Sandalwood Fragrance Biosynthesis Involves Sesquiterpene Synthases of Both the Terpene Synthase (TPS)-a and TPS-b Subfamilies, including Santalene Synthases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sandalwood oil is one of the worlds most highly prized fragrances. To identify the genes and encoded enzymes responsible for santalene biosynthesis, we cloned and characterized three orthologous terpene synthase (TPS) genes SaSSy, SauSSy, and SspiSSy from three divergent sandalwood species; Santalum album, S. austrocaledonicum, and S. spicatum, respectively. The encoded enzymes catalyze the formation of α-, β-, epi-β-santalene, and α-exo-bergamotene from (E,E)-farnesyl diphosphate (E,E-FPP). Recombinant SaSSy was additionally tested with (Z,Z)-farnesyl diphosphate (Z,Z-FPP) and remarkably, found to produce a mixture of α-endo-bergamotene, α-santalene, (Z)-β-farnesene, epi-β-santalene, and β-santalene. Additional cDNAs that encode bisabolene/bisabolol synthases were also cloned and functionally characterized from these three species. Both the santalene synthases and the bisabolene/bisabolol synthases reside in the TPS-b phylogenetic clade, which is more commonly associated with angiosperm monoterpene synthases. An orthologous set of TPS-a synthases responsible for formation of macrocyclic and bicyclic sesquiterpenes were characterized. Strict functionality and limited sequence divergence in the santalene and bisabolene synthases are in contrast to the TPS-a synthases, suggesting these compounds have played a significant role in the evolution of the Santalum genus.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".