4.7 Article

Dual mechanisms regulating glutamate decarboxylases and accumulation of gamma-aminobutyric acid in tea (Camellia sinensis) leaves exposed to multiple stresses

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 6, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/srep23685

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation for Young Scholars of China [31401927]
  2. 100 Talents Programme of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [Y321011001, 201209]
  3. Foundation of Science and Technology Program of Guangzhou [2014J4100219]
  4. Foundation of Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Applied Botany
  5. Foundation of Guangdong Food and Drug Vocational College [2013YZ003]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

gamma-Aminobutyric acid (GABA) is one of the major inhibitory neurotransmitters in the central nervous system. It has multiple positive effects on mammalian physiology and is an important bioactive component of tea (Camellia sinensis). GABA generally occurs at a very low level in plants but GABA content increases substantially after exposure to a range of stresses, especially oxygen-deficiency. During processing of tea leaves, a combination of anoxic stress and mechanical damage are essential for the high accumulation of GABA. This is believed to be initiated by a change in glutamate decarboxylase activity, but the underlying mechanisms are unclear. In the present study we characterized factors regulating the expression and activity of three tea glutamate decarboxylase genes (CsGAD1, 2, and 3), and their encoded enzymes. The results suggests that, unlike the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana, there are dual mechanisms regulating the accumulation of GABA in tea leaves exposed to multiple stresses, including activation of CsGAD1 enzymatic activity by calmodulin upon the onset of the stress and accumulation of high levels of CsGAD2 mRNA induced by a combination of anoxic stress and mechanical damage.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available