Back

In vivo analysis of the relationship between CP26 and qE-type NPQ via higher-order Arabidopsis cp26 mutants

Kromdijk, J.; Walter, J.; Patel-Tupper, D.; Lam, L.; Ma, A.; Taylor, G.; Fleming, G.; Niyogi, K. K.

2024-07-26 plant biology
10.1101/2024.07.26.605339 bioRxiv
Show abstract

CP26 is a monomeric minor light-harvesting complex of PSII (LHCII) protein that connects major LHCII trimers to the PSII core in photosynthetic thylakoid membranes. Previous studies have proposed that CP26 is not only involved in light harvesting but could also be involved in non-photochemical quenching (NPQ). Here, we analyzed higher-order Arabidopsis cp26 mutants using biophysical and pharmacological approaches to investigate the nature of NPQ and its relationship to known NPQ regulators (PSII subunit S (PsbS), the xanthophyll-converting enzyme VDE and the pH gradient across the thylakoid membrane). Maximum PSII quantum efficiencies (Fv/Fm) and chlorophyll fluorescence lifetimes in the dark were significantly lower in cp26 mutants, confirming that CP26 deficiency leads to a sustained quenched state even in the absence of light. Destabilized PSII-LHCII supercomplexes as observed with native PAGE analysis are the likely cause for this pre-quenched state, without other antenna proteins being able to rescue this phenotype. Further analyses revealed that cp26 mutants exhibit modest (single mutant) to highly significant (double mutants) reductions in overall NPQ capacity, which do not directly rely on PsbS and VDE (although the effect is more pronounced when these qE components are altered) but depend on thylakoid lumen acidification and protonation of protein residues. Together, these results show that the NPQ component lacking in cp26 mutants acts independently of qE and qZ and is induced in a slower phase of NPQ induction that most likely relies on pH-dependent conformational changes.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.