4.7 Article

New Insights into Stress-Induced β-Ocimene Biosynthesis in Tea (Camellia sinensis) Leaves during Oolong Tea Processing

期刊

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 69, 期 39, 页码 11656-11664

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.1c04378

关键词

oolong tea; ocimene; terpene synthase; tea processing; jasmonates; stress response

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [32002093]
  2. Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University (FAFU) Construction Project for Technological Innovation and Service System of Tea Industry Chain [K1520005A02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Terpenoid volatiles play critical roles in the floral odors of tea products. A new ocimene synthase gene, CsOCS, has been isolated from tea plants, which produces (E)-beta-ocimene and (Z)-beta-ocimene in plastids. Treatment with exogenous methyl jasmonate enhances the emission of ocimene from tea leaves, indicating CsOCS as a key enzyme for beta-ocimene synthesis during oolong tea processing.
As the major contributors to the floral odors of tea products, terpenoid volatiles play critical roles in the defense response of plants to multiple stresses. Until now, only a few TPS genes in tea plants (Camellia sinensis) have been functionally validated. In this study, by comparative studies conducted at gene, protein, and metabolite levels during oolong tea processing, we isolated an ocimene synthase gene, CsOCS, which displays a low similarity to previously characterized tea ocimene synthases. Further prokaryotic expression and subcellular localization analysis showed that it is plastid-located and could produce (E)-beta-ocimene and (Z)-beta-ocimene using GPP as the substrate. The optimum temperature and pH of the enzyme were 30 degrees C and 7.5, respectively. Treatment with exogenous methyl jasmonate elevated the transcript level of CsOCS and enhanced the emission of ocimene from tea leaves. Collectively, CsOCS is implicated as a key enzyme for beta-ocimene synthesis during oolong tea processing.

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