4.7 Article

Pectins esterification in the apoplast of aluminum-treated pea root nodules

期刊

JOURNAL OF PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 184, 期 -, 页码 1-7

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.jplph.2015.05.011

关键词

Aluminum; Apoplast; Infection thread; Pectin; Root nodule

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aiming to elucidate the possible involvement of pectins in aluminum-mediated growth inhibition the distribution of pectins in the apoplast of root nodules was investigated. Experiments were performed on the pea (Pisum sativum L.) root nodules treated with aluminum (50 mu M AlCl3, for 2 or 24 h). For histochemical acidic pectin localization we used ruthenium red staining. Immunolabeling techniques with monoclonal antibodies specific to high methyl-esterified pectin (JIM7), low methyl-esterified pectin (JIM5) and calcium cross-linked pectin (2F4) were used to re-examine the pattern of pectin esterification and distribution. After immunolabeling the samples were observed using a fluorescent and transmission electron microscope. Ruthenium red staining showed that acid pectin content increased in the apoplast of Al-treated nodules and immunolocalization of pectin epitopes revealed that the fraction of de-esterified pectins increased significantly under Al stress. JIM5 and 2F4 epitopes were located on the inner surface of the primary cell wall with higher intensity at cell corners lining the intercellular spaces and at infection threads (ITs) walls. By contrast, JIM 7 labels all walls uniformly throughout the nodule. In the presence of Al, the increase of JIM5 and 2F4 labeling in thick plant and IT walls, together with a decrease of JIM7 labeling was observed. These results indicate a specific role for pectin de-esterification in the process of wall thickening and growth inhibition. In particular, Al-dependent increase in pectin content and their low methyl esterification degree correlate with wall thickness and higher rigidity, and in this way, may affect IT and nodules growth. (C) 2015 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

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