The covalent binding story of the complement proteins C3 and C4 (I) 1972-1981.

Alex Law and Paul Levine recall their work to establish the covalent bond between C3 and target surfaces. It started with a naive experiment by analyzing the membrane polypeptides of sheep erythrocytes bound with 125I-labelled C3. They found complexes with molecular weight higher than the individual C3 polypeptides. These complexes survived all conditions designed to disrupt non-covalent interactions. They then showed that the bond was an ester, with an active acyl group on C3 which reacted with a hydroxyl group on the acceptor molecule. With the discovery of an internal thioester by Jim Prahl, Jamila Janatova, Brian Tack and their colleagues, it became clear that the reaction was by an acyl transfer from the thioester of C3 to the target hydroxyl group. Later on they showed that C4 also bound covalently to target molecules. By establishing a fluid phase system to study the kinetics of the binding reactions of C3 and C4, Alex was able to continue the work in the MRC Immunochemistry Unit in Oxford from 1981, to eventually determine the chemical mechanism of the binding reaction. In order to give some sense of reality, this article is written as a narrative from Alex, who did the experiments. Both Alex and Paul are retired. Pauls lives on Martha's Vineyard where he writes occasional articles on science for one of the Island's newspapers. Alex lives in Hong Kong and tries to make some sense of the local politics.

Microarray karyotyping of commercial wine yeast strains reveals shared, as well as unique, genomic signatures.

BACKGROUND: Genetic differences between yeast strains used in wine-making may account for some of the variation seen in their fermentation properties and may also produce differing sensory characteristics in the final wine product itself. To investigate this, we have determined genomic differences among several Saccharomyces cerevisiae wine strains by using a "microarray karyotyping" (also known as "array-CGH" or "aCGH") technique. RESULTS: We have studied four commonly used commercial wine yeast strains, assaying three independent isolates from each strain. All four wine strains showed common differences with respect to the laboratory S. cerevisiae strain S288C, some of which may be specific to commercial wine yeasts. We observed very little intra-strain variation; i.e., the genomic karyotypes of different commercial isolates of the same strain looked very similar, although an exception to this was seen among the Montrachet isolates. A moderate amount of inter-strain genomic variation between the four wine strains was observed, mostly in the form of depletions or amplifications of single genes; these differences allowed unique identification of each strain. Many of the inter-strain differences appear to be in transporter genes, especially hexose transporters (HXT genes), metal ion sensors/transporters (CUP1, ZRT1, ENA genes), members of the major facilitator superfamily, and in genes involved in drug response (PDR3, SNQ1, QDR1, RDS1, AYT1, YAR068W). We therefore used halo assays to investigate the response of these strains to three different fungicidal drugs (cycloheximide, clotrimazole, sulfomethuron methyl). Strains with fewer copies of the CUP1 loci showed hypersensitivity to sulfomethuron methyl. CONCLUSION: Microarray karyotyping is a useful tool for analyzing the genome structures of wine yeasts. Despite only small to moderate variations in gene copy numbers between different wine yeast strains and within different isolates of a given strain, there was enough variation to allow unique identification of strains; additionally, some of the variation correlated with drug sensitivity. The relatively small number of differences seen by microarray karyotyping between the strains suggests that the differences in fermentative and organoleptic properties ascribed to these different strains may arise from a small number of genetic changes, making it possible to test whether the observed differences do indeed confer different sensory properties in the finished wine.