4.6 Article

Phs1 and the Synthesis of Very Long Chain Fatty Acids Are Required for Ballistospore Formation

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105147

关键词

-

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [23370057]
  2. University of Missouri Research Board, National Science Foundation [MCB-0920581]
  3. National Institutes of Health (NIAID) [R21 AI094364]
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [26251010, 23370057] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The production and dissemination of spores by members of the fungal kingdom is a major reason for the success of this eukaryotic lineage in colonizing most terrestrial ecosystems. Ballistospores are a type of spore produced by basidiomycete fungi, such as the mushrooms and plant pathogenic rusts. These spores are forcefully discharged through a unique liquid-drop fusion mechanism, enabling the aerosolization of these particles that can contribute to plant disease and human allergies. The genes responsible for this process are unknown due to technical challenges in studying many of the fungi that produce ballistospores. Here, we applied newly-developed techniques in a forward genetic screen to identify genes required for ballistospore formation or function in a tractable red yeast, a species of Sporobolomyces. One strain bearing a mutation in the PHS1 gene was identified as a mirror mutant. PHS1 encodes 3-hydroxyacyl-CoA dehydratase required for the third step in very long chain fatty acid biosynthesis. The Sporobolomyces PHS1 gene complements the essential functions of a S. cerevisiae phs1 mutant. The Sporobolomyces phs1 mutant strain has less dehydratase activity and a reduction in very long chain fatty acids compared to wild type. The mutant strain also exhibits sensitivity to cell wall stress agents and loss of shooting due to a delay in ballistospore formation, indicating that the role of Phs1 in spore dissemination may be primarily in cellular integrity.

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