| Literature DB >> 35328360 |
Shunbo Yang1, Dongmei Li1, Shanshan Li1, Huijuan Yang1, Zhengyang Zhao1,2.
Abstract
Aroma is a key quality attribute of apples, making major contributions to commercial value and consumer choice. However, the mechanism underlying molecular regulation of aroma formation genes and transcription factors remains poorly understood in apples. Here, we investigated the aroma volatile profiles of two apple varieties with distinctive flavors using headspace solid-phase microextraction (HS-SPME) combined with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). A total of 35 volatile compounds were identified in Granny Smith and Jonagold apples. Aldehydes were the most abundant volatiles contributing to the aroma in Granny Smith apple while esters were the dominant volatile compounds in Jonagold apple. In order to know more about the expression levels of aroma-related genes involved in the metabolic pathways, transcriptome sequencing of these two different apple varieties was conducted utilizing the Illumina platform. In total, 94 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were found in the fatty acid metabolism, amino acid metabolism, the mevalonate pathway and phenylpropanoid pathway. Furthermore, compared to the Granny Smith apple, the expression of multiple genes and transcription factors were upregulated in the Jonagold apple, which might play important roles in the synthesis of aroma volatile compounds. Our study contributes toward better understanding on the molecular mechanism of aroma synthesis in apples and provides a valuable reference for metabolic engineering and flavor improvement in the future.Entities:
Keywords: GC-MS; apple; aroma; gene expression; transcriptome sequencing
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35328360 PMCID: PMC8951106 DOI: 10.3390/ijms23062939
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Phenotypes of Granny Smith and Jonagold apples. (a–c) Phenotype of the Granny Smith apple. (d–f) Phenotype of the Jonagold apple.
Physiological traits of Granny Smith and Jonagold apples.
| Trait | Granny Smith | Jonagold |
|---|---|---|
| Fresh weight (g) | 205 ± 15 | 240 ± 18 |
| Height (mm) | 50.05 ± 1.23 | 56.20 ± 1.85 |
| Diameter (mm) | 57.80 ± 2.10 | 61.55 ± 2.35 |
| L* value | 63.52 ± 0.65 | 58.62 ± 1.67 |
| a* value | −17.62 ± 1.85 | 13.38 ± 2.30 |
| b* value | 37.95 ± 1.52 | 29.13 ± 2.58 |
| TSS (°Brix) | 13.7 ± 0.2 | 14.2 ± 0.2 |
| TA (%) | 0.40 ± 0.04 | 0.32 ± 0.03 |
| Firmness (kg/cm2) | 7.05 ± 0.15 | 6.58 ± 0.12 |
| Internal ethylene (μL/L) | 5 ± 1 | 62 ± 8 |
| CO2 production (μmol/kg·s) | 70 ± 8 | 48 ± 5 |
Values are means ± standard deviation; TSS—total soluble solid; TA—titratable acidity.
The contents (µg/kg) of volatile compounds detected in Granny Smith and Jonagold apples.
| Class | Compounds | CAS No | RT | RI | Granny Smith | Jonagold |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ester | Propyl acetate | 109-60-4 | 10.67 | 982 | – | 7.99 ± 0.21 |
| Isobutyl acetate | 110-19-0 | 11.72 | 1020 | – | 2.40 ± 0.11 | |
| Propyl propionate | 106-36-5 | 12.57 | 1050 | – | 1.40 ± 0.02 | |
| Butyl acetate | 123-86-4 | 13.40 | 1074 | - | 213.44 ± 15.74 | |
| 2-Methylbutyl acetate | 624-41-9 | 14.84 | 1126 | – | 85.03 ± 6.17 | |
| Isobutyl butanoate | 539-90-2 | 15.29 | 1155 | – | 1.19 ± 0.03 | |
| Butyl propionate | 590-01-2 | 15.41 | 1157 | – | 8.87 ± 0.24 | |
| Amyl acetate | 628-63-7 | 16.37 | 1178 | – | 14.65 ± 1.35 | |
| Butyl butanoate | 109-21-7 | 17.69 | 1240 | – | 5.75 ± 0.17 | |
| Butyl 2-methylbutanoate | 15706-73-7 | 18.08 | 1243 | – | 19.21 ± 1.08 | |
| Hexyl acetate | 142-92-7 | 19.28 | 1274 | 1.25 ± 0.06 | 885.38 ± 25.44 | |
| ( | 2497-18-9 | 21.01 | 1338 | – | 1.84 ± 0.06 | |
| Hexyl propanoate | 2445-76-3 | 21.14 | 1347 | – | 8.40 ± 0.54 | |
| Heptyl acetate | 112-06-1 | 22.09 | 1386 | – | 3.16 ± 0.26 | |
| Butyl hexanoate | 626-82-4 | 23.17 | 1410 | – | 1.75 ± 0.10 | |
| Hexyl butanoate | 2639-63-6 | 23.23 | 1423 | 0.35 ± 0.02 | 27.19 ± 1.58 | |
| Hexyl 2-methylbutyrate | 10032-15-2 | 23.53 | 1438 | 0.46 ± 0.03 | 31.95 ± 2.13 | |
| Heptyl formate | 112-23-2 | 24.15 | 1455 | – | 1.59 ± 0.08 | |
| Octyl acetate | 112-14-1 | 24.81 | 1483 | – | 5.56 ± 0.42 | |
| Hexyl hexanoate | 6378-65-0 | 28.07 | 1593 | – | 6.60 ± 0.38 | |
| Alcohol | 1-Butanol | 71-36-3 | 15.35 | 1156 | – | 19.42 ± 1.02 |
| 2-Methyl-1-butanol | 137-32-6 | 17.20 | 1210 | 0.91 ± 0.05 | 6.42 ± 0.38 | |
| 2-Hexyn-1-ol | 764-60-3 | 17.41 | 1225 | 0.85 ± 0.05 | – | |
| 1-Hexanol | 111-27-3 | 21.40 | 1361 | 1.00 ± 0.04 | 74.69 ± 4.81 | |
| Aldehyde | Hexanal | 66-25-1 | 13.76 | 1090 | 7.95 ± 0.58 | 23.93 ± 1.84 |
| ( | 6789-80-6 | 15.60 | 1161 | 3.32 ± 0.27 | – | |
| ( | 6728-26-3 | 17.93 | 1240 | 40.24 ± 3.62 | 86.21 ± 6.92 | |
| ( | 57266-86-1 | 21.03 | 1339 | 1.42 ± 0.08 | – | |
| 1-Nonanal | 124-19-6 | 22.79 | 1401 | 0.50 ± 0.03 | 1.66 ± 0.20 | |
| ( | 2548-87-0 | 23.89 | 1443 | 1.90 ± 0.10 | 2.12 ± 0.06 | |
| ( | 60784-31-8 | 26.63 | 1531 | 0.81 ± 0.06 | 3.47 ± 0.12 | |
| ( | 3913-81-3 | 29.08 | 1655 | – | 3.88 ± 0.23 | |
| Ketone | 1-Octen-3-one | 4312-99-6 | 20.22 | 1305 | 0.73 ± 0.05 | – |
| phenylpropene | Estragole | 140-67-0 | 29.66 | 1687 | 1.04 ± 0.10 | 530.16 ± 47.66 |
| Terpenoid | α-Farnesene | 502-61-4 | 30.75 | 1754 | 1.65 ± 0.11 | 31.15 ± 2.85 |
Values are means ± standard deviation; CAS No: CAS number; RT: retention time; RI: retention index; –: indicates not detected.
Figure 2Percentage (%) of each type of volatile compounds in Granny Smith and Jonagold apples. (a) Volatile compounds in Granny Smith. (b) Volatile compounds in Jonagold.
Figure 3Analysis of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between Granny Smith and Jonagold apples. (a) Volcano plot of DEGs. (b) Hierarchical cluster analysis of DEGs. (c) Gene ontology (GO) classifications of DEGs. (d) Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway enrichment of DEGs.
Figure 4Expression profiles of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) involved in fatty acid and isoleucine metabolism pathways between the Granny Smith and Jonagold apples.
Figure 5Expression profiles of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) involved in sesquiterpene and phenylpropanoid metabolism pathways between the Granny Smith and Jonagold apples. (a) Biosynthetic pathway for α-farnesene. (b) Biosynthetic pathway for estragole.
Figure 6Expression profiles of selected 12 DEGs determined by qRT-PCR.