Bacterial Adhesion

Ofek, Itzhak; Sharon, Nathan; Abraham, Soman N.

doi:10.1007/0-387-30742-7_2

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 154 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…ompD is correlated with the adhesion of Salmonella to macrophages and intestinal epithelial cells [ 38 , 39 ]. The inability of bacterial adherence facilitates its physical elimination and impedes the initiation of infection [ 40 ]. PrgK is one of those genes that encode for SPI-1 secretion apparatus proteins and assembly of the needle complex.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ginsenoside Rg3 reduces the adhesion, invasion, and intracellular survival of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium

Mechesso

Quah

Park

2021

Journal of Ginseng Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ginsenoside Rg3 reduces the adhesion, invasion, and intracellular survival of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium

Mechesso

Quah

Park

2021

Journal of Ginseng Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This adherence is often facilitated by adhesive surface‐bound molecules called adhesins that bind to the ECM covering mucosal cells. ECM typically comprises a heterogeneous mixture of glycoproteins, such as collagen, elastin, fibronectin laminin, and glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) . These molecules are targeted by microbial adhesins to aid colonisation and invasion.…”

Section: Proteases As Virulence Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non‐proteolytic functions of microbial proteases increase pathological complexity

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proteases are enzymes that catalyse hydrolysis of peptide bonds thereby controlling the shape, size, function, composition, turnover and degradation of other proteins. In microbes, proteases are often identified as important virulence factors and as such have been targets for novel drug design. It is emerging that some proteases possess additional non-proteolytic functions that play important roles in host epithelia adhesion, tissue invasion and in modulating immune responses. These additional "moonlighting" functions have the potential to obfuscate data interpretation and have implications for therapeutic design. Moonlighting enzymes comprise a subcategory of multifunctional proteins that possess at least two distinct biological functions on a single polypeptide chain. Presently, identifying moonlighting proteins relies heavily on serendipitous empirical data with clues arising from proteins lacking signal peptides that are localised to the cell surface. Here, we describe examples of microbial proteases with additional non-proteolytic functions, including streptococcal pyrogenic exotoxin B, PepO and C5a peptidases, mycoplasmal aminopeptidases, mycobacterial chaperones and viral papain-like proteases. We explore how these non-proteolytic functions contribute to host cell adhesion, modulate the coagulation pathway, assist in non-covalent folding of proteins, participate in cell signalling, and increase substrate repertoire. We conclude by describing how proteomics has aided in moonlighting protein discovery, focusing attention on potential moonlighters in microbial exoproteomes.

show abstract

“…Several other cluster associations have been claimed for SHBs that lack arcsecond positions. At the present it is difficult to assess whether the latter associations are in fact correct, but some caution should be exercised given that the probability of finding a cluster in the NED archive within 10 ′ from a random position on the sky is non-negligible, ∼ 5% [45]. Moreover, since none of the SHBs with arcsecond positions are located in clusters, we consider the cluster associations claimed to date to be suggestive, though not secure.…”

Section: Host Galaxies and Offsetsmentioning

confidence: 87%

The Afterglows and Host Galaxies of Short GRBs: An Overview

Berger

2006

AIP Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Despite a rich diversity in observational properties, gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) can be divided into two broad categories based on their duration and spectral hardness -the long-soft and the short-hard GRBs. The discovery of afterglows from long GRBs in 1997, and their localization to arcsecond accuracy, was a watershed event. The ensuing decade of intense study led to the realization that long-soft GRBs are located in star forming galaxies, produce about 10 51 erg in collimated relativistic ejecta, are accompanied by supernovae, and result from the death of massive stars. While theoretical arguments suggest that short GRBs have a different physical origin, the lack of detectable afterglows prevented definitive conclusions. The situation changed dramatically starting in May 2005 with the discovery of the first afterglows from short GRBs localized by Swift and HETE-2. Here I summarize the discovery of these afterglows and the underlying host galaxies, and draw initial conclusions about the nature of the progenitors and the properties of the bursts. HISTORY AND MODELSThe detection of short-duration gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) dates back to the Vela satellites [1]. However, only in 1993 the short bursts (with T 90 ∼ < 2 s) were recognized as a separate sub-class from the long GRBs, and were furthermore shown to have on average a harder γ-ray spectrum [2]; hereafter I will refer to short-hard bursts as SHBs. The short durations of SHBs suggest that they are unlikely to result from the death of massive stars, for which the natural timescale (the free-fall time) is significantly longer, t f f ≈ 30 s (M/10 M ⊙ ) −1/2 (R/10 10 cm) 3/2 .Instead the main theoretical thrust has been focused on coalescing compact objects -neutron stars and/or black holes (DNS or NS-BH) -as the progenitors of SHBs [3,4,5,6,7]. In this context the duration, which is set by the viscous timescale of the gas accreting onto the newly-formed black hole, is short due to the small scale of the system. Other progenitors have been proposed in addition to the DNS and NS-BH systems, namely magnetars, thought to be the power source behind soft γ-ray repeaters [8], and accretion-induced collapse (AIC) of neutron stars [9,10]. The magnetar model is unlikely to account for SHBs at cosmological distances, since even the 2004 Dec. 27 giant flare from SGR 1806-20 would only be detected by BATSE or Swift at ∼ < 50 Mpc; magnetars may contribute to a local population of SHBs. The AIC model has not been investigated in detail, but in the case of a white dwarf was shown to be too baryon rich to produce GRBs [11].Naturally, without a distance and energy scale, or an understanding of the microand macro-environments of SHBs, it is nearly impossible to make any quantitative statements about their progenitors or the detailed underlying physics. As in the case of

show abstract

Bacterial Adhesion

Cited by 14 publications

References 154 publications

Ginsenoside Rg3 reduces the adhesion, invasion, and intracellular survival of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium

Ginsenoside Rg3 reduces the adhesion, invasion, and intracellular survival of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium

Non‐proteolytic functions of microbial proteases increase pathological complexity

The Afterglows and Host Galaxies of Short GRBs: An Overview

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About