| Literature DB >> 29434668 |
Elizabeth R Milano1, Courtney E Payne2, Ed Wolfrum2, John Lovell1, Jerry Jenkins3,4, Jeremy Schmutz3,4, Thomas E Juenger1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biofuels derived from lignocellulosic plant material are an important component of current renewable energy strategies. Improvement efforts in biofuel feedstock crops have been primarily focused on increasing biomass yield with less consideration for tissue quality or composition. Four primary components found in the plant cell wall contribute to the overall quality of plant tissue and conversion characteristics, cellulose and hemicellulose polysaccharides are the primary targets for fuel conversion, while lignin and ash provide structure and defense. We explore the genetic architecture of tissue characteristics using a quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping approach in Panicum hallii, a model lignocellulosic grass system. Diversity in the mapping population was generated by crossing xeric and mesic varietals, comparative to northern upland and southern lowland ecotypes in switchgrass. We use near-infrared spectroscopy with a primary analytical method to create a P. hallii specific calibration model to quickly quantify cell wall components.Entities:
Keywords: Bioenergy feedstock; Cell wall composition; Lignocellulosic biomass; NIRS; Panicum hallii; QTL
Year: 2018 PMID: 29434668 PMCID: PMC5797396 DOI: 10.1186/s13068-018-1033-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels ISSN: 1754-6834 Impact factor: 6.040
Fig. 1Panicum hallii var. filipes and var. hallii. P. hallii var. filipes (left) and P. hallii var. hallii (right) growing in 1-gallon containers
Composition of calibration samples
| Composition component | Mean | SE | Max. | Min. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Extractives | ||||
| % Sucrose | 1.6 | 0.21 | 6.3 | 0 |
| % Soluble glucose | 0.7 | 0.07 | 2.2 | 0.1 |
| % Soluble fructose | 1.0 | 0.11 | 5.2 | 0.1 |
| % Water extractable others | 10.3 | 0.26 | 13.7 | 6.3 |
| % Ethanol extractives | 3.8 | 0.06 | 4.8 | 3.2 |
| Cell wall | ||||
| % Lignin | 14.4 | 0.13 | 15.7 | 12.2 |
| % Glucan | 28.8 | 0.19 | 32.8 | 25.6 |
| % Xylan | 18.5 | 0.14 | 21.1 | 16.7 |
| % Galactan | 1.7 | 0.06 | 3.0 | 1.2 |
| % Arabinan | 3.7 | 0.07 | 5.4 | 2.6 |
| % Acetyl | 7.3 | 0.23 | 11.1 | 4.2 |
| % Total ash | 7.3 | 0.23 | 11.1 | 4.2 |
| % Total protein | 1.2 | 0.03 | 1.7 | 0.9 |
| Total % | 93.9 | 0.2 | 96.9 | 91.2 |
Composition statistics for 113 calibration samples reported as % of total dry biomass
SE standard error, Max maximum value, Min minimum value
Fig. 2Comparison of major cell wall composition components in five lignocellulosic plant species. Mean and standard deviation values for NIRS calibration datasets are reported for P. hallii, switchgrass [27], Sorghum [30], Miscanthus [29], and poplar [41]
Trait predictions for mapping population
| Ash |
| Lignin |
| Glucan |
| Xylan |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F2 | 7.0 (0.08) | 262 | 14.3 (0.04) | 262 | 28.4 (0.07) | 262 | 18.5 (0.04) | 262 |
| F2 range | 3.0–11.4 | – | 12.7–16.6 | – | 25.3–31.8 | – | 17.0–20.9 | – |
| F1 | 6.7 (0.11) | 25 | 14.3 (0.09) | 25 | 28.3 (0.17) | 25 | 18.6 (0.09) | 25 |
| FIL2 | 7.2 (0.13) | 25 | 15.0 (0.13) | 25 | 29.0 (0.21) | 25 | 18.8 (0.11) | 25 |
| HAL2 | 10.1 (0.25) | 13 | 14.8 (0.16) | 13 | 29.3 (0.23) | 13 | 17.7 (0.13) | 13 |
| < 0.0001 | – | 0.405 | – | 0.411 | – | < 0.0001 | – |
Mean (SE) for cell wall trait predictions. N is the number of replicates for the parental lines and the number of F2 individuals measured for each trait, pval significance is the result of a t test for difference between the parental (HAL2 and FIL2) lines. Trait values presented as % dry biomass
Fig. 3Phenotypic trait distributions for the F2 mapping population. Parent and F1 hybrid means are indicated by vertical arrows and standard error indicated by horizontal line
Phenotypic trait correlations for F2 population
| Trait 1 | Trait 2 |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ash | Lignin | − 0.23 | < 0.0001 |
| Ash | Glucan | 0.07 | 0.24 |
| Ash | Xylan | − 0.54 | < 0.0001 |
| Lignin | Glucan | 0.54 | < 0.0001 |
| Lignin | Xylan | 0.53 | < 0.0001 |
| Glucan | Xylan | 0.50 | < 0.0001 |
Pairwise Pearson product-moment correlation (r) and significance (pval)
Fig. 4Panicum hallii genetic linkage map with QTL for cell wall traits. QTL plotted to the left of respective linkage groups. Color bars represent 1.5-LOD interval and horizontal line indicates location of QTL
QTL and main effects for each cell wall trait
| Trait | LG | Pos | 1.5-LOD | LOD | PVE | PPD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ash | 1 | 61.17 | 56–65.2 | 7.73 | − 0.449 (0.076) | − 0.026 (0.102) | 5.55 | − 31.23 |
| Asha | 3 | 5.08 | 3.5–6.9 | 28.88 | 0.847 (0.091) | − 0.198 (0.119) | 26.06 | 58.87 |
| Asha | 3 | 71.11 | 69.7–73.8 | 22.17 | − 0.932 (0.092) | − 0.145 (0.117) | 18.57 | − 64.79 |
| Ash | 4 | 36.48 | 31.4–39 | 5.06 | 0.134 (0.075) | 0.493 (0.105) | 3.53 | 9.33 |
| Ash | 5 | 1.63 | 0–4.7 | 9.15 | 0.563 (0.088) | − 0.136 (0.11) | 6.67 | 39.16 |
| Ash | 8 | 47.65 | 42.1–50.7 | 13.09 | 0.629 (0.079) | 0.132 (0.107) | 9.95 | 43.74 |
| Ash | 9 | 161.45 | 131.5–167.1 | 6.57 | 0.379 (0.07) | − 0.092 (0.103) | 4.66 | 26.31 |
| Glucan | 3 | 61.07 | 37–71.1 | 3.64 | − 0.398 (0.097) | − 0.13 (0.136) | 7.14 | NA |
| Lignin | 3 | 21.15 | 16.3–28.1 | 4.48 | − 0.187 (0.054) | − 0.246 (0.074) | 7.57 | NA |
| Lignin | 3 | 77.27 | 61.1–85.4 | 4.38 | − 0.224 (0.056) | − 0.18 (0.074) | 7.39 | NA |
| Lignin | 9 | 167.14 | 162.3–169.2 | 3.55 | 0.064 (0.051) | − 0.291 (0.074) | 5.94 | NA |
| Xylan | 3 | 26.24 | 21.1–29.7 | 5.84 | − 0.293 (0.059) | 0.082 (0.078) | 9.62 | 53.52 |
| Xylan | 5 | 6.52 | 0–20.4 | 4.80 | − 0.275 (0.059) | 0.049 (0.082) | 7.82 | 50.26 |
| Xylan | 8 | 56.39 | 46–66.4 | 4.77 | − 0.234 (0.058) | − 0.187 (0.077) | 7.76 | 42.82 |
LG linkage group, Pos position of QTL on LG in cM, 1.5-LOD 1.5 LOD drop confidence interval for each QTL in cM, LOD logarithm of odds score, a (SE) additive effect and standard error, D (SE) dominance deviation and standard error, PVE percent of additive variance explained by each QTL, PPD percent of parental divergence explained if applicable
aEpistatic interaction