红背山麻杆叶的化学成分研究(Ⅱ)——黄酮和苯乙醇苷类化合物

采用80％丙酮提取物的水萃取部位,利用凝胶、MCI、反相碳18、及 Toyopearl Butyl-650C 柱色谱进行分离纯化得到7个黄酮和3个苯乙醇苷类化合物。根据化合物的波谱数据分析鉴定为槲皮素(1)、槲皮苷(2)、异懈皮苷(3)、芦丁(4)、异牡荆素(5)、牡荆素(6)、木犀草素-7-O-α-L-鼠李糖(1→6)-β-D-葡萄糖苷(7)、2-phenethylβ-D-glucoside(8)、icariside D1(9)、2-苯乙基-D-芸香甙(10)。其中化合物1-3、5-6、8-10为首次从本属植物中分离得到。     

Proteolytic Processing of the Extracellular Scaffolding Protein LEV-9 Is Required for Clustering Acetylcholine Receptors

Correct positioning of neurotransmitter-gated receptors at postsynapses is essential for synaptic transmission. At Caenorhabditis elegans neuromuscular junctions, clustering of levamisole-sensitive acetylcholine receptors (L-AChRs) requires the muscle-secreted scaffolding protein LEV-9, a multidomain factor containing complement control protein (CCP) modules. Here we show that LEV-9 needs to be cleaved at its C terminus to exert its function. LEV-9 cleavage is not required for trafficking nor secretion but directly controls scaffolding activity. The cleavage site is evolutionarily conserved, and post-translational cleavage ensures the structural and functional decoupling between different isoforms encoded by the lev-9 gene. Data mining indicates that most human CCP-containing factors are likely cleaved C-terminally from CCP tandems, suggesting that not only domain architectures but also cleavage location can be conserved in distant architecturally related proteins.     

Manipulating the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Caenorhabditis elegans</Emphasis> genome using <Emphasis Type="Italic">mariner</Emphasis> transposons

Tc1, one of the founding members of the Tc1/mariner transposon superfamily, was identified in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans more than 25 years ago. Over the years, Tc1 and other endogenous mariner transposons became valuable tools for mutagenesis and targeted gene inactivation in C. elegans. However, transposition is naturally repressed in the C. elegans germline by an RNAi-like mechanism, necessitating the use of mutant strains in which transposition was globally derepressed, which causes drawbacks such as uncontrolled proliferation of the transposons in the genome and accumulation of background mutations. The more recent mobilization of the Drosophila mariner transposon Mos1 in the C. elegans germline circumvented the problems inherent to endogenous transposons. Mos1 transposition strictly depends on the expression of the Mos transposase, which can be controlled in the germline using inducible promoters. First, Mos1 can be used for insertional mutagenesis. The mobilization of Mos1 copies present on an extrachromosomal array results in the generation of a small number of Mos1 genomic insertions that can be rapidly cloned by inverse PCR. Second, Mos1 insertions can be used for genome engineering. Triggering the excision of a genomic Mos1 insertion causes a chromosomal break, which can be repaired by transgene-instructed gene conversion. This process is used to introduce specific changes in a given gene, such as point mutations, deletions or insertions of a tag, and to create single-copy transgenes.     

Activation of nicotinic receptors uncouples a developmental timer from the molting timer in C. elegans

C. elegans develops through four larval stages (L1 to L4) separated by molts. The identity of larval stages is mostly determined by stage-specific expression of heterochronic genes, which constitute an intrinsic genetic timer. However, extrinsic cues such as food availability or population density also modulate the developmental timing of C. elegans by mechanisms that remain largely unknown. To investigate a potential role of the nervous system in the temporal regulation of C. elegans development, we pharmacologically manipulated nicotinic neurotransmission, which represents a prominent signaling component in C. elegans nervous system. Exposure to the nicotinic agonist DMPP during post-embryonic development is lethal at the L2/L3 molt. Specifically, it delays cell divisions and differentiation during the L2 stage but does not affect the timing of the molt cycle, hence causing exposure of a defective L3 cuticle to the environment after the L2/L3 molt. Forcing development through a previously uncharacterized L2 diapause resynchronizes these events and suppresses DMPP-induced lethality. Nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) containing the UNC-63 subunit are required, probably in neurons, to trigger the action of DMPP. Using a forward genetic screen, we further demonstrated that the nuclear hormone receptor (NHR) DAF-12 is necessary to implement the developmental effects of DMPP. Therefore, a novel neuroendocrine pathway involving nAChRs and the NHR DAF-12 can control the speed of stage-specific developmental events in C. elegans. Activation of DMPP-sensitive nAChRs during the second larval stage uncouples a molting timer and a developmental timer, thus causing a heterochronic phenotype that is lethal at the subsequent molt.     

Cardiovascular risk management in rheumatoid arthritis: are we still waiting for the first step?

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with a similar cardiovascular risk to that in diabetes, and therefore cardiovascular risk management (CV-RM) - that is, identification and treatment of cardiovascular risk factors (CRFs) - is mandatory. However, whether and to what extent this is done in daily clinical practice is unknown. In a retrospective cohort investigation, CV-RM was therefore compared between rheumatologists and primary care physicians (PCPs). Remarkably, CRFs in RA were less frequently identified and managed by rheumatologists in comparison with PCPs. In addition, PCPs assessed CRFs less frequently in RA than in diabetes. Obviously, there is a clear need for improvement of CV-RM in RA and this should be a joint effort from the rheumatologist and the PCP.Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have an increased cardiovascular (CV) risk that appears similar to that in diabetes. This observation highlights the significant CV burden in RA. In 1999, the American Diabetes Association and the American Heart Association published a statement for prevention of CV disease in diabetes. Since then, the CV risk in diabetes has been substantially lower than in earlier decades. Given the increased CV risk in RA, screening, identification of cardiovascular risk factors (CRFs) and cardiovascular risk management (CV-RM) are also highly needed as recommended by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR). The increased risk in RA is attributed to systemic inflammation as well as increased prevalence of CRFs. Hence, we should aim for tight disease control and control of CRFs.Presently unknown is whether and to what extent CV-RM is translated into clinical practice. In a retrospective cohort-comprising 251 patients with RA, 251 patients with diabetes, and 251 general population individuals-Desai and colleagues therefore investigated the identification and management of CRFs by rheumatologists and primary care physicians (PCPs) [1]. RA patients had to be registered at the University of Michigan Health System for at least 12 months between June 2007 and April 2012 and had been evaluated both by their rheumatologist as well as the PCP. CRFs of interest were smoking, exercise, weight, blood pressure, lipid profile, and fasting blood glucose.In RA, PCPs identified and managed most CRFs more frequently than rheumatologists. Secondly, identification of CRFs by rheumatologists in RA patients with elevated C-reactive protein levels was not different as compared with those with normal C-reactive protein levels. A third important observation was that PCPs identified and managed CRFs more frequently in patients with diabetes, followed by general population individuals and least often in RA patients. These striking results raise several issues.First, it is hard to believe that the largely absent CV-RM by rheumatologists is explained by under-recognition because the increased CV risk in RA must presently be well known among rheumatologists. A large amount of literature on this topic has been published over the last decade. Additionally, the necessity to screen, identify, and manage CRFs is incorporated into training programmes for rheumatology residents [2]. Against this background, it is important to realise that there is a lag time between the publication of the EULAR guideline and its actual implementation (that is, the guideline was published in 2010 [3] while the current study started in 2007). In other words, CV-RM in today''s clinical practice might have been improved, but not yet recognised.Second, that the CV risk in RA is related to the inflammatory burden is well known. Nevertheless, the present study did not indicate that there is more attention for CV-RM by rheumatologists in patients with a higher inflammatory load.Third, undertreatment of the increased CV risk in RA by PCPs might be explained by under-recognition because CRFs were assessed more frequently in diabetes in comparison with RA.The EULAR guidelines recommend screening and identification of CRFs in all RA patients, and, if indicated according to CV risk-prediction charts, adequate management. As accurate assessment of CV risk depends on RA characteristics, the EULAR favoured individualising risk assessment. Hence, a risk multiplication factor of 1.5 should be used in the presence of two of the following criteria: disease duration >10 years, rheumatoid factor, and/or anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide positivity or the presence of extra-articular manifestations. However, alternative approaches have been suggested - for example, increasing the age of an RA patient by 10 years to obtain a more precise CV risk estimate or to use other risk scores. Perhaps this lack of an RA-specific CV risk-prediction model hampers CV-RM implementation. Obviously, this discussion can only be solved by developing a RA-specific CV risk-prediction model, but this will take several years to complete.One may obviously argue that, due to its retrospective design, the strength of the conclusions of Desai and colleagues may be limited; however, they are in line with other recently published literature and thus confirm extending evidence that CV-RM is poorly conducted in RA, both by rheumatologists and PCPs. Another argument against CV-RM in RA is that we should wait until trials have been conducted that demonstrate the efficacy of statins and antihypertensive agents in RA. However, it will be (many) years before specific risk models are available and withholding cardiopreventive drugs that are very likely to work also in our high-risk population is unethical. Moreover, it is important to realise that, due to the decreased incidence of CV events in the last decades, CV prevention trials are nowadays very difficult to conduct. For instance, the TRACE-RA study [4] - a large placebo-controlled double-blind primary CV prevention trial in RA with atorvastatin - was stopped prematurely owing to the very low number of CV events that occurred.Altogether, the study from Desai and colleagues provides three important clues for improvement of CV-RM in RA. First, more education is urgently needed for both rheumatologists and PCPs. Second, it is important to realise that the contribution of higher prevalence CRFs in RA is one side of the coin, but the other side is effective suppression of the inflammation. The latter is a clear task for the rheumatologist. Third, CV care of a RA patient should be a joint effort by the rheumatologist and the PCP, and they should collaborate and agree on who performs the screening, identification, and, if required, management of CRFs.     

Mos1 transposition as a tool to engineer the Caenorhabditis elegans genome by homologous recombination

Gene knockouts and knock-ins have emerged as powerful tools to study gene function in model organisms. The construction of such engineered alleles requires that homologous recombination between a transgenic fragment carrying the modifications desired in the genome and the locus to engineer occurs at high frequencies. Homologous recombination frequency is significantly increased in the vicinity of a DNA double-strand break. Based on this observation, a new generation of transgene-instructed genome engineering protocols was developed. Here, we present MosTIC (for “Mos1 excision-induced transgene-instructed gene conversion”), a new technique that provides a means to engineer the Caenorhabditis elegans genome. MosTIC is initiated by the mobilization of Mos1, a Drosophila transposon experimentally introduced in C. elegans. During MosTIC, a Mos1 insertion localized in the genomic region to engineer is mobilized after germline expression of the Mos transposase. Mos1 excision generates a DNA double-strand break, which is repaired by homologous recombination using a transgenic repair template. This results in the transfer of information from the transgene into the genome. Depending on the method used to trigger Mos1 excision, two alternative MosTIC protocols are available, which are presented here in detail. This technique can be used for a wide range of applications, such as structure-function analysis, protein localization and purification, genetic screens or generation of single copy transgenes at a defined locus in the genome.