4.6 Article

High resolution mass spectrometry imaging of plant tissues: towards a plant metabolite atlas

期刊

ANALYST
卷 140, 期 22, 页码 7696-7709

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c5an01065a

关键词

-

资金

  1. Hessian Ministry of Science and Arts (HMWK) through LOEWE focus Ambiprobe
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [DFG Sp314/13-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mass spectrometry (MS) imaging provides spatial and molecular information for a wide range of compounds. This tool can be used to investigate metabolic changes in plant physiology and environmental interactions. A major challenge in our study was to prepare tissue sections that were compatible with high spatial resolution analysis and therefore dedicated sample preparation protocols were established and optimized for the physicochemical properties of all major plant organs. We combined high spatial resolution (5 mu m), in order to detect cellular features, and high mass accuracy (<2 ppm root mean square error), for molecular specificity. Mass spectrometry imaging experiments were performed in positive and negative ion mode. Changes in metabolite patterns during plant development were investigated for germination of oilseed rape. The detailed localization of more than 90 compounds allowed assignment to metabolic processes and indicated possible functions in plant tissues. The 'untargeted' nature of MS imaging allows the detection of marker compounds for the physiological status, as demonstrated for plant-pathogen interactions. Our images show excellent correlation with optical/histological examination. In contrast to previous MS imaging studies of plants, we present a complete workflow that covers multiple species, such as oilseed rape, wheat seed and rice. In addition, different major plant organs and a wide variety of compound classes were analyzed. Thus, our method could be used to develop a plant metabolite atlas as a reference to investigate systemic and local effects of pathogen infection or environmental stress.

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

4.6
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