Molecular analysis of cellulose biosynthesis in Arabidopsis

Science

Volumn 279, Issue 5351, 1998, Pages 717-720

  Arioli, Tony ^a   Peng, Liangcai ^a   Betzner, Andreas S ^b   Burn, Joanne ^a   Wittke, Werner ^c   Herth, Werner ^c   Camilleri, Christine ^d   Höfte, Herman ^d   Plazinski, Jacek ^a   Birch, Rosemary ^a   Cork, Ann ^a   Glover, Julie ^a   Redmond, John ^a   Williamson, Richard E ^a,e  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b Groupe Limagrain Pacific ^*  (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^d CEMAGREF   (France)

^e AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CELLULOSE; GLUCAN; SYNTHETASE;

ARABIDOPSIS; ARTICLE; CARBOHYDRATE SYNTHESIS; ENZYME ACTIVE SITE; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN ASSEMBLY;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ARABIDOPSIS; ARABIDOPSIS PROTEINS; CELL MEMBRANE; CELLULOSE; CHROMOSOME MAPPING; CLONING, MOLECULAR; CRYSTALLIZATION; FREEZE FRACTURING; GENES, PLANT; GENETIC COMPLEMENTATION TEST; GLUCANS; GLUCOSYLTRANSFERASES; MOLECULAR SEQUENCE DATA; MUTATION; PLANT ROOTS; PLANT SHOOTS;

ARABIDOPSIS; EMBRYOPHYTA;

EID: 6844258836     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.279.5351.717     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. D. P. Delmer and Y. Amor, Plant Cell 7, 987 (1995).
2. T. I. Baskin, A. S. Betzner, R. Hoggart, A. Cork, R. E. Williamson, Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 19, 427 (1992).
3. J. R. Pear, Y. Kawagoe, W. E. Schreckengost, D. P. Delmer, D. M. Stalker, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 12637 (1996).
4. -1) was digested with mixtures of endo-cellulase (E.C. 3.2.1.4; Megazyme, Australia) and β-glucosidase (E.C. 3.2.1.21; Sigma) or of α-amylase (E.C. 3.2.1.1; Sigma) and α-glucosidase (E.C. 3.2.1.20; Sigma). The former enzyme pair was inactive against 1,3-linked laminarin and starch but released 83% of the glucose released by trifluoroacetic acid from the rsw1 glucan, whereas the latter pair released none but could release 95% of the glucose from starch.
5. -1) was digested with mixtures of endo-cellulase (E.C. 3.2.1.4; Megazyme, Australia) and β-glucosidase (E.C. 3.2.1.21; Sigma) or of α-amylase (E.C. 3.2.1.1; Sigma) and α-glucosidase (E.C. 3.2.1.20; Sigma). The former enzyme pair was inactive against 1,3-linked laminarin and starch but released 83% of the glucose released by trifluoroacetic acid from the rsw1 glucan, whereas the latter pair released none but could release 95% of the glucose from starch.
6. -1) was digested with mixtures of endo-cellulase (E.C. 3.2.1.4; Megazyme, Australia) and β-glucosidase (E.C. 3.2.1.21; Sigma) or of α-amylase (E.C. 3.2.1.1; Sigma) and α-glucosidase (E.C. 3.2.1.20; Sigma). The former enzyme pair was inactive against 1,3-linked laminarin and starch but released 83% of the glucose released by trifluoroacetic acid from the rsw1 glucan, whereas the latter pair released none but could release 95% of the glucose from starch.
7. -1) was digested with mixtures of endo-cellulase (E.C. 3.2.1.4; Megazyme, Australia) and β-glucosidase (E.C. 3.2.1.21; Sigma) or of α-amylase (E.C. 3.2.1.1; Sigma) and α-glucosidase (E.C. 3.2.1.20; Sigma). The former enzyme pair was inactive against 1,3-linked laminarin and starch but released 83% of the glucose released by trifluoroacetic acid from the rsw1 glucan, whereas the latter pair released none but could release 95% of the glucose from starch.
8. -1) was digested with mixtures of endo-cellulase (E.C. 3.2.1.4; Megazyme, Australia) and β-glucosidase (E.C. 3.2.1.21; Sigma) or of α-amylase (E.C. 3.2.1.1; Sigma) and α-glucosidase (E.C. 3.2.1.20; Sigma). The former enzyme pair was inactive against 1,3-linked laminarin and starch but released 83% of the glucose released by trifluoroacetic acid from the rsw1 glucan, whereas the latter pair released none but could release 95% of the glucose from starch.
9. W. Herth, in Botanical Microscopy, A. W. Robards, Ed. (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1985), pp. 285-310.
10. Visual mapping scored double mutant phenotypes in F2 plants [C. Koncz, N.-H. Chua, J. Schell, Methods in Arabidopsis Research (World Scientific, Singapore, 1992)] and showed linkage to ga5, whereas molecular mapping used RFLP [C. Chang, J. L. Bowman, A. W. Dejohn, E. S. Lander, E. M. Meyerowitz, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 85, 6856 (1988); H.-G. Nam et al., Plant Cell 1, 699 (1989)] or CAPS [A. Konieczny and F. Ausubel, Plant J. 4, 403 (1993)] markers in F2 or F3 families from a cross to Landsberg (Ler). Mapping information at Arabidopsis thaliana Database (AtDB) (Stanford, CA).
11. Visual mapping scored double mutant phenotypes in F2 plants [C. Koncz, N.-H. Chua, J. Schell, Methods in Arabidopsis Research (World Scientific, Singapore, 1992)] and showed linkage to ga5, whereas molecular mapping used RFLP [C. Chang, J. L. Bowman, A. W. Dejohn, E. S. Lander, E. M. Meyerowitz, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 85, 6856 (1988); H.-G. Nam et al., Plant Cell 1, 699 (1989)] or CAPS [A. Konieczny and F. Ausubel, Plant J. 4, 403 (1993)] markers in F2 or F3 families from a cross to Landsberg (Ler). Mapping information at Arabidopsis thaliana Database (AtDB) (Stanford, CA).
12. Visual mapping scored double mutant phenotypes in F2 plants [C. Koncz, N.-H. Chua, J. Schell, Methods in Arabidopsis Research (World Scientific, Singapore, 1992)] and showed linkage to ga5, whereas molecular mapping used RFLP [C. Chang, J. L. Bowman, A. W. Dejohn, E. S. Lander, E. M. Meyerowitz, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 85, 6856 (1988); H.-G. Nam et al., Plant Cell 1, 699 (1989)] or CAPS [A. Konieczny and F. Ausubel, Plant J. 4, 403 (1993)] markers in F2 or F3 families from a cross to Landsberg (Ler). Mapping information at Arabidopsis thaliana Database (AtDB) (Stanford, CA).
13. Visual mapping scored double mutant phenotypes in F2 plants [C. Koncz, N.-H. Chua, J. Schell, Methods in Arabidopsis Research (World Scientific, Singapore, 1992)] and showed linkage to ga5, whereas molecular mapping used RFLP [C. Chang, J. L. Bowman, A. W. Dejohn, E. S. Lander, E. M. Meyerowitz, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 85, 6856 (1988); H.-G. Nam et al., Plant Cell 1, 699 (1989)] or CAPS [A. Konieczny and F. Ausubel, Plant J. 4, 403 (1993)] markers in F2 or F3 families from a cross to Landsberg (Ler). Mapping information at Arabidopsis thaliana Database (AtDB) (Stanford, CA).
14. EST T20782 became of interest when located to YACs in the rsw1 interval as part of a mapping program [H.H. Höfte et al., Plant J. 4, 1051 (1993)] and aligned in a contig with four rice ESTs (D41986, D41766, D40691, and D41261) whose two 5′ members show weak sequence similarities to a bacterial cellulose synthase [H. C. Wong et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 87, 8130 (1990); see supplementary material (17)]. DNA sequence analysis located the RSW1 gene on genomic cosmid 23H12 [N. E. Olszewski, F. B. Martin, F. M. Ausubel, Nucleic Acids Res. 16, 10765 (1988)], which hybridizes with the T20782 insert, and on YAC5C8, which spans the rsw1 locus (Fig. 2A). T20782 is part of the RSW1 transcript derived from exons 8 through 14 and 12 base pairs from exon 7. Exons 1 to 8 were sequenced from cDNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) products amplified from Co double-stranded cDNA with primers upstream of the RSW1 start site and a primer from within the EST. We determined the rsw1 mutation by sequencing two PCR fragments spanning the full rsw1 cDNA and rsw1 genomic PCR fragments corresponding to the region.
15. EST T20782 became of interest when located to YACs in the rsw1 interval as part of a mapping program [H.H. Höfte et al., Plant J. 4, 1051 (1993)] and aligned in a contig with four rice ESTs (D41986, D41766, D40691, and D41261) whose two 5′ members show weak sequence similarities to a bacterial cellulose synthase [H. C. Wong et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 87, 8130 (1990); see supplementary material (17)]. DNA sequence analysis located the RSW1 gene on genomic cosmid 23H12 [N. E. Olszewski, F. B. Martin, F. M. Ausubel, Nucleic Acids Res. 16, 10765 (1988)], which hybridizes with the T20782 insert, and on YAC5C8, which spans the rsw1 locus (Fig. 2A). T20782 is part of the RSW1 transcript derived from exons 8 through 14 and 12 base pairs from exon 7. Exons 1 to 8 were sequenced from cDNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) products amplified from Co double-stranded cDNA with primers upstream of the RSW1 start site and a primer from within the EST. We determined the rsw1 mutation by sequencing two PCR fragments spanning the full rsw1 cDNA and rsw1 genomic PCR fragments corresponding to the region.
16. EST T20782 became of interest when located to YACs in the rsw1 interval as part of a mapping program [H.H. Höfte et al., Plant J. 4, 1051 (1993)] and aligned in a contig with four rice ESTs (D41986, D41766, D40691, and D41261) whose two 5′ members show weak sequence similarities to a bacterial cellulose synthase [H. C. Wong et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 87, 8130 (1990); see supplementary material (17)]. DNA sequence analysis located the RSW1 gene on genomic cosmid 23H12 [N. E. Olszewski, F. B. Martin, F. M. Ausubel, Nucleic Acids Res. 16, 10765 (1988)], which hybridizes with the T20782 insert, and on YAC5C8, which spans the rsw1 locus (Fig. 2A). T20782 is part of the RSW1 transcript derived from exons 8 through 14 and 12 base pairs from exon 7. Exons 1 to 8 were sequenced from cDNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) products amplified from Co double-stranded cDNA with primers upstream of the RSW1 start site and a primer from within the EST. We determined the rsw1 mutation by sequencing two PCR fragments spanning the full rsw1 cDNA and rsw1 genomic PCR fragments corresponding to the region.
17. Single-letter abbreviations for the amino acid residues are as follows: D, Asp; L, Leu; Q, Gln; R, Arg; V, Val; and W, Trp. X stands for any single residue; the commas stand for intervening sections of residues of arbitrary length.
18. For the D,D,D,QXXRW signature, see I. M. Saxena, R. M. Brown, M. Fevre, R. Geremi, B. Henrissat, J. Bacteriol. 177, 1419 (1995). For sequences with similarities to the full EST, see A. G. Matthyse, S. White, R. Ughtfoot, ibid., p. 1069; H. J. Sofia, V. Burland, D. L. Daniels, G. Plunkett III, F. R. Blattner, Nucleic Acids Res. 22, 2576 (1994).
19. For the D,D,D,QXXRW signature, see I. M. Saxena, R. M. Brown, M. Fevre, R. Geremi, B. Henrissat, J. Bacteriol. 177, 1419 (1995). For sequences with similarities to the full EST, see A. G. Matthyse, S. White, R. Ughtfoot, ibid., p. 1069; H. J. Sofia, V. Burland, D. L. Daniels, G. Plunkett III, F. R. Blattner, Nucleic Acids Res. 22, 2576 (1994).
20. For the D,D,D,QXXRW signature, see I. M. Saxena, R. M. Brown, M. Fevre, R. Geremi, B. Henrissat, J. Bacteriol. 177, 1419 (1995). For sequences with similarities to the full EST, see A. G. Matthyse, S. White, R. Ughtfoot, ibid., p. 1069; H. J. Sofia, V. Burland, D. L. Daniels, G. Plunkett III, F. R. Blattner, Nucleic Acids Res. 22, 2576 (1994).
21. J. A. Campbell, G. J. Davies, V. Bulone, B. Henrissat, Biochem. J. 326, 929 (1997).
22. Ath-A and Ath-B were cDNA clones isolated by hybridization from a cDNA library of 21-day-old Co plants using a PCR fragment spanning the 5′ part of RSW1 transcript. Ath-A is on YAC CIC9H6, chromosome 4. The EST T20782 clone was from Arabidopsis Biological Resource Center (Columbus, OH); rice EST D39394, from the MAFF DNA Bank (Tsukuba, Japan). The sequences were analyzed at the Australian National Genome Information Service with the use of Wisconsin GCG software [J. Devereux, P. Haeberley, O. Smithies, Nucleic Acids Res. 12, 387 (1984)]. Sequences for RSW1, Ath-A, Ath-B, and rice D39394 have been deposited at GenBank (AF027172, AF027173, AF027174, and AF030052, respectively); comparisons are provided as supplementary material (17).
23. I. M. Saxena, F. C. Lin, R. M. Brown, Plant Mol, Biol. 15, 673 (1990); G. F. Kutish et al., Virology 223, 303 (1996).
24. I. M. Saxena, F. C. Lin, R. M. Brown, Plant Mol, Biol. 15, 673 (1990); G. F. Kutish et al., Virology 223, 303 (1996).
25. 2+ [Y. Kawagoe and D. P. Delmer, Plant Physiol. 114 (suppl.), 85 (1997)].
26. 2+ [Y. Kawagoe and D. P. Delmer, Plant Physiol. 114 (suppl.), 85 (1997)].
27. Five protein sequences (accession numbers 2262116, 2262115, 2262114, 2244887, and 2244890) were identified by Gapped BLASTX searches of GenBank with the use of RSW1 and were analyzed as in (11).
28. I. M. Saxena and R. M. Brown, Cellulose 4, 33 (1997).
29. S. Cutler and C. Somerville, Curr. Biol. 7, R108 (1997).
30. Supplementary material available at www. sciencemag.org/feature/data/974564.shl
31. W. Herth, Planta 164, 12 (1985); B. Schneider and W. Herth, Protoplasma 131, 142 (1986).
32. W. Herth, Planta 164, 12 (1985); B. Schneider and W. Herth, Protoplasma 131, 142 (1986).
33. R. Schmidt, J. West, G. Cnops, A. Balestrazzi, C. Dean, Plant J. 9, 755 (1996).
34. M. Bevan, Nucleic Acids Res. 12, 8711 (1984).
35. N. Bechtold, J. Ellis, G. Pelletier, C. R Acad. Sci. Paris 316, 1194 (1993).
36. We thank R. Schmidt and C. Lister for sharing mapping information and clones. Supported by the Australian National University (A.C., J.P., L.P., J.R., and R.E.W.), Australian Research Council (J.P.), Cooperative Research Centre for Pant Science (T.A., R.B., A.C., J.B., and L.P.), Cotton Seed Distributors (T.A. and J.G.), Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (A.S.B., W.H., and W.W.), Groupe Limagrain Pacific (A.S.B.), Groupement de Recherches et d'Etudes sur les Génomes and Actions Coordonnées Concertées dans le Domaine des Sciences du Vivant (C.C. and H.H.), and North Eucalypt Technologies (J.B. and J.G.).