Xylan Is Critical for Proper Bundling and Alignment of Cellulose Microfibrils in Plant Secondary Cell Walls.
atomic force micorscopy (AFM)
cell wall mechanical properties
cellulose arrangement
cellulose deposition
glucuronoxylan
irregular xylan mutants (irx)
secondary cell wall (SCW)
xylan (hemicellulose)
Journal
Frontiers in plant science
ISSN: 1664-462X
Titre abrégé: Front Plant Sci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101568200
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
07
07
2021
accepted:
24
08
2021
entrez:
11
10
2021
pubmed:
12
10
2021
medline:
12
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Plant biomass represents an abundant and increasingly important natural resource and it mainly consists of a number of cell types that have undergone extensive secondary cell wall (SCW) formation. These cell types are abundant in the stems of Arabidopsis, a well-studied model system for hardwood, the wood of eudicot plants. The main constituents of hardwood include cellulose, lignin, and xylan, the latter in the form of glucuronoxylan (GX). The binding of GX to cellulose in the eudicot SCW represents one of the best-understood molecular interactions within plant cell walls. The evenly spaced acetylation and 4-O-methyl glucuronic acid (MeGlcA) substitutions of the xylan polymer backbone facilitates binding in a linear two-fold screw conformation to the hydrophilic side of cellulose and signifies a high level of molecular specificity. However, the wider implications of GX-cellulose interactions for cellulose network formation and SCW architecture have remained less explored. In this study, we seek to expand our knowledge on this by characterizing the cellulose microfibril organization in three well-characterized GX mutants. The selected mutants display a range of GX deficiency from mild to severe, with findings indicating even the weakest mutant having significant perturbations of the cellulose network, as visualized by both scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and atomic force microscopy (AFM). We show by image analysis that microfibril width is increased by as much as three times in the severe mutants compared to the wild type and that the degree of directional dispersion of the fibrils is approximately doubled in all the three mutants. Further, we find that these changes correlate with both altered nanomechanical properties of the SCW, as observed by AFM, and with increases in enzymatic hydrolysis. Results from this study indicate the critical role that normal GX composition has on cellulose bundle formation and cellulose organization as a whole within the SCWs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34630488
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.737690
pmc: PMC8495263
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
737690Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Crowe, Hao, Pattathil, Pan, Ding, Hodge and Jensen.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Biotechnol Biofuels. 2012 Nov 26;5(1):84
pubmed: 23181474
Int J Biol Macromol. 1993 Apr;15(2):109-12
pubmed: 8485102
Plant Physiol. 2016 May;171(1):93-109
pubmed: 26951434
Trends Plant Sci. 2019 May;24(5):402-412
pubmed: 30905522
New Phytol. 2018 Jul;219(1):230-245
pubmed: 29708593
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Jun 19;115(25):6506-6511
pubmed: 29784790
Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2019 Apr;56:97-104
pubmed: 30423528
Plant J. 2007 Dec;52(6):1154-68
pubmed: 17944810
J Struct Biol. 2020 Aug 1;211(2):107532
pubmed: 32442716
Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2017 Jan 1;70(Pt 1):207-215
pubmed: 27770882
Plant J. 2008 May;54(4):559-68
pubmed: 18476863
J Vis Exp. 2010 Mar 11;(37):
pubmed: 20224547
Methods Mol Biol. 2012;908:61-72
pubmed: 22843389
Plant J. 2011 May;66(3):401-13
pubmed: 21251108
Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2006;22:53-78
pubmed: 16824006
New Phytol. 2008;178(2):239-252
pubmed: 18298430
Curr Biol. 2020 Mar 9;30(5):941-947.e2
pubmed: 32037093
Plant J. 2014 Oct;80(2):207-15
pubmed: 25139408
Glycobiology. 2012 Mar;22(3):439-51
pubmed: 22048859
Biomacromolecules. 2008 Mar;9(3):1022-6
pubmed: 18247566
C R Biol. 2004 Sep-Oct;327(9-10):785-90
pubmed: 15587069
Plant Cell. 2013 Jan;25(1):270-87
pubmed: 23371948
J Cell Biol. 1982 Jul;94(1):64-9
pubmed: 6889605
Front Plant Sci. 2012 Aug 22;3:204
pubmed: 22936943
Glycobiology. 2014 Jun;24(6):494-506
pubmed: 24637390
Plant Signal Behav. 2014;9(1):e27809
pubmed: 24525904
Biotechnol Biofuels. 2017 Nov 30;10:286
pubmed: 29213325
Plant J. 2011 May;66(3):387-400
pubmed: 21288268
Plant Physiol. 2012 Aug;159(4):1408-17
pubmed: 22706449
Plant Cell. 2005 Aug;17(8):2281-95
pubmed: 15980264
Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2018 Feb 13;376(2112):
pubmed: 29277742
Plant Cell. 2007 Feb;19(2):549-63
pubmed: 17322407
Ann Bot. 2018 May 11;121(6):1107-1125
pubmed: 29415210
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Aug 28;109(35):14253-8
pubmed: 22893684
Carbohydr Polym. 2021 Oct 15;270:118364
pubmed: 34364609
Front Plant Sci. 2019 Oct 23;10:1398
pubmed: 31708959
Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2008 Jun;11(3):258-65
pubmed: 18374624
ACS Nano. 2020 Jan 28;14(1):724-735
pubmed: 31886646
Biotechnol Biofuels. 2015 Mar 12;8:41
pubmed: 25802552
Nat Biotechnol. 2018 Mar;36(3):249-257
pubmed: 29431741
Plant J. 2014 Aug;79(3):492-506
pubmed: 24889696
Bioresour Technol. 2017 Dec;245(Pt A):242-249
pubmed: 28892697
Plant Physiol. 2010 Jun;153(2):542-54
pubmed: 20424005
Nat Plants. 2017 Nov;3(11):859-865
pubmed: 28993612
Science. 2012 Nov 23;338(6110):1055-60
pubmed: 23180856
New Phytol. 2018 May;218(3):1049-1060
pubmed: 29460505
Plant Physiol. 2016 Aug;171(4):2418-31
pubmed: 27325663
Plant Physiol. 2010 Jun;153(2):526-41
pubmed: 20335400
Plant Physiol. 2010 Sep;154(1):121-33
pubmed: 20592039
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Oct 4;113(40):11348-11353
pubmed: 27647923
Biochem Soc Trans. 2016 Feb;44(1):74-8
pubmed: 26862191
Biomacromolecules. 2017 Apr 10;18(4):1311-1321
pubmed: 28252951
Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2013 Jun 7;15(21):8429-40
pubmed: 23628858
Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2014 Dec;22:122-131
pubmed: 25460077
Plant Cell Physiol. 2009 Jun;50(6):1099-115
pubmed: 19398462
Plant Cell Physiol. 2009 Jun;50(6):1075-89
pubmed: 19395414
Plant Physiol. 2010 Feb;152(2):787-96
pubmed: 19965966
New Phytol. 2015 Jan;205(2):666-81
pubmed: 25307149
Nat Commun. 2016 Dec 21;7:13902
pubmed: 28000667
Plant Cell Physiol. 2016 Aug;57(8):1707-19
pubmed: 27345025
Plant J. 2009 Feb;57(4):718-31
pubmed: 18980649
Plant J. 2009 Feb;57(4):732-46
pubmed: 18980662
Plant J. 2013 May;74(3):423-34
pubmed: 23373848
Sci Rep. 2019 Mar 7;9(1):3869
pubmed: 30846723
Plant J. 2015 Aug;83(3):413-26
pubmed: 26043357
Biotechnol Biofuels. 2010 May 24;3:10
pubmed: 20497524
Front Plant Sci. 2020 Apr 24;11:479
pubmed: 32391038
PLoS One. 2014 Aug 13;9(8):e105014
pubmed: 25118690
New Phytol. 2019 Mar;221(4):1703-1723
pubmed: 30312479
Plant Physiol. 2016 Jan;170(1):234-49
pubmed: 26527657
Biotechnol Biofuels. 2019 May 6;12:109
pubmed: 31080516
Plant Physiol. 2013 Dec;163(4):1558-67
pubmed: 24154621
Plant J. 2014 Oct;80(2):197-206
pubmed: 25141999
Plant J. 2016 Jan;85(2):179-92
pubmed: 26676644
Plant Cell Physiol. 2007 Dec;48(12):1659-72
pubmed: 17991630
J Vis Exp. 2010 Mar 12;(37):
pubmed: 20228730
Mol Plant. 2013 Mar;6(2):570-3
pubmed: 23180670