4.8 Article

A comprehensive metabolomics and lipidomics atlas for the legumes common bean, chickpea, lentil and lupin

期刊

PLANT JOURNAL
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tpj.16329

关键词

legumes; chickpea; common bean; lentil; lupin; metabolomics; lipidomics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article assesses the metabolic diversity in five common legume species grown in Europe using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS). Over 3400 metabolites were detected and quantified, including major nutritional and anti-nutritional compounds. The data generated will be valuable for metabolomics-assisted crop breeding and metabolite-based genome-wide association studies in legume species.
Legumes represent an important component of human and livestock diets; they are rich in macro- and micronutrients such as proteins, dietary fibers and polyunsaturated fatty acids. Whilst several health-promoting and anti-nutritional properties have been associated with grain content, in-depth metabolomics characterization of major legume species remains elusive. In this article, we used both gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) to assess the metabolic diversity in the five legume species commonly grown in Europe, including common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris), chickpea (Cicer arietinum), lentil (Lens culinaris), white lupin (Lupinus albus) and pearl lupin (Lupinus mutabilis), at the tissue level. We were able to detect and quantify over 3400 metabolites covering major nutritional and anti-nutritional compounds. Specifically, the metabolomics atlas includes 224 derivatized metabolites, 2283 specialized metabolites and 923 lipids. The data generated here will serve the community as a basis for future integration to metabolomics-assisted crop breeding and facilitate metabolite-based genome-wide association studies to dissect the genetic and biochemical bases of metabolism in legume species.

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

4.8
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