The outer membrane insertase of Gram-negative bacteria, BAM, is a key target for urgently needed novel antibiotics. Functional reconstitutions of BAM have so far been limited to synthetic membranes and with low throughput capacity for inhibitor screening. Here, we describe a BAM functional assay in native membrane environment capable of high-throughput screening. This is achieved by employing outer membrane vesicles (OMVs) to present BAM directly in native membranes. Refolding of the model substrate OmpT by BAM was possible from the chaperones SurA and Skp, with the required SurA concentration three times higher than Skp. In the OMVs, the antibiotic darobactin displayed up to tenfold higher potency than in synthetic membranes, highlighting the impact of native-like conditions in antibiotics development. The assay was successfully miniaturized for 1536-well plates and upscaled using large scale fermentation, resulting in high-throughput capacities to screen large commercial compound libraries. Our OMV-based assay thus lays the basis for discovery, hit validation and lead expansion of novel antibiotics targeting BAM.

In response to critiques of the ‘slavery versus freedom’ binary and its limitations, researchers at the international Bonn Center for Dependency and Slavery Studies (BCDSS—www.dependency.uni-bonn.de) at the University of Bonn tentatively employ the analytical concept of ‘asymmetrical dependency’ in their investigations of coercive social relations, such as slavery, debt bondage, and servitude. In this paper, we discuss some basic theoretical assumptions that undergird this analytical concept. In outlining an approach to asymmetrical dependency that is grounded in social and cultural theory, our goal is to provide a framework within which individual researchers can situate their projects and further develop their theoretical understanding of this phenomenon. To this end, we first introduce the analytical concept of asymmetrical dependency and explore its potential in light of the current state of research of slavery studies and related fields. We then conceptualize asymmetrical dependency as a dynamic relational process and employ a chiefly praxeological methodology to identify and describe some fundamental dynamics of these relations. Finally, we argue that the interdisciplinary study of asymmetrical dependency requires a broad practice of comparative analyses. We, therefore, consider several recent critiques of and models for comparison while relating them to the analytical concept of asymmetrical dependency we propose.

No abstract

No abstract

Theory in a Time of Excess (Equinox 2017) serves as a useful starting point to argue for a plural understanding of theory in the study of religion. While the existing conversation often implies that there is only one acceptable way of theorizing, it seems useful to distinguish between (at least) three understandings of theory—and a fourth potentially “illegitimate” one. These four forms (discourse theories, creative theories, scientific theories, and essentialist theories) are all present in the volume. Different theoretical approaches can learn from each other and expose their respective blind spots, which is the main reason to further a meta-theoretical debate about a permissible plurality within theory-building. Rather than a call to “just get along” under one big tent, this critical attitude implies that we should strive to better profile all four of these forms of theorizing in order to discuss their potential place in our discipline.