4.3 Article

Cellular responses of the dinoflagellate Prorocentrum donghaiense Lu to phosphate limitation and chronological ageing

期刊

JOURNAL OF PLANKTON RESEARCH
卷 38, 期 1, 页码 83-93

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/plankt/fbv112

关键词

metacaspases; programmed cell death; reactive oxygen species; caspase-like activity; phosphate limitation; Prorocentrum donghaiense Lu; harmful algal bloom

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [U1406403, 41176112, 41330961]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [2011CB403603]
  3. Ocean Research Project of SOA [201305027]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Prorocentrum donghaiense Lu is a typical harmful algal species in the East China Sea, which has already had significant influences on ecosystems as well as caused economic losses over the past two decades. This study focused on cellular responses to phosphate limitation and chronological ageing for P. donghaiense. Results showed that reactive oxygen species (ROS) production, caspase-like activity and a metacaspase gene expression were significantly higher in the phosphate deplete treatment than in the phosphate replete treatment while algal cell death was not associated with caspase-like activity, and the test alga still grew with low photosynthetic efficiency in the phosphate-limited culture. Our results indicate that ROS production played multiple roles in the chronological ageing and regulation stress signalling or/and cell death in P. donghaiense. Metacaspase and caspase-like enzymes not only played a programmed cell death (PCD)-specific role (caused cell death) but also linked with chronological ageing of cultures and acclimation (survival) for phosphate limitation. It also demonstrated that classical hallmarks of PCD (such as cleavage of caspase substrates) for metazoa might be not suitable for characterization of PCD pathways in phytoplankton. This study provides a novel insight into why P. donghaiense blooms can persist for a long period with high abundance.

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

4.3
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