| Literature DB >> 28694800 |
Vilma Pérez1,2,3, Martha Hengst1,2, Lenka Kurte1,2, Cristina Dorador2,4, Wade H Jeffrey5, Ruddy Wattiez6, Veronica Molina7, Sabine Matallana-Surget8.
Abstract
Salar de Huasco, defined as a polyextreme environment, is a high altitude saline wetland in the Chilean Altiplano (3800 m.a.s.l.), permanently exposed to the highest solar radiation doses registered in the world. We present here the first comparative proteomics study of a photoheterotrophic bacterium, Rhodobacter sp., isolated from this remote and hostile habitat. We developed an innovative experimental approach using different sources of radiation (in situ sunlight and UVB lamps), cut-off filters (Mylar, Lee filters) and a high-throughput, label-free quantitative proteomics method to comprehensively analyze the effect of seven spectral bands on protein regulation. A hierarchical cluster analysis of 40 common proteins revealed that all conditions containing the most damaging UVB radiation induced similar pattern of protein regulation compared with UVA and visible light spectral bands. Moreover, it appeared that the cellular adaptation of Rhodobacter sp. to osmotic stress encountered in the hypersaline environment from which it was originally isolated, might further a higher resistance to damaging UV radiation. Indeed, proteins involved in the synthesis and transport of key osmoprotectants, such as glycine betaine and inositol, were found in very high abundance under UV radiation compared to the dark control, suggesting the function of osmolytes as efficient reactive oxygen scavengers. Our study also revealed a RecA-independent response and a tightly regulated network of protein quality control involving proteases and chaperones to selectively degrade misfolded and/or damaged proteins.Entities:
Keywords: Chilean Altiplano; UV radiation; extreme environment; osmoprotectants; proteomics
Year: 2017 PMID: 28694800 PMCID: PMC5483449 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01173
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
List of the analyzed conditions (artificial UVB, natural Full Sun, natural PAR, natural PAR+UVA, natural UVA+UVB, natural UVB, natural UVA), obtained by comparing different treatments and controls.
| Treatments | Replicates | Controls | Condition | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARTIFICIAL | UVB | 4 | DARK | UVB |
| DARK | 3 | – | – | |
| NATURAL | FULL SUN | 3 | DARK | FULL SUN |
| PAR | UVA+UVB | |||
| PAR+UVA | UVB | |||
| PAR | 3 | DARK | PAR | |
| PAR+UVA | 3 | DARK | PAR+UVA | |
| PAR | UVA | |||
| DARK | 3 | – | – |
Summary of the number of quantified proteins for the different conditions.
| TREATMENT | Number of identified proteins | Number of quantified proteins | Number of quantified proteins within threshold | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Down-regulated (≤0.66) | Up-regulated (≥1.5) | |||
| Artificial UVB | 957 | 131 | 49 | 18 | 31 |
| Natural light treatments | 1195 | 300 | 178 | 94 | 84 |
| - Natural FULL SUN | 72 | 48 | 29 | 19 | |
| - Natural PAR | 21 | 8 | 2 | 6 | |
| - Natural PAR+UVA | 36 | 19 | 13 | 6 | |
| - Natural UVA+UVB | 70 | 47 | 29 | 18 | |
| - Natural UVB | 46 | 27 | 13 | 14 | |
| - Natural UVA | 55 | 29 | 8 | 21 | |