Professional Documents
Culture Documents
179 Nahrung/Food 46 (2002) No. 3, pp. 179 – 183 i WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH, 69469 Weinheim 2002 0027-769X/2002/0305-0179$17.50+.50/0
Prescha et al.
Table 1. The characteristic of analysed genetic lines of potatoes with Table 2. The lipids in the tubers of control and transgenic potato
modified 14-3-3 protein synthesis lines from the field trials 1998–2000
Genetic line Characteristics Potato Total fat Nonpolar lipids Polar lipids
lines (crude) % DW % of % DW % of
Desiree Control line % DWa) total fat total fat
Table 3. The relative composition of the fatty acids in the tubers of control and transgenic potato lines with modifications of 14-3-3 protein
synthesis (field trials 1998–2000)
1998
Desiree 20.19 l 0.69 4.13 l 0.17 2.93 l 0.89 48.58 l 0.87 14.05 l 0.19 10.12 l 1.11
J2 19.31 l 1.31 3.38 l 0.50 4.54 l 0.95 50.79 l 0.71 14.62 l 0.87 7.36 l 1.24
J4 18.25 l 1.34 3.08 l 0.13 4.31 l 0.83 50.66 l 0.93 13.82 l 0.23 9.88 l 1.32
J5 20.02 l 1.38 3.23 l 0.31 4.32 l 0.92 45.06 l 0.69 20.63 l 0.83 6.74 l 1.52
G1 18.21 l 1.31 3.03 l 0.31 2.89 l 0.70 53.80 l 0.15 14.15 l 0.18 7.92 l 0.84
J1 19.24 l 0.23 2.80 l 0.18 4.24 l 0.24 38.36 l 0.75 25.62 l 0.31 9.74 l 0.91
G2 11.74 l 0.40 1.88 l 0.17 2.52 l 0.27 61.31 l 0.69 16.67 l 0.15 5.88 l 0.73
1999
Desiree 19.87 l 0.42 4.44 l 0.26 2.70 l 0.51 51.13 l 0.74 15.01 l 0.16 6.85 l 1.25
J2 20.31 l 0.83 4.19 l 0.47 3.58 l 0.35 52.02 l 1.21 14.79 l 0.28 5.11 l 1.24
J4 19.25 l 0.38 3.52 l 0.41 4.22 l 0.28 52.37 l 1.36 14.55 l 0.34 6.09 l 0.79
J5 20.09 l 0.72 4.21 l 0.59 3.96 l 0.21 44.86 l 0.92 21.66 l 0.40 5.22 l 0.55
G1 18.90 l 0.23 3.68 l 0.19 3.01 l 0.18 52.42 l 0.87 14.73 l 0.39 7.26 l 0.68
J1 19.52 l 0.45 3.16 l 0.21 4.01 l 0.23 40.57 l 1.43 23.49 l 0.62 9.16 l 0.83
G2 13.23 l 0.54 1.95 l 0.19 2.69 l 0.17 62.71 l 1.14 16.94 l 0.58 2.48 l 0.46
2000
Desiree 31.02 l 1.51 4.35 l 0.67 3.18 l 0.66 40.31 l 1.24 12.11 l 1.13 9.03 l 0.52
J2 33.52 l 0.89 4.12 l 0.39 3.37 l 0.35 36.56 l 1.14 12.01 l 0.34 10.42 l 0.74
J4 33.52 l 0.84 4.32 l 1.06 2.85 l 0.79 37.96 l 1.59 11.57 l 0.95 9.61 l 1.27
J5 26.05 l 1.22 4.39 l 0.65 2.63 l 0.18 41.30 l 1.72 18.29 l 1.00 7.34 l 0.49
G1 30.66 l 0.48 4.11 l 0.83 2.70 l 0.85 40.19 l 0.83 12.36 l 0.41 10.00 l 0.91
J1 18.35 l 1.39 2.32 l 0.59 1.88 l 0.26 48.99 l 0.63 23.97 l 1.53 4.49 l 0.88
G2 17.98 l 0.97 2.33 l 0.81 3.34 l 0.33 50.38 l 0.84 22.23 l 1.15 3.74 l 0.52
in total fat was calculated to be 50%. There were only faint years the increase in cis-a-linoleic acid in J5 and J1 plants was
changes (up to 10%) in the neutral lipids content in all trans- detected. Also consistently seen was the increase in cis-a-lino-
genic lines in comparison to the control. Determination of leic acid in G2 plants.
polar lipids showed higher differences between absolue values The percentage compositions of fatty acids in the nonpolar
of this fraction content in control and transgenic potato. All fraction of lipids in tubers from the field experiment conducted
transgenic samples with the exception of G1 contained higher in three years are presented in Table 4. It was demonstrated
levels of polar lipids in dry matter of tubers in 1999. In the that in all samples studied the predominant fatty acids of this
subsequent year, the rate of polar lipids in total fat of trans- fraction were palmitic acid and cis-a-linoleic acid. In the
genic lines was slightly below the value for control plants and tubers from field trials 1998 and 1999 the highest differences,
thus reminded the situation from 1998. The proportions of neu- concerning the contributions of both fatty acids in the whole
tral and polar fractions in lipids of transgenic tubers (with nonpolar fraction were present in J2 potatoes when compared
exception of G1) were similar. to the control. A 50 and 44% increase of cis-a-linolenic acid,
The results of the determination of percentage composition also a 43 and 38% decrease of palmitic acid was detected in
of fatty acids in total fat of potato tubers from three years these two consecutive seasons. Among three lines with repres-
experiment (1998–2000) is presented in Table 3. The data sion of 14-3-3 only G1 potatoes had the percentage contribu-
from 1998 and 1999 are quite consistent and showed that cis- tion of fatty acids of this fraction similar to that of the control
a-linoleic acid was the main fatty acid in both groups of pota- line. In the remaining two transgenic lines with inhibited
toes, genetically modified and unmodified. Besides, the lipids synthesis of 14-3-3 a 31% lower (in both seasons) percentage
of studied potatoes contained high amounts of palmitic and contribution of palmitic acid in J5 line than in the control was
cis-a-linolenic acids. Significant changes in the content of observed. The contribution of palmitic acid was also smaller in
main unsaturated fatty acids in fat were observed between the the case of J1 and G2 plants. However, in the case of J1 plants
transformed lines, with the repression of gene ARF, and the the increase in cis-a-linolenic acid was consistently detected in
control cultivar. The line G2 showed also the significant three years experiment. In summary, the composition analysis
increase in the percentage of cis-a-linoleic acid in the total of the fatty acids in total fat and in nonpolar lipids from pota-
pool of fatty acids in comparison to the control. On the con- toes cultivated in field revealed the consistent changes in com-
trary, in the line J1 this parameter was visibly lower. However, position of fatty acids in the examined transgenic lines.
line J1 showed a significantly higher (26%) percentage of cis-
a-linolenic acid when compared to the control. In the tubers of
line G2, the highest percentage of unsaturated fatty acids 4 Discussion
among all potato lines studied was observed. The data from
the analysis of last year harvested tubers differed from those The fat in potato tubers is present in small amounts and
obtained in 1998 and 1999. It was shown that all plants con- makes up to 0.12% of fresh tubers’ mass. Its content in various
tained mainly cis-a-linoleic acid. Consistently in all three strains of potato ranged from 0.02 to 0.2% [17]. Most of the
Table 4. The relative composition of fatty acids in the nonpolar fraction of tuber lipids from control and transgenic potato lines with modifica-
tions of 14-3-3 protein synthesis (field trials 1998–2000)
1998
Desiree 40.42 l 0.58 6.74 l 0.76 6.33 l 0.17 20.61 l 0.66 12.86 l 0.43 13.04 l 0.81
J2 23.02 l 2.50 5.91 l 0.46 10.83 l 0.67 30.47 l 0.60 17.15 l 1.13 12.62 l 0.87
J4 38.58 l 0.35 8.56 l 0.19 8.83 l 0.17 21.68 l 0.22 10.19 l 0.18 12.16 l 0.73
J5 30.76 l 0.71 6.96 l 0.33 10.27 l 0.21 28.26 l 0.35 11.40 l 0.25 12.35 l 0.92
G1 40.93 l 0.43 6.90 l 0.30 6.63 l 0.09 20.49 l 0.21 13.48 l 0.18 11.57 l 0.71
J1 29.26 l 1.75 6.87 l 0.34 7.54 l 1.58 27.89 l 0.39 15.18 l 0.28 13.26 l 1.22
G2 33.89 l 0.71 9.12 l 0.17 8.26 l 0.76 25.71 l 0.55 10.14 l 0.20 12.88 l 0.77
1999
Desiree 40.62 l 0.89 6.19 l 0.39 7.63 l 0.62 19.84 l 0.36 14.42 l 0.55 11.30 l 0.26
J2 25.05 l 0.54 6.24 l 0.22 11.87 l 0.74 28.52 l 0.92 16.80 l 0.49 11.52 l 0.31
J4 40.39 l 1.37 8.93 l 0.57 8.69 l 0.44 20.51 l 1.18 11.43 l 0.95 10.05 l 0.80
J5 31.08 l 0.83 7.11 l 0.29 11.12 l 0.47 29.76 l 0.82 11.63 l 0.41 9.30 l 0.50
G1 41.26 l 0.86 6.88 l 0.36 6.92 l 0.67 20.20 l 0.94 14.33 l 0.19 10.41 l 0.70
J1 30.50 l 1.05 6.81 l 0.24 8.41 l 0.29 26.18 l 0.94 16.53 l 0.25 11.57 l 0.85
G2 35.12 l 0.97 10.11 l 0.33 8.81 l 0.51 24.58 l 0.83 10.81 l 0.44 10.57 l 0.99
2000
Desiree 32.56 l 1.41 7.06 l 0.74 3.22 l 0.26 36.84 l 1.27 10.56 l 0.57 9.70 l 1.01
J2 32.93 l 1.19 4.47 l 0.24 2.68 l 0.65 37.50 l 2.03 12.14 l 0.80 10.28 l 0.85
J4 30.32 l 0.82 5.44 l 0.19 4.34 l 0.34 34.46 l 1.56 16.57 l 0.43 8.87 l 0.77
J5 39.80 l 1.28 6.53 l 0.47 3.45 l 0.81 31.48 l 1.60 8.26 l 0.31 10.49 l 0.69
G1 32.67 l 0.82 7.25 l 0.48 3.24 l 0.17 37.34 l 1.37 10.74 l 0.52 8.77 l 0.44
J1 30.29 l 0.87 4.96 l 0.23 3.59 l 0.57 30.87 l 1.16 15.19 l 0.48 15.10 l 0.85
G2 20.39 l 1.54 5.26 l 0.81 9.24 l 0.93 31.33 l 0.92 17.60 l 0.84 16.18 l 1.21
lipids are located in the region between the peel and vascular nificant only in the first year of field cultivation and in subse-
ring of tuber. Therefore, in the thickly peeled potatoes the con- quent years was only slightly seen.
tent of this nutritional component is even smaller [18]. Fat in Of other transgenic tuber features those with increase of cis-
potatoes does not serve as a storage material, such a role is ful- a-linolenic acid content in total lipids in J5 and J1 plants were
filled by starch grains. It was reported [18, 19] that the total fat also consistently seen within three years field experiments.
of potato tubers consists mainly of phospholipids (47%), The consistent increase of this fatty acid in lipid nonpolar frac-
glyco- and galactolipids (22%), which are structural elements tion in J1 plants was also clearly detected. The mechanism by
of biological membranes, as well as of neutral lipids such as which the changes in fat content and fatty acids composition in
acylglycerols and free fatty acids (21%). Another report sug- transgenic plants occurred is as yet unknown but the results
gested [17] that the fat, which composes 0.5% of dry matter of obtained strongly suggest the involvement of the 14-3-3 iso-
tubers, consists of phospholipids (0.2% of dry matter), free forms in the regulation of lipid metabolism. It should be
fatty acids and simple lipids (0.15% of dry matter each). The pointed out that the data suggest the potential role of specific
composition of the fatty acids in fat isolated from tubers is 14-3-3 isoform in regulation of the ratio between predominant
especially advantageous from the nutritional point, since the fatty acids in this lipid fraction.
essential part of fatty acids pool is formed by unsaturated fatty
acids with one to three double bonds, mainly linoleic acid This work is supported by KBN grants 6P04 B00218 and PBZ/
(40–50%) [18, 19]. Because in many countries potatoes com- 029/P06/2000.
pose a large portion of the daily food rations, they contribute
significantly to the increased daily consumption of unsaturated
fatty acids. Thus, the cultivation of potato species, which accu-
mulates more fat in their tubers, would be an interesting scien-
5 References
tific task. Up to date there is no data in literature indicating [1] Szopa, J., Acta Biochim. Polon. 1995, 42, 183–190.
that there were any successful transformations of potatoes with [2] Aitken, A., Trends Cell Biol. 1996, 6, 340–347.
increased capability for storage of fat in comparison to conven- [3] Wilczyński, G., Kulma, A., Szopa, J., J. Plant Physiol. 1998,
tional cultivars. 153, 118–126.
The performed analysis of fat content and its composition in [4] Wilczyński, G., Kulma, A., Markiewicz, E., Szopa, J., Cell Mol.
potato tubers with modified level of synthesis of protein Biol. Lett. 1997, 2, 239–241.
[5] Bachmann, M., Huber, J. L., Liao, P. L., Gage, D. A., Huber, S.
14-3-3 isoforms suggests the usefulness of the transgenic tech-
C., FEBS Lett. 1996, 398, 127–131.
nology for this purpose. Overexpression of 14-3-3 in potato [6] Wilczyński, G., Willmitzer, L., Szopa, J., Proc. Conference of
tubers resulted in a significant increase in fat content. Thus, Plant Biology, Report, San Diego, CA 2000, No. 1018.
features of the plant were consistently observed within three [7] Jarillo, J. A., Capel, J., Leyva, A., Martinez-Zapater, J. M., Sali-
years field trials. However, the increase in fat quantity was sig- nas, J., Plant Mol. Biol. 1994, 25, 693–704.
[8] Chen, Z., Fu, H., Liu, D., Chang, P. F. L., Narasiman, M., Feri, [15] Hamilton, R. J., Hamilton, S., Lipid Analysis. A Practical
R., Hasegawa, P. M., Bressan, R. A., Plant J. 1994, 6, 729–740. Approach. Oxford University Press, New York 1992, pp. 163–
[9] Markiewicz, E., Wilczyński, G., Rzepecki, R., Kulma, A., Szopa, 166.
J., Cell. Mol. Biol. Lett. 1996, 1, 391–415. [16] Szymczak, J., Diagnostyka Laboratoryjna 1979, 15, 221–226.
[10] Wilczyński, G., Kulma, A., Feiga, I., Wenczel, A., Szopa, J., [17] Lisińska, G., Leszczyński, W., Potato Science and Technology,
Cell. Mol. Biol. Lett. 1998, 3, 75–91. Elsevier Applied Science, London, New York 1989, pp. 34–35.
[11] Szopa, J., J. Plant Physiol. 1994, 144, 617–619. [18] Kolbe, H., Fischer, J., Rogozińska, I., Kartoffelbau 1996, 47,
[12] Wilczyński, G., Kulma, A., Szopa, J., J. Plant Physiol. 1997, 290–294.
151, 118–126. [19] Trevini, M., Schoenecker, G., Iwanzik, W., Riedmann, M., Stute,
[13] Kulma, A., Wilczyński, G., Milcarz, M., Prescha, A., Szopa, J., R., Potato Res. 1985, 28, 42–47.
in: Bielecki, S., Tramper, J., Polak, J. (Eds.), Food Biotechnol-
ogy. Progress in Biotechnology, Vol. 17, Elsevier, Amsterdam Received June 6, 2001
2000, pp. 19–33. Accepted December 10, 2001
[14] Bligh, E. G., Dyer, W. J., Can. J. Biochem. Physiol. 1959, 37,
911.