4.7 Article

Decreased arginine and nitrite levels in nitrate reductase-deficient Arabidopsis thaliana plants impair nitric oxide synthesis and the hypersensitive response to Pseudomonas syringae

期刊

PLANT SCIENCE
卷 171, 期 1, 页码 34-40

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2006.02.010

关键词

Arabidopsis thaliana; L-arginine; nitrite; nitric oxide; nitrate reductase; hypersensitive response

资金

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [03/09097-5] Funding Source: FAPESP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nitric oxide ((NO)-N-center dot) produced in plants is implicated in defense responses against pathogens. (NO)-N-center dot synthesis in such conditions has been attributed to a nitric oxide synthase (NOS)-like enzyme and, more recently, to a mitochondrial-dependent NO2--reducing activity. In this work, we used an NR-deficient double mutant (nia1 nia2) of Arabidopsis thaliana that is deficient in endogenous NO2- to analyse the hypersensitive response (HR) against an avirulent strain of Pseudomonas syringae pv. maculicola (Psm). The inoculation of Psm into nia1 nia2 A. thaliana caused leaf chlorosis whereas the HR was induced in wild-type plants. (NO)-N-center dot production in situ was substantially increased in wild-type but not in nia1 nia2 leaves following inoculation of Psm, as measured with the fluorescent (NO)-N-center dot indicator 4,5-diaminofluorescein diacetate. However, the infiltration of L-arginine or NO2- into nia1 nia2 leaves triggered (NO)-N-center dot production in situ. Moreover, co-infiltration of NO2- and Psm restored the HR in the leaves of nia1 nia2 plants. The total content of free amino acids, particularly L-arginine, was much lower in nia1 nia2 leaves compared to wild-type leaves. Overall, these results suggest that the HR is affected in NR-deficient plants because these plants lack L-arginine and NO2-, two important endogenous substrates for (NO)-N-center dot synthesis. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. 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

4.7
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