4.6 Article

Diurnal oscillations of metabolite abundances and gene analysis provide new insights into central metabolic processes of the brown alga Ectocarpus siliculosus

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 188, 期 1, 页码 98-110

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03400.x

关键词

brown algae (Phaeophyceae); carbon-concentrating mechanisms; Ectocarpus siliculosus; metabolite profiling; nyctemeral cycle; photorespiration; transcriptomic profiling; gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)

资金

  1. Rennes Metropole
  2. European community [MESTCT 2005-020737]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>Knowledge about primary metabolic processes is essential for the understanding of the physiology and ecology of seaweeds. The Ectocarpus siliculosus genome now facilitates integrative studies of the molecular basis of primary metabolism in this brown alga. Metabolite profiling was performed across two light-dark cycles and under different CO(2) and O(2) concentrations, together with genome and targeted gene expression analysis. Except for mannitol, E. siliculosus cells contain low levels of polyols, organic acids and carbohydrates. Amino acid profiles were similar to those of C3-type plants, including glycine/serine accumulation under photorespiration-enhancing conditions. gamma-Aminobutyric acid was only detected in traces. Changes in the concentrations of glycine and serine, genome annotation and targeted expression analysis together suggest the presence of a classical photorespiratory glycolate pathway in E. siliculosus rather than a malate synthase pathway as in diatoms. Several metabolic and transcriptional features do not clearly fit with the hypothesis of an alanine/aspartate-based inducible C4-like metabolism in E. siliculosus. We propose a model in which the accumulation of alanine could be used to store organic carbon and nitrogen during the light period. We finally discuss a possible link between low gamma-aminobutyric acid contents and the absence of glutamate decarboxylase genes in the Ectocarpus genome.

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

4.6
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