Expression profiling in developing peach seed and mesocarp as affected by growth regulators

Jasmonates (JAs) and spermidine (Sd) influence fruit (and seed) development and ripening. In order to unravel their effects in peach fruit, at molecular level, field applications of methyl jasmonate (MJ) and propyl dihydrojasmonate (PDJ), and Sd were performed at an early developmental stage (late S1). At commercial harvest, JA-treated fruit were less ripe than controls. Realtime RT-PCR analyses confirmed a down-regulation of ethylene biosynthetic, perception and signaling genes, and flesh softening-related genes. The expression of cell wall-related genes, of a sugar-transporter and hormone-related transcript levels was also affected by JAs. Seeds from JA-treated fruit showed a shift in the expression of developmental marker genes suggesting that the developmental program was probably slowed down, in agreement with the contention that JAs divert resources from growth to defense. JAs also affected phenolic content and biosynthetic gene expression in the mesocarp. Levels of hydroxycinnamic acids, as well as those of flavan-3-ols, were enhanced, mainly by MJ, in S2. Transcript levels of phenylpropanoid pathway genes were up-regulated by MJ, in agreement with phenolic content. Sd-treated fruits at harvest showed reduced ethylene production and flesh softening. Sd induced a short-term and long-term response patterns in endogenous polyamines. At ripening the up-regulation of the ethylene biosynthetic genes was dramatically counteracted by Sd, leading to a down-regulation of softening-related genes. Hormone-related gene expression was also altered both in the short- and long-term. Gene expression analyses suggest that Sd interfered with fruit development/ripening by interacting with multiple hormonal pathways and that fruit developmental marker gene expression was shifted ahead in accord with a developmental slowing down. 24-Epibrassinolide was applied to Flaminia peaches under field conditions early (S1) or later (S3) during development. Preliminary results showed that, at harvest, treated fruit tended to be larger and less mature though quality parameters did not change relative to controls.

The Structure of Financial Supervision: Consolidation or Fragmentation for Financial Regulators?

This research was designed to answer the question of which direction the restructuring of financial regulators should take – consolidation or fragmentation. This research began by examining the need for financial regulation and its related costs. It then continued to describe what types of regulatory structures exist in the world; surveying the regulatory structures in 15 jurisdictions, comparing them and discussing their strengths and weaknesses. This research analyzed the possible regulatory structures using three methodological tools: Game-Theory, Institutional-Design, and Network-Effects. The incentives for regulatory action were examined in Chapter Four using game theory concepts. This chapter predicted how two regulators with overlapping supervisory mandates will behave in two different states of the world (where they can stand to benefit from regulating and where they stand to lose). The insights derived from the games described in this chapter were then used to analyze the different supervisory models that exist in the world. The problem of information-flow was discussed in Chapter Five using tools from institutional design. The idea is based on the need for the right kind of information to reach the hands of the decision maker in the shortest time possible in order to predict, mitigate or stop a financial crisis from occurring. Network effects and congestion in the context of financial regulation were discussed in Chapter Six which applied the literature referring to network effects in general in an attempt to conclude whether consolidating financial regulatory standards on a global level might also yield other positive network effects. Returning to the main research question, this research concluded that in general the fragmented model should be preferable to the consolidated model in most cases as it allows for greater diversity and information-flow. However, in cases in which close cooperation between two authorities is essential, the consolidated model should be used.