Measuring Rubisco activity: Challenges and opportunities of NADH-linked microtiter plate-based and 14C-based assays

13Citations
Citations of this article
58Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Rubisco is central to carbon assimilation, and efforts to improve the efficiency and sustainability of crop production have spurred interest in phenotyping Rubisco activity. We tested the hypothesis that microtiter plate-based methods provide comparable results to those obtained with the radiometric assay that measures the incorporation of 14CO2 into 3-phosphoglycerate (3-PGA). Three NADH-linked assays were tested that use alternative coupling enzymes: Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) and glycerolphosphate dehydrogenase (GlyPDH); phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase (PEPC) and malate dehydrogenase (MDH); and pyruvate kinase (PK) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). To date there has been no thorough evaluation of their reliability by comparison with the 14C-based method. The three NADH-linked assays were used in parallel to estimate (i) the 3-PGA concentration-response curve of NADH oxidation, (ii) the Michaelis-Menten constant for ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate, (iii) fully active and inhibited Rubisco activities, and (iv) Rubisco initial and total activities in fully illuminated and shaded leaves. All three methods correlated strongly with the 14C-based method, and the PK-LDH method showed a strong correlation and was the cheapest method. PEPC-MDH would be a suitable option for situations in which ADP/ATP might interfere with the assay. GAPDH-GlyPDH proved more laborious than the other methods. Thus, we recommend the PK-LDH method as a reliable, cheaper, and higher throughput method to phenotype Rubisco activity for crop improvement efforts.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sales, C. R. G., Da Silva, A. B., & Carmo-Silva, E. (2020). Measuring Rubisco activity: Challenges and opportunities of NADH-linked microtiter plate-based and 14C-based assays. Journal of Experimental Botany, 71(18), 5302–5312. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eraa289

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free