4.7 Article

Generation, characterization, and heterologous expression of wild-type and up-regulated forms of Arabidopsis thaliana leaf ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase

期刊

PLANTA
卷 215, 期 3, 页码 430-439

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00425-001-0727-8

关键词

ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase; Arabidopsis (AGPase); allosteric regulation; bacterial expression; starch biosynthesis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase (AGPase), a key enzyme in starch biosynthesis of higher plants, consists of a pair of regulatory large (LS) and catalytically small (SS) subunits. In plants. these subunits are coded by multiple genes resulting in the formation of tissue-specific enzyme forms, which are differentially regulated during plant growth and development. Some AGPase isoforms differ in catalytic and regulatory properties as well as intracellular location. In an effort to gain a better understanding of the role of the leaf AGPase in carbon partitioning and its effect on plant productivity, the Arabidopsis leaf AGPase containing the mature forms of the SS and LS was expressed in a heterologous expression system and characterized enzymatically. The Arabidopsis recombinant AGPase had kinetic values for 3-phosphoglyceric acid. glucose-1-phosphate and Mg2+ similar to those of the native enzyme. As the N-terminus of the LS has been suggested to be involved in enzyme function, the length of the N-terminal region was extended or shortened. Of the five modified LSs analyzed. only the T5 form lacking six residues of the mature N-terminus was able to form detectable levels of enzyme activity, indicating that the N-terminal region is critical for enzyme function, Two up-regulatory LS mutations that allosterically activate the potato enzyme. a stem isoform, were introduced into the corresponding Arabidopsis LS sequences and co-expressed with wild-type SS. Both modified enzymes showed up-regulatory properties, indicating that these specific residue changes were also operational in the leaf isoform.

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