4.5 Article

Comprehensive Analysis of the Rice RING E3 Ligase Family Reveals Their Functional Diversity in Response to Abiotic stress

期刊

DNA RESEARCH
卷 20, 期 3, 页码 299-314

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/dnares/dst011

关键词

E3 ligase; environmental stress; functional diversity; interactome; RING finger protein

资金

  1. BioGreen21 Program [PJ007043]
  2. Next-Generation BioGreen 21 Program (Plant Molecular Breeding Center [PJ009084]
  3. Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea
  4. Kangwon National University [120110129]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A large number of really interesting new gene (RING) E3 ligases contribute to the post-translational modification of target proteins during plant responses to environmental stresses. However, the physical interactome of RING E3 ligases in rice remains largely unknown. Here, we evaluated the expression patterns of 47 Oryza sativa RING finger protein (OsRFP) genes in response to abiotic stresses via semi-quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and in silico analysis. Subsequently, molecular dissection of nine OsRFPs was performed by the examination of their E3 ubiquitin ligase activity, subcellular localization, and physical interaction with target proteins. Most of the OsRFPs examined possessed E3 ligase activity and showed diverse subcellular localization. Yeast two-hybrid analysis was then employed to construct a physical interaction map of seven OsRFPs with their 120 interacting proteins. The results indicated that these OsRFPs required dynamic translocation and partitioning for their cellular activation. Heterogeneous overexpression of each of the OsRFP genes in Arabidopsis suggested that they have functionally diverse responses to abiotic stresses, which may have been acquired during evolution. This comprehensive study provides insights into the biological functions of OsRFPs, which may be useful in understanding how rice plants adapt to unfavourable environmental conditions.

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

4.5
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