Refine
Document Type
- Article (16)
Language
- English (16)
Has Fulltext
- yes (16)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (16)
Keywords
- heat stress (3)
- alternative splicing (2)
- pre-mRNA (2)
- ribosome biogenesis (2)
- A. thaliana (1)
- Alternate hydrophobicity (1)
- Amino acid pattern (1)
- Arabidopsis thaliana (1)
- Beta-sheet (1)
- Chloroplast (1)
Institute
- Biowissenschaften (16)
- Exzellenzcluster Makromolekulare Komplexe (8)
- Biochemie und Chemie (2)
- Biochemie, Chemie und Pharmazie (1)
- Biodiversität und Klima Forschungszentrum (BiK-F) (1)
- Center for Membrane Proteomics (CMP) (1)
- Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies (FIAS) (1)
- Georg-Speyer-Haus (1)
- Informatik (1)
- Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft (1)
Heat stress transcription factors (HSFs) regulate transcriptional response to a large number of environmental influences, such as temperature fluctuations and chemical compound applications. Plant HSFs represent a large and diverse gene family. The HSF members vary substantially both in gene expression patterns and molecular functions. HEATSTER is a web resource for mining, annotating, and analyzing members of the different classes of HSFs in plants. A web-interface allows the identification and class assignment of HSFs, intuitive searches in the database and visualization of conserved motifs, and domains to classify novel HSFs.
Transcriptional basis for differential thermosensitivity of seedlings of various tomato genotypes
(2020)
Transcriptional reprograming after the exposure of plants to elevated temperatures is a hallmark of stress response which is required for the manifestation of thermotolerance. Central transcription factors regulate the stress survival and recovery mechanisms and many of the core responses controlled by these factors are well described. In turn, pathways and specific genes contributing to variations in the thermotolerance capacity even among closely related plant genotypes are not well defined. A seedling-based assay was developed to directly compare the growth and transcriptome response to heat stress in four tomato genotypes with contrasting thermotolerance. The conserved and the genotype-specific alterations of mRNA abundance in response to heat stress were monitored after exposure to three different temperatures. The transcripts of the majority of genes behave similarly in all genotypes, including the majority of heat stress transcription factors and heat shock proteins, but also genes involved in photosynthesis and mitochondrial ATP production. In turn, genes involved in hormone and RNA-based regulation, such as auxin- and ethylene-related genes, or transcription factors like HsfA6b, show a differential regulation that associates with the thermotolerance pattern. Our results provide an inventory of genes likely involved in core and genotype-dependent heat stress response mechanisms with putative role in thermotolerance in tomato seedlings.
The insertion of membrane proteins requires proteinaceous complexes in the cytoplasm, the membrane, and the lumen of organelles. Most of the required complexes have been described, while the components for insertion of β‐barrel‐type proteins into the outer membrane of chloroplasts remain unknown. The same holds true for the signals required for the insertion of β‐barrel‐type proteins. At present, only the processing of Toc75‐III, the β‐barrel‐type protein of the central chloroplast translocon with an atypical signal, has been explored in detail. However, it has been debated whether Toc75‐V/ outer envelope protein 80 (OEP80), a second protein of the same family, contains a signal and undergoes processing. To substantiate the hypothesis that Toc75‐V/OEP80 is processed as well, we reinvestigated the processing in a protoplast‐based assay as well as in native membranes. Our results confirm the existence of a cleavable segment. By protease protection and pegylation, we observed intermembrane space localization of the soluble N‐terminal domain. Thus, Toc75‐V contains a cleavable N‐terminal signal and exposes its polypeptide transport‐associated domains to the intermembrane space of plastids, where it likely interacts with its substrates.
Specialized surveillance mechanisms are essential to maintain the genetic integrity of germ cells, which are not only the source of all somatic cells but also of the germ cells of the next generation. DNA damage and chromosomal aberrations are, therefore, not only detrimental for the individual but affect the entire species. In oocytes, the surveillance of the structural integrity of the DNA is maintained by the p53 family member TAp63α. The TAp63α protein is highly expressed in a closed and inactive state and gets activated to the open conformation upon the detection of DNA damage, in particular DNA double-strand breaks. To understand the cellular response to DNA damage that leads to the TAp63α triggered oocyte death we have investigated the RNA transcriptome of oocytes following irradiation at different time points. The analysis shows enhanced expression of pro-apoptotic and typical p53 target genes such as CDKn1a or Mdm2, concomitant with the activation of TAp63α. While DNA repair genes are not upregulated, inflammation-related genes become transcribed when apoptosis is initiated by activation of STAT transcription factors. Furthermore, comparison with the transcriptional profile of the ΔNp63α isoform from other studies shows only a minimal overlap, suggesting distinct regulatory programs of different p63 isoforms.
High-throughput protein localization studies require multiple strategies. Mass spectrometric analysis of defined cellular fractions is one of the complementary approaches to a diverse array of cell biological methods. In recent years, the protein content of different cellular (sub-)compartments was approached. Despite of all the efforts made, the analysis of membrane fractions remains difficult, in that the dissection of the proteomes of the envelope membranes of chloroplasts or mitochondria is often not reliable because sample purity is not always warranted. Moreover, proteomic studies are often restricted to single (model) species, and therefore limited in respect to differential individual evolution. In this study we analyzed the chloroplast envelope proteomes of different plant species, namely, the individual proteomes of inner and outer envelope (OE) membrane of Pisum sativum and the mixed envelope proteomes of Arabidopsis thaliana and Medicago sativa. The analysis of all three species yielded 341 identified proteins in total, 247 of them being unique. 39 proteins were genuine envelope proteins found in at least two species. Based on this and previous envelope studies we defined the core envelope proteome of chloroplasts. Comparing the general overlap of the available six independent studies (including ours) revealed only a number of 27 envelope proteins. Depending on the stringency of applied selection criteria we found 231 envelope proteins, while less stringent criteria increases this number to 649 putative envelope proteins. Based on the latter we provide a map of the outer and inner envelope core proteome, which includes many yet uncharacterized proteins predicted to be involved in transport, signaling, and response. Furthermore, a foundation for the functional characterization of yet unidentified functions of the inner and OE for further analyses is provided.
Vesicle transport is a central process to ensure protein and lipid distribution in eukaryotic cells. The current knowledge on the molecular components and mechanisms of this process is majorly based on studies in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Arabidopsis thaliana, which revealed 240 different proteinaceous factors either experimentally proven or predicted to be involved in vesicle transport. In here, we performed an orthologue search using two different algorithms to identify the components of the secretory pathway in yeast and 14 plant genomes by using the ‘core-set’ of 240 factors as bait. We identified 4021 orthologues and (co-)orthologues in the discussed plant species accounting for components of COP-II, COP-I, Clathrin Coated Vesicles, Retromers and ESCRTs, Rab GTPases, Tethering factors and SNAREs. In plants, we observed a significantly higher number of (co-)orthologues than yeast, while only 8 tethering factors from yeast seem to be absent in the analyzed plant genomes. To link the identified (co-)orthologues to vesicle transport, the domain architecture of the proteins from yeast, genetic model plant A. thaliana and agriculturally relevant crop Solanum lycopersicum has been inspected. For the orthologous groups containing (co-)orthologues from yeast, A. thaliana and S. lycopersicum, we observed the same domain architecture for 79% (416/527) of the (co-)orthologues, which documents a very high conservation of this process. Further, publically available tissue-specific expression profiles for a subset of (co-)orthologues found in A. thaliana and S. lycopersicum suggest that some (co-)orthologues are involved in tissue-specific functions. Inspection of localization of the (co-)orthologues based on available proteome data or localization predictions lead to the assignment of plastid- as well as mitochondrial localized (co-)orthologues of vesicle transport factors and the relevance of this is discussed.
Background: Protein translocation across membranes is a central process in all cells. In the past decades the molecular composition of the translocation systems in the membranes of the endoplasmic reticulum, peroxisomes, mitochondria and chloroplasts have been established based on the analysis of model organisms. Today, these results have to be transferred to other plant species. We bioinformatically determined the inventory of putative translocation factors in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) by orthologue search and domain architecture analyses. In addition, we investigated the diversity of such systems by comparing our findings to the model organisms Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Arabidopsis thaliana and 12 other plant species.
Results: The literature search end up in a total of 130 translocation components in yeast and A. thaliana, which are either experimentally confirmed or homologous to experimentally confirmed factors. From our bioinformatic analysis (PGAP and OrthoMCL), we identified (co-)orthologues in plants, which in combination yielded 148 and 143 orthologues in A. thaliana and S. lycopersicum, respectively. Interestingly, we traced 82% overlap in findings from both approaches though we did not find any orthologues for 27% of the factors by either procedure. In turn, 29% of the factors displayed the presence of more than one (co-)orthologue in tomato. Moreover, our analysis revealed that the genomic composition of the translocation machineries in the bryophyte Physcomitrella patens resemble more to higher plants than to single celled green algae. The monocots (Z. mays and O. sativa) follow more or less a similar conservation pattern for encoding the translocon components. In contrast, a diverse pattern was observed in different eudicots.
Conclusions: The orthologue search shows in most cases a clear conservation of components of the translocation pathways/machineries. Only the Get-dependent integration of tail-anchored proteins seems to be distinct. Further, the complexity of the translocation pathway in terms of existing orthologues seems to vary among plant species. This might be the consequence of palaeoploidisation during evolution in plants; lineage specific whole genome duplications in Arabidopsis thaliana and triplications in Solanum lycopersicum.
50 years of amino acid hydrophobicity scales : revisiting the capacity for peptide classification
(2016)
Background: Physicochemical properties are frequently analyzed to characterize protein-sequences of known and unknown function. Especially the hydrophobicity of amino acids is often used for structural prediction or for the detection of membrane associated or embedded β-sheets and α-helices. For this purpose many scales classifying amino acids according to their physicochemical properties have been defined over the past decades. In parallel, several hydrophobicity parameters have been defined for calculation of peptide properties. We analyzed the performance of separating sequence pools using 98 hydrophobicity scales and five different hydrophobicity parameters, namely the overall hydrophobicity, the hydrophobic moment for detection of the α-helical and β-sheet membrane segments, the alternating hydrophobicity and the exact ß-strand score.
Results: Most of the scales are capable of discriminating between transmembrane α-helices and transmembrane β-sheets, but assignment of peptides to pools of soluble peptides of different secondary structures is not achieved at the same quality. The separation capacity as measure of the discrimination between different structural elements is best by using the five different hydrophobicity parameters, but addition of the alternating hydrophobicity does not provide a large benefit. An in silico evolutionary approach shows that scales have limitation in separation capacity with a maximal threshold of 0.6 in general. We observed that scales derived from the evolutionary approach performed best in separating the different peptide pools when values for arginine and tyrosine were largely distinct from the value of glutamate. Finally, the separation of secondary structure pools via hydrophobicity can be supported by specific detectable patterns of four amino acids.
Conclusion: It could be assumed that the quality of separation capacity of a certain scale depends on the spacing of the hydrophobicity value of certain amino acids. Irrespective of the wealth of hydrophobicity scales a scale separating all different kinds of secondary structures or between soluble and transmembrane peptides does not exist reflecting that properties other than hydrophobicity affect secondary structure formation as well. Nevertheless, application of hydrophobicity scales allows distinguishing between peptides with transmembrane α-helices and β-sheets. Furthermore, the overall separation capacity score of 0.6 using different hydrophobicity parameters could be assisted by pattern search on the protein sequence level for specific peptides with a length of four amino acids.
Ribosome biogenesis is one cell function-defining process. It depends on efficient transcription of rDNAs in the nucleolus as well as on the cytosolic synthesis of ribosomal proteins. For newly transcribed rRNA modification and ribosomal protein assembly, so-called small nucleolar RNAs (snoRNAs) and ribosome biogenesis factors (RBFs) are required. For both, an inventory was established for model systems like yeast and humans. For plants, many assignments are based on predictions. Here, RNA deep sequencing after nuclei enrichment was combined with single molecule species detection by northern blot and in vivo fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)-based localization studies. In addition, the occurrence and abundance of selected snoRNAs in different tissues were determined. These approaches confirm the presence of most of the database-deposited snoRNAs in cell cultures, but some of them are localized in the cytosol rather than in the nucleus. Further, for the explored snoRNA examples, differences in their abundance in different tissues were observed, suggesting a tissue-specific function of some snoRNAs. Thus, based on prediction and experimental confirmation, many plant snoRNAs can be proposed, while it cannot be excluded that some of the proposed snoRNAs perform alternative functions than are involved in rRNA modification
Ribosome biogenesis is essential for cellular function and involves rRNA synthesis, rRNA processing and modification, and ribosomal protein assembly. Ribosome biogenesis factors and small nucleolar RNA assist these events. Ribosomal maturation takes place in the nucleolus, the nucleoplasm, and the cytosol in a coordinated and controlled manner. For example, some ribosomal proteins are thought to be assembled in the cytoplasm based on the observations in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Here, we used cellular fractionation to demonstrate that cleavage of the 20S intermediate, the precursor to mature 18S rRNA, does not occur in the nucleoplasm of Arabidopsis thaliana. It most likely occurs in the cytoplasm. Further, we verified the proposed localization of RPS10e, RPS26e, and RPL24a/b in the nucleus and RPP1 in the nucleolus of A. thaliana by ribosome profiling, immunofluorescence, and analysis of the localization of GFP fusion proteins. Our results suggest that the order of events during ribosomal protein assembly in the ribosome biogenesis pathway differs between plants and yeast.