↓ Skip to main content

Site-directed mutagenesis of the Arabidopsis heterotrimeric G protein β subunit suggests divergent mechanisms of effector activation between plant and animal G proteins

Overview of attention for article published in Planta, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Site-directed mutagenesis of the Arabidopsis heterotrimeric G protein β subunit suggests divergent mechanisms of effector activation between plant and animal G proteins
Published in
Planta, October 2011
DOI 10.1007/s00425-011-1526-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Chakravorty, Yuri Trusov, José Ramón Botella

Abstract

Heterotrimeric G proteins are integral components of signal transduction in humans and other mammals and have been therefore extensively studied. However, while they are known to mediate many processes, much less is currently known about the effector pathways and molecular mechanisms used by these proteins to regulate effectors in plants. We designed a complementation strategy to study G protein signaling in Arabidopsis thaliana, particularly the mechanism of action of AGB1, the sole identified β subunit. We used biochemical and effector regulation data from human G protein studies to identify four potentially important residues for site-directed mutagenesis (T65, M111, D250 and W361 of AGB1). Each residue was individually mutated and the resulting mutated protein introduced in the agb1-2 mutant background under the control of the native AGB1 promoter. Interestingly, even though these mutations have been shown to have profound effects on effector signaling in humans, all the mutated subunits were able to restore thirteen of the fifteen Gβ-deficient phenotypes characterized in this study. Only one mutated protein, T65A was unable to complement the hypersensitivity to mannitol during germination observed in agb1 mutants; while only D250A failed to restore lateral root numbers in the agb1 mutant to wild-type levels. Our results suggest that the mechanisms used in mammalian G protein signaling are not well conserved in plant G protein signaling, and that either the effectors used by plant G proteins, or the mechanisms used to activate them, are at least partially divergent from the well-studied mammalian G proteins.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 3%
Unknown 37 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 32%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 61%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 November 2011.
All research outputs
#15,239,825
of 22,659,164 outputs
Outputs from Planta
#1,862
of 2,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,720
of 136,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Planta
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,659,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,709 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 136,726 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.