Chemistry of Natural Compounds

, Volume 34, Issue 4, pp 486–491 | Cite as

Comparative characteristics of proteins of cottonplant lines differing in the strength of the fiber

  • A. A. Akhunov
  • F. A. Ibragimov
  • Z. Golubenko
  • N. A. Abdurashidova
  • É. Ch. Mustakimova
  • Yu. V. Beresneva
Article
  • 29 Downloads

Abstract

The enzymes and proteins of the fibers of two lines of cotton plant differing in the strength of the fiber have been investigated. It has been shown that the activities of glucan synthetase and peroxidase rise as the fiber matures, while the activities of β-(1-3)-glucanase and cellulase fall. The specific enzymatic activities of peroxidase and glucan synthetase in the L-175 line, distinguished by a stronger fiber, are higher than for the L-466 line with a weaker fiber. The activity of glucanase changes according to the strength of the fiber. In a study of the protein composition of cotton fibers, polypeptides with molecular masses of 28 and 39 kDa were found among the proteins responsible for the strength of the fiber.

Keywords

Enzymatic Activity Organic Chemistry Molecular Mass Polypeptide Cellulase 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sh. Yunuskhanov and A. P. Ibragimov, Cottonplant Proteins [in Russian], Fan, Tashkent (1988), p. 152.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. P. Ibragimov, Molecular Mechanisms of the Biosynthesis of Cottonplant Proteins and Nucleic Acids [in Russian], Fan, Tashkent (1975), p. 164.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. F. Bonner, The Molecular Biology of Development, Oxford University Press, New York (1965) [Russian translation, Mir, Moscow (1967), p. 45].Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    É. Ch. Mustakimova, F. A. Ibragimov, and A. A. Akhunov Uzb., Biol. Zh., No. 2, 38 (1994).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    N. A. Vlasova, The Differentiation and Development of Cottonplant Fibrils, [in Russian], Fan, Tashkent (1974), p. 43.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. Raider and K. Taylor, Isoenzymes. [Russian translation], Mir, Moscow (1983).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. F. Titov, Usp. Sovremen. Biol.,85, No. 4, 63 (1978).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Buchely, M. Durr, and A. S. Buchala, Planta,166, No. 4, 530 (1985).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. P. Jaduet, A. S. Buchala, and H. Meir, Planta,156 No. 3, 481 (1982).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. Kh. Yuldashev et al., Methods for Physiological and Biochemical Investigations of the Cotton Plant [in Russian], Tashkent (1973), p. 35.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    U. K. Laemmli and J. Ing, J. Mol. Biol.,62, 465 (1971).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    O. H. Lowry, N. Rosebrough, A. L. Farr, and R. J. Randall, J. Biol. Chem.,193, No. 2, 265 (1951).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. N. Boyarkin, Biokhimiya,16, No. 7, 352 (1951).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    B. J. Davis, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci., No. 2, 404 (1964).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. N. Stepanenko and A. V. Morozova, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR,17, No. 2, 302 (1970).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. A. Akhunov
  • F. A. Ibragimov
  • Z. Golubenko
  • N. A. Abdurashidova
  • É. Ch. Mustakimova
  • Yu. V. Beresneva

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations