comparison of nitrite reductase enzymes from green leaves, scutella, and roots of corn (Zea mays L.)

Nitrite reductase from green leaves of corn (Zea mays L.) is eluted from a diethylaminoethyl-cellulose column in one peak of activity by a chloride gradient, while nitrite reductase from scutellum tissue is resolved into two peaks of activity, apparently representing two forms of the enzyme NiR1 and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Plant physiology (Bethesda) 1973-03, Vol.51 (3), p.481-484
Hauptverfasser: Dalling, M.J, Hucklesby, D.P, Hageman, R.H
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Nitrite reductase from green leaves of corn (Zea mays L.) is eluted from a diethylaminoethyl-cellulose column in one peak of activity by a chloride gradient, while nitrite reductase from scutellum tissue is resolved into two peaks of activity, apparently representing two forms of the enzyme NiR1 and NiR2. One of these (NiR2) elutes at the same concentration of chloride as the leaf nitrite reductase. Roots and etiolated shoots also exhibited both forms of the enzyme, however, lesser amounts of NiR1 is extractable from these tissues than from scutellum. Comparison of green leaf nitrite reductase with NiR2 from scutellum tissue shows similar or identical properties with respect to molecular weight, isoelectric point, electron donor requirements, inhibition properties, pH optima, thermal stability, and pH tolerance. The significance of these similarities in relation to probable differences in the biochemical mechanism of nitrite reduction between leaf and scutellum tissues is discussed. Although ferredoxin is considered, with some reservations, to be the electron donor for nitrite reductase in green tissue, the reductant for nongreen tissue is not known. The possibility that nitrite reductases from green and nongreen tissues uses the same electron donor, in vivo, is considered.
ISSN:0032-0889
1532-2548
DOI:10.1104/pp.51.3.481