Cargando…

Inter-laboratory comparison of plant volatile analyses in the light of intra-specific chemodiversity

INTRODUCTION: Assessing 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 s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Eckert, Silvia, Eilers, Elisabeth J., Jakobs, Ruth, Anaia, Redouan Adam, Aragam, Kruthika Sen, Bloss, Tanja, Popp, Moritz, Sasidharan, Rohit, Schnitzler, Jörg-Peter, Stein, Florian, Steppuhn, Anke, Unsicker, Sybille B., van Dam, Nicole M., Yepes, Sol, Ziaja, Dominik, Müller, Caroline
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10289961/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37351733
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11306-023-02026-6
_version_ 1785062390780395520
author Eckert, Silvia
Eilers, Elisabeth J.
Jakobs, Ruth
Anaia, Redouan Adam
Aragam, Kruthika Sen
Bloss, Tanja
Popp, Moritz
Sasidharan, Rohit
Schnitzler, Jörg-Peter
Stein, Florian
Steppuhn, Anke
Unsicker, Sybille B.
van Dam, Nicole M.
Yepes, Sol
Ziaja, Dominik
Müller, Caroline
author_facet Eckert, Silvia
Eilers, Elisabeth J.
Jakobs, Ruth
Anaia, Redouan Adam
Aragam, Kruthika Sen
Bloss, Tanja
Popp, Moritz
Sasidharan, Rohit
Schnitzler, Jörg-Peter
Stein, Florian
Steppuhn, Anke
Unsicker, Sybille B.
van Dam, Nicole M.
Yepes, Sol
Ziaja, Dominik
Müller, Caroline
author_sort Eckert, Silvia
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Assessing 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. OBJECTIVES: In 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. METHODS: Monoclonal 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. RESULTS: Chemotype-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. CONCLUSION: Our 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11306-023-02026-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10289961
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102899612023-06-25 Inter-laboratory comparison of plant volatile analyses in the light of intra-specific chemodiversity Eckert, Silvia Eilers, Elisabeth J. Jakobs, Ruth Anaia, Redouan Adam Aragam, Kruthika Sen Bloss, Tanja Popp, Moritz Sasidharan, Rohit Schnitzler, Jörg-Peter Stein, Florian Steppuhn, Anke Unsicker, Sybille B. van Dam, Nicole M. Yepes, Sol Ziaja, Dominik Müller, Caroline Metabolomics Original Article INTRODUCTION: Assessing 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. OBJECTIVES: In 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. METHODS: Monoclonal 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. RESULTS: Chemotype-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. CONCLUSION: Our 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11306-023-02026-6. Springer US 2023-06-23 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10289961/ /pubmed/37351733 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11306-023-02026-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Eckert, Silvia
Eilers, Elisabeth J.
Jakobs, Ruth
Anaia, Redouan Adam
Aragam, Kruthika Sen
Bloss, Tanja
Popp, Moritz
Sasidharan, Rohit
Schnitzler, Jörg-Peter
Stein, Florian
Steppuhn, Anke
Unsicker, Sybille B.
van Dam, Nicole M.
Yepes, Sol
Ziaja, Dominik
Müller, Caroline
Inter-laboratory comparison of plant volatile analyses in the light of intra-specific chemodiversity
title Inter-laboratory comparison of plant volatile analyses in the light of intra-specific chemodiversity
title_full Inter-laboratory comparison of plant volatile analyses in the light of intra-specific chemodiversity
title_fullStr Inter-laboratory comparison of plant volatile analyses in the light of intra-specific chemodiversity
title_full_unstemmed Inter-laboratory comparison of plant volatile analyses in the light of intra-specific chemodiversity
title_short Inter-laboratory comparison of plant volatile analyses in the light of intra-specific chemodiversity
title_sort inter-laboratory comparison of plant volatile analyses in the light of intra-specific chemodiversity
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10289961/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37351733
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11306-023-02026-6
work_keys_str_mv AT eckertsilvia interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT eilerselisabethj interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT jakobsruth interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT anaiaredouanadam interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT aragamkruthikasen interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT blosstanja interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT poppmoritz interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT sasidharanrohit interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT schnitzlerjorgpeter interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT steinflorian interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT steppuhnanke interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT unsickersybilleb interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT vandamnicolem interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT yepessol interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT ziajadominik interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity
AT mullercaroline interlaboratorycomparisonofplantvolatileanalysesinthelightofintraspecificchemodiversity