Regulatory Peptides in Plants

Cell-penetrating peptides for sustainable agriculture

Cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs) are short (typically 5-30 amino acids), cationic, amphipathic, or hydrophobic peptides that facilitate the cellular uptake of diverse cargo molecules by eukaryotic cells via direct translocation or endocytosis across the plasma membrane. CPPs can deliver a variety of bioactive cargos, including proteins, peptides, nucleic acids, and small molecules into the cell. Once inside, the delivered cargo may function in the cytosol, nucleus, or other subcellular compartments. Numerous CPPs have been used for studies and drug delivery in mammalian systems. Although CPPs have many potential uses in plant research and agriculture, the application of CPPs in plants remains limited. Here we review the structures and mechanisms of CPPs and highlight their potential applications for sustainable agriculture.

Coupling proteomics and metabolomics for the unsupervised identification of protein-metabolite interactions in Chaetomium thermophilum

Protein-metabolite interactions play an important role in the cell's metabolism and many methods have been developed to screen them in vitro. However, few methods can be applied at a large scale and not alter biological state. Here we describe a proteometabolomic approach, using chromatography to generate cell fractions which are then analyzed with mass spectrometry for both protein and metabolite identification. Integrating the proteomic and metabolomic analyses makes it possible to identify protein-bound metabolites. Applying the concept to the thermophilic fungus Chaetomium thermophilum, we predict 461 likely protein-metabolite interactions, most of them novel. As a proof of principle, we experimentally validate a predicted interaction between the ribosome and isopentenyl adenine.

Chlorogenic acid effectively treats cancers through induction of cancer cell differentiation

Rationale: Inducing cancer differentiation is a promising approach to treat cancer. Here, we identified chlorogenic acid (CA), a potential differentiation inducer, for cancer therapy, and elucidated the molecular mechanisms underlying its differentiation-inducing effects on cancer cells.

Methods: Cancer cell differentiation was investigated by measuring malignant behavior, including growth rate, invasion/migration, morphological change, maturation, and ATP production. Gene expression was analyzed by microarray analysis, qRT-PCR, and protein measurement, and molecular biology techniques were employed for mechanistic studies. LC/MS analysis was the method of choice for chemical detection. Finally, the anticancer effect of CA was evaluated both in vitro and in vivo.

Results: Cancer cells treated with CA showed reduced proliferation rate, migration/invasion ability, and mitochondrial ATP production. Treating cancer cells with CA resulted in elevated SUMO1 expression through acting on its 3'UTR and stabilizing the mRNA. The increased SUMO1 caused c-Myc sumoylation, miR-17 family downregulation, and p21 upregulation leading to G₀/G₁ arrest and maturation phenotype. CA altered the expression of differentiation-related genes in cancer cells but not in normal cells. It inhibited hepatoma and lung cancer growth in tumor-bearing mice and prevented new tumor development in naïve mice. In glioma cells, CA increased expression of specific differentiation biomarkers Tuj1 and GFAP inducing differentiation and reducing sphere formation. The therapeutic efficacy of CA in glioma cells was comparable to that of temozolomide. CA was detectable both in the blood and brain when administered intraperitoneally in animals. Most importantly, CA was safe even at very high doses.

Conclusion: CA might be a safe and effective differentiation-inducer for cancer therapy. “Educating” cancer cells to differentiate, rather than killing them, could be a novel therapeutic strategy for cancer.