Article

Glutathione, photosynthesis and the redox regulation of stress-responsive gene expression.

Department of Biological Sciences, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, CO4 3SQ Colchester, UK.
Photosynthesis Research (Impact Factor: 3.19). 01/2006; 86(3):459-74. DOI: 10.1007/s11120-005-8811-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The ubiquitous antioxidant thiol tripeptide glutathione is present in millimolar concentrations in plant tissues and is regarded as one of the major determinants of cellular redox homeostasis. Recent research has highlighted a regulatory role for glutathione in influencing the expression of many genes important in plants' responses to both abiotic and biotic stress. Therefore, it becomes important to consider how glutathione levels and its redox state are influenced by environmental factors, how glutathione is integrated into primary metabolism and precisely how it can influence the functioning of signal transduction pathways by modulating cellular redox state. This review draws on a number of recent important observations and papers to present a unified view of how the responsiveness of glutathione to changes in photosynthesis may be one means of linking changes in nuclear gene expression to changes in the plant's external environment.

1 Follower
 · 
199 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Free radicals derived from reactive oxygen species and reactive nitrogen species are generated in our body by normal cellular metabolism which is enhanced under stress conditions. The most vulnerable biological targets of free radicals are cell structures including proteins, lipids and nucleic acids. Since antioxidants synthesized in the body are not sufficient under oxidative stress, their exogenous supply is important to prevent the body from free radical-induced injury. Recent researches have shown that antioxidants of plant origin with free radical scavenging property could have great importance as therapeutic agents in management of oxidative stress. Mangrove plants growing in inhospitable environment of the intertidal regions of land and sea in tropics and sub-tropics are equipped with very efficient free radical scavenging system to withstand the variety of stress conditions. These mangrove plants possess variety of phytochemical and are rich in phenolic compounds such as flavonoids, isoflavones, flavones, anthocyanins, coumarins, lignans, catechins, isocatechins, etc., which served as source of antioxidants. Isolation and identification of these antioxidant compounds offer great potential for their pharmaceutical exploitations. However, no comprehensive literature is available on antioxidants’ studies in mangrove plants in particular. Hence, the present review discusses the antioxidant potential of mangrove plants with its specific role under salt stress as well as the progress made so far in evaluation of antioxidant activities of different mangrove species.
    Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 03/2014; 36(3). DOI:10.1007/s11738-013-1438-z · 1.52 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lingonberry (Vaccinium vitis-idaea L. ssp. vitis-idaea Britton) cultivars Regal, Splendor, and Erntedank were obtained by conventional softwood cuttings (taken as a control), by in vitro shoot proliferation of node explants, and by adventitious shoot regeneration from excised leaves of micropropagated shoots. In the plants propagated in vitro, the total ascorbate content increased and its pool was more oxidized, the total glutathione content also increased but its pool became more reduced. The leaves of plants obtained from the in vitro culture showed significantly higher antioxidant enzyme activities except for dehydroascorbate reductase which was at a similar level in all plants. Total soluble phenolics, tannins, and flavonoids were enhanced in fruits of in vitro-propagated plants whereas in leaves, the levels of these metabolites (except flavonoids) were higher in ex vitro derived plants. The total radical scavenging capacity was enhanced in berries of the in vitro propagated plants. It is suggested that the active morphogenetic process, characterized by intensive formation and scavenging reactive oxygen species is reflected in the activities of antioxidant enzymes and metabolites. The reduction potential of glutathione is the most important parameter which determines patterns of growth and differentiation in the investigated plants.
    Biologia Plantarum 12/2013; 57(4). DOI:10.1007/s10535-013-0339-8 · 1.74 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: MicroRNA395 (miR395) is a conserved miRNA that targets a low-affinity sulfate transporter (AST68) and three ATP sulfurylases (APS1, APS3 and APS4) in higher plants. In this study, At2g28780 was confirmed as another target of miR395 in Arabidopsis. Interestingly, several dicots contained genes homologous to At2g28780 and a cognate miR395 complementary site but possess a gradient of mismatches at the target site. It is well-established that miR395 is induced during S deprivation in Arabidopsis; however, the signaling pathways that mediate this regulation are unknown. Several findings in the present study demonstrate that redox signaling plays an important role in induction of miR395 during S deprivation. These include the following results: (1) GSH supplementation suppressed miR395 induction in S-deprived plants; (2) miR395 is induced in Arabidopsis seedlings exposed to Arsenate or Cu(2+) , which induces oxidative stress; (3), S deprivation induced oxidative stress, and (4) compromised induction of miR395 during S deprivation in cad2 mutants (deficient in GSH biosynthesis) that is defective in glutaredoxin-dependent redox signaling and ntra/ntrb (defective in thioredoxin reductases a and b) double mutants that are defective in thioredoxin-dependent redox signaling. Collectively, these findings strongly support the involvement of redox signaling in inducing the expression of miR395 during S deprivation in Arabidopsis. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
    The Plant Journal 10/2013; 77(1). DOI:10.1111/tpj.12364 · 6.82 Impact Factor