4.7 Article

Identification of alternatively spliced transcripts of rice phytochelatin synthase 2 gene OsPCS2 involved in mitigation of cadmium and arsenic stresses

期刊

PLANT MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
卷 94, 期 1-2, 页码 167-183

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11103-017-0600-1

关键词

Alternative splicing; Arsenic stress; Cadmium stress; Heterologous expression; OsPCS2; Phytochelatin synthase; RNAi; Transgenic rice

资金

  1. DBT, Govt. of India [BT/PR12907/AGR/36/639/2009]
  2. IIT Kharagpur Food Security Project [4-25/2013-TS-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Enzymatic activity of phytochelatin synthase (PCS) in plant produces phytochelatins, which help in sequestration of heavy metal(loid) s inside the cell vacuole to alleviate toxicity. Here we report that among the two PCS genes-OsPCS1 and OsPCS2 in indica rice (Oryza sativa) cultivar, the OsPCS2 produces an alternatively spliced OsPCS2b transcript that bears the unusual premature termination codon besides the canonically spliced OsPCS2a transcript. Root-and shoot-specific differential ratios of alternatively spliced OsPCS2a and OsPCS2b transcript expressions were observed under cadmium stress. Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells transformed with OsPCS2a exhibited increased cadmium (Cd) and arsenic (As) tolerance and accumulation, unlike the OsPCS2b transformed yeast cells. An intron-containing hairpin RNA-mediated gene silencing was carried out in endosperm-specific manner for efficient down-regulation of OsPCS genes in rice grains. Analysis of the transgenic rice lines grown under metal(loid) stress revealed almost complete absence of both OsPCS1 and OsPCS2 transcripts in the developing seeds coupled with the significant reduction in the content of Cd (similar to 51%) and As (similar to 35%) in grains compared with the non-transgenic plant. Taken together, the findings indicate towards a crucial role played by the tissue-specific alternative splicing and relative abundance of the OsPCS2 gene during heavy metal(loid) stress mitigation in rice plant.

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