Influence of Ileo-Caecal Cannulation and Oxytetracycline on Ileo-Caecal and Rectal Coliform Populations in Pigs

The effect of surgery (insertion of an ileo-caecal cannula) and a subsequent parenteral treatment with oxytetracycline on the ileo-caecal and rectal coliform populations in 7 Swedish Yorkshire castrates were studied. Samples were collected during surgery as well as 3, 7, 14 and 20 days post surgery. The diversity of the enteric coliform flora was initially high both in the ileo-caecal ostium and in rectum. No alteration in the diversity of the enteric coliform flora was observed following surgery and treatment with oxytetracycline. As the insertion of ileo-caecal cannulas did not affect the intestinal coliform flora this study gives support to the use of this technique to mirror processes in the small intestine of pigs. Further, the diversity of the enteric coliform flora was unaffected by the parenteral treatment with oxytetracycline.     

Hormonally regulated programmed cell death in barley aleurone cells

Cell death was studied in barley (cv Himalaya) aleurone cells treated with abscisic acid and gibberellin. Aleurone protoplasts incubated in abscisic acid remained viable in culture for at least 3 weeks, but exposure to gibberellin initiated a series of events that resulted in death. Between 4 and 8 days after incubation in gibberellin, >70% of all protoplasts died. Death, which occurred after cells became highly vacuolated, was manifest by an abrupt loss of plasma membrane integrity followed by rapid shrinkage of the cell corpse. Hydrolysis of DNA began before death and occurred as protoplasts ceased production of alpha-amylase. DNA degradation did not result in the accumulation of discrete low molecular weight fragments. DNA degradation and cell death were prevented by LY83583, an inhibitor of gibberellin signaling in barley aleurone. We conclude that cell death in aleurone cells is hormonally regulated and is the final step of a developmental program that promotes successful seedling establishment.     

Genetic islands of <Emphasis Type="Italic">Streptococcus agalactiae</Emphasis> strains NEM316 and 2603VR and their presence in other Group B Streptococcal strains

Background  

Streptococcus agalactiae (Group B Streptococcus; GBS) is a major contributor to obstetric and neonatal bacterial sepsis. Serotype III strains cause the majority of late-onset sepsis and meningitis in babies, and thus appear to have an enhanced invasive capacity compared with the other serotypes that cause disease predominantly in immunocompromised pregnant women. We compared the serotype III and V whole genome sequences, strains NEM316 and 2603VR respectively, in an attempt to identify genetic attributes of strain NEM316 that might explain the propensity of strain NEM316 to cause late-onset disease in babies. Fourteen putative pathogenicity islands were described in the strain NEM316 whole genome sequence. Using PCR- and targeted microarray- strategies, the presence of these islands were assessed in a diverse strain collection including 18 colonizing isolates from healthy pregnant women, and 13 and 8 invasive isolates from infants with early- and late-onset sepsis, respectively.     

Plant- and stimulus-specific variations in remote-controlled sieve-tube occlusion

Phloem injury triggers local sieve-plate occlusion including callose-mediated constriction and protein plugging of sieve pores. In intact plants, reversible sieve-plate occlusion is induced by electric potential waves (EPWs)—accompanied by Ca²⁺-influx—as result of distant burning. Here, we present additional results which pertain to (a) the variability of EPW-profiles in relation to forisome conformation in intact Vicia faba plants and (b) the differential occlusion reactions to burning and cutting in various plant species. A correlation between stimulus perception and mode of phloem loading is discussed.Key words: callose, electrical potential waves, forisome, membrane potential, phloem transport, sieve-element occlusion, wound potentials     

Single-turnover kinetics of homoprotocatechuate 2,3-dioxygenase

Homoprotocatechuate 2,3-dioxygenase isolated from Brevibacterium fuscum utilizes an active site Fe(II) and O(2) to catalyze proximal extradiol cleavage of the substrate aromatic ring. In contrast to other members of the ring cleaving dioxygenase family, the transient kinetics of the extradiol dioxygenase catalytic cycle have been difficult to study because the iron is nearly colorless and EPR silent. Here, it is shown that the reaction cycle kinetics can be monitored by utilizing the alternative substrate 4-nitrocatechol (4NC), which is also cleaved in the proximal extradiol position. Changes in the optical spectrum of 4NC occurring as a result of ionization, environmental changes, and ring cleavage allow both the substrate binding and product formation phases of the reaction to be studied. It is shown that substrate binding occurs in a four-step process probably involving binding to two ionization states of the enzyme at different rates. Following an initial rapid binding of the monoanionic 4NC in the active site, slower binding to the Fe(II) and conversion to the dianionic form occur. The bound dianionic 4NC reacts rapidly with O(2) in four additional steps, apparently occurring in sequence. On the basis of the optical properties of the intermediates, these steps are hypothesized to be O(2) binding to the iron, isomerization of the resulting complex, ring opening, and product release. The natural substrate appears to form the same intermediates but with much larger rate constants. These are the first transient intermediates to be reported for an extradiol dioxygenase reaction.     

Hydrogen Peroxide Sensitivity of Catechol-2,3-Dioxygenase: a Cautionary Note on Use of xylE Reporter Fusions under Aerobic Conditions

Catechol-2,3-dioxygenase (C23O) of Pseudomonas putida, encoded by the xylE gene, was found to be sensitive to hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) when used as a reporter in gene fusion constructs. Exposure of Pseudomonas aeruginosa katA or katA katB mutants harboring katA- or katB-lacZ (encoding β-galactosidase) or -xylE fusion plasmids to H₂O₂ stimulated β-galactosidase activity, while there was little or no detectable C23O activity in these strains. More than 95% of C23O activity was lost after a 5-min exposure to equimolar H₂O₂, while a 10,000-fold excess was required for similar inhibition of β-galactosidase. Electron paramagnetic resonance spectra of the nitrosyl complexes of C23O showed that H₂O₂ nearly stoichiometrically oxidized the essential active-site ferrous ion, thus accounting for the loss of activity. Our results suggest using caution in interpreting data derived from xylE reporter fusions under aerobic conditions, especially where oxidative stress is present or when catalase-deficient strains are used.     

Induction as well as suppression: How aphid saliva may exert opposite effects on plant defense

Aphids ingest from the sieve tubes and by doing so they are confronted with sieve-tube occlusion mechanisms, which are part of the plant defense system. Because aphids are able to feed over longer periods, they must be able to prevent occlusion of the sieve plates induced by stylet penetration. Occlusion probably depends upon Ca²⁺-influx into the sieve element (SE) lumen. Aphid behavior, biochemical tests and in vitro experiments demonstrated that aphid''s watery saliva, injected during initial phase of a stylet penetration into the SE lumen, contains proteins that are able to bind calcium and prevent calcium-induced SE occlusion. In this addendum, we speculate on the consequences of saliva secretion for plant resistance. (a) The release of elicitors (e.g., oligogalacturonides) due to cell wall digestion by gel saliva enzymes may increase the resistance of cortex, phloem parenchyma cells and companion cells (CC) around the puncture site. (b) Ca²⁺-binding by aphid watery saliva may suppress the local defense responses in the SEs. (c) Signaling cascades triggered in CCs may lead to systemic resistance.Key words: aphid saliva, calcium binding, elicitor, oligogalacturonides, local plant defense, systemic plant defense, phloem translocation, aphid/plant-interactionAfter having penetrated the sieve-element (SE) plasma membrane, aphids encounter unspecific wound-induced occlusion reactions to prevent sap leakage.^1–4 Occlusion mechanisms by callose, structural P-proteins and forisomes are likely induced by a sudden calcium influx into the sieve-tube lumen.⁵ Calcium possibly enters the sieve-tube lumen through the stylet wounding-site in the plasma membrane and/or stretch-activated calcium-channels.^6–8 After SE penetration, aphids secrete watery saliva that contains calcium-binding proteins presumed to sabotage sieve-plate occlusion.^9,10We demonstrated that Megoura viciae (Buckton) is most likely able to prevent or reduce sieve-tube occlusion in Vicia faba by secretion of watery saliva. By in vitro confrontation of isolated forisomes, protein bodies responsible for sieve-tube occlusion in Fabaceaen,⁵ and watery saliva concentrate, we were able to show that salivary proteins convey forisomes from a dispersed (+Ca²⁺) into a condensed (−Ca²⁺) state.¹⁰ The dispersed forisome functions in vivo as a plug, leading to stoppage of mass flow.⁵This in vitro evidence was corroborated by aphid behavior in response to leaf tip burning, which triggers an electrical potential wave (EPW) along the sieve tubes. Such an EPW induces Ca²⁺-influx and corresponding SE occlusion along the pathway.¹¹ The passage of the EPW is associated with a prolonged secretion of watery saliva of aphids. This is interpreted as an attempt to unplug the SEs by calcium binding.¹⁰ Similar behavioral changes in response to leaf-tip burning were observed in an extended set of aphid/plant species combinations, indicating that attempted sabotage of sieve-tube occlusion by aphid saliva is a widespread phenomenon (unpublished).Aphid feeding was reported to induce local (on the same leaf) and systemic (in distant leaves) reactions of the host plant. The local response led to enhanced feeding,^12–14 while the systemic response showed reduced ingestion and extended periods of watery saliva secretion in sieve tubes distant from previous feeding sites.^12–14 These contrasting observations were described to be independent of the aphid species.¹³ The question arises how aphids induce these seemingly opposite plant responses?The aphid stylet pushing forward through cortical and vascular tissue is surrounded by a sheath of gel saliva, secreted into the apoplast.^15,16 Gel saliva contains cellulase and pectinase that amongst others produce oligogalacturonides (OGs) along the stylet sheath by digestion of cell wall material.^17,18 Usually, OGs act as elicitors, triggering a variety of plant responses against pathogens and insects in which the activation of calcium channels is involved.^19,20 This seems to conflict with a suppression of resistance as observed for the impact of watery saliva in SEs.¹⁰ We will make an attempt to explain this paradoxon.OG induced defense responses may be triggered in all cell types adjacent to the salivary sheath (Fig. 1). Because watery saliva is only secreted briefly into these cells, which are punctured for orientation purposes (Hewer et al., unpublished), it seems unlikely that OG induced defense is suppressed here by saliva-mediated calcium binding.¹⁵ The diffusion range of OGs may be restricted to the close vicinity of the stylet sheath leading to an enhanced regional defense with a limited sphere of action (Fig. 1). Because the settling distance of aphids is restricted by their body size (1–10 mm),²¹ aphids feeding on the same leaf are probably hardly confronted with the regional defense induced by another aphid (Fig. 1). Otherwise, they would show an increased number of test probes before first phloem activity, as described for volatile mediated plant defense in cortex cells.¹³ Circumstantial support in favor of our hypothesis is provided by production of hydrogen peroxide in the apoplast,²² which is most likely associated with the action of OGs.²² Observations of hydrogen peroxide production during aphid (Macrosiphum euphorbiae) infestation of tomato in a limited area along the leaf veins, the preferred feeding sites of this species, indicate a locally restricted defense response (Fig. 1 and ​and22).⁴ The question arises why the cell signals are not spread via plasmodesmata to adjacent cells to induce resistance in a more extended leaf area? Dissemination of the signals may be prevented by closure of plasmodesmata (Fig. 1) through callose deposition,^23,24 which is most likely directly coupled with calcium influx induced by OGs,²⁵ by apoplastic hydrogen peroxide and to a minor extent by stylet puncture (Fig. 2).^7,26Open in a separate windowFigure 1Hypothetical model on how stylet penetration induces and suppresses plant defense. Sheath saliva (light blue) that envelopes the stylet during propagation through the apoplast contains cellulase and pectinase,^17,18 enzymes producing elicitors (e.g., oligogalacturonides (oGs)) by local cell wall digestion.¹⁹ Parenchyma cells adjacent to the sheath may develop a defense response owing to signaling cascades triggered by oG-mediated Ca²⁺-influx.¹⁹ Together with a Ca²⁺-dependent transient closure of plasmodesmata by callose (black crosses),^23,24 the focused production of oGs may cause a defense response with a limited sphere of action (red—strong, brown—light, green—none). This restricted domain of defense may not be perceived by other aphids, since the settling distance is limited by the aphid body size. Nearby aphids do not show any sign of defense perception in their probing and feeding behavior.¹⁴ Signaling cascade compounds may be channeled from parenchyma cells to CCs (dashed yellow arrows), where they are subsequently released into the SEs. There they may act as long-distance systemic defense components (grey arrows). In contrast to the parenchyma domain (where only minor amounts of watery saliva are secreted), Ca²⁺-mediated reactions such as defense cascades and sieve-plate (SP) occlusion are suppressed in SEs by large amounts of watery saliva. The left aphid penetrates an SE and injects watery saliva (red cloud; ws) that inhibits local sieve-plate occlusion and,¹⁰ most likely, is transported by mass flow (black arrow) to adjacent SEs,²⁷ where occlusion is impeded as well. A short-distance systemic spread over a few centimeters may explain local suppression of plant defense resulting in a higher rate of colonization. Salivary proteins or their degradation products may serve as systemic defense signals as well (grey arrows), but may also diffuse via the PPUs into CCs where additional systemic signals are induced (yellow arrows).Open in a separate windowFigure 2Hypothetical involvement of Ca²⁺-channels in aphid-induced cell defense (detail). During probing with its stylet the aphid secretes gel saliva as a lubrication substance (light blue) into the apoplast.¹⁵ on the way to the sieve tubes, aphids briefly puncture most non-phloem cells (red) after which the puncturing sites are sealed with gel saliva.^7,16 Gel saliva also most likely prevents the influx of apoplastic calcium into pierced sieve elements (green) by sealing the penetration site.⁷ Watery saliva (red cloud), injected into the SE lumen,⁹ contains proteins which bind calcium ions (marked by X) that enter the SE via e.g., mechano sensitive Ca²⁺-channels activated by stylet penetration (blue tons).¹⁰ In this way, aphids suppress SE occlusion and activation of local defense cascades. In the parenchyma cells around the gel saliva sheath, a small cylindrical zone of defense may be induced by oligogalacturonides (oGs; brown triangles) produced by cell wall (grey) digestion.^17–19 Perceived by unknown receptor proteins (R; e.g., a receptor like protein kinase)³⁴ and kinase mediation (black dotted and dashed arrows), oGs lead to a Ca²⁺-influx through kinase activated calcium channels (orange tons).²⁵ Around the probing site, aphids apparently induce the production of superoxide by Ca²⁺-induced activation of the NADPH oxidase (violet box) and its following conversion to hydrogen peroxide (red spots) is mediated by superoxide dismutase (SoD).⁴ Hydrogen peroxide activates Ca²⁺-channels (violet tons) and diffuses through plasma membrane (curled arrows) therefore potentially acting as a intracellular signal.²⁶By contrast, Ca²⁺-influx into SEs, induced by presence of OGs or stylet insertion (Fig. 2), is not expected to trigger local defense given the abundant excretion of Ca²⁺-binding watery saliva.^7,10,25 Watery saliva may spread to down-stream and adjacent SEs through transverse and lateral sieve plates (Fig. 1).^7,27 Aphids puncturing nearby SEs may therefore encounter less severe sieve-plate occlusion which results in facilitated settling and thus in increased population growth. Aggregation of feeding aphids would self-amplify population growth until a certain density is attained. Farther from the colonization site, this effect may be lost due to dilution. Stimulation of aphid feeding by aphid infestation was observed locally on potato by Myzus persicae and M. euphorbiae, respectively, 96 h after infestation.¹³ However, a similar effect was not observed for M. persicae on Arabidopsis thaliana where aphids induced premature leaf senescence and resistance 12 h after infestation,²⁸ possibly induced by OGs.¹⁹As a speculation, OG induced Ca²⁺-influx into parenchyma cells adjacent to the salivary sheath activate Ca²⁺-induced signaling cascades via CaM,^26,29 CDPKs,^30,31 MAPKinases and reactive oxygen species (Fig. 2).³² Systemic resistance, induced by aphid infestation,^12–14 is mediated by unknown compounds such as, e.g., salivary proteins, their degradation products, signal cascade products or volatiles.¹³ Compounds produced in CCs first have to pass the PPUs, while SE signaling elements can be directly transported via mass flow (Fig. 1).The question arises if aphids profit from induced resistance on local (cortex and parenchyma cells) and systemic (distant plant organs) levels as holds for suppression of defense in SEs. Possibly settling and subsequent spread of competing pathogens/herbivores (e.g., fungi or other piercing-sucking insects) are suppressed by induced defense. In this context it is intriguing to understand how aphids cope with the self-induced systemic resistance, which probably lasts over weeks.³³