EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
52,725,316
Abstracts:
28,411,598
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on Google+Follow on Google+
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Kinetics Analysis of the Plasma Membrane Sucrose-H+ Symporter from Sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris L.) Leaves






Plant Physiology 106(3): 991-998

Kinetics Analysis of the Plasma Membrane Sucrose-H+ Symporter from Sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris L.) Leaves

The kinetics behavior of the H+-sucrose (Suc) symporter was investigated in plasma membrane vesicles from sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) leaves by analyzing the effect of external and internal pH (pHo and pHi, respectively) on Suc uptake. The apparent Km for Suc uptake increased 18-fold as the pHo increased from 5.5 to 7.5. Over this same pHo range, the apparent Vmax for Suc uptake remained constant. The effects of pHi in the presence or absence of internal Suc were exclusively restricted to changes in Vmax. Thus, proton concentration on the inside of the membrane vesicles ([H+]i) behaved as a noncompetitive inhibitor of Suc uptake. The Km for the proton concentration on the outside of the membrane vesicles was estimated to be pH 6.3, which would indicate that at physiological apoplastic pH Suc transport might be sensitive to changes in pHo. On the other hand, the [H+]i for half-maximal inhibition of Suc uptake was approximately pH 5.4, making regulation of Suc transport through changes in [H+]i unlikely. These results were interpreted in the framework of the kinetics models for co-transport systems developed by D. Sanders, U.-P. Hansen, D. Gradmann, and C. L. Slayman (J Membr Biol [1984] 77: 123-152). Based on their analysis, the behavior of the Suc symporter with respect to the [H+]i is interpreted as an ordered binding mechanism by which the binding of Suc on the apoplastic side of the membrane and its release on the symplastic side precedes that of H+ (i.e. a first-on, first-off model).


Accession: 002646239

PMID: 12232379

DOI: 10.2307/4276154



Related references

Carrier mediated sucrose transport on the plasma membrane of sugar beet leaves beta vulgaris l catalyzes extravesicular alkalization with a stoichiometry of sucrose to hydrogen uptake of 1 1. Physiologia Plantarum 79(2 PART 2): A96, 1990

Sucrose uptake by plasma membrane vesicles purified from sugar beet beta vulgaris l. leaves submitted to ageing. Comptes Rendus de l'Academie des Sciences Serie III Sciences de la Vie 314(2): 93-98, 1992

Substrate specificity of the H+-sucrose symporter on the plasma membrane of sugar beets (Beta vulgaris L.). Plant physiology 99(2): 439-444, 1992

Substrate Specificity of the H-Sucrose Symporter on the Plasma Membrane of Sugar Beets (Beta vulgaris L.) : Transport of Phenylglucopyranosides. Plant Physiology 99(2): 439-444, 1992

Sucrose dependent proton transport in plasma membrane vesicles isolated from sugar beet leaves beta vulgaris l. evidence in support of the proton symport model for sucrose transport. Planta (Heidelberg) 183(4): 584-589, 1991

Substrate specificity of the proton sucrose symporter on the plasma membrane of sugar beets beta vulgaris l. transport of phenylglucopyranosides. Plant Physiology (Rockville) 99(2): 439-444, 1992

Effect of mannose on the plasma membrane ATPase from sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) leaves. Plant Science Limerick 104(2): 153-160, 1995

Absorption of l valine by plasma membrane vesicles purified from sugar beet beta vulgaris l. leaves. Comptes Rendus de l'Academie des Sciences Serie III Sciences de la Vie 311(1): 51-56, 1990

Surcose transport in isolated plasma-membrane vesicles from sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) Evidence for an electrogenic sucrose-proton symport. Planta 178(3): 393-399, 1989

Effect of cutting on solute uptake by plasma membrane vesicles from sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) leaves. Plant Physiology 103(1): 49-58, 1993