Corn stover variability drives differences in Rhodo conversion to SAF-Task 7-Okonkwo-2023-ABPDU
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
INSTRUMENT(S): Q Exactive HF-X
ORGANISM(S): Rhodotorula Toruloides (ncbitaxon:5286)
SUBMITTER: 
Kristin Burnum-Johnson
PROVIDER: MSV000095450 | MassIVE | Fri Jul 26 10:00:00 BST 2024
SECONDARY ACCESSION(S): PXD054281
REPOSITORIES: MassIVE
Publications
Corn stover variability drives differences in bisabolene production by engineered Rhodotorula toruloides.
Okonkwo Onyinye O Dou Chang C Oksen Ethan E Narani Akash A Marcondes Wilian W Chen Xiaowen X Kim Joonhoon J Gao Yuqian Y Burnet Meagan C MC Webb-Robertson Bobbie-Jo M BM Poirier Brenton C BC Tanjore Deepti D Magnuson Jon K JK Munoz Nathalie Munoz NM Gardner James J
Journal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology 20240101
Microbial conversion of lignocellulosic biomass represents an alternative route for production of biofuels and bioproducts. While researchers have mostly focused on engineering strains such as Rhodotorula toruloides for better bisabolene production as a sustainable aviation fuel, less is known about the impact of the feedstock heterogeneity on bisabolene production. Critical material attributes like feedstock composition, nutritional content, and inhibitory compounds can all influence bioconvers ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Bacteria isolated from potato scab lesions in Finland or northern Sweden were analyzed using microarrays, PCR, and sequencing. Data indicate wide genetic variability in pathogenicity islands among S.turgidiscabies and S.scabies strains.
2010-02-01 | GSE18665 | GEO
Project description:Background: RNA-seq is revolutionizing the way we study transcriptomes. mRNA can be surveyed without prior knowledge of gene transcripts. Alternative splicing of transcript isoforms and the identification of previously unknown exons are being reported. Initial reports of differences in exon usage, and splicing between samples as well as quantitative differences among samples are beginning to surface. Biological variation has been reported to be larger than technical variation. In addition, technical variation has been reported to be in line with expectations due to random sampling. However, strategies for dealing with technical variation will differ depending on the magnitude. The size of technical variance, and the role of sampling are examined in this manuscript. Results: Independent Solexa/Illumina experiments containing technical replicates are analyzed. When coverage is low, large disagreements between technical replicates are apparent. Exon detection between technical replicates is highly variable when the coverage is less than 5 reads per nucleotide and estimates of gene expression are more likely to disagree when coverage is low. Although large disagreements in the estimates of expression are observed at all levels of coverage. Conclusions: Technical variability is too high to ignore. Technical variability results in inconsistent detection of exons at low levels of coverage. Further, the estimate of the relative abundance of a transcript can substantially disagree, even when coverage levels are high. This may be due to the low sampling fraction and if so, it will persist as an issue needing to be addressed in experimental design even as the next wave of technology produces larger numbers of reads. We provide practical recommendations for dealing with the technical variability, without dramatic cost increases. Three independent samples of D. simulans male heads were collected with each sample representing a unique pool of biological material. Each sample was prepared according to manufacturer's instructions and then the same library was run on two lanes of a Solexa/Illumina flow cell, resulting in two technical replicates for each biological replicate, runs were 36 base-pair paired end.
2014-01-15 | E-GEOD-54068 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Background: RNA-seq is revolutionizing the way we study transcriptomes. mRNA can be surveyed without prior knowledge of gene transcripts. Alternative splicing of transcript isoforms and the identification of previously unknown exons are being reported. Initial reports of differences in exon usage, and splicing between samples as well as quantitative differences among samples are beginning to surface. Biological variation has been reported to be larger than technical variation. In addition, technical variation has been reported to be in line with expectations due to random sampling. However, strategies for dealing with technical variation will differ depending on the magnitude. The size of technical variance, and the role of sampling are examined in this manuscript. Results: Independent Solexa/Illumina experiments containing technical replicates are analyzed. When coverage is low, large disagreements between technical replicates are apparent. Exon detection between technical replicates is highly variable when the coverage is less than 5 reads per nucleotide and estimates of gene expression are more likely to disagree when coverage is low. Although large disagreements in the estimates of expression are observed at all levels of coverage. Conclusions: Technical variability is too high to ignore. Technical variability results in inconsistent detection of exons at low levels of coverage. Further, the estimate of the relative abundance of a transcript can substantially disagree, even when coverage levels are high. This may be due to the low sampling fraction and if so, it will persist as an issue needing to be addressed in experimental design even as the next wave of technology produces larger numbers of reads. We provide practical recommendations for dealing with the technical variability, without dramatic cost increases. Three independent samples of D. melanogaster female heads were collected with each sample representing a unique pool of biological material. Each sample was prepared according to manufacturer's instructions and then the same library was run on two lanes of a Solexa/Illumina flow cell, resulting in two technical replicates for each biological replicate, runs were 36 base-pair paired end.
2014-01-15 | E-GEOD-54067 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Variability in gene expression is an important and largely unknown phenomenon responsible of tumor resistance to chemotherapy. Here, we show that energy metabolism proteins are highly variable, specially Glut1, G6PD, PKM2 and SDHA. In contrast, the variability of housekeeping proteins was low. We identified the PI3K/Akt/mTor pathway as the source of variability for PKM2.Variability was independent of the energy source used. However, cells grown on glucose down-regulate G6PDH and SDHA, promoting oxidative stress. Variability and chemotherapy plasticity were directly related, and the combination of drugs with opposite effect on the expression of plastic proteins resulted in positive synergy. Human solid tumor cells displayed higher variability in metabolic enzymes than cultured cells. The most aggressive tumors showed higher variability than less aggressive ones. This suggests that variability in energy metabolism enzymes could be a biomarker for tumor stratification and therapy election.
2022-03-05 | GSE127900 | GEO
Project description:Assessment of sources of non-biological (technical) variability in the processing of RNA samples and gene chips during microarray analysis. The purpose of this experiment was to measure technical variability in microarray data introduced by various steps in preparation of the RNA, amplification/labeling of the RNA and hybridization of the sample to the arrays on separate days. The experimental design utilized a single tissue source - homogenized brain tissue pooled from 3 eight week old male C57/Bl mice.
2010-12-11 | GSE26008 | GEO
Project description:A Thalamic Orphan Receptor Drives Variability in Short Term Memory
| PRJNA659237 | ENA
Project description:Genetic and environmental exposures cause variability in gene expression. Although most genes are affected in a population, their effect sizes vary greatly, indicating the existence of regulatory mechanisms that could amplify or attenuate expression variability. Here, we investigate the relationship between the sequence and transcription start site architectures of promoters and their expression variability across human individuals. We find that expression variability can be largely explained by a promoter’s DNA sequence and its binding sites for specific transcription factors. We show that promoter expression variability reflects the biological process of a gene, demonstrating a selective trade-off between stability for metabolic genes and plasticity for responsive genes and those involved in signaling. Promoters with a rigid transcription start site architecture are more prone to have variable expression and to be associated with genetic variants with large effect sizes, while a flexible usage of transcription start sites within a promoter attenuates expression variability and limits genotypic effects. Our work provides insights into the variable nature of responsive genes and reveals a novel mechanism for supplying transcriptional and mutational robustness to essential genes through multiple transcription start site regions within a promoter.
2022-11-14 | GSE188099 | GEO
Project description:Background: RNA-seq is revolutionizing the way we study transcriptomes. mRNA can be surveyed without prior knowledge of gene transcripts. Alternative splicing of transcript isoforms and the identification of previously unknown exons are being reported. Initial reports of differences in exon usage, and splicing between samples as well as quantitative differences among samples are beginning to surface. Biological variation has been reported to be larger than technical variation. In addition, technical variation has been reported to be in line with expectations due to random sampling. However, strategies for dealing with technical variation will differ depending on the magnitude. The size of technical variance, and the role of sampling are examined in this manuscript. Results: Independent Solexa/Illumina experiments containing technical replicates are analyzed. When coverage is low, large disagreements between technical replicates are apparent. Exon detection between technical replicates is highly variable when the coverage is less than 5 reads per nucleotide and estimates of gene expression are more likely to disagree when coverage is low. Although large disagreements in the estimates of expression are observed at all levels of coverage. Conclusions: Technical variability is too high to ignore. Technical variability results in inconsistent detection of exons at low levels of coverage. Further, the estimate of the relative abundance of a transcript can substantially disagree, even when coverage levels are high. This may be due to the low sampling fraction and if so, it will persist as an issue needing to be addressed in experimental design even as the next wave of technology produces larger numbers of reads. We provide practical recommendations for dealing with the technical variability, without dramatic cost increases.
2014-01-15 | GSE54068 | GEO
Project description:Background: RNA-seq is revolutionizing the way we study transcriptomes. mRNA can be surveyed without prior knowledge of gene transcripts. Alternative splicing of transcript isoforms and the identification of previously unknown exons are being reported. Initial reports of differences in exon usage, and splicing between samples as well as quantitative differences among samples are beginning to surface. Biological variation has been reported to be larger than technical variation. In addition, technical variation has been reported to be in line with expectations due to random sampling. However, strategies for dealing with technical variation will differ depending on the magnitude. The size of technical variance, and the role of sampling are examined in this manuscript. Results: Independent Solexa/Illumina experiments containing technical replicates are analyzed. When coverage is low, large disagreements between technical replicates are apparent. Exon detection between technical replicates is highly variable when the coverage is less than 5 reads per nucleotide and estimates of gene expression are more likely to disagree when coverage is low. Although large disagreements in the estimates of expression are observed at all levels of coverage. Conclusions: Technical variability is too high to ignore. Technical variability results in inconsistent detection of exons at low levels of coverage. Further, the estimate of the relative abundance of a transcript can substantially disagree, even when coverage levels are high. This may be due to the low sampling fraction and if so, it will persist as an issue needing to be addressed in experimental design even as the next wave of technology produces larger numbers of reads. We provide practical recommendations for dealing with the technical variability, without dramatic cost increases.
2014-01-15 | GSE54067 | GEO
Project description:Non-genetic differences underlie variability in proliferation among esophageal epithelial clones
| PRJNA1092633 | ENA