4.5 Article

Menadione stress in Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains deficient in the glutathione transferases

期刊

BIOCHIMICA ET BIOPHYSICA ACTA-GENERAL SUBJECTS
卷 1770, 期 2, 页码 213-220

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbagen.2006.10.013

关键词

glutathione transferase; menadione; oxidative stress; Saccharomyces cerevisiae

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using S. cerevisiae as a eukaryotic cell model we have analyzed the involvement of both glutathione transferase isoforms, Gtt1 and Gtt2, in constitutive resistance and adaptive response to menadione, a quinone which can exert its toxicity as redox cycling and/or electrophiles. The detoxification properties, of these enzymes, have also been analyzed by the appearance of S-conjugates in the media. Direct exposure to menadione (20 mM/60 min) showed to be lethal for cells deficient on both Girl and Gtt2 isoforms. However, after pre-treatment with a low menadione concentration, cells deficient in Gtt2 displayed reduced ability to acquire tolerance when compared with the control and the Gill deficient strains. Analyzing the toxic effects of menadione we observed that the gtt2 Mutant showed no reduction in lipid peroxidation levels. Moreover, measuring the levels of intracellular oxidation during menadione stress we have shown that the increase of this oxidative stress parameter was due to the capacity menadione possesses in generating reactive oxygen species (ROS) and that both GSH and Gtt2 isoform were required to enhance ROS production. Furthermore, the efflux of the menadione-GSH conjugate, which is related with detoxification of xenobiotic pathways, was not detected in the gtt2 mutant. Taken together, these results suggest that acquisition of tolerance against stress generated by menadione and the process of detoxification through S-conjugates are dependent upon Gtt2 activity. This assessment was corroborated by the increase of GTT2 expression, and not of GTT1, after menadione treatment. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V All rights reserved.

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