↓ Skip to main content

EST-based in silico identification and in vitro test of antimicrobial peptides in Brassica napus

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
EST-based in silico identification and in vitro test of antimicrobial peptides in Brassica napus
Published in
BMC Genomics, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12864-015-1849-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tao Ke, Huihui Cao, Junyan Huang, Fan Hu, Jin Huang, Caihua Dong, Xiangdong Ma, Jingyin Yu, Han Mao, Xi Wang, Qiuhong Niu, Fengli Hui, Shengyi Liu

Abstract

Brassica napus is the third leading source of vegetable oil in the world after soybean and oil palm. The accumulation of gene sequences, especially expressed sequence tags (ESTs) from plant cDNA libraries, has provided a rich resource for genes discovery including potential antimicrobial peptides (AMPs). In this study, we used ESTs including those generated from B. napus cDNA libraries of seeds, pathogen-challenged leaves and deposited in the public databases, as a model, to perform in silico identification and consequently in vitro confirmation of putative AMP activities through a highly efficient system of recombinant AMP prokaryotic expression. In total, 35,788 were generated from cDNA libraries of pathogen-challenged leaves and 187,272 ESTs from seeds of B. napus, and the 644,998 ESTs of B. napus were downloaded from the EST database of PlantGDB. They formed 201,200 unigenes. First, all the known AMPs from the AMP databank (APD2 database) were individually queried against all the unigenes using the BLASTX program. A total of 972 unigenes that matched the 27 known AMP sequences in APD2 database were extracted and annotated using Blast2GO program. Among these unigenes, 237 unigenes from B. napus pathogen-challenged leaves had the highest ratio (1.15 %) in this unigene dataset, which is 13 times that of the unigene datasets of B. napus seeds (0.09 %) and 2.3 times that of the public EST dataset. About 87 % of each EST library was lipid-transfer protein (LTP) (32 % of total unigenes), defensin, histone, endochitinase, and gibberellin-regulated proteins. The most abundant unigenes in the leaf library were endochitinase and defensin, and LTP and histone in the pub EST library. After masking of the repeat sequence, 606 peptides that were orthologous matched to different AMP families were found. The phylogeny and conserved structural motifs of seven AMPs families were also analysed. To investigate the antimicrobial activities of the predicted peptides, 31 potential AMP genes belonging to different AMP families were selected to test their antimicrobial activities after bioinformatics identification. The AMP genes were all optimized according to Escherichia coli codon usage and synthetized through one-step polymerase chain reaction method. The results showed that 28 recombinant AMPs displayed expected antimicrobial activities against E. coli and Micrococcus luteus and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum strains. The study not only significantly expanded the number of known/predicted peptides, but also contributed to long-term plant genetic improvement for increased resistance to diverse pathogens of B.napus. These results proved that the high-throughput method developed that combined an in silico procedure with a recombinant AMP prokaryotic expression system is considerably efficient for identification of new AMPs from genome or EST sequence databases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 23%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Master 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 9 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 15%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 11 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 May 2016.
All research outputs
#20,328,845
of 22,873,031 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#9,289
of 10,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,455
of 267,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#264
of 284 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,873,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,665 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,130 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 284 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.