|
|
||||||||
|
First published online July 29, 2005; 10.1104/pp.105.061903 Plant Physiology 138:2280-2291 (2005) © 2005 American Society of Plant Biologists Daylength and Circadian Effects on Starch Degradation and Maltose Metabolism1Department of Botany (Y.L., T.D.S.) and Department of Biochemistry (J.P.G.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706
Transitory starch is stored during the day inside chloroplasts and broken down at night for export. Maltose is the primary form of carbon export from chloroplasts at night. We investigated the influence of daylength and circadian rhythms on starch degradation and maltose metabolism. Starch breakdown was faster in plants of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) ecotype Wassilewskija growing in long days. Transcript levels of genes encoding enzymes involved in starch degradation and maltose metabolism showed a strong diurnal rhythm. Under altered photoperiods, the transcript levels and the rate of starch degradation changed within one day/night cycle. However, the amount of proteins involved in starch degradation was maintained relatively constant throughout the day/night cycle. To investigate whether the diurnal cycling of the transcript levels is only a response to light or is also regulated by a circadian clock, we measured the amount of messenger RNAs in Arabidopsis leaves under continuous light and continuous darkness. The expression of genes encoding starch degradation-related enzymes was under very strong circadian control in continuous light. Under continuous light, the amount of maltose also showed a strong endogenous rhythm close to 24 h, indicating that maltose metabolism is under circadian control. Light is necessary for the cycling of transcript levels and maltose levels. Under continuous darkness, these genes were barely expressed, and no cycling of maltose levels was observed.
1 This work was supported by the Chemical Sciences, Geosciences, and Biosciences Division, U.S. Department of Energy. Article, publication date, and citation information can be found at www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/doi/10.1104/pp.105.061903. * Corresponding author; e-mail tsharkey{at}wisc.edu; fax 6082627509. Received February 24, 2005; returned for revision April 13, 2005; accepted April 20, 2005. This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ASPB Publications | PLANT PHYSIOLOGY® | THE PLANT CELL | |
|---|---|---|---|