4.5 Article

SUBCELLULAR TARGETING AND BIOSYNTHESIS OF CYCLOTIDES IN PLANT CELLS

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY
卷 98, 期 12, 页码 2018-2026

出版社

BOTANICAL SOC AMER INC
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.1100382

关键词

confocal microscopy; cyclotides; FM dye; kalata B1; Nicotiana benthamiana; Oak1; Solanaceae; vacuolar processing enzyme; vacuolar targeting

资金

  1. La Trobe University
  2. ARC [DP0984390]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Premise of the study: The cyclotide kalata B1 is found in the leaves of Oldenlandia affinis and is a potent insecticidal and nematocidal molecule. This peptide is cleaved from a precursor protein, Oak1, and ligation of the N- and C-termini occurs to form a continuous peptide backbone. The subcellular location of the excision and cyclization reactions is unknown, and there is debate as to which enzyme catalyzes the event. To determine where in the plant cell Oak1 is processed, we prepared constructs encoding GFP (green fluorescent protein) linked to the cyclotide precursor Oak1. Methods: The GFP constructs were transiently expressed in the leaves of Nicotiana benthamiana, and GFP fluorescence was observed in living cells using confocal microscopy. A Fei Mao (FM) styryl dye was infiltrated into whole leaves that were still growing and expressing GFP constructs, enabling the plasma membrane and the tonoplast to be highlighted for visualization of the vacuole in living cells. Key results: The full length Oak1 precursor directed GFP to the vacuole, suggesting that excision and cyclization of the cyclotide domain occurs in the vacuole where the cyclotides are then stored. The N-terminal propeptide and N-terminal repeat of Oak1 were both sufficient to target GFP to the vacuole, although the C-terminal propeptide, which is essential for cyclization, was not a targeting signal. Conclusions: The vacuolar location of cyclotides supports our hypothesis that the vacuolar processing enzyme, asparaginyl endoproteinase, has a pivotal role in excision and cyclization from cyclotide precursors.

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