| Literature DB >> 31944575 |
Xiaoxiao Dong1, Sujuan Duan1,2, Hong-Bin Wang1, Hong-Lei Jin2.
Abstract
The balance between cellular carbon (C) andEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31944575 PMCID: PMC7540278 DOI: 10.1111/jipb.12907
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Integr Plant Biol ISSN: 1672-9072 Impact factor: 7.061
Figure 1Mutations of the
(A) Schematic diagram of LPE2 gene (At3g27160) inferred by DNA sequence analysis. Exons (black boxes) and introns (lines) are indicated. The positions of the T‐DNA insertions corresponding to lpe2‐1 and lpe2‐2 are shown. ATG start codon and TGA stop coden are shown. (B) Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis of genomic DNA from the wild type and lpe2 mutants to confirm the homozygosity of the mutants. 1 and 2, amplification with primers F and R for SALK_077692 and Lba1; 3 and 4, amplification with primers F and R for CS843433 and Lba1. (C) Relative level of LPE2 protein in wild‐type (WT) and lpe2 mutant plants. CBB, Coomassie blue staining. (D) Imagines in (a) are of 3‐week‐old wild type (Col‐0), lpe2‐1,and lpe2‐2 plants under growth light conditions. (b) False‐color images representing Fv/Fm under a growth light condition in 3‐week‐old wild‐type, lpe2‐1, and lpe2‐2 plants. The false color ranged from black (0) via red, orange, yellow, green, blue, and violet to purple (1) as indicated at the bottom. Growth light (−100 µmol photons m2/s). Six biological replicates were performed in all experiments, and similar results were obtained. (E, F), Light‐response curves of PSII quantum yield (ФPSII) (E), non‐photochemical quenching(qN) (F), and electron transport rate (ETR) (G) in the wild type and lpe2 mutants. Measurements were performed at the following light intensities: 0, 81,145, 186, 281, 335, 461, 701, and 926 mmol photons m2/s‐1. PPDF, Photosynthetic photon flux density. Each data point represents at least 20 independent plants.
Figure 2Subcellular localization of LOW PHOTOSYNTHETIC EFFICIENCY2 (LPE2) protein
(A) Schematic diagram of the LPE2 protein including chloroplast transit peptide (CTP). (B) Localization of LPE2 protein within the chloroplast by green fluorescent protein (GFP) assay in Arabidopsis protoplast. The fluorescence of LPE2‐GFP specifically matched with that of chlorophyll autofluorescence, confirming chloroplast targeting of LPE2 exclusively. LPE2‐GFP, LPE2‐GFP fusion; Vec‐GFP, control with empty vector; HHL1‐GFP, HHL1‐GFP fusion. Bars = 10 µm. (C) Immunolocalization of LPE2. Intact chloroplasts were isolated from leaves wild type plants and then separated into thylakoid membrane and stromal fractions. Polyclonal antibodies were used against the integral membrane protein, Lhcb1; the abundant stroma protein, ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase large subunit (RbcL); and LPE2. Three additional independent biological replicates were performed, and similar results were obtained.
Figure 3Analysis of photosystem complexes and subunits from the wild‐type (WT) and
(A) Blue native‐polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (BN‐PAGE) and immunoblot analysis of chlorophyll‐protein complexes. Equal thylakoid membranes (10 µg of chlorophyll) from the leaves of the wild type and lpe2 mutants were solubilized by treatment with 2% (w/v) dodecyl b‐D‐maltoside and separated by BN‐PAGE. The assignments of the macromolecular protein complexes of thylakoid membranes indicated at left were identified according to Jin et al. (2014). then BN‐PAGE (3 µg of chlorophyll) for immunoblot analysis, Anti‐D1 antiserum used to probe the PSII complex, anti‐PsaA antiserum used to probe the PSI complex, anti‐cytochrome f antiserum used to probe the cytochrome b6/f (Cytb6/f) complex, anti‐ATPB antiserum used to probe the ATP synthase (ATPase) complex. anti‐Lhca1 antiserum used to probe the light harvesting complex II (LHCII) trimer complex. Three independent biological replicates for all experiments were performed, and a representative one is shown. The LHCII trimmer is used as a control. (B) Proteins immunodetected from (A) were analyzed with Phoretix 1D Software (Phoretix International). Values (means ± SE; n = 3 independent biological replicates) are given as ratios to protein amounts of the wild type (Col‐0) and lpe2 mutants. **, P < 0.01;***, P < 0.001, by Student's t‐test. (C) Thylakoid membrane proteins from the wild type (Col‐0) and lpe2 mutants were separated by 12% SDS‐urea‐PAGE, transferred onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes, and probed with antibody against known thylakoid membrane proteins obtained from Agrisera. Samples were loaded on an equal chlorophyll basis. Cytf, Cytochrome b6/f complex; LHC, light‐harvesting complex; ATPase, ATP synthase complex. CBB, Coomassie brilliant blue. Rubisco large subunit (RbcL) is used as a control. (D) Proteins immunodetected from (C) were analyzed with Phoretix 1D Software (Phoretix International). Values (means ± SE; n = 3 independent biological replicates) are given as ratios to protein amounts of the wild type (Col‐0) and lpe2 mutants. **, P < 0.01;***, P < 0.001, by Student's t‐test. All experiments were repeated three times with similar results.
Figure 4Transcriptome analysis of wild‐type (WT) and
(A) Volcano plot showing difference of gene expression in lpe2‐2 mutant plants plotted against −log10 (q‐value) highlighting wild type plants (dark grey, q‐value < 0.05, n = 3, ANOVA). Blue plots indicate down regulation; red plots indicate up regulation; gray plots indicate not significant. (B) Analysis of differentially expressed genes (DEGs). The enriched molecular function terms of DEGs among wild type and lpe2‐2 mutant plants. Two additional independent biological replicates were performed, and similar results were obtained.
Figure 5Loss of LOW PHOTOSYNTHETIC EFFICIENCY2 (LPE2) confers carbon‐response and nitrogen‐response
(A) Gene Ontology (GO) analysis of genes relative to carbon metabolism and signal in the transcriptome data. (B) Downregulated genes relative to carbon metabolism and signal. (C) Relative levels of expression of genes associated with carbon metabolism and signal in Col‐0 and lpe2‐2. Values are means ± SD from three biological replicates. The atpE gene is used as a control. (D) GO analysis of genes relative to nitrogen metabolism and signal. (E) Downregulated genes relative to nitrogen metabolism and signal in the transcriptome data. (F) Relative levels of expression of genes associated with nitrogen metabolism and signal in Col‐0 and lpe2‐2. Values are means ± SD from three biological replicates. The petB gene is used as a control.
Figure 6
(A) Phenotypes of Arabidopsis seedlings germinated and grown for 7 d on media containing different concentrations of Suc and nitrogen.100 Suc/0.1 N, 100 mM Sucrose and 0.1 mM nitrogen; 100 Suc/60 N, 100 mM Sucrose and 60 mM nitrogen; 29.2 Suc/60 N, 29.2 mM Sucrose and 60 mM nitrogen;0 Suc/0.1 N, 0 mM Sucrose and 0.1 mM nitrogen; 0 Suc/60 N, 0 mM Sucrose and 60 mM nitrogen. Scale bar = 0.1 cm. 29.2 Suc/60 N medium indicate the normal concentration of C and N in 1/2 MS. Bar = 0.3 cm. (B) Quantitative real‐time polymerase chain reaction (qRT‐PCR) analysis of CAB2, RBCS1‐A and CHS mRNA transcript levels in wild‐type (WT) and lpe2 seedlings. Each line was germinated on the same media variations as described in (A), and then analyzed 7 d after germination. Significant differences were identified at 5% (*) and 1% (**) probability levels by using Student's t‐test. (C) Root length of Arabidopsis seedlings germinated and grown for 10 d on media containing different concentrations of Suc and nitrogen. 100 Suc/0.1 N, 100 mM Sucrose and 0.1 mM nitrogen; 100 Suc/60 N, 100 mM Sucrose and 60 mM nitrogen; 29.2 Suc/0.1 N, 29.2 mM Sucrose and 0.1 mM nitrogen; 29.2 Suc/60 N, 29.2 mM Sucrose and 60 mM nitrogen;0 Suc/0.1 N, 0 mM Sucrose and 0.1 mM nitrogen; 0 Suc/60 N, 0 mM Sucrose and 60 mM nitrogen. Scale bar = 0.1 cm. 29.2 Suc/60 N medium indicate the normal concentration of C and N in 1/2 MS. Three additional independent biological replicates were performed, and similar results were obtained.