4.8 Article

Arabidopsis hot mutants define multiple functions required for acclimation to high temperatures

期刊

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 132, 期 2, 页码 757-767

出版社

AMER SOC PLANT BIOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.1104/pp.102.017145

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Plants acquire thermotolerance to lethal high temperatures if first exposed to moderately high temperature or if temperature is increased gradually to an otherwise lethal temperature. We have taken a genetic approach to dissecting acquired thermotolerance by characterizing loss-of-function thermotolerance mutants in Arabidopsis. In previous work, we identified single recessive alleles of four loci required for thermotolerance of hypocotyl elongation, hot1-1, hot2-1, hot3-1, and hot4-1. Completed screening of M-2 progeny from approximately 2500 M-1 plants has now identified new alleles of three of these original loci, along with three new loci. The low mutant frequency suggests that a relatively small number of genes make a major contribution to this phenotype or that other thermotolerance genes encode essential or redundant functions. Further analysis of the original four loci was performed to define the nature of their thermotolerance defects. Although the HOT1 locus was shown previously to encode a major heat shock protein (Hsp), Hsp101, chromosomal map positions indicate that HOT2, 3, and 4 do not correspond to major Hsp or heat shock transcription factor genes. Measurement of thermotolerance at different growth stages reveals that the mutants have growth stage-specific heat sensitivity. Analysis of Hsp accumulation shows that hot2 and hot4 produce normal levels of Hsps, whereas hot3 shows reduced accumulation. Thermotolerance of luciferase activity and of ion leakage also varies in the mutants. These data provide the first direct genetic evidence, to our knowledge, that distinct functions, independent of Hsp synthesis, are required for thermotolerance, including protection of membrane integrity and recovery of protein activity/synthesis.

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

4.8
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