4.7 Article

AtPng1 knockout mutant of Arabidopsis thaliana shows a juvenile phenotype, morpho-functional changes, altered stress response and cell wall modifications

期刊

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 167, 期 -, 页码 11-21

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2021.07.024

关键词

A. thaliana; Transglutaminase; AtPng1p; Differentiation; Phenotype; Abiotic stress; Cell wall; Polyamines

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study on the AtPng1 knock out (KO) line reveals the significant role of TGase activity in plant development and stress response, with the KO line showing a more juvenile phenotype and exhibiting different responses after heat and wound stress compared to the wild type. Additionally, the residual TGase activity in the KO line, particularly in the plastidial fraction, suggests a complex relationship between TGase and plant growth and stress adaptation.
In order to ascertain the role of plant transglutaminases (TGase) in growth and abiotic stress response, the AtPng1 knock out (KO) line of A. thaliana has been analyzed during plant development and under heat and wound stress. Comparing wild type (WT) and KO lines a 58-kDa band was immunodetected by anti-AtPng1p antibody in the cell wall and chloroplasts only in the WT line. A residual TGase activity, not showing correlation with development nor stress response, was still present in the KO line. The KO line was less developed, with a juvenile phenotype characterized by fewer, smaller and less differentiated cells. Chloroplast TGase activity was insensitive to mutation. Data on stressed plants showed that (i) KO plants under heat stress were more juvenile compared to WT, (ii) different responses between WT and KO lines after wounding took place. TGase activity was not completely absent in the KO line, presenting high activity in the plastidial fraction. In general, the mutation affected A. thaliana growth and development, causing less differentiated cytological and anatomical features.

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