title: Molecular integrity of chloroplast DNA and mitochondrial DNA in mesophyll and bundle sheath cells of maize.
abstract: When compared to maize mesophyll cells, the plastid and mitochondrial DNAs in bundle sheath cells are less fragmented, less damaged, and contain fewer DNA polymerase-blocking impediments. Plants that conduct C4 photosynthesis differ from those that employ C3 photosynthesis with respect to leaf anatomy, biochemical pathways, and the proteins and RNA transcripts present in the leaf mesophyll (M) and bundle sheath (BS) cells. Here, we investigate the organellar DNA (orgDNA) from plastids and mitochondria in these two cell types. We use standard qPCR, long PCR, and DNA damage analysis to quantify the amount and quality of orgDNA in isolated M and BS cells of maize. When compared to M cells, BS cells have less orgDNA damage and a higher percentage of unimpeded orgDNA. In addition, the orgDNA is more fragmented in M than BS cells, although orgDNA in BS is subject to more in vitro repair. We suggest that the differences in molecular integrity of orgDNA in these two cells are due to higher levels of reactive oxygen species in M than BS cells.
authors: Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195-5325, USA.
authors: Rachana A
authors: RA
authors: Kumar
authors: Delene J
authors: DJ
authors: Oldenburg
authors: Arnold J
authors: AJ
authors: Bendich
mesh_terms: D004260:DNA Repair; D018742:DNA, Chloroplast / Q000235:genetics*; D004272:DNA, Mitochondrial / Q000235:genetics*; D017343:Genes, Plant; D010788:Photosynthesis; D060888:Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction; D003313:Zea mays / Q000166:cytology / Q000235:genetics* / Q000502:physiology
chemical_list: D018742:DNA, Chloroplast; D004272:DNA, Mitochondrial
references: Plant Physiol. 2010 Mar;152(3):1219-50
references: 20089766
references: Mol Cell Proteomics. 2008 Sep;7(9):1609-38
references: 18453340
references: J Exp Bot. 2011 May;62(9):3039-48
references: 21414963
references: Trends Plant Sci. 2009 Feb;14(2):100-9
references: 19162526
references: Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 2007 Jan-Feb;42(1):41-63
references: 17364684
references: Plant Physiol. 2012 May;159(1):211-26
references: 22415515
references: Planta. 2013 Feb;237(2):603-17
references: 23229060
references: Clin Chem. 2009 Apr;55(4):611-22
references: 19246619
references: Plant Cell Physiol. 2009 Oct;50(10):1736-49
references: 19667101
references: J Exp Bot. 2011 May;62(8):2715-30
references: 21266496
references: Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2008 Apr;11(2):228-31
references: 18203653
references: Planta. 2006 Dec;225(1):41-55
references: 16941116
references: Plant Cell. 2005 Nov;17(11):3111-40
references: 16243905
references: Plant Cell. 2011 Nov;23(11):3879-92
references: 22128120
references: Rice (N Y). 2013 Oct 28;6(1):28
references: 24280149
references: Physiol Plant. 2013 Feb;147(2):218-33
references: 22651245
references: J Exp Bot. 2014 Jul;65(13):3341-56
references: 24803502
references: Plant Physiol. 1973 Jun;51(6):1133-7
references: 16658479
references: Antioxid Redox Signal. 2013 Jun 1;18(16):2122-44
references: 23234467
references: Nat Genet. 2010 Dec;42(12):1060-7
references: 21037569
references: Plant Physiol. 2012 Sep;160(1):165-77
references: 22829318
references: Plant Physiol. 2006 Jun;141(2):357-66
references: 16760488
references: J Exp Bot. 2014 Dec;65(22):6425-39
references: 25261192
references: BMC Genomics. 2007 Jan 09;8:12
references: 17212830