4.6 Article

Responses of Rhodotorula mucilaginosa under Pb(II) stress: carotenoid production and budding

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 24, 期 2, 页码 678-688

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1462-2920.15603

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2020YFC1808000]
  2. Program for Student Innovation Through Research and Training [S20190010, 201910307090P]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study revealed that Rhodotorula mucilaginosa resists heavy metal stress by increasing carotenoid production and budding rate. Additionally, carotenoids were found to play a crucial role on the cell surface post lead exposure.
Rhodotorula mucilaginosa resists heavy metal (HM) stress because of its abundant extracellular polymeric substances and functional vesicles. In this study, we provided new insights into its survival strategies at both biochemical and genetic levels. After lead exposure, carotenoid biosynthesis was initiated within 24 h incubation and then increased to the maximum after 96 h of incubation. Raman analysis confirmed that carotenoids (primarily beta-carotene) were the major identifiable chemical substances on the cell surface. Moreover, the increased carotenoid production was accompanied by a rising budding rate, similar to 40% higher than that in the cultures without Pb. During the 96 h of incubation, the driving force for Pb accumulation was assigned to this elevated budding rate. After 96 h, biosorption was primarily attributed to the enhanced antioxidant ability of the single cells during carotenoid production. Furthermore, the yeast budding cells demonstrated an evidently heterogeneous biosorption of Pb, i.e., the rejuvenated daughters had a relatively lower Pb level than the mother cells. This resulted in the protection of the buds from Pb stress. After investigating phosphorus uptake and the RNA sequencing data, we finally confirmed two tightly correlated pathways that resist HM stress, i.e., biochemical (carotenoid production) and reproductive (healthy buds) pathways.

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