Comprehensive study reveals the roles of OsPEAMT1 and OsPEAMT2 genes in stress response and plant development.
Phosphoethanolamine N-methyltransferase (PEAMT) is a key enzyme that catalyzes three successive methylation steps of phosphoethanolamine (P-EA) to phosphocholine (P-Cho). Meanwhile, P-Cho is a major precursor of phosphatidylcholine (PC) and glycine betaine (GB), which are involved in cell signal transduction, stress response, etc. Therefore, the PEAMT gene plays an essential role in plant growth and development as well as stress resistance. There are two homologous PEAMT genes in rice (Oryza sativa L. ssp. japonica), namely, OsPEAMT1 and OsPEAMT2. However, there has not been any comprehensive functional analysis of these two genes. Here, we employed bioinformatics methods to analyze the amino acid sequences and promoters of OsPEAMT1 and OsPEAMT2, and found that both proteins contain two methyltransferase domains. OsPEAMT1 is highly similar with ZmPEAMT, and OsPEAMT2 is closely related to LmPEAMT and TaPEAMT. There are abundant plant hormone response elements, stress response elements and low-temperature response elements in the promoters of OsPEAMT1 and OsPEAMT2. The in vitro enzymatic activity assays of recombinant proteins of OsPEAMT1 and OsPEAMT2 indicated that they can catalyze the production of P-Cho from P-EA, respectively. Meanwhile, the endogenous P-Cho content increased significantly (p < 0.05) when exogenous P-EA was added to rice. These indicate that OsPEAMT1 and OsPEAMT2 proteins have catalytic functions in vivo and in vitro. The expression patterns of both genes are different in different tissues, flowers and seeds at various developmental stages. Additionally, both genes have different responses to salt and low-temperature stress. This study supplies valuable insights into the function of OsPEAMT1 and OsPEAMT2, and it will provide key targets for rice molecular breeding, offering important insights for the development of rice with stress resistance and high yield.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: