4.4 Review

Biochemistry, toxicology and ecology of the venom of the spider Cupiennius salei (Ctenidae)

期刊

TOXICON
卷 43, 期 5, 页码 543-553

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.toxicon.2004.02.009

关键词

CSTX; neurotoxins; cupiennins; cytolytic peptides; amino acid sequences; synergism; spider; apocrine venom gland; LD50; venom regeneration; venom economy; venom optimisation hypothesis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The venom of Cupiennius salei consists of many low molecular compounds, nine neurotoxic acting peptides (CSTX), at least eight neurotoxic and cytolytic acting peptides (cupiennins), a highly active hyaluronidase, and several hitherto unidentified proteins. The structure of several peptides is given. A synergistic action between three main groups is proposed: injected into the prey tissue, the enzyme hyaluronidase acts as a spreading factor, thus, facilitating a better access of venom neurotoxins to their targets, cupiennins disturb cell membranes and influence cell excitability, through this augmenting the mere neurotoxic effect of CSTX-1 synergistically. The venom glands of an apocrine secretion type provide an average of 12 mul per milking (adult female). Venom sensitivity of arthropods differs between 0.001 and > 20 nl venom/mg insect. Regeneration time of an empty venom gland is approx. 2 weeks. Consequently, spiders may encounter situations in which they have to decide whether their limited venom storage is sufficient to kill a given prey item. Experiments are presented which show that C. salei knows the actual venom content of its venom glands. It injects no more venom than necessary. This coincides with an experimentally determined LD50 value in harmless prey items, but C. salei injects more venom in aggressive or otherwise dangerous prey items (quantification of injected venom amounts by monoclonal antibodies). These results indicate that C. salei uses its venom as economically as possible and this supports our venom optimisation hypothesis. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据