4.7 Article

Melatonin regulates proteomic changes during leaf senescence in Malus hupehensis

期刊

JOURNAL OF PINEAL RESEARCH
卷 57, 期 3, 页码 291-307

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jpi.12169

关键词

GO; leaf senescence; Malus; melatonin; NanoLC-MS/MS; proteome; tandem mass tag

资金

  1. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China [2011AA100201]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the relationship between melatonin and aging, the overall changes and regulation of proteome profiling by long-term melatonin exposure during leaf senescence is not well understood. In this study, leaf senescence in Malus hupehensis plants was delayed when exogenous melatonin was regularly applied to the roots for 2 months compared with natural leaf senescence. Proteins of samples 0 and 50 day for both treatments were extracted and labeled with TMT regents before being examined via NanoLC-MS/MS. The proteomics data showed that 622 and 309 proteins were altered by senescence and melatonin, respectively. Our GO analysis by Blast2GO revealed that most of the altered proteins that are involved in major metabolic processes exhibited hydrolase activity and were mainly located in the plastids. These proteins were classified into several senescence-related functional categories, including degradation of macromolecules, redox and stress responses, transport, photosynthesis, development, and other regulatory proteins. We found that melatonin treatment led to the downregulation of proteins that are normally upregulated during senescence. The melatonin-related delay in senescence might have occurred due to the altering of proteins involved in processes associated with senescence. And as well, there are many unknown regulatory proteins possibly being involved in the melatonin's function. This study is the first to demonstrate changes at the proteome level in response to exogenous melatonin in plants. Our findings provide a set of informative and fundamental data about the role of melatonin in apple leaf senescence.

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