Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://223.31.159.10:8080/jspui/handle/123456789/630
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorShekhar, Shubhendu-
dc.contributor.authorMishra, Divya-
dc.contributor.authorGayali, Saurabh-
dc.contributor.authorBuragohain, Alak Kumar-
dc.contributor.authorChakraborty, Subhra-
dc.contributor.authorChakraborty, Niranjan-
dc.date.accessioned2016-03-23T05:59:51Z-
dc.date.available2016-03-23T05:59:51Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.citationJ. Proteomics, 143: 306-317en_US
dc.identifier.issn1874-3919-
dc.identifier.urihttp://172.16.0.77:8080/jspui/handle/123456789/630-
dc.descriptionAccepted date: 16 March 2016en_US
dc.description.abstractSweetpotato has long been acknowledged as a significant contributor of global caloric needs, which continues to be of remarkable economic value. It is an important staple and emergency food in many countries and its annual world production hovers to about 130 million tons. The tubers act as sink and compete for the available photoassimilates eventually leading to the acquisition of nutrients and phytochemicals. Differential display of genes or gene-products, and metabolites causes differences in nutritive value of closely related ecotypes. To better understand the molecular basis for differential nutrient availability and phytochemicals, and exploit the natural genetic variation(s), we aimed at developing proteometabolic profiles of two contrasting ecotypes of sweetpotato. Proteomic analyses led to the identification of 1541 and 1201 proteins in orange fleshed and white fleshed sweetpotato ecotypes, respectively, presumably associated with binding, followed by catalytic, transferase, hydrolase, kinase and transporter activities. Furthermore, metabolome profiling revealed 148 and 126 metabolites in cv. OFSP and WFSP, respectively. This study would provide a basis for future comparative proteometabolomic efforts for sweetpotato, in particular and tuber crops in general. The results would expand our understanding of the proteome as well as metabolome and give new insights into how ecotype-specific traits are developed.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThis work was supported by grants (BT/PR3123/16//250) from the Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Govt. of India. We kindly acknowledge the University Grant Commission (UGC) and CSIR, Govt. of India for providing predoctoral fellowship to D.M and S.G. We also thank CTCRI, India for providing planting materials of sweetpotato and JNU AIRF for GC-MS analysis. Assistance of Mr. Shankar Acharya and Mr. C. Ravishankar during field management is highly acknowledged.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherElsevier B.V.en_US
dc.subjectFood securityen_US
dc.subjectNon-model cropen_US
dc.subjectSweetpotatoen_US
dc.subjectEcotypesen_US
dc.subjectNutrient acquisitionen_US
dc.subjectProteometabolomicen_US
dc.titleComparison of proteomic and metabolomic profiles of two contrasting ecotypes of sweetpotato (Ipomoea batata L)en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.officialurlhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1874391916300847en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jprot.2016.03.028en_US
Appears in Collections:Institutional Publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Chakraborty N_2016_6.pdf
  Restricted Access
1.53 MBAdobe PDFView/Open Request a copy


Items in IR@NIPGR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.