Protein phosphorylation regulates maize endosperm starch synthase IIa activity and protein−protein interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY Starch synthesis is an elaborate process employing several isoforms of starch synthases (SSs), starch branching enzymes (SBEs) and debranching enzymes (DBEs). In cereals, some starch biosynthetic enzymes can form heteromeric complexes whose assembly is controlled by protein phosphorylation. Previous studies suggested that SSIIa forms a trimeric complex with SBEIIb, SSI, in which SBEIIb is phosphorylated. This study investigates the post‐translational modification of SSIIa, and its interactions with SSI and SBEIIb in maize amyloplast stroma. SSIIa, immunopurified and shown to be free from other soluble starch synthases, was shown to be readily phosphorylated, affecting Vmax but with minor effects on substrate Kd and Km values, resulting in a 12‐fold increase in activity compared with the dephosphorylated enzyme. This ATP‐dependent stimulation of activity was associated with interaction with SBEIIb, suggesting that the availability of glucan branching limits SSIIa and is enhanced by physical interaction of the two enzymes. Immunoblotting of maize amyloplast extracts following non‐denaturing polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis identified multiple bands of SSIIa, the electrophoretic mobilities of which were markedly altered by conditions that affected protein phosphorylation, including protein kinase inhibitors. Separation of heteromeric enzyme complexes by GPC, following alteration of protein phosphorylation states, indicated that such complexes are stable and may partition into larger and smaller complexes. The results suggest a dual role for protein phosphorylation in promoting association and dissociation of SSIIa‐containing heteromeric enzyme complexes in the maize amyloplast stroma, providing new insights into the regulation of starch biosynthesis in plants.
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".