4.7 Article

Arabinogalactan-proteins from non-coniferous gymnosperms have unusual structural features

Journal

CARBOHYDRATE POLYMERS
Volume 261, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2021.117831

Keywords

Arabinogalactan-protein; Bioinformatics; Cell wall; Glycosyltransferases; Gymnosperms

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study characterized AGPs from gymnosperms including Ginkgo biloba, Ephedra distachya, Encephalartos longifolius and Cycas revoluta. The findings showed similarities and differences in the structure of AGPs from gymnosperms compared to those from angiosperms, with unique structural elements identified in Ginkgo AGP. Additionally, bioinformatic analysis revealed a lower number of galactosyltransferases responsible for AGP backbone biosynthesis in the Ginkgo genome.
Arabinogalactan-proteins (AGPs), important signalling molecules of the plant cell wall, are structurally extensively investigated in angiosperms, but information on AGPs in gymnosperms is still limited. We characterized AGPs from the gymnosperms Ginkgo biloba, Ephedra distachya, Encephalartos longifolius and Cycas revoluta. The protein contents are comparable to that of angiosperm AGPs. Hydroxyproline is the site of linking the carbohydrate part and was detected in all AGPs with highest concentration in Cycas AGP (1.1 % of the AGP). Interestingly, with the exception of Cycas, all AGPs contained the monosaccharide 3-O-methylrhamnose not present in angiosperm polysaccharides. The carbohydrate moieties of Cycas and Ephredra showed the main components 1,3,6-linked galactose and terminal arabinose typical of angiosperm AGPs, whereas that of Ginkgo AGP was unique with 1,4-linked galactose as dominant structural element. Bioinformatic search for glycosyltransferases in Ginkgo genome also revealed a lower number of galactosyltransferases responsible for biosynthesis of the 1,3Gal/1,6-Gal AGP backbone.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available