Search

Background: In China, nitrogen (N)-deficiency often occurs in Citrus orchards, which is one of the main causes of yield loss and fruit quality decline. Little information is known about the adaptive responses of Citrus carbon (C) and N metabolisms to N-deficiency. Seedlings of 'Xuegan' (Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck) were supplied with nutrient solution at an N concentration of 0 (N-deficiency), 5, 10, 15 or 20 mM for 10 weeks. Thereafter, we examined the effects of N supply on the levels of C and N in roots, stems and leaves, and the levels of organic acids, nonstructural carbohydrates, NH4+-N, NO3−-N, total soluble proteins, free amino acids (FAAs) and derivatives (FAADs), and the activities of key enzymes related to N assimilation and organic acid metabolism in roots and leaves. Results: N-deficiency elevated sucrose export from leaves to roots, C and N distributions in roots and C/N ratio in roots, stems and leaves, thus enhancing root dry weight/shoot dry weight ratio and N use efficiency. N-deficient leaves displayed decreased accumulation of starch and total nonstructural carbohydrates (TNC) and increased sucrose/starch ratio as well as a partitioning trend of assimilated C toward to sucrose, but N-deficient roots displayed elevated accumulation of starch and TNC and reduced sucrose/starch ratio as well as a partitioning trend of assimilated C toward to starch. N-deficiency reduced the concentrations of most FAADs and the ratios of total FAADs (TFAADs)/N in leaves and roots. N-deficiency reduced the demand for C skeleton precursors for amino acid biosynthesis, thus lowering TFAADs/C ratio in leaves and roots. N-deficiency increased (decreased) the relative amounts of C-rich (N-rich) FAADs, thus increasing the molar ratio of C/N in TFAADs in leaves and roots. Conclusions: Our findings corroborated our hypothesis that C and N metabolisms displayed adaptive responses to N-deficiency in C. sinensis seedlings, and that some differences existed between roots and leaves in N-deficiency-induced alterations of and C and N metabolisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) account for less than 1% of all gastrointestinal tumors. The biological behaviors of GISTs vary from benign to malignant. GISTs are common in the stomach (55.6%) and small intestine (31.8%), but rarely in the rectum, colon (6%), and other sites (5.5%). Currently, the majority of published reports of primary appendiceal stromal tumors (PASTs) are case reports or case series. Methods: The PASTs described in this study were identified from a literature review (23 cases) and our center (one case). The relationship between PAST gross types and clinicopathological factors was analyzed and summarized. At the same time, the study also analyzed the related risk factors and survival of PASTs and GISTs. Results: Twenty-four cases of PASTs were compared with 254 cases of GISTs from our center. The results showed that there was a significant difference between the two groups in tumor size (P < 0.001), histological type (P = 0.013), CD34 expression (P < 0.001), and DOG-1 expression (P < 0.001). Disease-free survival (DFS) analysis of 11 cases of PASTs and 227 cases of GISTs found that a comparison of 3-year and 5-year DFS was not statistically significant (P = 0.894 and P = 0.846, respectively). In the DFS multivariate analysis, tumor mucosal ulceration, tumor size, and NIH risk classification were independent prognostic factors in 3-year and 5-year DFS. Conclusion: In this study, there was no significance in the survival of patients with appendix and gastric stromal tumors, which we hypothesized to be associated with the low sample size and incomplete follow-up records. Based on this, we conclude that the prognosis of primary appendiceal stromal tumors may be better than gastric tumors, but this needs to be confirmed in further prospective studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]