4.7 Article

Characterization of plant sulfiredoxin and role of sulphinic form of 2-Cys peroxiredoxin

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY
卷 61, 期 5, 页码 1509-1521

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erq016

关键词

Antioxidant defence; Arabidopsis; hydrogen peroxide; inorganic phosphate; peroxiredoxin; sulfiredoxin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The antioxidant function of 2-Cys peroxiredoxin (Prx) involves the oxidation of its conserved peroxidatic cysteine to sulphenic acid that is recycled by a reductor agent. In conditions of oxidative stress, the peroxidatic cysteine can be overoxidized to sulphinic acid inactivating the Prx. An enzyme recently discovered, named sulfiredoxin (Srx), reduces the sulphinic 2-Cys Prx (Prx-SO2H). To explore the physiological functions of Srx in plants we have cloned, expressed and purified to homogeneity a Srx from Arabidopsis thaliana (AtSrx), as well as five variants by sitedirected mutagenesis on amino acids involved in its activity. The activity of sulfiredoxin, determined by a new method, is dependent on the concentration of the sulphinic form of Prx and the conserved Srx is capable of regenerating the functionality of both pea and Arabidopsis Prx-SO2H. Molecular modelling of AtSrx and the facts that the R28Q variant shows a partial inactivation, that the activity of the E76A variant is equivalent to that of the native enzyme and that the double mutation R28Q/ E76A abolishes the enzymatic activity suggests that the pair His100-Glu76 may be involved in the activation of C72 in the absence of R28. The knock-out mutant plants without Srx or 2-Cys Prx exhibited phenotypical differences under growth conditions of 16 h light, probably due to the signalling role of the sulphinic form of Prx. These mutants showed more susceptibility to oxidative stress than wild-type plants. This work presents the first systematic biochemical characterization of the Srx/ Prx system from plants and contributes to a better understanding of its physiological function.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据