Expression and functions of myo-inositol monophosphatase family genes in seed development of Arabidopsis

Sato, Yuko; Yazawa, Katsumi; Yoshida, Seiji; Tamaoki, Masanori; Nakajima, Nobuyoshi; Iwai, Hiroaki; Ishii, Tadashi; Satoh, Shinobu

doi:10.1007/s10265-010-0381-y

Cited by 17 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The strongest GUS activity, driven by both constructs, in organs other than the seeds was present in the vascular tissues [35]. Similar patterns of reporter gene activity were previously shown in transgenic plants harboring the AtMRP5 promoter [25] and promoters of different Arabidopsis genes coding for enzymes involved in different steps in PA pathway [49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56]. These data suggest that vascular tissues The transmembrane domains (TMD) and the nucleotide-binding domains (NBD) are represented in red and green, respectively.…”

Section: Gmmrp13/gmabcc3supporting

confidence: 74%

Phytic Acid and Transporters: What Can We Learn from low phytic acid Mutants?

Cominelli

Pilu

Sparvoli

2020

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phytic acid has two main roles in plant tissues: Storage of phosphorus and regulation of different cellular processes. From a nutritional point of view, it is considered an antinutritional compound because, being a cation chelator, its presence reduces mineral bioavailability from the diet. In recent decades, the development of low phytic acid (lpa) mutants has been an important goal for nutritional seed quality improvement, mainly in cereals and legumes. Different lpa mutations affect phytic acid biosynthetic genes. However, other lpa mutations isolated so far, affect genes coding for three classes of transporters: A specific group of ABCC type vacuolar transporters, putative sulfate transporters, and phosphate transporters. In the present review, we summarize advances in the characterization of these transporters in cereals and legumes. Particularly, we describe genes, proteins, and mutants for these different transporters, and we report data of in silico analysis aimed at identifying the putative orthologs in some other cereal and legume species. Finally, we comment on the advantage of using such types of mutants for crop biofortification and on their possible utility to unravel links between phosphorus and sulfur metabolism (phosphate and sulfate homeostasis crosstalk).

show abstract

Section: Gmmrp13/gmabcc3supporting

confidence: 74%

Phytic Acid and Transporters: What Can We Learn from low phytic acid Mutants?

Cominelli

Pilu

Sparvoli

2020

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Arabidopsis transformants [46], two IMP candidate genes, IMPL1 and IMPL2 were expressed in a similar manner both in the vegetative and reproductive organs. The expression of IMP genes in a promoter-GUS assay on developing seeds was not coupled with the expression of the genes encoding MIPSs, which supply the substrate for IMPs in a 'de novo' synthesis pathway.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expression dynamics and genome distribution of osmoprotectants in soybean: identifying important components to face abiotic stress

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDespite the importance of osmoprotectants, no previous in silico evaluation of high throughput data is available for higher plants. The present approach aimed at the identification and annotation of osmoprotectant-related sequences applied to short transcripts from a soybean HT-SuperSAGE (High Throughput Super Serial Analysis of Gene Expression; 26-bp tags) database, and also its comparison with other transcriptomic and genomic data available from different sources.MethodsA curated set of osmoprotectants related sequences was generated using text mining and selected seed sequences for identification of the respective transcripts and proteins in higher plants. To test the efficiency of the seed sequences, these were aligned against four HT-SuperSAGE contrasting libraries generated by our group using soybean tolerant and sensible plants against water deficit, considering only differentially expressed transcripts (p ≤ 0.05). Identified transcripts from soybean and their respective tags were aligned and anchored against the soybean virtual genome.ResultsThe workflow applied resulted in a set including 1,996 seed sequences that allowed the identification of 36 differentially expressed genes related to the biosynthesis of osmoprotectants [Proline (P5CS: 4, P5CR: 2), Trehalose (TPS1: 9, TPPB: 1), Glycine betaine (BADH: 4) and Myo-inositol (MIPS: 7, INPS1: 8)], also mapped in silico in the soybean genome (25 loci). Another approach considered matches using Arabidopsis full length sequences as seed sequences, and allowed the identification of 124 osmoprotectant-related sequences, matching ~10.500 tags anchored in the soybean virtual chromosomes. Osmoprotectant-related genes appeared clustered in all soybean chromosomes, with higher density in some subterminal regions and synteny among some chromosome pairs.ConclusionsSoybean presents all searched osmoprotectant categories with some important members differentially expressed among the comparisons considered (drought tolerant or sensible vs. control; tolerant vs. sensible), allowing the identification of interesting candidates for biotechnological inferences. The identified tags aligned to corresponding genes that matched 19 soybean chromosomes. Osmoprotectant-related genes are not regularly distributed in the soybean genome, but clustered in some regions near the chromosome terminals, with some redundant clusters in different chromosomes indicating their involvement in previous duplication and rearrangements events. The seed sequences, transcripts and map represent the first transversal evaluation for osmoprotectant-related genes and may be easily applied to other plants of interest.

show abstract

“…This enzyme is involved in the myo -inositol “salvage pathway” and SAL1/FRY expression only partially overlaps the expression of AtMIPS genes. This expression pattern suggested that the salvage pathway may also be involved in myo -inositol synthesis during seed development [ 54 ]. More recently, it was shown that AtIMPL2 functions in the histidine biosynthetic pathway while AtIMP and AtIMPL1 catalyze the hydrolysis of inositol- and galactose-phosphates in Arabidopsis vegetative tissues [ 53 ].…”

Section: Biosynthetic Pathwaysmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seed Biofortification and Phytic Acid Reduction: A Conflict of Interest for the Plant?

Sparvoli

Cominelli

2015

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of the phosphorus in seeds is accumulated in the form of phytic acid (myo-inositol-1,2,3,4,5,6-hexakisphosphate, InsP6). This molecule is a strong chelator of cations important for nutrition, such as iron, zinc, magnesium, and calcium. For this reason, InsP6 is considered an antinutritional factor. In recent years, efforts to biofortify seeds through the generation of low phytic acid (lpa) mutants have been noteworthy. Moreover, genes involved in the biosynthesis and accumulation of this molecule have been isolated and characterized in different species. Beyond its role in phosphorus storage, phytic acid is a very important signaling molecule involved in different regulatory processes during plant development and responses to different stimuli. Consequently, many lpa mutants show different negative pleitotropic effects. The strength of these pleiotropic effects depends on the specific mutated gene, possible functional redundancy, the nature of the mutation, and the spatio-temporal expression of the gene. Breeding programs or transgenic approaches aimed at development of new lpa mutants must take into consideration these different aspects in order to maximize the utility of these mutants.

show abstract

Expression and functions of myo-inositol monophosphatase family genes in seed development of Arabidopsis

Cited by 17 publications

References 36 publications

Phytic Acid and Transporters: What Can We Learn from low phytic acid Mutants?

Phytic Acid and Transporters: What Can We Learn from low phytic acid Mutants?

Expression dynamics and genome distribution of osmoprotectants in soybean: identifying important components to face abiotic stress

Seed Biofortification and Phytic Acid Reduction: A Conflict of Interest for the Plant?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About