The chemical compound 'Heatin' stimulates hypocotyl elongation and interferes with the Arabidopsis NIT1-subfamily of nitrilases

Temperature passively affects biological processes involved in plant growth. Therefore, it is challenging to study the dedicated temperature signalling pathways that orchestrate thermomorphogenesis, a suite of elongation growth-based adaptations that enhance leaf-cooling capacity. We screened a chemical library for compounds that restored hypocotyl elongation in the pif4-2-deficient mutant background at warm temperature conditions in Arabidopsis thaliana to identify modulators of thermomorphogenesis. The small aromatic compound 'Heatin', containing 1-iminomethyl-2-naphthol as a pharmacophore, was selected as an enhancer of elongation growth. We show that ARABIDOPSIS ALDEHYDE OXIDASES redundantly contribute to Heatin-mediated hypocotyl elongation. Following a chemical proteomics approach, the members of the NITRILASE1-subfamily of auxin biosynthesis enzymes were identified among the molecular targets of Heatin. Our data reveal that nitrilases are involved in promotion of hypocotyl elongation in response to high temperature and Heatin-mediated hypocotyl elongation requires the NITRILASE1-subfamily members, NIT1 and NIT2. Heatin inhibits NIT1-subfamily enzymatic activity in vitro and the application of Heatin accordingly results in the accumulation of NIT1-subfamily substrate indole-3-acetonitrile in vivo. However, levels of the NIT1-subfamily product, bioactive auxin (indole-3-acetic acid), were also significantly increased. It is likely that the stimulation of hypocotyl elongation by Heatin might be independent of its observed interaction with NITRILASE1-subfamily members. However, nitrilases may contribute to the Heatin response by stimulating indole-3-acetic acid biosynthesis in an indirect way. Heatin and its functional analogues present novel chemical entities for studying auxin biology

Regulation of microRNA biogenesis and turnover by animals and their viruses

Item does not contain fulltextMicroRNAs (miRNAs) are a ubiquitous component of gene regulatory networks that modulate the precise amounts of proteins expressed in a cell. Despite their small size, miRNA genes contain various recognition elements that enable specificity in when, where and to what extent they are expressed. The importance of precise control of miRNA expression is underscored by functional studies in model organisms and by the association between miRNA mis-expression and disease. In the last decade, identification of the pathways by which miRNAs are produced, matured and turned-over has revealed many aspects of their biogenesis that are subject to regulation. Studies in viral systems have revealed a range of mechanisms by which viruses target these pathways through viral proteins or non-coding RNAs in order to regulate cellular gene expression. In parallel, a field of study has evolved around the activation and suppression of antiviral RNA interference (RNAi) by viruses. Virus encoded suppressors of RNAi can impact miRNA biogenesis in cases where miRNA and small interfering RNA pathways converge. Here we review the literature on the mechanisms by which miRNA biogenesis and turnover are regulated in animals and the diverse strategies that viruses use to subvert or inhibit these processes

History of clinical transplantation

How transplantation came to be a clinical discipline can be pieced together by perusing two volumes of reminiscences collected by Paul I. Terasaki in 1991-1992 from many of the persons who were directly involved. One volume was devoted to the discovery of the major histocompatibility complex (MHC), with particular reference to the human leukocyte antigens (HLAs) that are widely used today for tissue matching.1 The other focused on milestones in the development of clinical transplantation.2 All the contributions described in both volumes can be traced back in one way or other to the demonstration in the mid-1940s by Peter Brian Medawar that the rejection of allografts is an immunological phenomenon.3,4 © 2008 Springer New York

History of clinical transplantation

The emergence of transplantation has seen the development of increasingly potent immunosuppressive agents, progressively better methods of tissue and organ preservation, refinements in histocompatibility matching, and numerous innovations is surgical techniques. Such efforts in combination ultimately made it possible to successfully engraft all of the organs and bone marrow cells in humans. At a more fundamental level, however, the transplantation enterprise hinged on two seminal turning points. The first was the recognition by Billingham, Brent, and Medawar in 1953 that it was possible to induce chimerism-associated neonatal tolerance deliberately. This discovery escalated over the next 15 years to the first successful bone marrow transplantations in humans in 1968. The second turning point was the demonstration during the early 1960s that canine and human organ allografts could self-induce tolerance with the aid of immunosuppression. By the end of 1962, however, it had been incorrectly concluded that turning points one and two involved different immune mechanisms. The error was not corrected until well into the 1990s. In this historical account, the vast literature that sprang up during the intervening 30 years has been summarized. Although admirably documenting empiric progress in clinical transplantation, its failure to explain organ allograft acceptance predestined organ recipients to lifetime immunosuppression and precluded fundamental changes in the treatment policies. After it was discovered in 1992 that long-surviving organ transplant recipient had persistent microchimerism, it was possible to see the mechanistic commonality of organ and bone marrow transplantation. A clarifying central principle of immunology could then be synthesized with which to guide efforts to induce tolerance systematically to human tissues and perhaps ultimately to xenografts