Skip Navigation


JXB Advance Access originally published online on April 4, 2006
Journal of Experimental Botany 2006 57(8):1711-1718; doi:10.1093/jxb/erj180
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
57/8/1711    most recent
erj180v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hancock, J.
Right arrow Articles by Neill, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hancock, J.
Right arrow Articles by Neill, S.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Hancock, J.
Right arrow Articles by Neill, S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2006]. Published by Oxford University Press [on behalf of the Society for Experimental Biology]. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

RESEARCH PAPER

Doing the unexpected: proteins involved in hydrogen peroxide perception

John Hancock1,*, Radhika Desikan1, Judith Harrison1, Jo Bright1, Richard Hooley2 and Steven Neill1

1Centre for Research in Plant Science, Genomics Research Institute, University of the West of England, Bristol, Coldharbour Lane, Bristol BS16 1QY, UK
2Department of Biology and Biochemistry, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath BA2 7AY, UK

*To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: john.hancock{at}uwe.ac.uk

A look back at the early literature on reactive oxygen species (ROS) gives the impression that these small inorganic molecules had a singular defined role, that of host defence in mammalian systems. However, it is now known that their roles also include a major part in cell signalling, in a broad range of organisms from mammals to plants. Similarly, a look back at papers on the proteins now thought to be involved in the perception of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) will show that they too had defined functions assigned to them, completely independent to H2O2 signalling. These proteins have disparate roles, in ethylene perception or even major metabolic pathways such as glycolysis. However, the chemistry of H2O2 sensing dictates that the proteins have a commonality, with active thiol groups being potential ROS targets. The challenge now is to determine the full range of proteins which may partake in the role of H2O2 perception, and to determine the mechanisms by which the signal is transmitted to the next players in the signal transduction pathways.

Key words: Hydrogen peroxide, pathways, perception, ROS, signalling, signal transduction


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 GeneticsHome page
R. Dayer, B. B. Fischer, R. I. L. Eggen, and S. D. Lemaire
The Peroxiredoxin and Glutathione Peroxidase Families in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii
Genetics, May 1, 2008; 179(1): 41 - 57.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Exp BotHome page
J. Moreno, M. J. Garcia-Murria, and J. Marin-Navarro
Redox modulation of Rubisco conformation and activity through its cysteine residues
J. Exp. Bot., May 1, 2008; 59(7): 1605 - 1614.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Integr. Comp. Biol.Home page
E. Spinelli Oliveira, J. T. Hancock, M. Hermes-Lima, D. A. Isola, M. Ochs, J. Yu, and D. Wilhem Filho
Implications of dealing with airborne substances and reactive oxygen species: what mammalian lungs, animals, and plants have to say?
Integr. Comp. Biol., October 1, 2007; 47(4): 578 - 591.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.