4.7 Review

Functional and Structural Variation among Sticholysins, Pore-Forming Proteins from the Sea Anemone Stichodactyla helianthus

Journal

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms21238915

Keywords

actinoporins; cholesterol; cnidaria; leakage; sphingomyelin; venom

Funding

  1. Sigrid Juselius Foundation
  2. Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation
  3. Magnus Ehrnrooth Foundation
  4. UCM-Banco Santander grants [PR75/18-21561, PR87/19-22556]
  5. ISB/AA
  6. UCM-Banco Santander fellowship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Venoms constitute complex mixtures of many different molecules arising from evolution in processes driven by continuous prey-predator interactions. One of the most common compounds in these venomous cocktails are pore-forming proteins, a family of toxins whose activity relies on the disruption of the plasmatic membranes by forming pores. The venom of sea anemones, belonging to the oldest lineage of venomous animals, contains a large amount of a characteristic group of pore-forming proteins known as actinoporins. They bind specifically to sphingomyelin-containing membranes and suffer a conformational metamorphosis that drives them to make pores. This event usually leads cells to death by osmotic shock. Sticholysins are the actinoporins produced by Stichodactyla helianthus. Three different isotoxins are known: Sticholysins I, II, and III. They share very similar amino acid sequence and three-dimensional structure but display different behavior in terms of lytic activity and ability to interact with cholesterol, an important lipid component of vertebrate membranes. In addition, sticholysins can act in synergy when exerting their toxin action. The subtle, but important, molecular nuances that explain their different behavior are described and discussed throughout the text. Improving our knowledge about sticholysins behavior is important for eventually developing them into biotechnological tools.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available