4.7 Article

Functional characterization of a class III acid endochitinase from the traps of the carnivorous pitcher plant genus, Nepenthes

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY
卷 62, 期 13, 页码 4639-4647

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/err173

关键词

Carnivorous plants; digestive fluid; endochitinase; Nepenthes; PR proteins; real-time PCR

资金

  1. Max Planck Society

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Carnivory in plants is an adaptation strategy to nutrient-poor environments and soils. Carnivorous plants obtain some additional mineral nutrients by trapping and digesting prey; the genus Nepenthes is helped by its specialized pitcher traps. To make the nutrients available, the caught prey needs to be digested, a process that requires the concerted activity of several hydrolytic enzymes. To identify and investigate the various enzymes involved in this process, fluid from Nepenthes traps has been analysed in detail. In this study, a novel type of Nepenthes endochitinase was identified in the digestion fluid of closed pitchers. The encoding endochitinase genes have been cloned from eight different Nepenthes species. Among these, the deduced amino acid sequence similarity was at least 94.9%. The corresponding cDNA from N. rafflesiana was heterologously expressed, and the purified protein, NrChit1, was biochemically characterized. The enzyme, classified as a class III acid endochitinase belonging to family 18 of the glycoside hydrolases, is secreted into the pitcher fluid very probably due to the presence of an N-terminal signal peptide. Transcriptome analyses using real-time PCR indicated that the presence of prey in the pitcher up-regulates the endochitinase gene not only in the glands, which are responsible for enzyme secretion, but at an even higher level, in the glands' surrounding tissue. These results suggest that in the pitchers' tissues, the endochitinase as well as other proteins from the pitcher fluid might fulfil a different, primary function as pathogenesis-related proteins.

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