↓ Skip to main content

Evolution of RLSB, a nuclear-encoded S1 domain RNA binding protein associated with post-transcriptional regulation of plastid-encoded rbcL mRNA in vascular plants

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evolution of RLSB, a nuclear-encoded S1 domain RNA binding protein associated with post-transcriptional regulation of plastid-encoded rbcL mRNA in vascular plants
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12862-016-0713-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pradeep Yerramsetty, Matt Stata, Rebecca Siford, Tammy L. Sage, Rowan F. Sage, Gane Ka-Shu Wong, Victor A. Albert, James O. Berry

Abstract

RLSB, an S-1 domain RNA binding protein of Arabidopsis, selectively binds rbcL mRNA and co-localizes with Ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (Rubisco) within chloroplasts of C3 and C4 plants. Previous studies using both Arabidopsis (C3) and maize (C4) suggest RLSB homologs are post-transcriptional regulators of plastid-encoded rbcL mRNA. While RLSB accumulates in all Arabidopsis leaf chlorenchyma cells, in C4 leaves RLSB-like proteins accumulate only within Rubisco-containing bundle sheath chloroplasts of Kranz-type species, and only within central compartment chloroplasts in the single cell C4 plant Bienertia. Our recent evidence implicates this mRNA binding protein as a primary determinant of rbcL expression, cellular localization/compartmentalization, and photosynthetic function in all multicellular green plants. This study addresses the hypothesis that RLSB is a highly conserved Rubisco regulatory factor that occurs in the chloroplasts all higher plants. Phylogenetic analysis has identified RLSB orthologs and paralogs in all major plant groups, from ancient liverworts to recent angiosperms. RLSB homologs were also identified in algae of the division Charophyta, a lineage closely related to land plants. RLSB-like sequences were not identified in any other algae, suggesting that it may be specific to the evolutionary line leading to land plants. The RLSB family occurs in single copy across most angiosperms, although a few species with two copies were identified, seemingly randomly distributed throughout the various taxa, although perhaps correlating in some cases with known ancient whole genome duplications. Monocots of the order Poales (Poaceae and Cyperaceae) were found to contain two copies, designated here as RLSB-a and RLSB-b, with only RLSB-a implicated in the regulation of rbcL across the maize developmental gradient. Analysis of microsynteny in angiosperms revealed high levels of conservation across eudicot species and for both paralogs in grasses, highlighting the possible importance of maintaining this gene and its surrounding genomic regions. Findings presented here indicate that the RLSB family originated as a unique gene in land plant evolution, perhaps in the common ancestor of charophytes and higher plants. Purifying selection has maintained this as a highly conserved single- or two-copy gene across most extant species, with several conserved gene duplications. Together with previous findings, this study suggests that RLSB has been sustained as an important regulatory protein throughout the course of land plant evolution. While only RLSB-a has been directly implicated in rbcL regulation in maize, RLSB-b could have an overlapping function in the co-regulation of rbcL, or may have diverged as a regulator of one or more other plastid-encoded mRNAs. This analysis confirms that RLSB is an important and unique photosynthetic regulatory protein that has been continuously expressed in land plants as they emerged and diversified from their ancient common ancestor.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 21%
Student > Master 5 18%
Researcher 5 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Professor 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 54%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 29%
Unknown 5 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 July 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#3,171
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,077
of 367,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#60
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 367,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.