Klimacharakter und Pflanzendecke

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Studies on prolysostaphin processing and characterization of the lysostaphin immunity factor (Lif) of Staphylococcus simulans biovar staphylolyticus

Lysostaphin is an extracellular glycylglycine endopep-tidase produced by Staphylococcus simulans biovar staphylolyticus ATCC1362 that lyses staphylococcal cells by hydrolysing the polyglycine interpeptide bridges of the peptidoglycan. Renewed analysis of the sequence of the lysostaphin gene (Iss), and the sequencing of the amino-terminus of purified prolysostaphin and of mature lysostaphin revealed that lysostaphin is organized as a preproprotein of 493 amino acids (aa), with a signal peptide consisting of 36 aa, a propeptide of 211 aa from which 195 aa are organized in 15 tandem repeats of 13 aa length, and a mature protein of 246 aa. Prolysostaphin is processed in the culture supernatant of S. simulans biovar staphylolyticus by an extracellular cysteine protease. Although prolysostaphin was staphylolytically active, the mature lysostaphin was about 4.5-fold more active. The controlled expression in Staphylococcus carnosus of Iss and Iss with deletions in the prepropeptide region indicated that the tandem repeats of the propeptide are not necessary for protein export or activation of Lss, but keep Lss in a less active state. Intracellular expressed pro- and mature lysostaphin exert staphy-lolytic activity in cell-free extracts, but do not affect growth of the corresponding clones. We characterized a lysostaphin immunity factor gene (lif) which is located in the opposite direction to Iss. The expression of lif in S. carnosus led to an increase in the serine/glycine ratio of the interpeptide bridges of peptidoglycan from 2 to 35%, suggesting that lysostaphin immunity depends on serine incorporation into the interpeptide bridge. If, in addition to lif, Iss is co-expressed the serine/glycine ratio is further increased to 58%, suggesting that Lss selects for optimal serine incorporation. Lif shows similarity to FemA and FemB     

Pulling or drilling, does size or species matter? An experimental study of prey handling in Octopus dierythraeus ()

The influence of both predator and prey size on the shift from a pulling to a drilling predatory response was examined in the intertidal octopus Octopus dierythraeus, using an experimental program. Additionally, selective drilling, where particular regions of the prey are targeted, was examined for a variety of bivalve and gastropod prey. O. dierythraeus always initially attempted to pull bivalves apart. Shells that were eventually drilled were always subjected to significantly more pulling attempts than those that could be pulled apart, indicating that octopus are willing to expend more energy to access the flesh quickly. There was no defined threshold where bivalve size caused an octopus to switch from a pulling to a drilling response. Instead, there was a broad size range where the octopus could adopt either handling method and it varied for each individual. Octopus may only able to pull open bivalves before the molecular ratchet or ‘catch’ mechanism that many bivalves possess is engaged. This might explain the lack of a relationship between either octopus or bivalve size and the success of pulling, as it is likely that when the bivalves were presented to individual octopus they were either setting the ‘catch’ mechanism, or had already engaged it. O. dierythraeus demonstrated selective drilling on a variety of molluscan prey, with penetration sites differing between prey species. O. dierythraeus targeted the valve periphery, which was the thinnest part of the shell, therefore minimizing handling time. O. dierythraeus always drilled gastropods, but did not target the thinnest regions of the shells, with drill site varying according to the morphology of the prey. Elongate species with pronounced aperture lips were drilled in the apical region, close to the columella on the side of the opercula whereas nonelongate species were drilled immediately above the aperture. The location of drilling sites may represent a trade-off between targeting the most effective places to inject paralyzing secretions and the mechanically simplest places to drill.