ArticlePlant biotechnology journal2023
Field testing of transgenic aspen from large greenhouse screening identifies unexpected winners.
Article in Plant biotechnology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Glucuronoyl Esterase Expressed in Aspen Xylem Affects γ-Ester Linkages Between Lignin and Glucuronoxylan Reducing Recalcitrance and Accelerating Growth.Plant biotechnology journal · 2025Article
- An updated sulfate transporter phylogeny uncovers a perennial-specific subgroup associated with lignification.Tree physiology · 2025Article
- Impact of Intron and Retransformation on Transgene Expression in Leaf and Fruit Tissues of Field-Grown Pear Trees.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Impact of xylan on field productivity and wood saccharification properties in aspen.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Trees constitute promising renewable feedstocks for biorefinery using biochemical conversion, but their recalcitrance restricts their attractiveness for the industry. To obtain trees with reduced recalcitrance, large-scale genetic engineering experiments were performed in hybrid aspen blindly targeting genes expressed during wood formation and 32 lines representing seven constructs were selected for characterization in the field. Here we report phenotypes of five-year old trees considering 49 traits related to growth and wood properties. The best performing construct considering growth and glucose yield in saccharification with acid pretreatment had suppressed expression of the gene encoding an uncharacterized 2-oxoglutarate-dependent dioxygenase (2OGD). It showed minor changes in wood chemistry but increased nanoporosity and glucose conversion. Suppressed levels of SUCROSE SYNTHASE, (SuSy), CINNAMATE 4-HYDROXYLASE (C4H) and increased levels of GTPase activating protein for ADP-ribosylation factor ZAC led to significant growth reductions and anatomical abnormalities. However, C4H and SuSy constructs greatly improved glucose yields in saccharification without and with pretreatment, respectively. Traits associated with high glucose yields were different for saccharification with and without pretreatment. While carbohydrates, phenolics and tension wood contents positively impacted the yields without pretreatment and growth, lignin content and S/G ratio were negative factors, the yields with pretreatment positively correlated with S lignin and negatively with carbohydrate contents. The genotypes with high glucose yields had increased nanoporosity and mGlcA/Xyl ratio, and some had shorter polymers extractable with subcritical water compared to wild-type. The pilot-scale industrial-like pretreatment of best-performing 2OGD construct confirmed its superior sugar yields, supporting our strategy.
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.