bertrand A, Limami A, Vian A, Lothier J (2018) Asparagine and sugars are both required to sustain secondary axis elongation after bud outgrowth in Rosa hybrida. J Plant Physiol 222:17–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ream TS, Woods DP, Amasino RM (2013) The molecular basis of vernalization in different plant groups. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Volume LXXVII, pp 105–115Google Scholar
- Ruzin SE (1999) Plant microtechnique and microscopy. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar