| Literature DB >> 33927734 |
Viviane Cristina Heinzen da Silva1, Marina C M Martins1, Maria Juliana Calderan-Rodrigues1, Anthony Artins2, Carolina Cassano Monte Bello1, Saurabh Gupta3, Tiago J P Sobreira4, Diego Mauricio Riaño-Pachón1, Valéria Mafra1, Camila Caldana1.
Abstract
The Target of Rapamycin (TOR) kinase pathway integrates energy and nutrient availability into metabolismEntities:
Keywords: C4 model; biomass; energy sensing; metabolism; nutrient sensing; plant growth and development; signaling; target of rapamycin pathway
Year: 2021 PMID: 33927734 PMCID: PMC8078139 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2021.637508
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
FIGURE 1Overview of the experiments performed in this study. Created with BioRender.com.
FIGURE 2TOR effect on root growth inhibition in S. viridis and A. thaliana. Seedlings of S. viridis and A. thaliana were grown under 12 h photoperiod until specific and compatible developmental stages before the transference to plates containing different concentrations of AZD8055 (1–10 μM) or DMSO 0.05% (control). The effect of AZD8055 on root growth (n = 15 roots for S. viridis or A. thaliana) was expressed relative to DMSO 0.05% to identify the AZD8055 inhibitory concentration (GI50) according to Montané and Menand (2013).
FIGURE 3AZD8055 severely impacts the growth of S. viridis and A. thaliana seedlings. Effect of AZD8055 on root and overall growth of S. viridis and A. thaliana. For all measurements, seedlings were grown hydroponically under 12 h photoperiod until specific and compatible developmental stages before application of DMSO 0.05% (control), 10 or 2 μM AZD8055 (S. viridis and A. thaliana, respectively). (A) Length of root EZ and MZ, expressed in cm. DW of S. viridis. (B) and A. thaliana. (C) Black and gray colors represent DMSO and AZD8055 treatments, respectively. Significant differences along time within the same treatment, using ANOVA, are indicated by letters (P < 0.05), lower case for DMSO and capital letters for AZD8055-treated plants, and significant differences between treatments are indicated by asterisks (Student’s t-test): ∗P < 0.05, ∗∗P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗P < 0.001.
FIGURE 4Comparative heatmap of metabolic changes in S. viridis and A. thaliana seedlings under TORC inhibition. Seedlings were grown hydroponically under 12 h photoperiod until specific and compatible developmental stages before application of DMSO 0.05% (control), 10 or 2 μM AZD8055 (S. viridis and A. thaliana, respectively). Metabolite profiling was carried out using GC-TOF-MS. Data represents the average of biological replicates (n = 5), median scaled, and normalized log2-transformed values. Significant differences between metabolites from control and TOR-inhibited seedlings are indicated by asterisks (Student’s t-test): ∗P < 0.05, ∗∗P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗P < 0.001, and also available on Supplementary Dataset 3. Metabolites in bold indicate differential behavior in S. viridis and A. thaliana.
FIGURE 5Comparative transcriptional changes in S. viridis and A. thaliana under TOR inhibition. (A) Venn diagrams of DEGs among distinct time points under TORC inhibition in S. viridis and A. thaliana, showing down- and up-regulated genes. (B) Classification of DEGs into Mapman categories in S. viridis and A. thaliana seedlings under TORC inhibition. The list of DEGs from control and TOR-inhibited seedlings is available on Supplementary Dataset 8.