How do short neurotoxins bind to a muscular-type nicotinic acetylcholine receptor?

We investigated the interacting surface between a short curarimimetic toxin and a muscular-type nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, looking for the ability of various biotinylated Naja nigricollis alpha-neurotoxin analogues to bind simultaneously the receptor and streptavidin. All these derivatives, modified at positions 10 (loop I), 27, 30, 33, 35 (loop II), 46, and 47 (loop III) or the N-terminal (erabutoxin numbering), still shared high affinity for the receptor, and in the absence of receptor they all bound soluble streptavidin. However, the proportion of the toxin-receptor complex that bound to streptavidin-coated beads, varied both with the location of the modification and with the length of the linker between biotin and the toxin. In the receptor-toxin complex, the concave side of loops II and III was not accessible to streptavidin, unlike the N terminus of the toxin and, to a certain extent, loop I. On the convex face, loop III was the most accessible, whereas the tip of loop II, especially Arg-30, seemed to be closer to the receptor. The present data demonstrate that short toxins neither penetrate deeply into a crevice as proposed earlier nor lie parallel to the receptor extracellular wall. These data also suggest that they may not lie strictly perpendicular to the cylindrical wall of the receptor. These results fit nicely with three-dimensional models of interaction between long neurotoxins and their receptors and support the idea that short and long curarimimetic toxins share a similar overall topology of interaction when bound to nicotinic receptors.     

Mapping by synthetic peptides of the binding sites for acetylcholine receptor on α-bungarotoxin

A set of seven peptides constituting the various loops and most of the surface areas of α-bungarotoxin (BgTX) was synthesized. In appropriate peptides, the cyclical (by a disulfide bond) monomers were prepared. In all cases, the peptides were purified and characterized. The ability of these peptides to bindTorpedo californica acetylcholine receptor (AChR) was studied by radiometric adsorbent titrations. Three regions, represented by peptides 1–16, 26–41, and 45–59, were able to bind¹²⁵I-labeled AChR and, conversely,¹²⁵I-labeled peptides were bound by AChR. In these regions, residues Ile-1, Val-2, Trp-28 and/or Lys-38, and one or all of the three residues Ala-45, Ala-46, and Thr-47, are essential contact residues in the binding of BgTX to receptor. Other synthetic regions of BgTX showed little or no AChR-binding activity. The specificity of AChR binding to peptides 1–16, 26–41, and 45–59 was confirmed by inhibition with unlabeled BgTX. It is concluded that BgTX has three main AChR-binding regions (loop I with N-terminal extension and loops II and III extended toward the N-terminal by residues 45–47).     

How do animals choose their mates?

How animals search for and evaluate prospective mates has, until recently, been a neglected aspect of sexual selection. Theory and field data suggest that discrimination varies with the costs and benefits of choice, but a consensus has yet to be reached on the tactics by which prospective mates are evaluated. This intriguing issue may be clarified by new studies that deal explicitly with the process of information acquisition.     

How do ants stick out their tongues?

The mouthparts are very important tools for almost any task performed by ants. In particular, the labiomaxillary complex is essential for food intake. In the present study we investigated the anatomical design of the labiomaxillary complex in various ant species, focusing on movement mechanisms. Six labial and six maxillary muscles with different functions control the several joints and ensure the proper performance of the labiomaxillary complex. According to our measurements of sarcomere lengths, muscle fiber lengths and diameters, and the relative muscle volumes, the labial and maxillary muscles feature rather slow than fast muscle characteristics and do not seem to be specialized for specific tasks. Since glossa protractor muscles are absent, the protraction of the glossa, the distal end of the labium, is a nonmuscular movement. By histological measurements of hemolymph volumes we could exclude a pressure-driven mechanism. Additional experiments showed that, upon relaxation of the glossa retractor muscles, the glossa protracts elastically. This elastic mechanism possibly sets an upper limit to licking frequency, thus influencing food intake rates and ultimately foraging behavior. In contrast to many other elastic mechanisms among arthropods, glossa protraction in ants is based on a mechanism where elasticity works as an actual antagonist to muscles. We compared the design of the labiomaxillary complex of ants with that of the honeybee and suggest an elastic mechanism for glossa protraction in honeybees as well.     

When do altricial birds reach maximum of their brood defence intensity?

It has been suggested that the brood defence by parents of altricial birds should increase during the breeding attempt until the young depart from the nest. The two proximate hypotheses provide alternative predictions about the peak of brood defence intensity: (1) the vulnerability hypothesis predicts a rapid rise in brood defence after hatching of the chicks, with maximum defence intensity just before fledging and strong decline afterwards; (2) the feedback hypothesis predicts that brood defence intensity will, after a rapid rise, reach a plateau at the end of the nestling period and early after fledging and then slowly decline. I compared brood defence behaviour of altricial meadow pipit (Anthus pratensis) breeding in the Czech Republic during the late nestling stage and during the fledging time. A stuffed stoat (Mustela erminea) was placed 5 m from a meadow pipit nest and the defence behaviour of parents was recorded for 10 min from a hide. Brood defence intensity was higher during the fledgling time than during the late nestling stage, and this trend was more evident in males than in females. Regardless of the proportion of already fledged chicks and those still present in the nest, brood defence did not significantly decrease during the fledgling time in males or females. The results do not agree with the predictions of the vulnerability hypothesis and support the predictions of the feedback hypothesis.     

How do ectoparasitic nycteribiids locate their bat hosts?

Nycteribiids (Diptera: Nycteribiidae) are specific haematophagous ectoparasites of bats, which spend nearly all their adult lives on hosts. However, females have to leave bats to deposit their larva on the walls of the roosts, where they later emerge as adult flies. Nycteribiids had thus to evolve efficient sensorial mechanisms to locate hosts from a distance. We studied the sensory cues involved in this process, experimentally testing the role of specific host odours, and general cues such as carbon dioxide, body heat, and vibrations. As models we used two nycteribiids (Penicillidia conspicua and Penicillidia dufourii) and their primary bat hosts (Miniopterus schreibersii and Myotis myotis, respectively). Carbon dioxide was the most effective cue activating and orientating the responses of nycteribiids, followed by body heat and body odours. They also responded to vibration, but did not orientate to its source. In addition, sensory cues combined (carbon dioxide and body heat) were more effective in orientating nycteribiids than either cue delivered alone. Results suggest that nycteribids have some capacity to distinguish specific hosts from a distance, probably through their specific body odours. However, the strong reliance of nycteribiids on cues combined indicates that they follow these to orientate to nearby multispecies bat clusters, where the chances of finding their primary hosts are high. The combination of sensory cues seems therefore an effective strategy used by nycteribiids to locate bat hosts at a distance.     

How do site-specific DNA-binding proteins find their targets?

Essentially all the biological functions of DNA depend on site-specific DNA-binding proteins finding their targets, and therefore ‘searching’ through megabases of non-target DNA. In this article, we review current understanding of how this sequence searching is done. We review how simple diffusion through solution may be unable to account for the rapid rates of association observed in experiments on some model systems, primarily the Lac repressor. We then present a simplified version of the ‘facilitated diffusion’ model of Berg, Winter and von Hippel, showing how non-specific DNA–protein interactions may account for accelerated targeting, by permitting the protein to sample many binding sites per DNA encounter. We discuss the 1-dimensional ‘sliding’ motion of protein along non-specific DNA, often proposed to be the mechanism of this multiple site sampling, and we discuss the role of short-range diffusive ‘hopping’ motions. We then derive the optimal range of sliding for a few physical situations, including simple models of chromosomes in vivo, showing that a sliding range of ~100 bp before dissociation optimizes targeting in vivo. Going beyond first-order binding kinetics, we discuss how processivity, the interaction of a protein with two or more targets on the same DNA, can reveal the extent of sliding and we review recent experiments studying processivity using the restriction enzyme EcoRV. Finally, we discuss how single molecule techniques might be used to study the dynamics of DNA site-specific targeting of proteins.     

How different are structurally flexible and rigid binding sites? Sequence and structural features discriminating proteins that do and do not undergo conformational change upon ligand binding

Proteins are dynamic molecules and often undergo conformational change upon ligand binding. It is widely accepted that flexible loop regions have a critical functional role in enzymes. Lack of consideration of binding site flexibility has led to failures in predicting protein functions and in successfully docking ligands with protein receptors. Here we address the question: which sequence and structural features distinguish the structurally flexible and rigid binding sites? We analyze high-resolution crystal structures of ligand bound (holo) and free (apo) forms of 41 proteins where no conformational change takes place upon ligand binding, 35 examples with moderate conformational change, and 22 cases where a large conformational change has been observed. We find that the number of residue-residue contacts observed per-residue (contact density) does not distinguish flexible and rigid binding sites, suggesting a role for specific interactions and amino acids in modulating the conformational changes. Examination of hydrogen bonding and hydrophobic interactions reveals that cases that do not undergo conformational change have high polar interactions constituting the binding pockets. Intriguingly, the large, aromatic amino acid tryptophan has a high propensity to occur at the binding sites of examples where a large conformational change has been noted. Further, in large conformational change examples, hydrophobic-hydrophobic, aromatic-aromatic, and hydrophobic-polar residue pair interactions are dominant. Further analysis of the Ramachandran dihedral angles (phi, psi) reveals that the residues adopting disallowed conformations are found in both rigid and flexible cases. More importantly, the binding site residues adopting disallowed conformations clustered narrowly into two specific regions of the L-Ala Ramachandran map. Examination of the dihedral angles changes upon ligand binding shows that the magnitude of phi, psi changes are in general minimal, although some large changes particularly between right-handed alpha-helical and extended conformations are seen. Our work further provides an account of conformational changes in the dihedral angles space. The findings reported here are expected to assist in providing a framework for predicting protein-ligand complexes and for template-based prediction of protein function.     

Comparison of acetylcholine and α-bungarotoxin binding sites in insects and vertebrates

1. The nervous tissue of locusts contains high affinity as well as low affinity binding sites for acetylcholine which display a similar nicotinic pharmacology.2. Hill plot analysis indicated a non-cooperative binding of acetylcholine.3. In membrane preparations from locust ganglia and mouse brain the number of binding sites for ACh was about ten fold lower than for BGTX, whereas in membranes from electric tissue both sites occurred in similar concentrations.4. Drug binding studies suggest that the high affinity binding sites for ACh and BGTX in preparations from insect and mouse are different; whereas in electric tissue both sites are very similar.5. Precipitation experiments using immobilized BGTX and specific antibodies indicated that in insect nervous tissue as in electric tissue the ACh and BGTX binding sites are located on the same receptor molecule and occupy distinct partially overlapping binding sites, whereas in the vertebrate brain both sites are located on distinct binding proteins.     

How do sessile dioecious species cope with their males?

In terrestrial plants the segregation of male and female reproductions on different individuals results in the seed-shadow handicap: males do not disperse any seed so that the number of local patches reached by seeds is potentially reduced in dioecious populations in comparison to hermaphrodite populations. An analytical model, incorporating a lottery-based recruitment and dispersal stochasticity, was built. The spatially mediated cost of the seed-shadow handicap has been assessed considering the criterions for the invasion of a resident hermaphrodite species by a dioecious species and the reverse invasion, both species having the same demographic parameters but assuming a likely higher fecundity for dioecious females. The reciprocal invasion of a dioecious and hermaphrodite species differing only by their fecundity is never possible. The seed-shadow handicap disappears when the dispersal or survival rate is high enough. This latter point is due to dispersal stochasticity, which allows for the existence of empty patches. A low fecundity and an aggregated seed distribution increase dispersal stochasticity and increase the positive impact of a low mortality rate on the relative competitivity of dioecy and hermaphroditism. Adding a dispersal cost has a comparable effect but also requires higher dispersal rates for the dioecious invasion.     

How do insects use path integration for their navigation?

 We combine experimental findings on ants and bees, and build on earlier models, to give an account of how these insects navigate using path integration, and how path integration interacts with other modes of navigation. At the core of path integration is an accumulator. This is set to an initial state at the nest and is updated as the insect moves so that it always reports the insect's current position relative to the nest. Navigation that uses path integration requires, in addition, a way of storing states of the accumulator at significant places for subsequent recall as goals, and a means of computing the direction to such goals. We discuss three models of how path integration might be used for this process, which we call vector navigation. Vector navigation is the principal means of navigating over unfamiliar terrain, or when landmarks are unavailable. Under other conditions, insects often navigate by landmarks, and ignore the output of the vector navigation system. Landmark navigation does not interfere with the updating of the accumulator. There is an interesting symmetry in the use of landmarks and path integration. In the short term, vector navigation can be independent of landmarks, and landmark navigation needs no assistance from path integration. In the longer term, visual landmarks help keep path vector navigation calibrated, and the learning of visual landmarks is guided by path integration. Received: 6 June 1999 / Accepted in revised form: 20 March 2000     

How to reach the right size?

Very little is known about how the size of an organism, or a specific tissue in an organism, is regulated. Coordinating and regulating the size of tissues is necessary for proper development, wound healing, and regeneration. Defects in a tissue-size regulation mechanism could lead to birth defects or cancer. In addition, there is a strong psychological aspect to some areas of tissue size regulation, as many cosmetic surgery procedures involve enlarging or reducing the size of some body parts. This review addresses the little bit that we know about size regulation. A key concept is that the size of a tissue is the size of the component cells multiplied by the number of those cells. This breaks the size regulation problem down to two parts. The size of cells can be regulated by nutrient sensing and secreted factors, and may have an upper limit due to an upper limit of a genome's ability to produce mRNA's and thus proteins. To regulate the number of cells in a tissue, there are several simple theoretical models involving secreted factors. In one case, the cells can secrete a characteristic factor and the concentration of the factor will increase with the number of cells secreting it, allowing the tissue to sense its own size. In another scenario, a specific cell secretes a limited amount of a factor necessary for the survival of a target population, and this then limits the size of the target population. There are currently several examples of secreted factors that regulate tissue size, including myostatin, which regulates the amount of muscles, leptin, which regulates adipose tissue, and growth hormone and insulin-like growth factors which regulate total mass. In addition, there are factors such as the found in Dictyostelium that regulate the breakup of a tissue into sub-groups. A better understanding of how these factors regulate size will hopefully allow us to develop new therapeutic procedures to treat birth defects or diseases that affect tissue size.