| Literature DB >> 22998926 |
Timothy J Tschaplinski1, Robert F Standaert, Nancy L Engle, Madhavi Z Martin, Amandeep K Sangha, Jerry M Parks, Jeremy C Smith, Reichel Samuel, Nan Jiang, Yunqiao Pu, Arthur J Ragauskas, Choo Y Hamilton, Chunxiang Fu, Zeng-Yu Wang, Brian H Davison, Richard A Dixon, Jonathan R Mielenz.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Down-regulation of the caffeic acid 3-O-methyltransferase EC 2.1.1.68 (COMT) gene in the lignin biosynthetic pathway of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) resulted in cell walls of transgenic plants releasing more constituent sugars after pretreatment by dilute acid and treatment with glycosyl hydrolases from an added enzyme preparation and from Clostridium thermocellum. Fermentation of both wild-type and transgenic switchgrass after milder hot water pretreatment with no water washing showed that only the transgenic switchgrass inhibited C. thermocellum. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GCMS)-based metabolomics were undertaken on cell wall aqueous extracts to determine the nature of the microbial inhibitors.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22998926 PMCID: PMC3524654 DOI: 10.1186/1754-6834-5-71
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels ISSN: 1754-6834 Impact factor: 6.040
Metabolite concentrations [mean (sem)] and fold change of down-regulated COMT versus wild-type (WT) switchgrass
| 0.83 (0.06) | nd | ∞ | 0.000 | |
| 0.11 (0.01) | nd | ∞ | 0.000 | |
| 0.34 (0.02) | nd | ∞ | 0.000 | |
| 0.11 (0.01) | nd | ∞ | 0.000 | |
| 5-hydroxyconiferyl alcohol-4- | 0.08 (0.01) | 0.00 (0.00) | 76.05 | 0.000 |
| 5-hydroxyconiferyl alcohol-5- | 0.17 (0.01) | 0.00 (0.00) | 59.83 | 0.000 |
| 2.60 (0.32) | 0.06 (0.01) | 42.79 | 0.000 | |
| 0.39 (0.02) | 0.03 (0.01) | 14.09 | 0.000 | |
| 3,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid | 7.52 (3.72) | 1.19 (0.34) | 6.34 | 0.096 |
| xanthine | 1.14 (0.14) | 0.43 (0.18) | 2.68 | 0.019 |
| hypoxanthine | 2.85 (0.96) | 1.07 (0.17) | 2.65 | 0.080 |
| succinic acid | 14.98 (3.97) | 5.78 (1.04) | 2.59 | 0.041 |
| guanosine | 5.18 (0.76) | 2.17 (0.62) | 2.39 | 0.018 |
| uracil | 2.02 (0.29) | 0.98 (0.22) | 2.07 | 0.023 |
| citraconic acid | 2.25 (0.18) | 1.23 (0.31) | 1.82 | 0.033 |
| guanine | 7.24 (0.28) | 4.10 (0.85) | 1.77 | 0.016 |
| 5-hydroxyferulic acid | 0.46 (0.01) | 0.27 (0.02) | 1.69 | 0.000 |
| uridine | 11.86 (0.49) | 7.27 (1.39) | 1.63 | 0.026 |
| maleic acid | 65.92 (1.63) | 41.74 (7.23) | 1.58 | 0.023 |
| vanillin | 26.20 (1.63) | 16.81 (3.48) | 1.56 | 0.060 |
| secoisolariciresinol | 2.27 (0.13) | 1.47 (0.38) | 1.54 | ns |
| 5- | 116.72 (6.82) | 77.40 (7.46) | 1.51 | 0.007 |
| adenine | 10.19 (0.72) | 7.25 (0.91) | 1.41 | 0.045 |
| 1- | 1.05 (0.05) | 0.77 (0.11) | 1.37 | 0.065 |
| ferulic acid | 7.06 (0.17) | 5.50 (0.14) | 1.28 | 0.000 |
| 0.26 (0.02) | 0.20 (0.01) | 1.28 | 0.029 | |
| adenosine | 9.62 (0.66) | 7.58 (0.86) | 1.27 | ns |
| 21.80 (0.21) | 19.31 (0.57) | 1.13 | 0.08 | |
| caffeic acid | 0.58 (0.04) | 0.53 (0.04) | 1.11 | ns |
| 4.63 (0.33) | 4.24 (0.80) | 1.09 | ns | |
| coniferyl alcohol | 3.34 (0.10) | 3.65 (0.22) | 0.92 | ns |
| 5-hydroxyconiferyl alcohol | 1.22 (0.06) | 1.36 (0.08) | 0.90 | ns |
| coniferyl aldehyde | 0.35 (0.01) | 0.45 (0.07) | 0.78 | ns |
| guaiacylglycerol | 5.25 (0.23) | 6.79 (0.53) | 0.77 | 0.047 |
| sinapyl aldehyde | 0.17 (0.02) | 0.22 (0.03) | 0.77 | ns |
| syringin | 0.23 (0.01) | 0.30 (0.03) | 0.77 | 0.093 |
| sinapyl alcohol | 2.51 (0.06) | 3.48 (0.20) | 0.72 | 0.004 |
| syringylglycerol | 2.99 (0.09) | 4.48 (0.25) | 0.67 | 0.001 |
| 0.63 (0.05) | 0.96 (0.09) | 0.65 | 0.021 | |
| 3.53 (0.17) | 5.57 (0.69) | 0.63 | 0.038 | |
| syringaresinol | 0.07 (0.00) | 0.14 (0.01) | 0.52 | 0.001 |
| 3.59 (0.19) | 5.98 (0.88) | 0.60 | 0.050 | |
| 3.91 (0.22) | 7.88 (1.34) | 0.50 | 0.035 | |
| pinoresinol | 0.22 (0.03) | 0.45 (0.07) | 0.49 | 0.031 |
| 7.42 (0.30) | 17.96 (4.41) | 0.41 | 0.073 | |
| hydroxymethylfurfural | 0.72 (0.12) | 3.40 (1.41) | 0.21 | ns |
a Metabolites in italics are tentative identifications.
Figure 1(a) Synthesis of -3,4-dimethoxy-5-hydroxycinnamyl alcohol (-sinapyl alcohol). (b) 1 H NMR spectrum of synthetic iso-sinapyl alcohol (aromatic and double-bond region).
Figure 2GCMS EI fragmentation pattern of trimethylsilyl derivatized a) sinapyl alcohol and synthetic b) -sinapyl alcohol.
Figure 3GCMS electron ionization (70 eV) fragmentation pattern of trimethylsilyl derivatized synthetic3, 4-dimethoxy-5-hydroxycinnamyl alcohol-5--glucoside (-syringin).
Figure 4The structures of the observed -sinapyl alcohol related metabolites and potential synthesis routes.
Figure 5(a) Chemical structures with atom numbering for sinapyl and -sinapyl alcohols. Spin density calculations for (b) sinapyl and (c) iso-sinapyl radicals. Potential coupling sites for iso-sinapyl radical are C2, C4, O5 and C6. In comparison to sinapyl radical, iso-sinapyl has one less coupling site and lacks reactivity at C8 in particular.
Horseradish peroxidase-catalyzed dehydrogenative polymerization of sinapyl alcohol (SA) or coniferyl alcohol (CA) with -sinapyl alcohol (-SA)
| SA | 39.2 | 6.3 | 1.3 |
| SA + | 47.7 | 6.7 | 1.5 |
| CA | 67.1 | 11.3 | 1.8 |
| CA + | 62.1 | 11.1 | 1.4 |
Figure 6GCMS EI fragmentation pattern of trimethylsilyl derivatized homodimeric lignans of -sinapyl alcohol. “M+” denotes the molecular ion.