Regulation of Starch Synthesis in the Bundle Sheath and Mesophyll of <i>Zea mays</i> L.

Spilatro, Steven R.; Preiss, Jack

doi:10.1104/pp.83.3.621

Cited by 43 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(25 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, we set out to investigate whether the maize C 4 system could respond to changing environmental conditions by adjusting the C 4 (amino) acid (MAL or Asp) delivered from M to BS as well as the proportions of other metabolic reactions shared between both cell types, such as SS, PR, and PEP regeneration (Walker et al, 1986;Spilatro and Preiss, 1987;Wingler et al, 1999;Friso et al, 2010;Majeran et al, 2010;Furbank, 2011). Using contrasting light qualities and their projected extinctions within the leaf profile, we could then estimate the rate of ATP synthesis in M and BS compartments as compared with the overall leaf-level operating efficiency measured by gas exchange and real-time carbon isotope discrimination.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1; Friso et al, 2010;Majeran et al, 2010), and any PPDK activity in BS is generally neglected (von Caemmerer, 2000; see "Discussion"). PR, respiration, and SS are processes located both in BS and M (Spilatro and Preiss, 1987;Kanai and Edwards, 1999;Majeran and van Wijk, 2009;Friso et al, 2010). These processes are described in detail below, after an initial comparison of modeled light profiles and measured photosynthetic characteristics under red, green, and blue wavelengths, to give a quantitative description of the biochemical mechanisms underpinning acclimation, fluxes and reaction rates, the dynamics of F, and the effects on the total and relative ATP demand for assimilation.…”

Section: Atp Demand In Bsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both BS and M express SS enzymes (Spilatro and Preiss, 1987;Majeran and van Wijk, 2009) and synthesize starch (Rascio et al, 1980;Kanai and Edwards, 1999), so SS was allocated to BS between zero and total SS rate. PR is not essential to BS, so minimum PR was set at zero.…”

Section: Minimum and Maximum Bs Allocationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is also an extensive overlap between BS and M functions, since both cell types can synthesize starch (Spilatro and Preiss, 1987;Kanai and Edwards, 1999) and reduce phosphoglyceric acid (PGA; Majeran and van Wijk, 2009; see the overall scheme in Fig. 1).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Operation of Two Decarboxylases, Transamination, and Partitioning of C4 Metabolic Processes between Mesophyll and Bundle Sheath Cells Allows Light Capture To Be Balanced for the Maize C4 Pathway

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The C 4 photosynthesis carbon-concentrating mechanism in maize (Zea mays) has two CO 2 delivery pathways to the bundle sheath (BS; via malate or aspartate), and rates of phosphoglyceric acid reduction, starch synthesis, and phosphoenolpyruvate regeneration also vary between BS and mesophyll (M) cells. The theoretical partitioning of ATP supply between M and BS cells was derived for these metabolic activities from simulated profiles of light penetration across a leaf, with a potential 3-fold difference in the fraction of ATP produced in the BS relative to M (from 0.29 to 0.96). A steady-state metabolic model was tested using varying light quality to differentially stimulate M or BS photosystems. CO 2 uptake, ATP production rate (J ATP ; derived with a low oxygen/chlorophyll fluorescence method), and carbon isotope discrimination were measured on plants under a low light intensity, which is considered to affect C 4 operating efficiency. The light quality treatments did not change the empirical ATP cost of gross CO 2 assimilation (J ATP /GA). Using the metabolic model, measured J ATP /GA was compared with the predicted ATP demand as metabolic functions were varied between M and BS. Transamination and the two decarboxylase systems (NADP-malic enzyme and phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase) were critical for matching ATP and reduced NADP demand in BS and M when light capture was varied under contrasting light qualities.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Atp Demand In Bsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Minimum and Maximum Bs Allocationmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Operation of Two Decarboxylases, Transamination, and Partitioning of C4 Metabolic Processes between Mesophyll and Bundle Sheath Cells Allows Light Capture To Be Balanced for the Maize C4 Pathway

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One interesting adaptation has been the species-dependent localization of sucrose and starch biosynthesis in the mesophyll or the bundle sheath cells . The key enzymes of starch biosynthesis are localized predominantly in the bundle sheath cell chloroplasts in maize leaves, although there is some capacity for making starch in the mesophyll cells, shown by the presence of starch in both cell types when plants were grown in continuous light (Downton & Hawker, 1973 ;Echeverria & Boyer, 1986 ;Spilatro & Preiss, 1987). However, starch was found only in the bundle sheath cell chloroplasts in leaves from a range of C % species grown under normal light conditions (Downton & Tregunna, 1968 ;Laetsch, 1971 ;.…”

Section:        C % mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tansley Review No. 105.

Lunn

Furbank

1999

New Phytologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sucrose has a central role in the metabolism of all higher plants. Here we discuss the location of sucrose synthesis in the leaves of C % plants, the control of flux through the pathway and its response to environmental conditions, and finally some of the prospects for the genetic manipulation of sucrose metabolism in C % plants. Much of our knowledge about sucrose synthesis in plants comes from C $ species ; it is evident, from those studies of C % species that are available, that there are many similarities between sucrose synthesis in C $ and C % plants. However, some of the basic regulatory mechanisms common to both C $ and C % plants seem to have been adapted for the specialized photosynthetic metabolism of C % plants. There are also some other important differences : for example, some C % species possess photosynthetic cells with little or no capacity for sucrose synthesis. For these reasons it is not always appropriate to extrapolate directly from C $ to C % plants. Even where data are available from one C % species, usually maize, it should not be assumed that all C % plants are necessarily the same in every respect. Although C % plants constitute a small fraction of the plant kingdom as a whole, they include a disproportionate number of agriculturally important species. C % plants also have some advantages over C $ plants for studies of the regulation of cell-specific gene expression and the control of metabolism. For these reasons we suggest that they are worthy of more attention by researchers.

show abstract