4.4 Article

α-conopeptides specifically expressed in the salivary gland of Conus pulicarius

Journal

TOXICON
Volume 52, Issue 1, Pages 101-105

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.toxicon.2008.05.004

Keywords

Conus pulicarius; alpha-conotoxins; cDNA libraries; salivary gland; alpha 4/7; conopeptide; exogenomics

Funding

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [P01 GM048677, P01 GM048677-130011, 3 PO1 GM048677, P01 GM048677-13S1] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To date, studies conducted on cone snail venoms have attributed the origins of this complex mixture of neuroactive peptides entirely to gene expression by the secretory cells lining the lumen of the venom duct. However, specialized tissues such as the salivary glands also secrete their contents into the anterior gut and could potentially contribute some venom components injected into target animals; evidence supporting this possibility is reported here. Sequence analysis of a cDNA library created from a salivary gland of Conus pulicarius revealed the expression of two transcripts whose predicted gene products, after post-translational processing, strikingly resemble mature conopeptides belonging to the alpha-conotoxin family. These two transcripts, like a-conotoxin transcripts, putatively encode mature peptides containing the conserved A-superfamily cysteine pattern (CC-C-C) but the highly conserved A-superfamily signal sequences were not present. Analysis of A-superfamily members expressed in the venom duct of the same C. pulicarius specimens revealed three putative a-conotoxin sequences; the salivary gland transcripts were not found in the venom duct cDNA library, suggesting that these alpha-conotoxins are salivary gland specific. Therefore, expression of conotoxin-like gene products by the salivary gland could potentially add to the complexity of Conus venoms. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available