4.6 Article

A cooperative role for Atf1 and Pap1 in the detoxification of the oxidative stress induced by glucose deprivation in Schizosaccharomyces pombe

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 279, 期 40, 页码 41594-41602

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M405509200

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In Schizosaccharomyces pombe, glucose concentrations below a certain threshold trigger the stress-activated protein kinase ( SAPK) signal transduction pathway and promote increased transcription of Atf1-dependent genes coding for the general stress response. Removal of glucose specifically induces the nuclear accumulation of green fluorescent protein-labeled Pap1 (GFP-Pap1) and the expression of genes dependent on this transcription factor. In contrast, depletion of the nitrogen source triggers the SAPK pathway but does not activate Pap1-dependent gene transcription, indicating that carbon stress rather than growth arrest leads to an endogenous oxidative condition that favors nuclear accumulation of Pap1. The reductant agents glutathione or N-acetylcysteine suppress the nuclear accumulation of GFP-Pap1 induced by glucose deprivation without inhibiting the activation of the MAPK Sty1. In addition, cells expressing a mutant GFP-Pap1 unable to accumulate into the nucleus upon hydrogen peroxide-mediated oxidative stress failed to show this protein into the nucleus in the absence of glucose. These results support the concept of a concerted action between the SAPK pathway and the Pap1 transcription factor during glucose exhaustion by which glucose limitation induces activation of the SAPK pathway prior to the oxidative stress caused by glucose deprivation. The ensuing induction of Atf1-dependent genes ( catalase) decreases the level of hydroperoxides allowing Pap1 nuclear accumulation and function. Congruent with this interpretation, glucose-depleted cells show higher adaptive response to exogenous oxidative stress than those maintained in the presence of glucose.

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

4.6
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