4.6 Article

Role of proteolysis in determining potency of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ac δ-endotoxin

期刊

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 66, 期 12, 页码 5174-5181

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.66.12.5174-5181.2000

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bacillus thuringiensis protein delta -endotoxins are toxic to a variety of different insect species. Larvicidal potency depends on the completion of a number of steps in the mode of action of the toxin, Here, we investigated the role of proteolytic processing in determining the potency of the B, thuringiensis Cry1Ac delta -endotoxin towards Pieris brassicae (family: Pieridae) and Mamestra brassicae (family: Noctuidae), In bioassays, Cry1Ac was over 2,000 times more active against P, brassicae than against M, brassicae larvae. Using gut juice purified from both insects, we processed Cry1Ac to soluble forms that had the same N terminus and the same apparent molecular weight. However, extended proteolysis of Cry1Ac in vitro with proteases from both insects resulted in the formation of an insoluble aggregate. With proteases from P, brassicae, the Cry1Ac-susceptible insect, Cry1Ac was processed to an insoluble product with a molecular mass of similar to 56 kDa, whereas proteases from M, brassicae, the non-susceptible insect, generated products with molecular masses of similar to 58, similar to 40, and similar to 20 M)a, N-terminal sequencing of the insoluble products revealed that both insects cleaved Cry1Ac within domain I, but M, brassicae proteases also cleaved the toxin at Arg423 in domain II. A similar pattern of processing was observed in vivo. When Arg423 was replaced with Gin or Ser, the resulting mutant toxins resisted degradation by M, brassicae proteases, However, this mutation had little effect on toxicity to M, brassicae, Differential processing of membrane-bound Cry1Ac was also observed in qualitative binding experiments performed with brush border membrane vesicles from the two insects and in midguts isolated from toxin-treated insects.

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

4.6
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