2005
DOI: 10.1110/ps.051579205
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Solution structure of a late embryogenesis abundant protein (LEA14) from Arabidopsis thaliana, a cellular stress‐related protein

Abstract: We report the three-dimensional structure of a late embryogenesis abundant (LEA) protein from Arabidopsis thaliana gene At1g01470.1. This protein is a member of Pfam cluster PF03168, and has been classified as a LEA14 protein. LEA proteins are expressed under conditions of cellular stress, such as desiccation, cold, osmotic stress, and heat. The structure, which was determined by NMR spectroscopy, revealed that the At1g01470.1 protein has an ab-fold consisting of one a-helix and seven b-strands that form two a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

5
71
0
5

Year Published

2006
2006
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 111 publications
(81 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
5
71
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…The data on the secondary structure of MtEm6 and MtPM25 in solution complement those obtained for members of groups 3 and 4 using FTIR spectroscopy as well as for dehydrins and a member of the D95 family with other spectroscopy techniques. In the hydrated state, LEA proteins exhibit a wide degree of disorder, ranging from unordered (group 1; Soulages et al, 2002; group 3 LEA proteins from Typha latifolia pollen [Wolkers et al, 2001]; nematodes [Goyal et al, 2003]; and dehydrins [Soulages et al, 2003]), to 60% to 70% unordered (GmPM16, a soybean group 4 LEA protein [Shih et al, 2004] and Em proteins [Table IV;McCubbin et al, 1985]), and finally down to 50% unordered (MtPM25 [Table IV] and an Arabidopsis Lea14, a member of the D 95 family [PF03168; Singh et al, 2005]). Likewise, the nature and contents of ordered structures in solution varies greatly.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The data on the secondary structure of MtEm6 and MtPM25 in solution complement those obtained for members of groups 3 and 4 using FTIR spectroscopy as well as for dehydrins and a member of the D95 family with other spectroscopy techniques. In the hydrated state, LEA proteins exhibit a wide degree of disorder, ranging from unordered (group 1; Soulages et al, 2002; group 3 LEA proteins from Typha latifolia pollen [Wolkers et al, 2001]; nematodes [Goyal et al, 2003]; and dehydrins [Soulages et al, 2003]), to 60% to 70% unordered (GmPM16, a soybean group 4 LEA protein [Shih et al, 2004] and Em proteins [Table IV;McCubbin et al, 1985]), and finally down to 50% unordered (MtPM25 [Table IV] and an Arabidopsis Lea14, a member of the D 95 family [PF03168; Singh et al, 2005]). Likewise, the nature and contents of ordered structures in solution varies greatly.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The maize full-length tga1 cDNA was cloned into a pVP-GW vector (Singh et al, 2005), which can produce proteins with S-His-tag and enhanced solubility. Proteins were overexpressed in E. coli, and then extracted and purified using Ni-NTA Superflow Columns (Qiagen) following the manufacturer's instructions.…”
Section: Heterologous Protein Expression Andmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most LEA proteins are hydrophilins, a set of proteins characterized by their biased amino acid composition, richness in Gly and other small and/or charged residues, and high hydrophilicity index (GarayArroyo et al, 2000). This amino acid composition promotes their flexible structure in solution, existing mainly as random coils, with the exception of the hydrophobic or atypical LEA proteins (Singh et al, 2005). Moreover, hydrophilic LEA proteins from groups 2, 3, and 4 show a prevalence of typical spectroscopic patterns of intrinsically unstructured proteins, with the occurrence of transitions from intrinsically unstructured proteins to ordered conformations in the presence of helix-promoting solvents or air drying (McCubbin et al, 1985;Russouw et al, 1995;Eom et al, 1996;Lisse et al, 1996;Ismail et al, 1999;Wolkers et al, 2001;Soulages et al, 2002Soulages et al, , 2003Goyal et al, 2003;Shih et al, 2004;Tolleter et al, 2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%