Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26754199›Full record

ArticleBMC plant biology2016

Cell wall proteome of sugarcane stems: comparison of a destructive and a non-destructive extraction method showed differences in glycoside hydrolases and peroxidases.

Maria Juliana Calderan-Rodrigues, Elisabeth Jamet, Thibaut Douché, Maria Beatriz Rodrigues Bonassi, Thaís Regiani Cataldi, Juliana Guimarães Fonseca, Hélène San Clemente, Rafael Pont-Lezica, Carlos Alberto Labate

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC plant biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. SsPit2A/B Effectors fromPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Plant Proteomics and Systems Biology.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Plant Cell Wall Proteomics: A Focus on Monocot Species,International journal of molecular sciences · 2019
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Maria Juliana Calderan-RodriguesDepartamento de Genética, Laboratório Max Feffer de Genética de Plantas, Escola Superior de Agricultura "Luiz de Queiroz", Universidade de São Paulo, Av. Pádua Dias 11, CP 83, 13400-970, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil. phdjuliana@gmail.com.
Elisabeth JametUniversité de Toulouse; UPS; UMR 5546, Laboratoire de Recherche en Sciences Végétales, BP 42617, F-31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France. jamet@lrsv.ups-tlse.fr.
Thibaut DouchéUniversité de Toulouse; UPS; UMR 5546, Laboratoire de Recherche en Sciences Végétales, BP 42617, F-31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France. thibaut.douche@pasteur.fr.
Maria Beatriz Rodrigues BonassiDepartamento de Genética, Laboratório Max Feffer de Genética de Plantas, Escola Superior de Agricultura "Luiz de Queiroz", Universidade de São Paulo, Av. Pádua Dias 11, CP 83, 13400-970, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil. beatrizcalderan@gmail.com.
Thaís Regiani CataldiDepartamento de Genética, Laboratório Max Feffer de Genética de Plantas, Escola Superior de Agricultura "Luiz de Queiroz", Universidade de São Paulo, Av. Pádua Dias 11, CP 83, 13400-970, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil. thais.cataldi@usp.br.
Juliana Guimarães FonsecaDepartamento de Genética, Laboratório Max Feffer de Genética de Plantas, Escola Superior de Agricultura "Luiz de Queiroz", Universidade de São Paulo, Av. Pádua Dias 11, CP 83, 13400-970, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil. j.g.fonseca@usp.br.
Hélène San ClementeUniversité de Toulouse; UPS; UMR 5546, Laboratoire de Recherche en Sciences Végétales, BP 42617, F-31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France. sancle@lrsv.ups-tlse.fr.
Rafael Pont-LezicaUniversité de Toulouse; UPS; UMR 5546, Laboratoire de Recherche en Sciences Végétales, BP 42617, F-31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France.
Carlos Alberto LabateDepartamento de Genética, Laboratório Max Feffer de Genética de Plantas, Escola Superior de Agricultura "Luiz de Queiroz", Universidade de São Paulo, Av. Pádua Dias 11, CP 83, 13400-970, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil. calabate@usp.br.
Laboratoire de Recherche en Sciences Végétales · FRUniversidade de São Paulo · BRUniversidade Cidade de São Paulo · BRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSugarcane has been used as the main crop for ethanol production for more than 40 years in Brazil. Recently, the production of bioethanol from bagasse and straw, also called second generation (2G) ethanol, became a reality with the first commercial plants started in the USA and Brazil. However, the industrial processes still need to be improved to generate a low cost fuel. One possibility is the remodeling of cell walls, by means of genetic improvement or transgenesis, in order to make the bagasse more accessible to hydrolytic enzymes. We aimed at characterizing the cell wall proteome of young sugarcane culms, to identify proteins involved in cell wall biogenesis. Proteins were extracted from the cell walls of 2-month-old culms using two protocols, non-destructive by vacuum infiltration vs destructive. The proteins were identified by mass spectrometry and bioinformatics.

resultsA predicted signal peptide was found in 84 different proteins, called cell wall proteins (CWPs). As expected, the non-destructive method showed a lower percentage of proteins predicted to be intracellular than the destructive one (33% vs 44%). About 19% of CWPs were identified with both methods, whilst the infiltration protocol could lead to the identification of 75% more CWPs. In both cases, the most populated protein functional classes were those of proteins related to lipid metabolism and oxido-reductases. Curiously, a single glycoside hydrolase (GH) was identified using the non-destructive method whereas 10 GHs were found with the destructive one. Quantitative data analysis allowed the identification of the most abundant proteins.

conclusionsThe results highlighted the importance of using different protocols to extract proteins from cell walls to expand the coverage of the cell wall proteome. Ten GHs were indicated as possible targets for further studies in order to obtain cell walls less recalcitrant to deconstruction. Therefore, this work contributed to two goals: enlarge the coverage of the sugarcane cell wall proteome, and provide target proteins that could be used in future research to facilitate 2G ethanol production.

Indexed as

ProteomeCell WallGlycoside HydrolasesPeroxidasesPlant ProteinsPlant StemsSaccharumGlycoside HydrolasesPeroxidasesPlant ProteinsProteome

Identifiers

PMID26754199
PMCPMC4709929
OpenAlexW2235560022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.