4.4 Article

Molecules involved in the modulation of rapid cell death in Xanthomonas

期刊

JOURNAL OF BACTERIOLOGY
卷 188, 期 15, 页码 5408-5416

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JB.00056-06

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In earlier studies from this laboratory, Xanthomonas campestris pv. glycines was found to exhibit a nutrition stress-related postexponential rapid cell death (RCD). The RCD was exhibited in protein-rich media but not in starch or other minimal media. This RCD in X. campestris pv. glycines was found to display features similar to those of the programmed cell death (PCD) of eukaryotes. Results of the present study showed that the observed RCD in this organism is both positively and negatively regulated by small molecules. The amino acids glycine and L-alanine as well as the D isomers of valine, methionine, and threonine were found to induce the synthesis of an active caspase-3-like protein that was associated with the onset of RCD. Addition of pyruvate and citrate to the culture medium induced both the synthesis of active caspase-3-like protein and RCD. Higher levels of intracellular accumulation of pyruvate and citrate were also observed under conditions favoring RCD. On the other hand, dextrin and maltose, the hydrolytic products of starch, inhibited the synthesis of the caspase-3-like protein. Addition of glucose and cyclic AMP (cAMP) to the RCD-favoring medium prevented RCD. Glucose, cAMP, caffeine (a known inhibitor of a phosphodiesterase that breaks down cAMP), and forskolin (from the herb Coleus forskholii, known to activate the enzyme adenylate cyclase that forms cAMP) inhibited the caspase enzyme activity in vivo and consequently the RCD process. The addition of glucose and other inhibitors of RCD enhanced intracellular cAMP accumulation. This is the first report demonstrating the involvement of small molecules in the regulation of nutrition stress-related stationary-phase rapid cell death in X. campestris pv. glycines, which is programmed.

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

4.4
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