Skip to main content

Table 1 PFA yield in field grown tobacco

From: A hyper-thermostable α-amylase from Pyrococcus furiosus accumulates in Nicotiana tabacum as functional aggregates

   

PFA (g/kg fresh leaf)a

Fresh leaf yield (kg/plant)b

 

PFA kg/ha

 

Transgenic

Year

first

second

 

first

second

 

PFA/plant

if 40,000

cultivar

line

 

harvest

harvest

average

harvest

harvest

total

g

plant/ha

81 V9

10 F10

2009

0.95 ± 0.34

1.80 ± 0.56

1.38

0.28 ± 0.03

0.31 ± 0.11

0.59

0.81

32.57

 

10 F18

2009

0.70 ± 0.16

1.68 ± 0.80

1.19

0.26 ± 0.04

0.28 ± 0.04

0.54

0.64

25.70

  

2010

0.21 ± 0.04

0.07 ± 0.01

0.14

0.25 ± 0.10

0.22 ± 0.05

0.47

0.07

2.63

 

10 F12

2009

0.55 ± 0.05

1.31 ± 0.11

0.93

0.30 ± 0.05

0.25 ± 0.09

0.55

0.51

20.46

I64

1 F9

2009

1.72 ± 0.26

1.05 ± 0.16

1.38

0.20 ± 0.06

0.27 ± 0.06

0.47

0.65

25.94

 

1 F18

2009

1.48 ± 0.49

0.52 ± 0.23

1

0.23 ± 0.02

0.29 ± 0.07

0.52

0.52

20.80

 

1 F14

2009

1.31 ± 0.13

1.01 ± 0.23

1.16

0.18 ± 0.06

0.23 ± 0.03

0.41

0.48

19.02

  

2010

0.89 ± 0.28

0.38 ± 0.23

0.63

0.25 ± 0.11

0.21 ± 0.04

0.46

0.29

11.59

TI 75

12 F8

2009

1.35 ± 0.15

2.29 ± 0.62

1.82

0.11 ± 0.03

0.14 ± 0.02

0.25

0.46

18.20

 

12 F34

2009

0.85 ± 0.26

1.01 ± 0.17

0.93

0.11 ± 0.02

0.18 ± 0.02

0.29

0.27

10.79

  

2010

2.39 ± 0.51

4.49 ± 0.47

3.44

0.19 ± 0.04

0.12 ± 0.01

0.31

1.07

42.66

 

12 F35

2009

0.40 ± 0.13

0.90 ± 0.23

0.65

0.14 ± 0.02

0.21 ± 0.07

0.35

0.23

9.10

Con.

7 F8

2009

0.53 ± 0.13

1.28 ± 0.24

0.91

0.25 ± 0.03

0.22 ± 0.01

0.47

0.43

17.11

Havana 38

 

2010

1.97 ± 0.59

1.24 ± 0.31

1.61

0.19 ± 0.02

0.15 ± 0.04

0.34

0.55

21.90

 

7 F13

2009

0.67 ± 0.10

1.25 ± 0.11

0.96

0.17 ± 0.03

0.16 ± 0.05

0.33

0.32

12.67

 

7 F15

2009

0.47 ± 0.26

0.40 ± 0.03

0.43

0.32 ± 0.05

0.22 ± 0.02

0.54

0.23

9.29

TI 95

3 F5

2009

0.83 ± 0.35

0.99 ± 0.12

0.91

0.14 ± 0.01

0.20 ± 0.05

0.34

0.31

12.38

  

2010

2.47 ± 0.44

0.41 ± 0.13

1.44

0.14 ± 0.03

0.15 ± 0.04

0.29

0.42

16.70

 

3 F4

2009

1.48 ± 0.32

0.62 ± 0.20

1.05

0.15 ± 0.03

0.15 ± 0.06

0.3

0.32

12.60

 

3 F30

2009

0.34 ± 0.07

0.45 ± 0.06

0.4

0.17 ± 0.04

0.20 ± 0.02

0.37

0.15

5.92

Little

9 F28

2009

1.10 ± 0.14

0.52 ± 0.30

0.81

0.17 ± 0.01

0.18 ± 0.06

0.35

0.28

11.34

Crittenden

 

2010

2.09 ± 0.62

2.67 ± 0.92

2.38

0.22 ± 0.06

0.16 ± 0.02

0.38

0.90

36.18

 

9 F20

2009

0.80 ± 0.07

0.55 ± 0.01

0.68

0.17 ± 0.03

0.19 ± 0.04

0.36

0.24

9.79

  

2010

2.31 ± 0.37

0.75 ± 0.49

1.53

0.25 ± 0.08

0.18 ± 0.04

0.43

0.66

26.32

 

9 F26

2009

0.18 ± 0.02

0.62 ± 0.43

0.4

0.18 ± 0.05

0.20 ± 0.03

0.38

0.15

6.08

  1. a: The data are expressed as the mean ± SD from four experimental plots
  2. b: the data are expressed as the mean ± SD from 40 (2009 first harvest), 12 (2009 s harvest) and 20 (2010 first and second harvest) plants
Back to article page

BMC Biotechnology

ISSN: 1472-6750

Contact us