NMR-based metabolomics profile comparisons to distinguish between embryogenic and non-embryogenic callus tissue of sugarcane at the biochemical level
- 468 Downloads
Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)-based metabolomics profile comparisons of embryogenic and non-embryogenic calli of sugarcane were performed using principal component analysis (PCA) to determine a possible relationship between certain metabolites and somatic embryogenesis. Mahalanobis distance (DM) analysis showed significant metabolic profile differences between the embryogenic and non-embryogenic callus groups. Significantly different spectral buckets and their corresponding metabolites have been identified using volcano- and loading-plot analyses, where glucose, fructose, sucrose, and alanine were observed at higher concentrations and asparagine, glutamine, lysine, 2-hydroxyisobutyrate, and choline were observed at lower concentrations in embryogenic calli than in non-embryogenic calli. The results of this research indicate possible roles of different sugars, amino acids, and aliphatic compounds during sugarcane somatic embryogenesis.
KeywordsSugarcane Embryogenic callus Non-embryogenic callus NMR-based metabolomics Pathway analysis
We would like to thank Dr. Jack C. Comstock of USDA-ARS Sugarcane Field Station Canal Point, Florida for supplying the sugarcane materials used for initiating callus cultures that were used in this investigation as plant tissue materials for comparison. AB is supported by SC-INBRE (2 P20 GM103499), BS was supported by BlueCross BlueShield of South Carolina, and IM was supported by Biotechnology graduate program of Claflin University, South Carolina.
- Arencibia A (1999) Gene transfer in sugarcane. In: Hohn T, Leisinger KM (eds) Biotechnology of food crops in developing countries. Plant Gene Research, pp 79–104Google Scholar
- Arencibia AD, Carmona E, Cornide MT, Menendez E, Molina P (2000) Transgenic sugarcane (Saccharum species). In: Bajaj YPS (ed) Biotechnology in agriculture and forestry 46. Transgenic crops I. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 188–206Google Scholar
- Choi YH, Tapias EC, Kim HK, Lefeber AWM, Erkelens C, Verhoeven JTJ, Brzin J, Zel J, Verpoorte R (2004) Metabolic discrimination of Catharanthus roseus leaves infected by phytoplasma using 1H-NMR spectroscopy and multivariate data analysis. Plant Physiol 135:2398–2410PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dave A, Batra A (1995) Role of protein metabolism constituents in somatic embryo formation in cumin. Indian J Plant Physiol 38:25–27Google Scholar
- Karp A (1991) On the current understanding of somaclonal variation. In: Miflin HF (ed) Oxford surveys of plant molecular and cell biology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 1–58Google Scholar
- Palama TL, Menard P, Fock I, Choi YH, Bourdon E, Goviden-Soulange J, Bahut M, Payet B, Verpoorte R, Kodja H (2010) Shoot differentiation from protocorm callus cultures of Vanilla planifolia (Orchidaceae): proteomic and metabolic responses at early stage. BMC Plant Biol 10:82PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pareek LK (2005) Trends in plant tissue culture and biotechnology. Published by Agrobios, Jodhpur. ISBN 10: 8177540890 / ISBN 13: 9788177540895Google Scholar
- Parella T (2004) Pulse Program Catalogue. In: NMRGuide4.0. Bruker BioSpin GmbHGoogle Scholar
- Patel S, Jasrai YT, Adiyecha R (2011) Induction of somatic embryogenesis and genetic fidelity of endangered medicinal herb Curculigo orchioides Gaertn. Res Plant Biol 1:48–52Google Scholar
- Philips GC, Gamborg OL (2005) Plant cell, tissue and organ culture. Narosa, New Delhi, pp 91–93Google Scholar
- Williams EG, Maheswaran G (1986) Somatic embryogenesis: factors influencing coordinated behaviour of cells as an embryogenic group. Ann Bot 57:443–462Google Scholar