4.7 Article

Rubisco carboxylation kinetics and inorganic carbon utilization in polar versus cold-temperate seaweeds

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY
卷 70, 期 4, 页码 1283-1297

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/ery443

关键词

Carbon concentrating mechanisms; carbon fixation; kinetics; macroalgae; photosynthesis; polar; Rubisco; seaweeds

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry for Science and Innovation [CTM2011-24007/ANT, CGL2015-67014R, AGL2009-07999, AGL2013-42364R]
  2. Spanish Ministry for Economy and Competitiveness
  3. FPU grant from the Spanish Ministry for Education

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the high productivity and ecological importance of seaweeds in polar coastal regions, little is known about their carbon utilization mechanisms, especially the kinetics of the CO2-fixing enzyme Rubisco. We analyzed Rubisco carboxylation kinetics at 4 degrees C and 25 degrees C in 12 diverse polar seaweed species (including cold-temperate populations of the same species) and the relationship with their ability to use bicarbonate, by using C-13 isotope discrimination and pH drift experiments. We observed a large variation in Rubisco carboxylation kinetics among the selected species, although no correlation was found between either the Michaelis-Menten constant for CO2 (K-c) or Rubisco content per total soluble protein ([Rubisco]/[TSP]) and the ability to use bicarbonate for non-green seaweeds. This study reports intraspecific Rubisco cold adaptation by means of either higher Rubisco carboxylation turnover rate (k(cat)(c)) and carboxylase efficiency (k(cat)(c)/K-c) at 4 degrees C or higher [Rubisco]/[TSP] in some of the analyzed species. Our data point to a widespread ability for photosynthetic bicarbonate usage among polar seaweeds, despite the higher affinity of Rubisco for CO2 and higher dissolved CO2 concentration in cold seawater. Moreover, the reported catalytic variation within form ID Rubisco might avert the canonical trade-off previously observed between K-c and k(cat)(c) for plant Rubiscos.

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