Identification and characterization of a plastid-localized Arabidopsis glyoxylate reductase isoform: comparison with a cytosolic isoform and implications for cellular redox homeostasis and aldehyde detoxification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Enzymes that reduce the aldehyde chemical grouping (i.e. H-C=O) to its corresponding alcohol could be crucial in maintaining plant health. Recently, recombinant expression of a cytosolic enzyme from Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh (designated as glyoxylate reductase 1 or AtGR1) revealed that it effectively catalyses the in vitro reduction of both glyoxylate and succinic semialdehyde (SSA). In this paper, web-based bioinformatics tools revealed a second putative GR cDNA (GenBank Accession No. AAP42747; designated herein as AtGR2) that is 57% identical on an amino acid basis to GR1. Sequence encoding a putative targeting signal (N-terminal 43 amino acids) was deleted from the full-length GR2 cDNA and the resulting truncated gene was co-expressed with the molecular chaperones GroES/EL in Escherichia coli, enabling production and purification of soluble recombinant protein. Kinetic analysis revealed that recombinant GR2 catalysed the conversion of glyoxylate to glycolate (K(m) glyoxylate=34 microM), and SSA to gamma-hydroxybutyrate (K(m) SSA=8.96 mM) via an essentially irreversible, NADPH-based mechanism. GR2 had a 350-fold higher preference for glyoxylate than SSA, based on the performance constants (k(cat)/K(m)). Fluorescence microscopic analysis of tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) suspension cells transiently transformed with GR1 linked to the green fluorescent protein (GFP) revealed that GR1 was localized to the cytosol, whereas GR2-GFP was localized to plastids via targeting information contained within its N-terminal 45 amino acids. The identification and characterization of distinct plastidial and cytosolic glyoxylate reductase isoforms is discussed with respect to aldehyde detoxification and the plant stress response.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".