Gene Expressions Analysis of Seed Physiological Quality in Soybean Cultivars


  •  Alexana Baldoni    
  •  Edila Vilella de Resende Von Pinho    
  •  Heloisa Oliveira dos Santos    
  •  Thais Lima Marques    
  •  Rucyan Walace Pereira    

Abstract

Soybean seed production with high physiological quality is important for ensuring populations of recommended plants for each cultivar. It is also known that there is genetic variability for this characteristic among the soybean cultivars. The objective was to study the genes expressionof protein and gene transcript involved in the physiological quality of soybean seeds. The seeds of CD 206 and CD 201 cultivars were classified as high quality while Savana and Emgopa 316 cultivars were classified as low quality by germination and vigor tests. Physiological, enzymatic and transcripts analysis were held in seeds of each cultivar during two harvest seasons, R8 and R8 + 15 days; at protein level the alcohol dehydrogenase isoenzyme systems (ADH), phosphoglucoisomerase (PGI), superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), malate dehydrogenase (MDH) and isocitrate lyase (ICL). The PCR technique in real time (qRT-PCR) was used for transcritome studies for quantitative gene expression analysis. The method used was the comparative Ct considering the relative expression levels in relation to cultivar of high quality CD 201. It is concluded that there is higher enzymes expression involved in respiration, alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH), malate dehydrogenase (MDH) and phosphoglucoisomerase (PGI), in seeds with high physiological quality, especially when harvesting is delayed. The proteomic and transcriptomic profiles related to the genes involved in free radicals removing systems in soybeans varies among cultivars and the season of seed harvest.



This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
  • Issn(Print): 1916-9752
  • Issn(Onlne): 1916-9760
  • Started: 2009
  • Frequency: monthly

Journal Metrics

(The data was calculated based on Google Scholar Citations)

  • Google-based Impact Factor (2016): 2.28
  • h-index (December 2017): 31
  • i10-index (December 2017): 304
  • h5-index (December 2017): 22
  • h5-median (December 2017): 27

Contact