Throughout this Reflections article, I have tried to follow up on the genesis in the 1960s and subsequent evolution of the concept of allosteric interaction and to examine its consequences within the past decades, essentially in the field of the neuroscience. The main conclusion is that allosteric mechanisms built on similar structural principles operate in bacterial regulatory enzymes, gene repressors (and the related nuclear receptors), rhodopsin, G-protein-coupled receptors, neurotransmitter receptors, ion channels, and so on from prokaryotes up to the human brain yet with important features of their own. Thus, future research on these basic cybernetic sensors is expected to develop in two major directions: at the elementary level, toward the atomic structure and molecular dynamics of the conformational changes involved in signal recognition and transduction, but also at a higher level of organization, the contribution of allosteric mechanisms to the modulation of brain functions.
Theory in BiologyI n the physical sciences, there is a long tradition of theory and model building; the advancement of the discipline has relied and still relies on an active interplay between theory and experimental studies and between the development of novel technologies and conceptual invention. In the biological sciences, a similar tradition exists, but it is not as systematic. The frequent enthusiasm for new techniques without explicit theoretical perspectives often hides an impoverished theoretical landscape where original hypotheses or ideas are rare. In my view, the theoretical objectives should precede, or be concomitant with, the technological and experimental means. According to Claude Bernard, "the experimenter who does not know what he is looking for will not understand what he finds" (1).1 The reasons for the difficulties encountered with the biological sciences possibly lie in the fact that the objects of biology are highly differentiated with multiple, intricate levels of organization. The identification of common conceptual rules further hinges on the considerable structural and functional diversity of the biological objects. Thus, there is the constant dilemma, often split between scientists, about the universality or the singularity of the objects they investigate. In this context, I have selected as a tentative common rule the concept of allosteric interaction and its consequences on the molecular chemistry of proteins, going from bacterial regulatory enzymes up to the nervous system and, tentatively, the higher functions of the brain.The circumstances of my personal life have been such that as an adolescent, I was already exposed to theory through the teaching of an exceptional professor of natural sciences, Jean Bathellier, who introduced me to the idea of biological evolution. This experience deeply influ-1 The full quote (see Ref. 255) is, "Empiricism may serve to accumulate facts, but it will never build science. The experimenter who does not know what he is looking for will not understand what he finds."