Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Plant Physiology logoLink to Plant Physiology
. 1981 Jun;67(6):1174–1180. doi: 10.1104/pp.67.6.1174

α-Galactoside Binding Proteins from Plant Membranes: Isolation, Characterization, and Relation to Helminthosporoside Binding Proteins of Sugarcane 1

Doug S Kenfield 1, Gary A Strobel 1,2
PMCID: PMC425856  PMID: 16661831

Abstract

α-Galactoside binding proteins were isolated from cellular membranes of mint and tobacco as well as two clones of sugarcane which differ in their sensitivity to helminthosporoside, a toxic galactoside. Sodium trichloroacetate was used to disrupt membranes after which the proteins were purified using a melibiose-Sepharose-6B affinity column. Proteins from mint, tobacco, and susceptible sugarcane had equal electrophoretic mobilities, whereas resistant sugarcane protein migrated more slowly. Pretreatment of the proteins with fluorescamine caused them to migrate with the tracking dye. Each of the proteins had molecular weights of about 100,000 and each was shown to be oligomeric. Gel filtration revealed that aqueous solutions of these membrane proteins contained a mixture of size species which included a high molecular weight multimer and lower molecular weight oligomers. The relative abundance of the oligomers was dependent upon protein concentration: the lower concentrations yielded higher relative amounts of oligomers (Kenfield and Strobel 1980 Biochim Biophys Acta 600: 705-712). Also, the binding activity of these receptors was inversely proportional to protein concentration. At low protein concentration (4 micrograms per milliliter), the Kd's of each of the proteins for galactinol, raffinose, and helminthosporoside was about 10 micromolar. At high protein concentrations (100 micrograms per milliliter), mint and resistant sugarcane proteins failed to bind α-galactosyl ligands, whereas proteins from tobacco and susceptible sugarcane exhibited a markedly decreased binding activity compared to that at lower protein concentrations. Binding proteins from susceptible sugarcane were mixed with receptors from either resistant sugarcane or mint at low protein concentrations, then assayed for binding activity. Such mixtures showed a concentration-dependent decrease in binding activity analogous to the activity of homogeneous protein solutions. Bovine serum albumin, a nonsubunit protein, had no effect on the binding activity of the protein from susceptible sugarcane. Thus, receptors from diverse plants can associate in vitro and form functional oligomers. The amino acid composition of each of the binding proteins was similar but not identical. The significance of these results is discussed in regard to regulation of carbohydrate transport and sensitivity to phytotoxins.

Full text

PDF
1174

Images in this article

1176Image
on p.1176
1177Image
on p.1177

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Albersheim P. The walls of growing plant cells. Sci Am. 1975 Apr;232(4):80–95. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0475-80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bradford M. M. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem. 1976 May 7;72:248–254. doi: 10.1016/0003-2697(76)90527-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. DAVIS B. J. DISC ELECTROPHORESIS. II. METHOD AND APPLICATION TO HUMAN SERUM PROTEINS. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1964 Dec 28;121:404–427. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1964.tb14213.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. FRYDMAN R. B., NEUFELD E. F. Synthesis of galactosylinositol by extracts from peas. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1963 Jul 18;12:121–125. doi: 10.1016/0006-291x(63)90246-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Fornstedt N., Porath J. Characterization studies on a new lectin found in seeds of Vicia ervilia. FEBS Lett. 1975 Sep 15;57(2):187–191. doi: 10.1016/0014-5793(75)80713-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hatefi Y., Hanstein W. G. Destabilization of membranes with chaotropic ions. Methods Enzymol. 1974;31:770–790. doi: 10.1016/0076-6879(74)31080-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Kenfield D. S., Strobel G. A. Inverse relationship of protein concentration and binding activity of alpha-galactoside receptors from sugarcane membranes. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1980 Aug 14;600(3):705–712. doi: 10.1016/0005-2736(80)90474-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. LOWRY O. H., ROSEBROUGH N. J., FARR A. L., RANDALL R. J. Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem. 1951 Nov;193(1):265–275. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Lew K. K., Roth J. R. Genetic approaches to determination of enzyme quaternary structure. Biochemistry. 1971 Jan 19;10(2):204–207. doi: 10.1021/bi00778a002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Maddy A. H. A critical evaluation of the analysis of membrane proteins by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis in the presence of dodecyl sulphate. J Theor Biol. 1976 Oct 21;62(2):315–326. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(76)90123-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Moreno A., Cardini C. E. A raffinose-sucrose transgalactosidase from wheat germ. Plant Physiol. 1966 May;41(5):909–910. doi: 10.1104/pp.41.5.909. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Pace J. L., Kemper D. L., Ragland W. L. The relationship of molecular weight to electrophoretic mobility of fluorescamine-labeled proteins in polyacrylamide gels. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1974 Mar 25;57(2):482–487. doi: 10.1016/0006-291x(74)90957-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Rosemblatt M. S., Margolies M. N., Cannon L. E., Haber E. Peptides: an analytical method for their resolution by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis applicable to a wide range of sizes and solubilities. Anal Biochem. 1975 May 12;65(1-2):321–330. doi: 10.1016/0003-2697(75)90516-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Schaffner W., Weissmann C. A rapid, sensitive, and specific method for the determination of protein in dilute solution. Anal Biochem. 1973 Dec;56(2):502–514. doi: 10.1016/0003-2697(73)90217-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Shepard J. F., Totten R. E. Mesophyll cell protoplasts of potato: isolation, proliferation, and plant regeneration. Plant Physiol. 1977 Aug;60(2):313–316. doi: 10.1104/pp.60.2.313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Steiner G. W., Strobel G. A. Helminthosporoside, a host-specific toxin from Helminthosporium sacchari. J Biol Chem. 1971 Jul 10;246(13):4350–4357. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Strobel G. A. Biochemical basis of the resistance of sugarcane to eyespot disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1973 Jun;70(6):1693–1696. doi: 10.1073/pnas.70.6.1693. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Strobel G. A., Hapner K. D. Transfer of toxin susceptibility to plant protoplasts via the hemlmintosporoside binding protein of sugarcane. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1975 Apr 21;63(4):1151–1156. doi: 10.1016/0006-291x(75)90689-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Strobel G. A. The helminthosporoside-binding protein of sugarcane. Its properties and relationship to susceptibility to the eye spot disease. J Biol Chem. 1973 Feb 25;248(4):1321–1328. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Strobel G. A. The toxin-binding protein of sugarcane, its role in the plant and in disease development. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1974 Oct;71(10):4232–4236. doi: 10.1073/pnas.71.10.4232. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Weber K., Osborn M. The reliability of molecular weight determinations by dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. J Biol Chem. 1969 Aug 25;244(16):4406–4412. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Plant Physiology are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES