4.5 Article

Cellulolytic environment in the midgut of the wood-feeding higher termite Nasutitermes takasagoensis

期刊

JOURNAL OF INSECT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 58, 期 1, 页码 147-154

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinsphys.2011.10.012

关键词

Cellulase; Termite; Midgut; Crystalline cellulose; Immunohistochemistry

资金

  1. Program for Promotion of Basic and Applied Researches for Innovations in Bio-oriented Industry (BRAIN)
  2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [20380037]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20380037, 23380047] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Unlike lower termites, xylophagous higher termites thrive on wood without the aid of symbiotic protists. In the higher termite Nasutitermes takasagoensis, both endogenous endo-beta-1,4-glucanase and beta-glucosidase genes are expressed in the midgut, which is believed to be the main site of cellulose digestion. To further explore the detailed cellulolytic system in the midgut of N. takasagoensis, we performed immunohistochemistry and digital light microscopy to determine distributions of cellulolytic enzymes in the salivary glands and the midgut as well as the total cellulolytic activity in the midgut. Although cellulolytic enzymes were uniformly produced in the midgut epithelium, the concentration of endo-beta-1,4-glucanase activity and luminal volume in the midgut were comparable to those of the wood-feeding lower termite Coptotermes formosanus, which digests cellulose with the aid of hindgut protists. However, the size of ingested wood particles was considerably larger in N. takasagoensis than that in C formosanus. Nevertheless, it is possible that the cellulolytic system in the midgut of N. takasagoensis hydrolyzes highly crystalline cellulose to a certain extent. The glucose produced did not accumulate in the midgut lumen. Therefore, the present study suggests that the midgut of the higher termite provides the necessary conditions for cellulolysis. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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