NOT PEER-REVIEWED
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

View peer-reviewed version

Supplemental Information

Fig S1. GO (a) and KEGG (b) pathway analysis of DEGs of S. zeamais after oil- fumigation

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27142v1/supp-1

Table S1. qRT-PCR was used to further validate and quantify the RNA levels for 20 selected genes that encode NADH or NAD+

qPCR primers and primer efficiency

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27142v1/supp-2

Fig.1. Fumigant toxicity of M. alternifolia essential oil (a) and itsconstituents (c) against T. confusum adults and the correspondingregression analysis (b).

Results are reported as mean ± SE (calculated from three independent experiments). The LC50 values were subjected to probit analysis. (Fong et al. 2016) Different lowercase letters at the top of the columns mean significant differences at a p value of 0.05. The error in Figure 3c represents the 95% fiducial limits.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27142v1/supp-3

Table S2. Top 22 enriched KEGG pathways between oil-fumigated and control samples

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27142v1/supp-4

Table S3. Genes associated with mitochondrial functions were differentially expressed

Differentially expressed genes in respiration- related enzymes

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27142v1/supp-5

Table S4. T. confusum transcriptome revealed 54 transcripts that encode cytochrome P450s, with 18 differentially expressed more than 2-fold and 33 significantly increased (p < 0.05) under oil exposure

Differentially expressed genes in xenobiotic detoxification- related enzymes

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27142v1/supp-6

Raw data per replicate of partial NAD+/ NADH level and corresponding calculative process

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27142v1/supp-7

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Min Liao performed the experiments, prepared figures and/or tables, approved the final draft.

Qian-Qian Yang performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, approved the final draft.

Jin-Jing Xiao analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Yong Huang analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Li-Jun Zhou contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, approved the final draft.

Ri-Mao Hua contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Hai-Qun Cao conceived and designed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Data Deposition

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The reads were submitted to the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA; accession number, SUB2742979).

Funding

This study was supported by the Anhui University Talent project (gxbjZD2016024), the Natural Science Research Projects of Anhui College (KJ2018A0148), the National Forestry Public Welfare Profession Scientific Research Special Project of China (NO. 201404601), and National Key Research and Development Program of China (NO. 2017YFD0201203). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.


Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
 
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies
  Visitors   Views   Downloads