Bacterial Toxins: Friends or Foes?

Schmitt, Clare K.; Meysick, Karen C.; O'Brien, A D

doi:10.3201/eid0502.990206

Cited by 124 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many bacteria have evolved to recruit host cell surface receptors that are linked to critical cellular mechanisms, such as signal transduction pathways, to trigger aberrant responses including inflammatory reactions, cytoskeletal rearrangement and cell death. [1][2][3] An intriguing result of our studies is that binding of Cry1Ab toxin to the cadherin receptor BT-R 1 on insect cells promotes cytotoxicity associated with magnesium-dependent cellular responses. In fact, cytotoxicity brought about by Cry1Ab appears to depend strictly on magnesium because the absence of magnesium prevented cell death even though the toxin bound to BT-R 1 ( Figure 5).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…The model agrees with the paradigm for many bacterial toxins that challenge host cells by targeting cell surface receptors and manipulating critical reactions associated with various cellular responses. 1,2 Obviously, cells can alter these responses and enable themselves to avoid toxin action. In fact, recent studies with another member of the Cry toxin family, Cry5B, showed that exposure of cells to Cry toxin induces changes in a mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway and stimulates cellular defenses necessary in coping with toxin attack.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1,2 Toxins affect host cells primarily in two ways. They form lytic pores in cell membrane by self-assembly of toxin oligomers or they elicit toxic reactions in cells through various events, including signal transduction, altered metabolism and inflammation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They form lytic pores in cell membrane by self-assembly of toxin oligomers or they elicit toxic reactions in cells through various events, including signal transduction, altered metabolism and inflammation. [1][2][3] In either situation, toxin molecules may incorporate into cell membrane as oligomers like the lytic pore-forming toxins and the A-B family of toxins. [4][5][6][7][8] X-ray crystallographic studies have shown that toxin oligomer complexes most likely assemble in b-barrel or umbrella-like channels in lipid membranes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Cytotoxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ab toxin depends on specific binding of the toxin to the cadherin receptor BT-R1 expressed in insect cells

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The specific role of cadherin receptors in cytotoxicity involving Cry toxins of Bacillus thuringiensis and their interactions with cell membrane has not been defined. To elucidate the involvement of toxin-membrane and toxinreceptor interactions in cytotoxicity, we established a cellbased system utilizing High Five insect cells stably expressing BT-R 1 , the cadherin receptor for Cry1Ab toxin. Cry1Ab toxin is incorporated into cell membrane in both oligomeric and monomeric form. Monomeric toxin binds specifically to BT-R 1 whereas incorporation of oligomeric toxin is nonspecific and lipid dependent. Toxin oligomers in the cell membrane do not produce lytic pores and do not kill insect cells. Rather, cell death correlates with binding of the Cry1Ab toxin monomer to BT-R 1 , which apparently activates a Mg 2 þ -dependent cellular signaling pathway.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cytotoxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ab toxin depends on specific binding of the toxin to the cadherin receptor BT-R1 expressed in insect cells

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most serious clinical symptoms associated with infectious diseases are the results of severe tissue damage, cellular malfunction or destruction caused by bacterial exotoxins such as botulinum, cholera, diphtheria, anthrax, tetanus and Shiga toxins (Henkel et al 2010;Schmitt et al 1999). A deletion of the toxin gene(s) generally disarms the bacteria and results in avirulence without harming their overall biological fitness.…”

Section: Preventing Host Damage and Development Of The Diseasementioning

confidence: 99%

Anti-virulence Strategies to Target Bacterial Infections

Mühlen

Dersch

2015

Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology

142

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resistance of important bacterial pathogens to common antimicrobial therapies and the emergence of multidrug-resistant bacteria is increasing at an alarming rate and constitutes one of our greatest challenges in the combat of bacterial infection and accompanied diseases. Given the current shortage of effective drugs, lack of successful prevention measures and only a few new antibiotics in the clinical pipeline demands the development of novel treatment options and alternative antimicrobial therapies. Our increasing understanding of bacterial virulence strategies and the induced molecular pathways of the infectious disease provide novel opportunities to target and interfere with crucial pathogenicity factors or virulence-associated traits of the bacteria while bypassing the evolutionary pressure on the bacterium to develop resistance. In the past decade, numerous new bacterial targets for anti-virulence therapies have been identified, and structure-based tailoring of intervention strategies as well as screening assays for small molecule inhibitors of such pathways were successfully established. In this chapter, we will take a closer look at the bacterial virulence-related factors and processes that present promising targets for antivirulence therapies, recently discovered inhibitory substances and their promises and discuss the challenges and problems that have to be faced.

show abstract

Nanomaterials‐based biosensors for detection of microorganisms and microbial toxins

Sutarlie

2016

Biotechnology Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Detection of microorganisms and microbial toxins is important for health and safety. Due to their unique physical and chemical properties, nanomaterials have been extensively used to develop biosensors for rapid detection of microorganisms with microbial cells and toxins as target analytes. In this paper, the design principles of nanomaterials-based biosensors for four selected analyte categories (bacteria cells, toxins, mycotoxins, and protozoa cells), closely associated with the target analytes' properties is reviewed. Five signal transducing methods that are less equipment intensive (colorimetric, fluorimetric, surface enhanced Raman scattering, electrochemical, and magnetic relaxometry methods) is described and compared for their sensory performance (in term oflimit of detection, dynamic range, and response time) for all analyte categories. In the end, the suitability of these five sensing principles for on-site or field applications is discussed. With a comprehensive coverage of nanomaterials, design principles, sensing principles, and assessment on the sensory performance and suitability for on-site application, this review offers valuable insight and perspective for designing suitable nanomaterials-based microorganism biosensors for a given application.

show abstract

Bacterial Toxins: Friends or Foes?

Cited by 124 publications

References 60 publications

Cytotoxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ab toxin depends on specific binding of the toxin to the cadherin receptor BT-R1 expressed in insect cells

Cytotoxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ab toxin depends on specific binding of the toxin to the cadherin receptor BT-R1 expressed in insect cells

Anti-virulence Strategies to Target Bacterial Infections

Nanomaterials‐based biosensors for detection of microorganisms and microbial toxins

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About