ArticleBMC genomics2021
De novo transcriptome analysis and comparative expression profiling of genes associated with the taste-modifying protein neoculin in Curculigo latifolia and Curculigo capitulata fruits.
Article in BMC genomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurculigo latifolia is a perennial plant endogenous to Southeast Asia whose fruits contain the taste-modifying protein neoculin, which binds to sweet receptors and makes sour fruits taste sweet. Although similar to snowdrop (Galanthus nivalis) agglutinin (GNA), which contains mannose-binding sites in its sequence and 3D structure, neoculin lacks such sites and has no lectin activity. Whether the fruits of C. latifolia and other Curculigo plants contain neoculin and/or GNA family members was unclear.
resultsThrough de novo RNA-seq assembly of the fruits of C. latifolia and the related C. capitulata and detailed analysis of the expression patterns of neoculin and neoculin-like genes in both species, we assembled 85,697 transcripts from C. latifolia and 76,775 from C. capitulata using Trinity and annotated them using public databases. We identified 70,371 unigenes in C. latifolia and 63,704 in C. capitulata. In total, 38.6% of unigenes from C. latifolia and 42.6% from C. capitulata shared high similarity between the two species. We identified ten neoculin-related transcripts in C. latifolia and 15 in C. capitulata, encoding both the basic and acidic subunits of neoculin in both plants. We aligned these 25 transcripts and generated a phylogenetic tree. Many orthologs in the two species shared high similarity, despite the low number of common genes, suggesting that these genes likely existed before the two species diverged. The relative expression levels of these genes differed considerably between the two species: the transcripts per million (TPM) values of neoculin genes were 60 times higher in C. latifolia than in C. capitulata, whereas those of GNA family members were 15,000 times lower in C. latifolia than in C. capitulata.
conclusionsThe genetic diversity of neoculin-related genes strongly suggests that neoculin genes underwent duplication during evolution. The marked differences in their expression profiles between C. latifolia and C. capitulata may be due to mutations in regions involved in transcriptional regulation. Comprehensive analysis of the genes expressed in the fruits of these two Curculigo species helped elucidate the origin of neoculin at the molecular level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.