Display options
Cite
Yousuf PY, Ganie AH, Khan I, et al. Nitrogen-Efficient and Nitrogen-Inefficient Indian Mustard Showed Differential Expression Pattern of Proteins in Response to Elevated CO2 and Low Nitrogen. Front Plant Sci. 2016;7:1074doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01074.
Yousuf, P. Y., Ganie, A. H., Khan, I., Qureshi, M. I., Ibrahim, M. M., Sarwat, M., Iqbal, M., & Ahmad, A. (2016). Nitrogen-Efficient and Nitrogen-Inefficient Indian Mustard Showed Differential Expression Pattern of Proteins in Response to Elevated CO2 and Low Nitrogen. Frontiers in plant science, 71074. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01074
Yousuf, Peerzada Y, et al. "Nitrogen-Efficient and Nitrogen-Inefficient Indian Mustard Showed Differential Expression Pattern of Proteins in Response to Elevated CO2 and Low Nitrogen." Frontiers in plant science vol. 7 (2016): 1074. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01074
Yousuf PY, Ganie AH, Khan I, Qureshi MI, Ibrahim MM, Sarwat M, Iqbal M, Ahmad A. Nitrogen-Efficient and Nitrogen-Inefficient Indian Mustard Showed Differential Expression Pattern of Proteins in Response to Elevated CO2 and Low Nitrogen. Front Plant Sci. 2016 Jul 29;7:1074. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01074. eCollection 2016. PMID: 27524987; PMCID: PMC4965474.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Front Plant Sci. 2016 Jul 29;7:1074. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01074. eCollection 2016.

Nitrogen-Efficient and Nitrogen-Inefficient Indian Mustard Showed Differential Expression Pattern of Proteins in Response to Elevated CO2 and Low Nitrogen.

Frontiers in plant science

Peerzada Y Yousuf, Arshid H Ganie, Ishrat Khan, Mohammad I Qureshi, Mohamed M Ibrahim, Maryam Sarwat, Muhammad Iqbal, Altaf Ahmad

Affiliations

  1. Department of Botany, Faculty of Science Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, India.
  2. Proteomics and Bioinformatics Laboratory, Department of Biotechnology, Faculty of Natural Sciences Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India.
  3. Department of Botany and Microbiology, Science College, King Saud UniversityRiyadh, Saudi Arabia; Department of Botany and Microbiology, Faculty of Science, Alexandria UniversityAlexandria, Egypt.
  4. Pharmaceutic Biotechnology, Amity Institute of Pharmacy, Amity University Noida, India.
  5. Proteomics and Nanobiotechnology Laboratory, Department of Botany, Faculty of Life Sciences, Aligarh Muslim University Aligarh, India.

PMID: 27524987 PMCID: PMC4965474 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01074

Abstract

Carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) are two essential elements that influence plant growth and development. The C and N metabolic pathways influence each other to affect gene expression, but little is known about which genes are regulated by interaction between C and N or the mechanisms by which the pathways interact. In the present investigation, proteome analysis of N-efficient and N-inefficient Indian mustard, grown under varied combinations of low-N, sufficient-N, ambient [CO2], and elevated [CO2] was carried out to identify proteins and the encoding genes of the interactions between C and N. Two-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2-DE) revealed 158 candidate protein spots. Among these, 72 spots were identified by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight/time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF/TOF). The identified proteins are related to various molecular processes including photosynthesis, energy metabolism, protein synthesis, transport and degradation, signal transduction, nitrogen metabolism and defense to oxidative, water and heat stresses. Identification of proteins like PII-like protein, cyclophilin, elongation factor-TU, oxygen-evolving enhancer protein and rubisco activase offers a peculiar overview of changes elicited by elevated [CO2], providing clues about how N-efficient cultivar of Indian mustard adapt to low N supply under elevated [CO2] conditions. This study provides new insights and novel information for a better understanding of adaptive responses to elevated [CO2] under N deficiency in Indian mustard.

Keywords: 2-DE; Brassica juncea; elevated CO2; nitrogen efficiency; proteomics

References

  1. Plant Physiol. 2004 Jun;135(2):849-58 - PubMed
  2. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2016 Feb;23 (3):2391-401 - PubMed
  3. Environ Pollut. 2008 Aug;154(3):462-6 - PubMed
  4. Trends Biochem Sci. 2012 Mar;37(3):118-25 - PubMed
  5. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2002;53:449-75 - PubMed
  6. Nature. 2014 Jun 5;510(7503):139-42 - PubMed
  7. J Exp Bot. 2002 Apr;53(370):979-87 - PubMed
  8. Protoplasma. 2015 Jul;252(4):935-46 - PubMed
  9. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2003;57:155-76 - PubMed
  10. Plant Sci. 2013 Jan;198:7-16 - PubMed
  11. Int J Mol Sci. 2014 Mar 21;15(3):5063-78 - PubMed
  12. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Nov 10;95(23):13965-70 - PubMed
  13. Plant J. 2009 Jan;57(2):279-88 - PubMed
  14. New Phytol. 2006;171(3):469-99 - PubMed
  15. Nature. 2001 May 24;411(6836):469-72 - PubMed
  16. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2006 Apr;17(2):113-22 - PubMed
  17. J Plant Physiol. 2010 Dec 15;167(18):1558-65 - PubMed
  18. Plant Cell. 2002 Aug;14(8):1675-90 - PubMed
  19. Science. 2003 Nov 28;302(5650):1512-3 - PubMed
  20. Trends Plant Sci. 2010 Dec;15(12):664-74 - PubMed
  21. Prog Lipid Res. 2004 Nov;43(6):534-52 - PubMed
  22. Plant Cell. 1997 Oct;9(10):1859-68 - PubMed
  23. Plant Signal Behav. 2013 Jan;8(1):e22734 - PubMed
  24. J Biol Chem. 2005 Apr 22;280(16):16170-4 - PubMed
  25. Phytochemistry. 2000 Nov;55(6):481-504 - PubMed
  26. Plant Cell Environ. 2014 Feb;37(2):439-50 - PubMed
  27. Genetics. 2007 Feb;175(2):487-503 - PubMed
  28. Plant J. 2007 Feb;49(3):528-39 - PubMed
  29. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2015 Dec;97:235-45 - PubMed
  30. Plant Cell Physiol. 2004 Dec;45(12):1768-78 - PubMed
  31. Nat Protoc. 2006;1(2):769-74 - PubMed
  32. Nature. 2006 Apr 13;440(7086):922-5 - PubMed
  33. Plant Cell. 2007 Aug;19(8):2440-53 - PubMed
  34. Commun Integr Biol. 2013 Sep 1;6(5):e25260 - PubMed
  35. Plant J. 2005 Jan;41(1):95-106 - PubMed
  36. Plant Cell Rep. 2009 Mar;28(3):527-37 - PubMed
  37. J Am Soc Hortic Sci. 1994 Nov;119(6):1137-43 - PubMed

Publication Types