4.7 Article

Characterization of glycosyltransferases responsible for salidroside biosynthesis in Rhodiola sachalinensis

期刊

PHYTOCHEMISTRY
卷 72, 期 9, 页码 862-870

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2011.03.020

关键词

Rhodiola sachalinensis; Crassulaceae; Secondary metabolism; Hairy root; Salidroside; UDP-glycosyltransferase

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30872029, 30900112]
  2. Key Natural Science Foundation of Beijing Municipality [5111001]
  3. Foundation of Beijing Municipal Education Committee [KM201110020001]
  4. Jurisdiction of Beijing Municipality [PHR20090516, PHR201108279]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Salidroside, the 8-O-beta-D-glucoside of tyrosol, is a novel adaptogenic drug extracted from the medicinal plant Rhodiola sachalinensis A. Bor. Due to the scarcity of R. sachalinensis and its low yield of salidroside, there is great interest in enhancing production of salidroside by biotechnological manipulations. In this study, two putative UDP-glycosyltransferase (UGT) cDNAs, UGT72B14 and UGT74R1, were isolated from roots and cultured cells of methyl jasmonate (MeJA)-treated R. sachalinensis, respectively. The level of sequence identity between their deduced amino acid sequences was ca. 20%. RNA gel-blot analysis established that UGT72B14 transcripts were more abundant in roots, and UGT74R1 was highly expressed in the calli, but not in roots. Functional analysis indicated that recombinant UGT72B14 had the highest level of activity for salidroside production, and that the catalytic efficiency (V-max/K-m) of UGT72B14 was 620% higher than that of UGT74R1. The salidroside contents of the UGT72B14 and UGT74R1 transgenic hairy root lines of R. sachalinensis were also similar to 420% and similar to 50% higher than the controls, respectively. UGT72B14 transcripts were mainly detected in roots, and UGT72B14 had the highest level of activity for salidroside production in vitro and in vivo. (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

4.7
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