title: Electrophysiological approach to determine kinetic parameters of sucrose uptake by single sieve elements or phloem parenchyma cells in intact Vicia faba plants.
abstract: Apart from cut aphid stylets in combination with electrophysiology, no attempts have been made thus far to measure in vivo sucrose-uptake properties of sieve elements. We investigated the kinetics of sucrose uptake by single sieve elements and phloem parenchyma cells in Vicia faba plants. To this end, microelectrodes were inserted into free-lying phloem cells in the main vein of the youngest fully-expanded leaf, half-way along the stem, in the transition zone between the autotrophic and heterotrophic part of the stem, and in the root axis. A top-to-bottom membrane potential gradient of sieve elements was observed along the stem (-130 mV to -110 mV), while the membrane potential of the phloem parenchyma cells was stable (approx. -100 mV). In roots, the membrane potential of sieve elements dropped abruptly to -55 mV. Bathing solutions having various sucrose concentrations were administered and sucrose/H(+)-induced depolarizations were recorded. Data analysis by non-linear least-square data fittings as well as by linear Eadie-Hofstee (EH) -transformations pointed at biphasic Michaelis-Menten kinetics (2 MM, EH: K m1 1.2-1.8 mM, K m2 6.6-9.0 mM) of sucrose uptake by sieve elements. However, Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC) favored single MM kinetics. Using single MM as the best-fitting model, K m values for sucrose uptake by sieve elements decreased along the plant axis from 1 to 7 mM. For phloem parenchyma cells, higher K m values (EH: K m1 10 mM, K m2 70 mM) as compared to sieve elements were found. In preliminary patch-clamp experiments with sieve-element protoplasts, small sucrose-coupled proton currents (-0.1 to -0.3 pA/pF) were detected in the whole-cell mode. In conclusion (a) K m values for sucrose uptake measured by electrophysiology are similar to those obtained with heterologous systems, (b) electrophysiology provides a useful tool for in situ determination of K m values, (c) As yet, it remains unclear if one or two uptake systems are involved in sucrose uptake by sieve elements, (d) Affinity for sucrose uptake by sieve elements exceeds by far that by phloem parenchyma cells, (e) Patch-clamp studies provide a feasible basis for quantification of sucrose uptake by single cells. The consequences of the findings for whole-plant carbohydrate partitioning are discussed.
authors.affiliation: Institute of Plant Physiology, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, Germany ; Institute of General Botany, Plant Cell Biology Research Group, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, Germany.
authors.forename: Jens B
authors.initials: JB
authors.lastname: Hafke
authors.forename: Sabina-Roxana
authors.initials: SR
authors.lastname: Höll
authors.forename: Christina
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Kühn
authors.forename: Aart J E
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: van Bel
keywords: Akaike's Information Criterion; Eadie–Hofstee plots; H+/sucrose symporter; Km values; carbohydrate partitioning; non-linear least-square fittings; phloem parenchyma cells sieve-element/companion cell complex; sucrose-induced depolarization of membrane potential
references.citation: Plant Cell. 2008 Apr;20(4):1073-87
references.pmid: 18441213
references.citation: Plant J. 2011 Oct;68(1):129-36
references.pmid: 21668536
references.citation: Planta. 1985 Jun;164(3):362-9
references.pmid: 24249605
references.citation: J Exp Bot. 2007;58(15-16):4061-70
references.pmid: 18182421
references.citation: Planta. 1972 Dec;107(4):279-300
references.pmid: 24477479
references.citation: Plant Cell. 2001 Feb;13(2):385-98
references.pmid: 11226192
references.citation: Mol Plant. 2011 May;4(3):377-94
references.pmid: 21502663
references.citation: Methods Enzymol. 1992;207:123-31
references.pmid: 1528115
references.citation: Clin Sci (Lond). 1982 Nov;63(5):405-14
references.pmid: 6749382
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2003 Apr;131(4):1509-10
references.pmid: 12692310
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2004 May;135(1):574-86
references.pmid: 15122035
references.citation: Plant Cell. 2003 Jun;15(6):1375-85
references.pmid: 12782730
references.citation: Plant Cell. 1993 Nov;5(11):1591-8
references.pmid: 8312741
references.citation: Plant Cell. 2000 Jul;12(7):1153-64
references.pmid: 10899981
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 1978 Apr;61(4):593-6
references.pmid: 16660343
references.citation: J Exp Bot. 1996 Aug;47 Spec No:1129-40
references.pmid: 21245242
references.citation: Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2010 Jun;13(3):288-98
references.pmid: 20303321
references.citation: Science. 1992 Nov 6;258(5084):873-4
references.pmid: 1439795
references.citation: Nature. 1959 Oct 24;184:1296-8
references.pmid: 14402470
references.citation: FEBS Lett. 2007 May 25;581(12):2309-17
references.pmid: 17434165
references.citation: Plant J. 2007 Feb;49(4):750-64
references.pmid: 17253986
references.citation: J Neurosci Methods. 1995 Jan;56(1):37-41
references.pmid: 7715244
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2005 Jul;138(3):1527-37
references.pmid: 15980202
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2006 Sep;142(1):220-32
references.pmid: 16861573
references.citation: Plant Mol Biol. 2008 Oct;68(3):289-99
references.pmid: 18618272
references.citation: Structure. 2002 Jun;10(6):763-72
references.pmid: 12057192
references.citation: Plant Cell Physiol. 2010 Jun;51(6):1007-18
references.pmid: 20400534
references.citation: J Exp Bot. 1996 Aug;47 Spec No:1165-77
references.pmid: 21245245
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 1981 Apr;67(4):845-8
references.pmid: 16661766
references.citation: Funct Plant Biol. 2004 Nov;31(10):987-993
references.pmid: 32688967
references.citation: PLoS One. 2010 Sep 07;5(9):e12605
references.pmid: 20838661
references.citation: Plant J. 2000 Mar;21(5):455-67
references.pmid: 10758497
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2011 Sep;157(1):109-19
references.pmid: 21771914
references.citation: J Membr Biol. 1979 May 7;47(1):39-57
references.pmid: 458847
references.citation: Mol Plant. 2011 May;4(3):395-406
references.pmid: 21502662
references.citation: Planta. 1987 Aug;171(4):474-82
references.pmid: 24225708
references.citation: Science. 2012 Jan 13;335(6065):207-11
references.pmid: 22157085
references.citation: Biochim Biophys Acta. 1977 Jan 4;464(1):118-26
references.pmid: 831787
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2003 Jan;131(1):102-13
references.pmid: 12529519
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 1981 Mar;67(3):560-4
references.pmid: 16661714
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2004 Jan;134(1):204-14
references.pmid: 14730068
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 1981 Apr;67(4):869-74
references.pmid: 16661771
references.citation: J Biol Chem. 2005 Jun 3;280(22):21437-43
references.pmid: 15805107
references.citation: Plant Sci. 2012 Jun;188-189:97-101
references.pmid: 22525249
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2007 Nov;145(3):703-11
references.pmid: 17885083
references.citation: Plant Cell Physiol. 2004 Oct;45(10):1461-70
references.pmid: 15564530
references.citation: FEBS Lett. 2000 Nov 24;485(2-3):189-94
references.pmid: 11094165
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Dec 5;97(25):13979-84
references.pmid: 11087840
references.citation: Plant Cell. 1997 Jun;9(6):895-908
references.pmid: 9212465
references.citation: J Theor Biol. 1977 Jan 21;64(2):277-94
references.pmid: 557154
references.citation: Plant Cell. 2000 Aug;12(8):1345-55
references.pmid: 10948254