Abstract
The effects of the temperature on the multi-exponential transverse relaxation signal of fruit tissues were studied by MRI at 1.5 T, with tomato as an example of fleshy fruits. The relative importance of chemical exchange mechanisms was investigated by comparing the results obtained from tomatoes with those obtained from aqueous solutions made up to simulate the vacuolar water pool. A more extended analysis of the effects of chemical exchanges on transverse relaxation time distributions was performed using the two-site Carver and Richards’s expression, by fitting the experimental dispersion curves with the theoretical model. At temperatures between 7 and 32 °C, the transverse relaxation signal in tomato pericarp was multi-exponential, indicating that cell membranes acted, at least partially, as barriers to diffusive exchanges of water molecules between cell compartments. Unexpectedly, the transition from two to three peaks in the T2 distribution occurred between 7 and 15 °C for most of the tomatoes analyzed. Further, the relaxation time of the vacuolar water pool of the tomato pericarp remained mostly stable with temperature, which was contrary to expectations when only chemical exchange mechanisms were taken into account. It was deduced that additional mechanisms compensated for the expected increase in T2 in the tomato pericarp. The hypotheses were discussed, in which the loss of the water magnetization at the membranes was assumed to be produced either by diffusive exchanges between compartments or by chemical exchanges between protons from water molecules and solid membranes.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of data and materials
All summary data are included in the article. Please contact the corresponding author for access to original images and data files.
References
H. Van As, J. van Duynhoven, J. Magn. Reson. 229, 25 (2013)
H. Adriaensen, M. Musse, S. Quellec, A. Vignaud, M. Cambert, F. Mariette, Magn. Reson. Imaging 31, 1677 (2013)
L. Van Der Weerd, M.M.A.E. Claessens, C. Efdé, H. Van As, Plant Cell Environ. 25, 1539 (2002)
M. Musse, K. Bidault, S. Quellec, B. Brunel, G. Collewet, M. Cambert, N. Bertin, Plant J. 180, 111600 (2020)
A. Raffo, R. Gianferri, R. Barbieri, E. Brosio, Food Chem. 89, 149 (2005)
C. Sorin, F. Mariette, M. Musse, L. Leport, F. Cruz, J.-C. Yvin, Appl. Sci. 8, 943 (2018)
B.P. Hills, K.P. Nott, Appl. Magn. Reson. 17, 521 (1999)
B.P. Hills, B. Remigereau, Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 32, 51 (1997)
M. Mortensen, A.K. Thybo, H.C. Bertram, H.J. Andersen, S.B. Engelsen, J. Agric. Food Chem. 53, 5976 (2005)
M.E. Gonzalez, D.M. Barrett, M.J. McCarthy, F.J. Vergeldt, E. Gerkema, A.M. Matser, H. Van As, J. Food Sci. 75, E417 (2010)
R. Leforestier, F. Mariette, M. Musse, J. Magn. Reson. 322, 106872 (2020)
P. Ilík, M. Špundová, M. Šicner, H. Melkovičová, Z. Kučerová, P. Krchňák, T. Fürst, K. Večeřová, K. Panzarová, Z. Benediktyová, New Phytol. 218, 1278 (2018)
P. Ahmad, M.N.V. Prasad, Environmental Adaptations and Stress Tolerance of Plants in the Era of Climate Change (Springer Science & Business Media, New York, 2011)
J. Osvald, N. Petrovic, J. Demsar, Acta Aliment. 30, 53 (2001)
A. Adekunte, B. Tiwari, P. Cullen, A. Scannell, C. O’donnell, Food Chem. 122, 500 (2010)
C. Agius, S. von Tucher, B. Poppenberger, W. Rozhon, MethodsX 5, 537 (2018)
M.A. Stevens, A.A. Kader, M. Albright-Holton, J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 102, 689 (1977)
W.G. Hopkins, Introduction to Plant Physiology (Wiley, New York, 1999)
D. Rolin, P. Baldet, D. Just, C. Chevalier, M. Biran, P. Raymond, Funct. Plant Biol. 27, 61 (2000)
L. Taiz, J. Exp. Biol. 172, 113 (1992)
K. Shiratake, E. Martinoia, Plant Biotechnol. 24, 127 (2007)
D.P. Almeida, D.J. Huber, Physiol. Plant. 105, 506 (1999)
M. Musse, F. De Guio, S. Quellec, M. Cambert, S. Challois, A. Davenel, Magn. Reson. Imaging 28, 1525 (2010)
F. Mariette, J. Guillement, C. Tellier, P. Marchal, Data Handling in Science and Technology (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1996), p. 218
J. Snaar, H. Van As, Biophys. J. 63, 1654 (1992)
D. Legland, M.F. Devaux, B. Bouchet, F. Guillon, M. Lahaye, J. Microsc. 247, 78 (2012)
M. Lemaire-Chamley, F. Mounet, C. Deborde, M. Maucourt, D. Jacob, A. Moing, Metabolites 9, 93 (2019)
M. Musse, K. Bidault, S. Quellec, B. Brunel, G. Collewet, M. Cambert, N. Bertin, Plant J. 105, 62 (2021)
C. Sorin, M. Musse, F. Mariette, A. Bouchereau, L. Leport, Planta 241, 333 (2015)
J.M. Coey, Magnetism and Magnetic Materials (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010)
B.P. Hills, J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans. 86, 481 (1990)
J. Carver, R. Richards, J. Magn. Reson. 6(1972), 89 (1969)
F.P. Duval, M. Cambert, F. Mariette, Appl. Magn. Reson. 28, 29 (2005)
L. van der Weerd, M.M. Claessens, T. Ruttink, F.J. Vergeldt, T.J. Schaafsma, H. Van As, J. Exp. Bot. 52, 2333 (2001)
A. Blicher, K. Wodzinska, M. Fidorra, M. Winterhalter, T. Heimburg, Biophys. J. 96, 4581 (2009)
Y. Niu, Y. Xiang, Front. Plant Sci. 9, 915 (2018)
G. Lester, E. Stein, J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 118, 223 (1993)
M. Janicka-Russak, K. Kabała, A. Wdowikowska, G. Kłobus, J. Plant. Res. 125, 291 (2012)
R. Leforestier, F. Mariette, M. Musse, J. Magn. Reson. 322, 106872 (2021)
J. Hou, Y. Zhang, Y. Sun, N. Xu, Y. Leng, J. Food Sci. 83, 661 (2018)
B. Hills, K. Wright, P.S. Belton, Mol. Phys. 67, 1309 (1989)
Acknowledgements
We are most grateful to the PRISM core facility (Rennes-Angers, France) for its technical support and to the GIS Biogenouest.
Funding
This work was in part funded by the Région Bretagne.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
723_2021_1374_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Supplementary file 1. Transverse relaxation time distribution in the tomato pericarp at different temperatures (blue dash 7 °C, green dash 15 °C, yellow dash 24 °C, red dash 32 °C), calculated from MSE images (TR = 20 s, TE = 6.5 ms, pixel size = 1.22 mm2, and slice thickness = 5 mm). The data shown correspond to the tomatoes numbered 1–4 (left to right and top to bottom) analyzed in Experiment 2. (DOCX 100 KB)
723_2021_1374_MOESM2_ESM.docx
Supplementary file 2. Transverse relaxation dispersion curves for the acid (orange symbols pH 4.4) and neutral (red symbols pH 7.0) solutions and for water (blue symbols) at circle 8, diamond suit 15, cross 24 and square 32 °C. T2s were measured using the MSE sequence (TR = 20 s, TE = 6.5 ms, 256 echoes, pixel size = 1.22 mm2 and slice thickness = 5 mm). Solid lines show least square fits of the Carver–Richards model to the experimental data. (DOCX 23 KB)
Appendix
Appendix
The effects of chemical exchange between two spin species (a, b) in homogeneous sugar systems can be estimated using the theoretical dispersion curves (variation of relaxation rate with interpulse spacing of the Carr–Purcell–Meiboom–Gill (CPMG) pulse sequence) provided by the Carver and Richard’s equations and corrected by Hills [32, 41]:
-
\(\frac{1}{{T_{2} }} = - \frac{1}{{{\text{TE}}}}\ln \lambda _{1} ,\)
-
\(\ln \lambda _{1} = - {\text{TE}}\frac{{\alpha _{ + } }}{2} + \ln \left[ {\sqrt {D_{ + } \cdot \cos h^{2} \xi - D_{ - } \cdot \cos ^{2} \eta } + \sqrt {D_{ + } \cdot \sin h^{2} \xi + D_{ - } \cdot \sin ^{2} \eta } } \right],\)
with:
-
TE: echo time (time between two 180° RF pulses)
-
\(\alpha _{ + } = \frac{1}{{T_{{2a}} }} + \frac{1}{{T_{{2b}} }} + k_{a} + k_{b} ,\)
-
\(\alpha _{ - } = \frac{1}{{T_{{2a}} }} - \frac{1}{{T_{{2b}} }} + k_{a} - k_{b} ,\)
-
\(T_{{2a}}\) and \(T_{{2b}}\): transverse relaxation times of the water protons and the exchangeable protons of the solute, respectively.
-
\(\tau _{a}\) and \(\tau _{b}\): lifetimes of states a and b, respectively.
-
\(k_{a} = \frac{1}{{\tau _{a} }}\) and \(k_{b} = \frac{1}{{\tau _{b} }}\): exchange rates at sites a and b, respectively \(\left( {k_{a} = \frac{{P_{b} }}{{P_{a} }}k_{b} } \right).\)
-
\(P_{a}\) and \(P_{b}\): fractions of the total proton population at sites a and b, respectively.
-
\(\left( {P_{a} = 1 - P_{b} } \right)\) and \(P_{b} = \frac{{{\text{number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{exchangeable}}\;{\text{protons}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{the}}\;{\text{solute}}}}{{{\text{number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{protons}}\;{\text{exchangeable}}\;{\text{in}}\;{\text{the}}\;{\text{solution}}\left( {{\text{solvent}} + {\text{solute}}} \right)}},\)
-
\(2D_{ + } = 1 + \frac{{\psi + 2\Delta \upomega ^{2} }}{{\sqrt {\left( {\psi ^{2} + \zeta ^{2} } \right)} }},\)
-
\(2D_{ - } = - 1 + \frac{{\psi + 2\Delta \upomega ^{2} }}{{\sqrt {\left( {\psi ^{2} + \zeta ^{2} } \right)} }},\)
-
\(\Delta \upomega = \omega _{b} - \omega _{a}\): chemical shift difference given in units of radial frequency rad s−1.
-
\(\psi = \alpha _{ - }^{2} - \Delta \upomega ^{2} + 4k_{a} k_{b} ,\)
-
\(\zeta = 2\Delta \upomega \cdot \alpha _{ - } ,\)
-
\(\xi = \left( {\frac{{{\text{TE}}}}{{2\sqrt 2 }}} \right)\left[ {\psi + \left( {\psi ^{2} + \zeta ^{2} } \right)^{{\frac{1}{2}}} } \right]^{{\frac{1}{2}}} ,\)
-
\(\eta = \left( {\frac{{{\text{TE}}}}{{2\sqrt 2 }}} \right)\left[ { - \psi + \left( {\psi ^{2} + \zeta ^{2} } \right)^{{\frac{1}{2}}} } \right]^{{\frac{1}{2}}} .\)
The chemical shift \(\Delta \upomega\) is given in units of radial frequency (rad s−1): \(\Delta \upomega = 2\pi \times B_{0} \times \updelta \upomega\), where δω is the chemical shift difference between the two sites a and b in ppm.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Leforestier, R., Mariette, F. & Musse, M. MRI Study of Temperature Dependence of Multi-exponential Transverse Relaxation Times in Tomato. Appl Magn Reson 52, 1543–1560 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00723-021-01374-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00723-021-01374-7