ArticleMetabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society2023
Inter-laboratory comparison of plant volatile analyses in the light of intra-specific chemodiversity.
Article in Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Organ-specific terpenoid responses in Tanacetum vulgare are chemotype-dependent.Plant biology (Stuttgart, Germany) · 2026Article
- A scalable PDMS extraction method for profiling fungal volatile compounds.Fungal biology and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Intraspecific chemical variation of Tanacetum vulgare affects plant growth and reproductive traits in field plant communities.Plant biology (Stuttgart, Germany) · 2025Article
- Intraspecific and intra-individual chemodiversity and phenotypic integration of terpenes across plant parts and development stages in an aromatic plant.Plant biology (Stuttgart, Germany) · 2025Article
- Understanding your Biases in Collecting Organismal VOCs.Journal of chemical ecology · 2025Article
- Plastic Responses to Single and Combined Environmental Stresses in a Highly Chemodiverse Aromatic Plant Species.Physiologia plantarumArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAssessing intraspecific variation in plant volatile organic compounds (VOCs) involves pitfalls that may bias biological interpretation, particularly when several laboratories collaborate on joint projects. Comparative, inter-laboratory ring trials can inform on the reproducibility of such analyses.
objectivesIn a ring trial involving five laboratories, we investigated the reproducibility of VOC collections with polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) and analyses by thermal desorption-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (TD-GC-MS). As model plant we used Tanacetum vulgare, which shows a remarkable diversity in terpenoids, forming so-called chemotypes. We performed our ring-trial with two chemotypes to examine the sources of technical variation in plant VOC measurements during pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical steps.
methodsMonoclonal root cuttings were generated in one laboratory and distributed to five laboratories, in which plants were grown under laboratory-specific conditions. VOCs were collected on PDMS tubes from all plants before and after a jasmonic acid (JA) treatment. Thereafter, each laboratory (donors) sent a subset of tubes to four of the other laboratories (recipients), which performed TD-GC-MS with their own established procedures.
resultsChemotype-specific differences in VOC profiles were detected but with an overall high variation both across donor and recipient laboratories. JA-induced changes in VOC profiles were not reproducible. Laboratory-specific growth conditions led to phenotypic variation that affected the resulting VOC profiles.
conclusionOur ring trial shows that despite large efforts to standardise each VOC measurement step, the outcomes differed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Our results reveal sources of variation in plant VOC research and may help to avoid systematic errors in similar experiments.
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.