4.5 Article

Rim101-upregulated Fets contribute to dark pigment formation in gray cells of Candida albicans

期刊

ACTA BIOCHIMICA ET BIOPHYSICA SINICA
卷 53, 期 12, 页码 1723-1730

出版社

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/abbs/gmab142

关键词

Candida albicans; gray cell; melanin; Rim101; Fet

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31400135, 31970144]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Three cell types of Candida albicans, white, opaque, and gray, show differences in morphology and pigment production, with Fets playing a role in regulating dark pigment formation. Environmental pH can influence cell phenotype switching, with Rim101-upregulated Fets contributing to dark pigment production in gray cells.
Candida albicans has long been known to switch between white and opaque phases; however, a third cell type, referred to as the 'gray' phenotype, was recently characterized. The three phenotypes have different colonial morphologies, with white cells forming white-colored colonies and opaque and gray cells forming dark-colored colonies. We previously showed that Wor1-upregulated ferroxidases (Fets) function as pigment multicopper oxidases that regulate the production of dark-pigmented melanin in opaque cells. In this study, we demonstrated that Fets also contributed to dark pigment formation in gray colonies but in a Wor1-independent manner. Deletion of both WOR1 and EFG1 locked cells in the gray phenotype in some rich media. However, the efgl/efgl wor1/wor1 mutant could switch between white and gray in minimal media depending on the ambient pH. Specifically, mutant cells exhibited the white phenotype at pH 4.5 but switched to gray at pH 7.5. Consistent with phenotype switching, Fets expressions and melanin production were also regulated by ambient pH. Ectopic expression of the Rim101-405 allele in the mutant enabled the pH restriction to be bypassed and promoted gray cell formation in acidic media. Our data suggest that Rim101-upregulated Fets contribute to dark pigment formation in the gray cells.

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

4.5
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