Functional Evolution of Duplicated Odorant-Binding Protein Genes, Obp57d and Obp57e, in Drosophila

Odorant-binding proteins (OBPs) are extracellular proteins found in insect chemosensilla, where they participate in the sensing of odors, tastes, and pheromones. Although a large number of OBP genes have been identified in insect genomes, their molecular functions and biological roles have been clarified in limited cases. Two OBP genes, Obp57d and Obp57e, were involved in the evolution of host-plant preference in Drosophila sechellia. Comparative analyses of the Obp57d/e genomic sequences from 27 closely related species suggested that the two genes arose by tandem gene duplication and functionally diverged from each other. In this study, the functional evolution of Obp57d and Obp57e was examined by in vitro binding assays using recombinant proteins synthesized in a bacterial system. Compared to the ancestral Dpse\OBP57de, Dmel\OBP57d was more specialized to tridecanoic acid while Dmel\OBP57e was generalized regarding their binding affinity, suggesting that the two OBP genes underwent subfunctionalization and neofunctionalization. A behavioral analysis using knockout flies supported that the biological role is different between OBP57d and OBP57e in vivo. Site-directed mutagenesis of the evolutionarily conserved amino acids revealed that these residues play an important role in protein folding. These findings provide a clue to understanding how the repertoire of OBP genes is maintained in a genome under natural selection

Checkpoint Signaling, Base Excision Repair, and PARP Promote Survival of Colon Cancer Cells Treated with 5-Fluorodeoxyuridine but Not 5-Fluorouracil

The fluoropyrimidines 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and FdUrd (5-fluorodeoxyuridine; floxuridine) are the backbone of chemotherapy regimens for colon cancer and other tumors. Despite their widespread use, it remains unclear how these agents kill tumor cells. Here, we have analyzed the checkpoint and DNA repair pathways that affect colon tumor responses to 5-FU and FdUrd. These studies demonstrate that both FdUrd and 5-FU activate the ATR and ATM checkpoint signaling pathways, indicating that they cause genotoxic damage. Notably, however, depletion of ATM or ATR does not sensitize colon cancer cells to 5-FU, whereas these checkpoint pathways promote the survival of cells treated with FdUrd, suggesting that FdUrd exerts cytotoxicity by disrupting DNA replication and/or inducing DNA damage, whereas 5-FU does not. We also found that disabling the base excision (BER) repair pathway by depleting XRCC1 or APE1 sensitized colon cancer cells to FdUrd but not 5-FU. Consistent with a role for the BER pathway, we show that small molecule poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1/2 (PARP) inhibitors, AZD2281 and ABT-888, remarkably sensitized both mismatch repair (MMR)-proficient and -deficient colon cancer cell lines to FdUrd but not to 5-FU. Taken together, these studies demonstrate that the roles of genotoxin-induced checkpoint signaling and DNA repair differ significantly for these agents and also suggest a novel approach to colon cancer therapy in which FdUrd is combined with a small molecule PARP inhibitor

Efficiency of safety measures applied to a manual knapsack sprayer for paraquat application to Maize (Zea mays L.)

The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the safety of mixer/loaders and applicators of paraquat to maize crop by knapsack sprayers and to determine the efficacy of safety measures applied to the sprayers. Potential dermal exposure (PDE) was evaluated in 22 worker body parts. The Cu2+ cation of a copper-based fungicide was used as tracer in the spray solution. Sanitary pads and cotton gloves were used to collect the pesticide solution on the sampled body parts. It was observed that paraquat application in front of the applicator's body (0.5 and 1.0 m lance) is unsafe because PDE was 1,979.8 ml/day (for 0.5 m lance) and 1,290.4 ml/day (for 1.0 m lance) and needs 50-80% and 37-69% control of PDE respectively. Control can be achieved by the use of protective garment on the legs and feet only, which received 92-93% of the PDE. Switching the spray nozzle to the back of the operator reduced the PDE by 98% and was sufficient to make working conditions safe, while maintaining the efficiency of application and making the work lighter and more comfortable. Mixer/loaders received 86% of the PDE to the hands and the work condition was safe (MOS > 1), however impermeable gloves could be used as a further safety measure