TPS Expression, Not Copy Number, Explains Aroma Diversity among Grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) Cultivars
Petersen, M.; Paineau, M.; Minio, A.; Cochetel, N.; Figueroa-Balderas, R.; Kruse, L. H.; Davis, S. K.; Bohlmann, J.; Cantu, D.; Castellarin, S. D.
Show abstract
Terpenoids are major contributors to grapevine berry and wine aroma, with mono- and sesquiterpenoids exhibiting substantial variation among cultivars. However, the genetic basis of cultivar-specific terpenoid profiles remains only partially understood due to gene duplications that expanded the terpenoid synthase (TPS) gene family across different cultivars. Here, we compared haplotype-resolved genome assemblies for seven cultivars to analyze copy number variation and expression profiles of terpenoid biosynthesis genes and terpenoid accumulation throughout flower and berry development. These assemblies resolved duplicated TPS loci at the haplotype level, revealing extensive copy number variation across cultivars and between haplotypes within a cultivar, with up to 44 mono-TPS genes on a single haplotype. We identified eight specific monoterpenoids as key drivers of cultivar-specific profiles in ripe berries. Total TPS transcript abundance correlated strongly with total terpenoid accumulation over time. In contrast, TPS copy number was largely decoupled from both expression and terpenoid accumulation, indicating that expression regulation, rather than gene dosage, underlies aroma differences among cultivars. Transcript-metabolite network analysis revealed both expected correlations between specific TPS genes and putative products as well as novel associations. We functionally validated selected candidate TPS in Nicotiana benthamiana, characterizing -farnesene, {beta}-ocimene, and multi-product -terpineol synthases. The in vivo characterization demonstrated that minor sequence variations can alter catalytic activity and product profile. Together, these findings show that the extensive duplication of TPS genes in grapevine does not itself determine terpenoid output; instead, cultivar-specific aroma arises from how these genes are expressed and from sequence differences that shape enzyme activity.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A cyclo-DOPA 6-O-glucosyltransferase-mediated route for gomphrenin I biosynthesis in Basella alba and Gomphrena globosa 94%
- Two bi-functional cytochrome P450 CYP72 enzymes from olive (Olea europaea) catalyze the oxidative C-C bond cleavage in the biosynthesis of secoxy-iridoids - flavor and quality determinants in olive oil 94%
- In a nutshell: pistachio genome and kernel development 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Function of the HYDROXYCINNAMOYL-CoA:SHIKIMATE HYDROXYCINNAMOYL TRANSFERASE is evolutionarily conserved in embryophytes 93%
- Natural variation in expression of the HECT E3 ligase UPL3 influences seed size and crop yields in Brassica napus by altering regulatory gene expression. 92%
- R2R3-MYB EVER links emission of volatiles with epicuticular wax biosynthesis in petunia petal epidermis 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Integrative analysis of the shikonin metabolic network identifies new gene connections and reveals evolutionary insight into shikonin biosynthesis 94%
- Early seed priming with closely related Bacillus strains induces divergent physiological and defense responses in melon 92%
- Transcripts switched off at the stop of phloem unloading highlight the energy efficiency of sugar import in the ripening V. vinifera fruit. 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Smoke exposure triggers rapid transcriptional changes and reveals glycosyltransferases linked to smoke taint in ripening grape berries 95%
- Dynamic histone acetylation in floral volatile synthesis and emission in petunia flowers 93%
- Esca Disease triggers local transcriptomic response and systemic DNA methylation changes in grapevine 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.