The color of apple skin, particularly anthocyanin-based coloration, is a key factor determining market acceptance. The mechanisms of anthocyanin accumulation in apples with different skin color patterns (i.e., striped and blushed) were analyzed. In total, 14 anthocyanins and 5 procyanidins were simultaneously assayed in red blushed-skin mutants (CF-B1 and CF-B2) and red striped-skin parents (CF-S1 and CF-S2), and 13 significant differences were revealed. Anthocyanin accumulation was significantly higher in the red blushed-skin apples than it was in the parents. The transcript levels of anthocyanin biosynthesis genes and regulatory factors (MdMYB10, MdbHLH3, and MdWD40) were associated with different skin color patterns during the coloring period at 4, 6, and 8 days after the fruits were debagged. The methylation levels of the MdMYB10 promoter regions −1203 to −779 bp, −1667 to −1180 bp, and −2295 to −1929 bp were associated with different skin color patterns, and there was more methylation in red striped-skin apples. These results improve our understanding of anthocyanin accumulation and its underlying molecular mechanism in apples with different skin color patterns, thereby providing valuable information for apple breeding.

This study aimed to assess the influence of increment of gantry (IG) value on plan quality among cervical cancer patients treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Twenty postoperative cervical cancer patients receiving radiotherapy were selected. Four different VMAT plans were designed in Monaco TPS using the same optimization conditions but with varying IG parameters (10°, 20°, 30°, and 40°). The IG10 group did not meet the clinical requirements. The target dose of the IG20 group was slightly worse than that of IG30 and IG40 groups; the differences in dose distribution in organs at risk among the IG20, IG30, and IG40 groups were negligible. The average monitoring units of the IG20, IG30, and IG40 groups were 704.6, 594.6, and 572.6, and the average control points of the three groups were 134.4, 139.4, and 140.3, respectively. The plan delivery times of the three groups were 117.6 s, 111.0 s, and 118.1 s, respectively. At a 3% dose difference and a 3 mm distance to agreement, the gamma pass rates of the IG20, IG30, and IG40 plans were 99.1%, 99.6%, and 99.4%, respectively. Considering the plan quality, the dose accuracy, and delivery efficiency, IG30 is recommended for cervical cancer VMAT planning.

Purpose: To assist in the selection of a suitable combination of an irradiation technique and jaw condition in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) for lung cancer treatment plans. Materials and methods: Thirty patients with lung cancer who underwent radiotherapy were enrolled retrospectively. They were categorized as having central lung cancer, peripheral lung cancer with mediastinal lymph node metastasis (peripheral E lung cancer), and peripheral lung cancer without mediastinal lymph node metastasis (peripheral N lung cancer). Four treatment plans were designed for each patient: fixed jaw and adaptive jaw IMRT technique (FJ-IMRT and JA-IMRT), and fixed jaw and jaw tracking VMAT technique (FJ-VMAT and JT-VMAT). The dose parameters of the four group plans were compared and analyzed. Results: Compared to FJ-IMRT, JA-IMRT significantly reduced the mean dose (D mean ) and volume percentage of 5 Gy (V 5Gy ) of the total lung in central and peripheral N lung cancer. Similarly, compared to FJ-VMAT, JT-VMAT provided better protection to most organs at risk (OARs), particularly for total lung and heart. In comparison with IMRT, VMAT significantly improved the conformity index (CI) of the planning target volume for the three lung cancer classifications, and it reduced the dose of almost all OARs except V 5Gy and D mean of the total lung. Moreover, the mean monitor units of the VMAT groups were far lower than the IMRT groups. Conclusion: Based on the dosimetric findings and considering clinical data published on lung and heart side effects, we propose recommendations on the preferred treatment technique based on tumor location and pulmonary function. For central lung cancer with normal pulmonary function, we advise JT-VMAT techniques. Conversely, for central lung cancer with poor pulmonary function, we recommend JA-IMRT techniques. We advocate JA-IMRT for peripheral E lung cancer. For peripheral N lung cancer, JT-VMAT techniques are strongly recommended.

No abstract

No abstract