Dataset Information

Light spectra affect in vitro shoot development of Cedrela fissilis Vell. (Meliaceae) by changing the differential accumulation of proteins and polyamine contents

ABSTRACT: Light spectrum quality is an important signal for plant growth and development. We aimed to analyze the effects of different light spectra on in vitro shoot development and proteomic and polyamine (PA) profiles in shoots of Cedrela fissilis. Cotyledonary and apical nodal segments were grown under different light emitting diode (LED) lamps and a fluorescent lamp. Shoots from cotyledonary nodal segments cultured with 6-benzyladenine (BA) grown under WmBdR LED increased their length, fresh and dry matter compared to shoots grown under fluorescent light. A non-redundant protein databank generated by transcriptome sequencing and de novo assembly of C. fissilis improved, and almost doubled, protein identification compared to a Citrus sinensis databank. Using the C. fissilis protein databank, a total of 616 proteins were identified, with 23 up- and 103 downaccumulated in shoots under WmBdR LED compared to fluorescent lamp. Differential accumulation of argininosuccinate synthase protein was associated with an increase in free-Put contents and, consequently, with higher shoot elongation under WmBdR LED. Furthermore, the proteins S-adenosylmethionine synthase, which is related to PA and ethylene biosynthesis, and 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate oxidase, related to ethylene biosynthesis, were unique in shoots grown under fluorescent lamp, showing lower elongation of shoots, possibly due to ethylene production. The downaccumulation of calreticulin, heat shock proteins, plastid-lipid-associated protein, ubiquitin-conjugating enzymes, and ultraviolet-B receptor UVR8 isoform X1 could be related to better shoot length under LED. This work provides important data related to the effects of light spectrum quality on in vitro morphogenesis via modulation of specific proteins and free-Put biosynthesis.

INSTRUMENT(S): SYNAPT G2-Si

ORGANISM(S): Cedrela Fissilis

TISSUE(S): Plant Cell, Cell Culture

SUBMITTER: Claudete Santa-Catarina

LAB HEAD: Claudete Santa-Catarina

PROVIDER: PXD018020 | Pride | 2020-09-04

REPOSITORIES: Pride

ACCESS DATA

Dataset's files

Source:

			Action	DRS
	Cedrela_fissilis_Databank_v20190523.fasta	Fasta
	PLGS_OUTPUTS_Cedrela_fissilis.zip	Other
	PLGS_OUTPUTS_Citrus_sinensis.zip	Other
	SupplementaryTableS1Cedrela_fissilisdatabase.xlsx	Xlsx
	SupplementaryTableS2Citrus_sinensisdatabase.xlsx	Xlsx

Items per page:

1 - 5 of 11

Publications

Light spectra affect the in vitro shoot development of Cedrela fissilis Vell. (Meliaceae) by changing the protein profile and polyamine contents.

Oliveira Tadeu Dos Reis TDR Aragão Victor Paulo Mesquita VPM Moharana Kanhu Charan KC Fedosejevs Eric E do Amaral Fernanda Plucani FP Sousa Kariane Rodrigues KR Thelen Jay J JJ Venâncio Thiago Motta TM Silveira Vanildo V Santa-Catarina Claudete C

Biochimica et biophysica acta. Proteins and proteomics 20200825 12

The light spectrum quality is an important signal for plant growth and development. We evaluated the effects of different light spectra on the in vitro shoot development of Cedrela fissilis and its proteomic and polyamine (PA) profiles. Cotyledonary and apical nodal segments were grown under different light emitting diodes (LED) and fluorescent lamps. Shoots from cotyledonary nodal segments cultured with 6-benzyladenine (BA) that were grown under W<sub>m</sub>B<sub>d</sub>R LED showed increased ...[more]

PMID: 32853775

Similar Datasets

Project description:Olfactory ensheathing cells are one of the few central nervous system regenerative cells discovered so far. It is characterized by its lifelong nerve regeneration function, and it can also release a variety of neurotrophic factors and neural adhesion molecules. It is considered to be the glial cell with the strongest myelination ability. Olfactory ensheathing cells and Schwann cells have phenotypes in common, they can promote axon regeneration(R. Doucette, 1995). Olfactory ensheathing cells have the characteristics of Schwann cells and astrocytes, but the overall performance tends to be the former, which has two unique characteristics. First, it exists not only in the peripheral nerves (Schwann cells), but also in the central nervous system (astroglia); second, the olfactory mucosa has the ability to regenerate life-long, including human olfactory ensheathing cells(J. C. Bartolomei and C. A. Greer, 2000). Regeneration is a process in which olfactory ensheathing cells participate in efficient regulation, although the specific mechanism is not yet clear. Olfactory ensheathing cells are different from astrocytes and Schwann cells, but at the same time have the characteristics of these two cells(S. C. Barnett, 2004), like Schwann cells help axon growth, but more than Schwann cells It can make axons grow long distances, that is, it has stronger migration(A. Ramon-Cueto et al., 1998); there are also astrocytes that have a nutritional effect on the survival of neurons and the growth of axons, but olfactory ensheathing cells can also wrap neurons forms myelin sheath to support the growth of nerve processes(R. Devon and R. Doucette, 1992; J. Gu et al., 2019). There are two characteristics that make olfactory ensheathing cells the best choice for the treatment of neurological diseases(S. C. Chiu et al., 2009; J. Kim et al., 2018; M. Abdel-Rahman et al., 2018). Olfactory ensheathing cells are gradually used to treat spinal cord injuries and have shown amazing effects(J. C. Bartolomei and C. A. Greer, 2000; K. J. Liu et al., 2010; R. Yao et al., 2018). Olfactory ensheathing cells that have been used in research are usually derived from the olfactory bulb(E. H. Franssen et al., 2007), but it is easier to obtain olfactory ensheathing cells from the olfactory mucosa in clinical practice(M. Ryszard et al., 2006), so the difference between the olfactory ensheathing cells from the olfactory bulb and the olfactory mucosa There are more and more studies(B. M. U. et al., 2007), and previous studies have shown that they not only have many similar functions, but also have many differences(M. W. Richter et al., 2005; L. Wang et al., 2014; K. E. Smith et al., 2020). Because olfactory ensheathing cells derived from the olfactory bulb are not easy to obtain, olfactory ensheathing cells derived from the olfactory mucosa have become the focus of attention. Although we know that olfactory ensheathing cells from two sources have nerve repair functions, it is not clear why the two different sources of olfactory ensheathing cells have different therapeutic effects. Nicolas G. once studied that the genetic difference between the two cells and found that there are many genes related to wound repair and nerve regeneration(G. Nicolas et al., 2010). We have reason to guess that olfactory ensheathing cells from these two sources will also have a large difference in protein level. Our research group wants to use the current mature transcriptome and proteomic sequencing technologies to explore the difference between olfactory ensheathing cells from the olfactory bulb and olfactory mucosa, and explain why the two sources of olfactory ensheathing cells shows different therapeutic effects, hope to provide a new theoretical basis for future clinical treatment.