Interactions between Nucleus and Cytoplasm

Brachet, Jean

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-66417-5_2

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 118 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A step forward in the elucidation of ribosome biogenesis was taken when eukaryotic systems were tested . It had already been supposed, based on many earlier cytochemical (6,211) and autoradiographic observations (212), that the nucleolus is the site of ribosomal RNA synthesis. Later, the lack of ribosomal RNA in a nucleolar mutant (213) and the electron-microscope localization of rRNA genes in the nucleolus (214) confirmed the early supposition .…”

Section: Ribosomal Biogenesis In Eukaryotesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ribosomes and protein synthesis.

Siekevitz¹,

Zamecnik²

1981

The Journal of Cell Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Let us start at the very beginning. Between 1897 and 1899, G. Gamier, in France, published elegant microscope studies describing a basophilic component ofthe cytoplasm of glandular cells (1) . Because of what he thought its role might be in the elaboration and transformation of secretory products, he gave a Greek name to these concepts-ergastoplasm (work plasm) . Gamier's research was extended by others-particularly A. Prenant, R. R. Bensley, and A. Matthews-to include other cell types, so that by the early part of this century ergastoplasm came to be a generally accepted term for a specific basophilic area of the cytoplasm . These early studies are extensively reviewed by F. Haguenau (1) . The next major advance was to show that basophilia was due to RNA: in 1933, J. Brachet used RNase (2) ; in 1939, T. Caspersson used ultraviolet spectrophotometry (3); in 1943, J. N. Davidson and C. Waymouth used chemical methods (4) . The high correlation which was shown between the amount ofRNA in various cells and the postulated protein-synthesizing capacity of those cells led Caspersson in 1941 (5) and Brachet in 1942 (6) to proclaim the importance of RNA in the process of protein synthesis . As can be imagined, this conjecture spurred many scientists in the next decade to try to answerthree questions. In what form was this cytoplasmic RNA? Did it really have a role in protein synthesis? Ifso, what was the role? Various methods were used: extraction and chemical procedures; extraction and physicochemical procedures, such as ultracentrifugation; and, because electron microscopy was becoming more and more refined, visualization . We now know that the RNA is in the form of ribosomes, and that the proteins of the ribosomes are involved in the many individual steps of protein synthesis; however, the function of ribosomal RNA is still elusive .The intensity of the research in the 1940s is caught very well in Haguenau's chapter on the visualization aspect (1) and in Magasanik's 1955 monograph ( 7) on the extraction and chemical properties of what were then called "pentose nucleoprotein." Confusion abounded, in good part due to the terminologies developed for the different techniques, such as Gamier's ergastoplasm, K. Porter's "endoplasmic reticulum" (8), A. Claude's "microsome" fraction (9), G. Palade's "small particulate component" (10), and the "nucleoprotein" preparations or particles discovered by various workers . The last are re-

show abstract

Section: Ribosomal Biogenesis In Eukaryotesmentioning

confidence: 99%