4.8 Article

Functions of Multiple Genes Encoding ADP-Glucose Pyrophosphorylase Subunits in Maize Endosperm, Embryo, and Leaf

期刊

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 164, 期 2, 页码 596-611

出版社

AMER SOC PLANT BIOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.1104/pp.113.231605

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Agriculture Competitive Grants Program [2010-65115-20376, 2011-67003-30215]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase (AGPase) provides the nucleotide sugar ADP-glucose and thus constitutes the first step in starch biosynthesis. The majority of cereal endosperm AGPase is located in the cytosol with a minor portion in amyloplasts, in contrast to its strictly plastidial location in other species and tissues. To investigate the potential functions of plastidial AGPase in maize (Zea mays) endosperm, six genes encoding AGPase large or small subunits were characterized for gene expression as well as subcellular location and biochemical activity of the encoded proteins. Seven transcripts from these genes accumulate in endosperm, including those from shrunken2 and brittle2 that encode cytosolic AGPase and five candidates that could encode subunits of the plastidial enzyme. The amino termini of these five polypeptides directed the transport of a reporter protein into chloroplasts of leaf protoplasts. All seven proteins exhibited AGPase activity when coexpressed in Escherichia coli with partner subunits. Null mutations were identified in the genes agpsemzm and agpllzm and shown to cause reduced AGPase activity in specific tissues. The functioning of these two genes was necessary for the accumulation of normal starch levels in embryo and leaf, respectively. Remnant starch was observed in both instances, indicating that additional genes encode AGPase large and small subunits in embryo and leaf. Endosperm starch was decreased by approximately 7% in agpsemzm- or agpllzm- mutants, demonstrating that plastidial AGPase activity contributes to starch production in this tissue even when the major cytosolic activity is present.

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

4.8
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