4.6 Article

Saccharomyces cerevisiae glutaredoxin 5-deficient cells subjected to continuous oxidizing conditions are affected in the expression of specific sets of genes

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 279, 期 13, 页码 12386-12395

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M311879200

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Saccharomyces cerevisiae GRX5 gene codes for a mitochondrial glutaredoxin involved in the synthesis of iron/sulfur clusters. Its absence prevents respiratory growth and causes the accumulation of iron inside cells and constitutive oxidation of proteins. Null Deltagrx5 mutants were used as an example of continuously oxidized cells, as opposed to situations in which oxidative stress is instantaneously caused by addition of external oxidants. Whole transcriptome analysis was carried out in the mutant cells. The set of genes whose expression was affected by the absence of Grx5 does not significantly overlap with the set of genes affected in respiratory petite mutants. Many Aft1-dependent genes involved in iron utilization that are up-regulated in a frataxin mutant were also up-regulated in the absence of Grx5. BIO5 is another Aft1-dependent gene induced both upon iron deprivation and in Deltagrx5 cells; this links iron and biotin metabolism. Other genes are specifically affected under the oxidative conditions generated by the grx5 mutation. One of these is MLP1, which codes for a homologue of the Slt2 kinase. Cells lacking MLP1 and GRX5 are hypersensitive to oxidative stress caused by external agents and exhibit increased protein oxidation in relation to single mutants. This in turn points to a role for Mlp1 in protection against oxidative stress. The genes of the Hap4 regulon, which are involved in respiratory metabolism, are down-regulated in Deltagrx5 cells. This effect is suppressed by HAP4 overexpression. Inhibition of respiratory metabolism during continuous moderately oxidative conditions could be a protective response by the cell.

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