Subcellular concentrations of sugar alcohols and sugars in relation to phloem translocation in Plantago major, Plantago maritima, Prunus persica, and Apium graveolens

Sugar and sugar alcohol concentrations were analyzed in subcellular compartments of mesophyll cells, in the apoplast, and in the phloem sap of leaves of Plantago major (common plantain), Plantago maritima (sea plantain), Prunus persica (peach) and Apium graveolens (celery). In addition to sucrose, common plantain, sea plantain, and peach also translocated substantial amounts of sorbitol, whereas celery translocated mannitol as well. Sucrose was always present in vacuole and cytosol of mesophyll cells, whereas sorbitol and mannitol were found in vacuole, stroma, and cytosol in all cases except for sea plantain. The concentration of sorbitol, mannitol and sucrose in phloem sap was 2- to 40-fold higher than that in the cytosol of mesophyll cells. Apoplastic carbohydrate concentrations in all species tested were in the low millimolar range versus high millimolar concentrations in symplastic compartments. Therefore, the concentration ratios between the apoplast and the phloem were very strong, ranging between 20- to 100-fold for sorbitol and mannitol, and between 200- and 2000-fold for sucrose. The woody species, peach, showed the smallest concentration ratios between the cytosol of mesophyll cells and the phloem as well as between the apoplast and the phloem, suggesting a mixture of apoplastic and symplastic phloem loading, in contrast to the herbal plant species (common plantain, sea plantain, celery) which likely exhibit an active loading mode for sorbitol and mannitol as well as sucrose from the apoplast into the phloem

New insights into the evolutionary history of plant sorbitol dehydrogenase

Background: Sorbitol dehydrogenase (SDH, EC 1.1.1.14) is the key enzyme involved in sorbitol metabolism in higher plants. SDH genes in some Rosaceae species could be divided into two groups. L-idonate-5-dehydrogenase (LIDH, EC 1.1.1.264) is involved in tartaric acid (TA) synthesis in Vitis vinifera and is highly homologous to plant SDHs. Despite efforts to understand the biological functions of plant SDH, the evolutionary history of plant SDH genes and their phylogenetic relationship with the V. vinifera LIDH gene have not been characterized. Results A total of 92 SDH genes were identified from 42 angiosperm species. SDH genes have been highly duplicated within the Rosaceae family while monocot, Brassicaceae and most Asterid species exhibit singleton SDH genes. Core Eudicot SDHs have diverged into two phylogenetic lineages, now classified as SDH Class I and SDH Class II. V. vinifera LIDH was identified as a Class II SDH. Tandem duplication played a dominant role in the expansion of plant SDH family and Class II SDH genes were positioned in tandem with Class I SDH genes in several plant genomes. Protein modelling analyses of V. vinifera SDHs revealed 19 putative active site residues, three of which exhibited amino acid substitutions between Class I and Class II SDHs and were influenced by positive natural selection in the SDH Class II lineage. Gene expression analyses also demonstrated a clear transcriptional divergence between Class I and Class II SDH genes in V. vinifera and Citrus sinensis (orange). Conclusions Phylogenetic, natural selection and synteny analyses provided strong support for the emergence of SDH Class II by positive natural selection after tandem duplication in the common ancestor of core Eudicot plants. The substitutions of three putative active site residues might be responsible for the unique enzyme activity of V. vinifera LIDH, which belongs to SDH Class II and represents a novel function of SDH in V. vinifera that may be true also of other Class II SDHs. Gene expression analyses also supported the divergence of SDH Class II at the expression level. This study will facilitate future research into understanding the biological functions of plant SDHs.Other UBCReviewedFacult