4.2 Article

Rhythmic activity of uptake hydrogenase in the prokaryote Rhodospirillum rubrum

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL RHYTHMS
卷 15, 期 3, 页码 218-224

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/074873040001500303

关键词

Rhodospirillum rubrum; prokaryote; uptake hydrogenase; rhythmic activity; anoxic conditions; Lomb-Scargle power spectra

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Growth of Rhodospirillum rubrum was followed in cultures kept under anoxic conditions at constant temperature in either continuous light (LL, 32 degrees C) or continuous darkness (DD, 32 degrees C and 16 degrees C). In DD, only small modifications of the turbidity were detected; linear regression analysis nevertheless gives a very significant slope! (t(34) = 13.07, p < 10(-14), with R-2 Of 0.834). Mean generation times reflected these differences of growth with 11.9 +/- 0.5 h in LL and 43.2 +/- 1.1 h in DD at 32 degrees C and 37.4 +/- 1.0 h at 16 degrees C cultures. The uptake hydrogenase (Hup) activity has been followed in situ in whole cells of A. rubrum grown in the same conditions, and a clear ultradian rhythm of activity has been observed. Indeed, after about 12 h in the new media, a rapid rise of hydrogenase activity was observed in both LL and :DD cultures after which it decreased again to very low values. The activity of Hup continued to show such fluctuations during the rest of the experiment, both in DD and in LL, during the growth and stationary phases. The Lomb-Scargle power periodogram method demonstrates the presence of a clear rhythmic Hu:p activity both in LL and DD. In the LL-grown cultures, the oscillating activity is faster and continues throughout the growth and the stationary phases, with an ultradian period of 12.1 +/- 0.5 h. In DD, the slow-growing bacteria showed an ultradian oscillatory pattern of Hup activity with periods of 15.2 +/- 0.5 h at 32 degrees C anti 23.4 +/- 2.0 h at 16 degrees C. The different periods obtained for LL- and DD-grown bacteria are significantly different.

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

4.2
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