ArticleFrontiers in plant science2024
Transcriptomics and starch biosynthesis analysis in leaves and developing seeds of mung bean provide a basis for genetic engineering of starch composition and seed quality.
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rheological, textural, and structural properties of heat-induced yam starch gels: Effects of high-amylose mung bean starch.Food chemistry: X · 2026Article
- Fruit Nutritional Composition and Seed Reserve Mobilization as Tools for Phenotypic Selection inFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Integrated Metabolomic and Transcriptomic Analysis of Volatile Organic Compound Biosynthesis During Mung Bean (Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mung bean starch is distinguished by its exceptional high amylose content and regulation of starch biosynthesis in leaves and storage tissues, such as seeds, share considerable similarities. Genetic engineering of starch composition and content, requires detailed knowledge of starch biosynthetic gene expression and enzymatic regulation. In this study we applied detailed transcriptomic analyses to unravel the global differential gene expression patterns in mung bean leaves and in seeds during various stages of development. The objective was to identify candidate genes and regulatory mechanisms that may enable generation of desirable seed qualities through the use of genetic engineering. Notable differences in gene expression, in particular low expression of the Protein Targeting to Starch (PTST), starch synthase (SS) 3, and starch branching enzyme1 (SBE1) encoding genes in developing seeds as compared to leaves were evident. These differences were related to starch molecular structures and granule morphologies. Specifically, the starch molecular size distribution at different stages of seed development correlated with the starch biosynthesis gene expression of the SBE1, SS1, granule-bound starch synthases (GBSS) and isoamylase 1 (ISA1) encoding genes. Furthermore, putative hormonal and redox controlled regulation were observed, which may be explained by abscisic acid (ABA) and indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) induced signal transduction, and redox regulation of ferredoxins and thioredoxins, respectively. The morphology of starch granules in leaves and developing seeds were clearly distinguishable and could be correlated to differential expression of SS1. Here, we present a first comprehensive transcriptomic dataset of developing mung bean seeds, and combined these findings may enable generation of genetic engineering strategies of for example starch biosynthetic genes for increasing starch levels in seeds and constitute a valuable toolkit for improving mung bean seed quality.
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.