4.6 Article

Identification and characterization of the glutathione S-Transferase (GST) family in radish reveals a likely role in anthocyanin biosynthesis and heavy metal stress tolerance

期刊

GENE
卷 743, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.gene.2020.144484

关键词

Radish (Raphanus sativus L.); Glutathione S-transferases (GSTs); Expression profile; Heavy metal stress; Anthocyanin biosynthesis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glutathione S-transferases (GSTs) are a large complex family of enzymes (EC 2.5.1.18) that play vital roles in flavonoid metabolism and plant growth and development and are responsive to heavy metal stress. However, knowledge about GST genes in radish (a vegetable crop with an extraordinary capacity to adapt to heavy metal stresses) is limited. Therefore, it is critical to identify putative candidate GST genes responsible for heavy metal stress tolerance and anthocyanin biosynthesis. In this study, we first identified 82 R. sativus GST (RsGST) genes using various bioinformatic approaches, and their expression profiles were characterized from RNAseq data. These RsGST genes could be grouped into 7 major subclasses: tau (43 members), phi (21 members), tetra-chlorohydroquinone dehalogenase (7 members), dehydroascorbat reductase (5 members), zeta (3 members), lambda (2 members) and theta (1 member). In addition, most of the RsGST genes showed organ-specific expression in our study. Moreover, the transcripts of RsGSTF12-1 and RsGSTF12-2, belonging to the phi class, might be candidates encoding anthocyanin transporters in carmine radish, whereas the tau class, consisting of RsGSTU13-1, RsGSTU19, RsGSTU24-1, and RsGSTU3, and theta class, consisting of RsGSTT1-1, might be defend radish against adverse heavy metal stresses. These results will aid in understanding the functions of the GST family related to heavy metal stress and anthocyanin biosynthesis, thereby potentially improving radish breeding programs for high-pigment-content material as well as HM-tolerant material.

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