PuSH - Publication Server of Helmholtz Zentrum München: Inter-laboratory comparison of plant volatile analyses in the light of intra-specific chemodiversity.

Information

Clues to quality of journals

Open Access Policy of Helmholtz Association 2016

CC Licencences

Publication Metrics

Navigation

Home

Deutsch

EVA: Electronic Publishing

New EVA Application

Research

Advanced Search

Browse by ...

... HMGU-Authors/Consortia

... Organizational Structure

... Journal

... Publication Type

... Research Data

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Publication Year

Publication overview

Statistics

Statistics (last 5 years)

OA Publications

Publish

Submit Publication

Import publication from...

...EVA

Report missing publication

Highlights

Support & Contact

Contact persons

Help

Data protection

Helmholtz Open Science

JANE Journal Estimator

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Eckert, S.* ; Eilers, E.J.* ; Jakobs, R.* ; Anaia, R.A.* ; Aragam, K.S.* ; Bloss, T.* ; Popp, M. ; Sasidharan, R.* ; Schnitzler, J.-P. ; Stein, F.* ; Steppuhn, A.* ; Unsicker, S.B.* ; van Dam, N.M.* ; Yepes, S.* ; Ziaja, D.* ; Müller, C.*

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

Metabolomics 19:62 (2023)

Publ. Version/Full Text

DOI

PMC

	Open Access Hybrid

Abstract
Metrics
Extra information

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.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Altmetric

3.600

1.002