4.7 Article

Multi-omics analysis of Ginkgo biloba preliminarily reveals the co-regulatory mechanism between stilbenes and flavonoids

期刊

INDUSTRIAL CROPS AND PRODUCTS
卷 167, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2021.113434

关键词

Flavonoid; Stilbene; Penetrating analysis; Secondary metabolites

资金

  1. Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation [2019A1515111150]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2019M663196]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study successfully identified 780 metabolites from G. biloba mature leaves by combining transcriptome and metabolome data, providing the most detailed summary of metabolites in G. biloba leaves to date. Additionally, a co-regulation mechanism of flavonoid and stilbene synthesis was preliminarily found, filling in some gaps in the G. biloba metabolome landscape.
As an ancient relict species, Ginkgo biloba has not only unique evolutionary status, but also outstanding medicinal value. Flavonoids, as the main medicinal components of G. biloba leaves, are widely involved with the molecular mechanism of their synthesis and regulation, an aspect which needs to be further studied. Besides this, there is still a lack of global systematic analyses of G. biloba secondary metabolites, which may introduce a bottleneck to subsequent investigations of their properties. In this study, a total of 780 metabolites were successfully identified from G. biloba mature leaves across different growth stages by combining transcriptome and metabolome data, potentially providing the most detailed summary of metabolites in G. biloba leaves to date. In addition, based on joint analysis and experimental verification, the co-regulation mechanism of flavonoid and stilbene synthesis was also preliminarily found, together with the genes and metabolites highly associated with flavonoid synthesis. These resources could fill in the blanks in the G. biloba metabolome landscape and may help to reveal the regulatory rules of these important metabolites.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据