From the Schnauzenorgan to the back: Morphological comparison of mormyromast electroreceptor organs at different skin regions of Gnathonemus petersii

The nocturnally active weakly electric fish Gnathonemus petersii is known to employ active electrolocation for the detection of objects and for orientation in its environment. The fish emits pulse‐type electric signals with an electric organ and perceives these signals with more than 3,000 epidermal electroreceptor organs, the mormyromasts, which are distributed over the animal's skin surface. In this study, we measured the metric dimensions of the mormyromasts from different body regions to find structural and functional specialization of the various body parts. We focused on the two foveal regions of G. petersii, which are located at the elongated and movable chin (the Schnauzenorgan; SO) and at the nasal region (NR), the skin region between the mouth and the nares. These two foveal regions were compared to the dorsal part (back) of the fish, which contains typical nonfoveal mormyromasts. While the gross anatomy of the mormyromasts from all skin regions is similar, the metric dimensions of the main substructures differed. The mormyromasts at the SO are the smallest and contain the smallest receptor cells. In addition, the number of receptor cells per organ is lowest at the SO. In contrast, at the back the biggest receptor organs with the highest amount of receptor cells per organ occur. The mormyromasts at the NR are in several respects intermediate between those from the back and the SO. However, mormyromasts at the NR are longer than those at all other skin regions, the canal leading from the receptor pore to the inner chambers were the longest and the overlaying epidermal layers are the thickest. These results show that mormyromasts and the epidermis they are embedded in at both foveal regions differ specifically from those found on the rest of the body. The morphological specializations lead to functional specialization of the two foveae. J. Morphol., 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Effect of microwave treatment on the shear bond strength of different types of commercial teeth to acrylic resin

doi:10.1111/j.1741‐2358.2009.00333.x
Effect of microwave treatment on the shear bond strength of different types of commercial teeth to acrylic resin Objective: The purpose of this study was to verify the effect of microwave treatment on the shear bond strength of commercial types of teeth to acrylic resin, when the glossy ridge laps were unmodified (groups 1 and 5), bur abraded (groups 2 and 6), bur grooved (groups 3 and 7) or etched by monomer (groups 4 and 8). Background: Controversial findings have shown that mechanical or chemical changes in ridge‐lap surface of the tooth increase or decrease the bond strength between tooth and acrylic resin, and the microwave disinfection may cause different changes on this bond strength. Materials and methods: Eighty specimens (n = 10) were made with the acrylic resin bonded to tooth glossy ridge lap, polymerised in water at 74°C for 9 h, and deflasked after flask cooling. Specimens of the groups 5, 6, 7 and 8 were individually immersed in 150 ml of water and submitted to microwave treatment in an oven at 650 W for 3 min. Control specimens (groups 1, 2, 3 and 4) were not microwave treated. Shear bond strength test was performed in an Instron machine with a cross‐speed of 1 mm/min. Collected data were submitted to anova and Tukey’s test (α = 0.05). Results: Microwave treatment decreased the shear bond strength values of the tooth/resin bond. In the microwaved and non‐microwaved procedures, mechanical retention improved the shear bond strength when compared with the control and monomer treatments. Conclusion: Shear bond strength of the tooth/resin bond was influenced by the microwave treatment and different commercial teeth association, and was lower for the Biotone tooth.     

Photoaffinity spin-labeling of the Ca2+ ATPase in sarcoplasmic reticulum : Evidence for oligomeric structure

A spin labeled fatty acid (16-doxylstearic acid) was linked to a photochemical reacting group (azido derivative). When the molecule is introduced, at a low concentration, into rabbit sarcoplasmic reticulum membranes, the spectrum before illumination is identical to the spectrum obtained with the corresponding spin labeled fatty acid. After illumination, a large immobilized components is seen. It corresponds to about 70% of the ESR signal of the effectively bound label, at room temperature. The fraction of immobilized component varies with temperature, from 100% at 0°C to 50% at 35°C. Addition of a small amount of detergent (dodecyl octaethylene glycol monoether), under non solubilizing conditions, decreases the fraction of signal due to a strongly immobilized probe. A possible interpretation is that the immobilized signal reflects protein bound spin labels trapped in Ca²⁺ ATPase oligomers, which are partially dissociated by detergent addition or temperature increase.     

Nuclear envelope‐associated dynein drives prophase centrosome separation and enables Eg5‐independent bipolar spindle formation

The microtubule motor protein kinesin‐5 (Eg5) provides an outward force on centrosomes, which drives bipolar spindle assembly. Acute inhibition of Eg5 blocks centrosome separation and causes mitotic arrest in human cells, making Eg5 an attractive target for anti‐cancer therapy. Using in vitro directed evolution, we show that human cells treated with Eg5 inhibitors can rapidly acquire the ability to divide in the complete absence of Eg5 activity. We have used these Eg5‐independent cells to study alternative mechanisms of centrosome separation. We uncovered a pathway involving nuclear envelope (NE)‐associated dynein that drives centrosome separation in prophase. This NE‐dynein pathway is essential for bipolar spindle assembly in the absence of Eg5, but also functions in the presence of full Eg5 activity, where it pulls individual centrosomes along the NE and acts in concert with Eg5‐dependent outward pushing forces to coordinate prophase centrosome separation. Together, these results reveal how the forces are produced to drive prophase centrosome separation and identify a novel mechanism of resistance to kinesin‐5 inhibitors.