Prevalence of Sarcocystis calchasi in free-ranging host species: Accipiter hawks and Common Woodpigeon in Germany

The apicomplexan parasite Sarcocystis calchasi (S. calchasi) triggers pigeon protozoal encephalitis, a neurologic disease in columbids. Accipiter hawks have been identified as the final host, and Columbidae and Psittaciformes as intermediate hosts. In this study, 368 free-ranging Accipiter hawks and 647 free-ranging common woodpigeons were sampled in a country-wide study in order to identify the prevalence of S. calchasi in these populations. A semi-nested PCR specific for S. calchasi tested positive in 7.3% (4.9-10.5) of submitted samples from Accipiter hawks. Juvenile Accipiter hawks (13.7%; 7.7-22.0) had a significantly higher infection rate with S. calchasi than adult Accipiter hawks (5.8%; 2.7-9.3). The prevalence of S. calchasi in common woodpigeons was 3.3% (5.4-9.7). Positive pigeons were identified in 14/16 federal states, and a region-dependency was detected, with higher rates of infection in the eastern parts of Germany. The results of this study suggest that the common woodpigeon is a natural reservoir for S. calchasi. In a study of one region for four consecutive years, an increase in prevalence was not detected. Findings indicate that the parasite is not newly introduced to Germany, but rather long established. The prevalence suggests that there is a substantial risk of S. calchasi infections in other free-ranging as well as captive host species

On the expanding terminology in the GPCR field: The meaning of receptor mosaics and receptor heteromers

The oligomerization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is a fact that deserves further attention as increases both the complexity and diversity of the receptor-mediated signal transduction, thus enriching the cell signaling. Consequently, in the present review we tackle among others the problems concerning the terminology used to describe aspects surrounding the GPCRs oligomerization phenomenon. Therefore, the theoretical implications of the GPCR oligomerization will be briefly discussed together with possible implications of this phenomenon especially for new strategies in drug development

Bioinformatics and mathematical modelling in the study of receptor-receptor interactions and receptor oligomerization: focus on adenosine receptors.

none8sìThe concept of intra-membrane receptor-receptor interactions (RRIs) between different types of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and evidence for their existence was introduced by Agnati and Fuxe in 1980/81 through the biochemical analysis of the effects of neuropeptides on the binding characteristics of monoamine receptors in membrane preparations from discrete brain regions and functional studies of the interactions between neuropeptides and monoamines in the control of specific functions such as motor control and arterial blood pressure control in animal models. Whether GPCRs can form high-order structures is still a topic of an intense debate. Increasing evidence, however, suggests that the hypothesis of the existence of high-order receptor oligomers is correct. A fundamental consequence of the view describing GPCRs as interacting structures, with the likely formation at the plasma membrane of receptor aggregates of multiple receptors (Receptor Mosaics) is that it is no longer possible to describe signal transduction simply as the result of the binding of the chemical signal to its receptor, but rather as the result of a filtering/integration of chemical signals by the Receptor Mosaics (RMs) and membrane-associated proteins. Thus, in parallel with experimental research, significant efforts were spent in bioinformatics and mathematical modelling. We review here the main approaches that have been used to assess the interaction interfaces allowing the assembly of GPCRs and to shed some light on the integrative functions emerging from the complex behaviour of these RMs. Particular attention was paid to the RMs generated by adenosine A(2A), dopamine D-2, cannabinoid CB1, and metabotropic glutamate mGlu(5) receptors (A(2A). D-2, CB1, and mGlu(5), respectively), and a possible approach to model the interplay between the D-2-A(2A)-CB1 and D-2-A(2A)-mGlu(5) trimers is proposed. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: "Adenosine Receptors". (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.openD. GUIDOLIN; F. CIRUELA; S. GENEDANI; M. GUESCINI; C. TORTORELLA; G. ALBERTIN; K. FUXE; L.F. AGNATID., Guidolin; F., Ciruela; S., Genedani; Guescini, Michele; C., Tortorella; G., Albertin; K., Fuxe; L. F., Agnat

Investigating the Role of Guanosine on Human Neuroblastoma Cell Differentiation and the Underlying Molecular Mechanisms

Neuroblastoma arises from neural crest cell precursors failing to complete the process of differentiation. Thus, agents helping tumor cells to differentiate into normal cells can represent a valid therapeutic strategy. Here, we evaluated whether guanosine (GUO), a natural purine nucleoside, which is able to induce differentiation of many cell types, may cause the differentiation of human neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells and the molecular mechanisms involved. We found that GUO, added to the cell culture medium, promoted neuron-like cell differentiation in a time- and concentration-dependent manner. This effect was mainly due to an extracellular GUO action since nucleoside transporter inhibitors reduced but not abolished it. Importantly, GUO-mediated neuron-like cell differentiation was independent of adenosine receptor activation as it was not altered by the blockade of these receptors. Noteworthy, the neuritogenic activity of GUO was not affected by blocking the phosphoinositide 3-kinase pathway, while it was reduced by inhibitors of protein kinase C or soluble guanylate cyclase. Furthermore, the inhibitor of the enzyme heme oxygenase-1 but not that of nitric oxide synthase reduced GUO-induced neurite outgrowth. Interestingly, we found that GUO was largely metabolized into guanine by the purine nucleoside phosphorylase (PNP) enzyme released from cells. Taken together, our results suggest that GUO, promoting neuroblastoma cell differentiation, may represent a potential therapeutic agent; however, due to its spontaneous extracellular metabolism, the role played by the GUO-PNP-guanine system needs to be further investigated

Guanosine-mediated anxiolytic-like effect: Interplay with adenosine a1 and a2a receptors

Acute or chronic administration of guanosine (GUO) induces anxiolytic-like effects, for which the adenosine (ADO) system involvement has been postulated yet without a direct experimental evidence. Thus, we aimed to investigate whether adenosine receptors (ARs) are involved in the GUO-mediated anxiolytic-like effect, evaluated by three anxiety-related paradigms in rats. First, we confirmed that acute treatment with GUO exerts an anxiolytic-like effect. Subsequently, we investigated the effects of pretreatment with ADO or A1R (CPA, CCPA) or A2AR (CGS21680) agonists 10 min prior to GUO on a GUO-induced anxiolytic-like effect. All the combined treatments blocked the GUO anxiolytic-like effect, whereas when administered alone, each compound was ineffective as compared to the control group. Interestingly, the pretreatment with nonselective antagonist caffeine or selective A1R (DPCPX) or A2AR (ZM241385) antagonists did not modify the GUO-induced anxiolytic-like effect. Finally, binding assay performed in hippocampal membranes showed that [3H]GUO binding became saturable at 100–300 nM, suggesting the existence of a putative GUO binding site. In competition experiments, ADO showed a potency order similar to GUO in displacing [3H]GUO binding, whereas AR selective agonists, CPA and CGS21680, partially displaced [3H]GUO binding, but the sum of the two effects was able to displace [3H]GUO binding to the same extent of ADO alone. Overall, our results strengthen previous data supporting GUO-mediated anxiolytic-like effects, add new evidence that these effects are blocked by A1R and A2AR agonists and pave, although they do not elucidate the mechanism of GUO and ADO receptor interaction, for a better characterization of GUO binding sites in ARs

Microvesicle and tunneling nanotube mediated intercellular transfer of g-protein coupled receptors in cell cultures.

none12Recent evidence shows that cells exchange collections of signals via microvesicles (MVs) and tunneling nano-tubes (TNTs). In this paper we have investigated whether in cell cultures GPCRs can be transferred by means of MVs and TNTs from a source cell to target cells. Western blot, transmission electron microscopy and gene expression analyses demonstrate that A(2A) and D(2) receptors are present in released MVs. In order to further demonstrate the involvement of MVs in cell-to-cell communication we created two populations of cells (HEK293T and COS-7) transiently transfected with D(2)R-CFP or A(2A)R-YFP. These two types of cells were co-cultured, and FRET analysis demonstrated simultaneously positive cells to the D(2)R-CFP and A(2A)R-YFP. Fluorescence microscopy analysis also showed that GPCRs can move from one cell to another also by means of TNTs. Finally, recipient cells pre-incubated for 24 h with A(2A)R positive MVs were treated with the adenosine A(2A) receptor agonist CGS-21680. The significant increase in cAMP accumulation clearly demonstrated that A(2A)Rs were functionally competent in target cells. These findings demonstrate that A(2A) receptors capable of recognizing and decoding extracellular signals can be safely transferred via MVs from source to target cells.openM. Guescini; G. Leo; S. Genedani; C. Carone; F. Pederzoli; F. Ciruela; D. Guidolin; V. Stocchi; M. Mantuano; D.O. Borroto-Escuela; K. Fuxe; L.F. AgnatiGuescini, Michele; G., Leo; S., Genedani; C., Carone; F., Pederzoli; F., Ciruela; D., Guidolin; Stocchi, Vilberto; Mantuano, Michela; D. O., Borroto Escuela; K., Fuxe; L. F., Agnat

Enhancement of the FGFR1 signaling in the FGFR1-5-HT1A heteroreceptor complex in midbrain raphe 5-HT neuron systems. Relevance for neuroplasticity and depression

New findings show existence of FGFR1-5-HT1A heteroreceptor complexes in 5-HT nerve cells of the dorsal and median raphe nuclei of the rat midbrain and hippocampus. Synergistic receptor-receptor interactions in these receptor complexes indicated their enhancing role in hippocampal plasticity. The existence of FGFR1-5-HT1A heteroreceptor complexes also in midbrain raphe 5-HT nerve cells open up the possibility that antidepressant drugs by increasing extracellular 5-HT levels can cause an activation of the FGF-2/FGFR1 mechanism in these nerve cells as well. Therefore, the agonist modulation of the FGFR1-5-HT1A heteroreceptor complexes and their specific role is now determined in rat medullary raphe RN33B cells and in the caudal midline raphe area of the midbrain rich in 5-HT nerve cells. The combined i.c.v. treatment with FGF-2 and the 5-HT1A agonist 8-OHDPAT synergistically increased FGFR1 and ERK1/2 phosphorylation in the raphe midline area of the midbrain and in the RN33B cells. Cotreatment with FGF2 and the 5-HT1A agonist induced RN33B cell differentiation as seen from development of an increased number and length of extensions per cell and their increased 5-HT immunoreactivity. These signaling and differentiation events were dependent on the receptor interface since they were blocked by incubation with TMV but not by TMII of the 5-HT1A receptor. Taken together, the 5-HT1A autoreceptors by being part of a FGFR1-5-HT1A heteroreceptor complex in the midbrain raphe 5-HT nerve cells appears to have also a trophic role in the central 5-HT neuron systems besides playing a key role in reducing the firing of these neurons

Agonist-induced formation of FGFR1 homodimers and signaling differ among members of the FGF family.

Fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 (FGFR1) is known to be activated by homodimerization in the presence of both the FGF agonist ligand and heparan sulfate glycosaminoglycan. FGFR1 homodimers in turn trigger a variety of downstream signaling cascades via autophosphorylation of tyrosine residues in the cytoplasmic domain of FGFR1. By means of Bioluminescence Energy Resonance Transfer (BRET) as a sign of FGFR1 homodimerization, we evaluated in HEK293T cells the effects of all known FGF agonist ligands on homodimer formation. A significant correlation between BRET(2) signaling and ERK1/2 phosphorylation was observed, leading to a further characterization of the binding and signaling properties of the FGF subfamilies. FGF agonist ligand-FGFR1 binding interactions appear as the main mechanism for the control of FGFR1 homodimerization and MAPK signaling which demonstrated a high correlation. The bioinformatic analysis demonstrates the interface of the two pro-triplets SSS (Ser-Ser-Ser) and YGS (Tyr-Gly-Ser) located in the extracellular and intracellular domain of the FGFR1. These pro-triplets are postulated participate in the FGFR1 homodimerization interface interaction. The findings also reveal that FGF agonist ligands within the same subfamily of the FGF gene family produced similar increases in FGFR1 homodimer formation and MAPK signaling. Thus, the evolutionary relationship within this gene family appears to have a distinct functional relevance

Investigating the Role of Guanosine on Human Neuroblastoma Cell Differentiation and the Underlying Molecular Mechanisms

Neuroblastoma arises from neural crest cell precursors failing to complete the process of differentiation. Thus, agents helping tumor cells to differentiate into normal cells can represent a valid therapeutic strategy. Here, we evaluated whether guanosine (GUO), a natural purine nucleoside, which is able to induce differentiation of many cell types, may cause the differentiation of human neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells and the molecular mechanisms involved. We found that GUO, added to the cell culture medium, promoted neuron-like cell differentiation in a time- and concentration-dependent manner. This effect was mainly due to an extracellular GUO action since nucleoside transporter inhibitors reduced but not abolished it. Importantly, GUO-mediated neuron-like cell differentiation was independent of adenosine receptor activation as it was not altered by the blockade of these receptors. Noteworthy, the neuritogenic activity of GUO was not affected by blocking the phosphoinositide 3-kinase pathway, while it was reduced by inhibitors of protein kinase C or soluble guanylate cyclase. Furthermore, the inhibitor of the enzyme heme oxygenase-1 but not that of nitric oxide synthase reduced GUO-induced neurite outgrowth. Interestingly, we found that GUO was largely metabolized into guanine by the purine nucleoside phosphorylase (PNP) enzyme released from cells. Taken together, our results suggest that GUO, promoting neuroblastoma cell differentiation, may represent a potential therapeutic agent; however, due to its spontaneous extracellular metabolism, the role played by the GUO-PNP-guanine system needs to be further investigated

Guanine inhibits the growth of human glioma and melanoma cell lines by interacting with GPR23

Guanine-based purines (GBPs) exert numerous biological effects at the central nervous system through putative membrane receptors, the existence of which is still elusive. To shed light on this question, we screened orphan and poorly characterized G protein-coupled receptors (GPRs), selecting those that showed a high purinoreceptor similarity and were expressed in glioma cells, where GBPs exerted a powerful antiproliferative effect. Of the GPRs chosen, only the silencing of GPR23, also known as lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) 4 receptor, counteracted GBP-induced growth inhibition in U87 cells. Guanine (GUA) was the most potent compound behind the GPR23-mediated effect, acting as the endpoint effector of GBP antiproliferative effects. Accordingly, cells stably expressing GPR23 showed increased sensitivity to GUA. Furthermore, while GPR23 expression was low in a hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyl-transferase (HGPRT)-mutated melanoma cell line showing poor sensitivity to GBPs, and in HGPRT-silenced glioma cells, GPR23-induced expression in both cell types rescued GUA-mediated cell growth inhibition. Finally, binding experiments using [H-3]-GUA and U87 cell membranes revealed the existence of a selective GUA binding (K-D = 29.44 & PLUSMN; 4.07 nM; Bmax 1.007 & PLUSMN; 0.035 pmol/mg prot) likely to GPR23. Overall, these data suggest GPR23 involvement in modulating responses to GUA in tumor cell lines, although further research needs to verify whether this receptor mediates other GUA effects