VENOM AND TOXINS FROM ARGIOPE LOBATA: ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL STUDIES

O. M. Klyuchko


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30970/sbi.1402.618

Abstract


The purpose of this study was to present experimental data on the action of venom and toxins from Argiope lobata spiders on the glutamate channel-receptor complex. Kainate was used as a glutamate channel-receptor complex agonist because it initiated non-inactivated inward ionic transmembrane electric currents in rat hippocampal membranes. Effects of antagonists can be studied on the background of such currents. Chemo-activated currents and glutamate channel-receptor complex antagonists from A. lobata were studied. Electrophysiological experiments were performed and all chemicals were applied to perfused hippocampal pyramidal neuronal membranes using the ’concentration-clamp’ technique. A conventional electronic circuit was used for single-electrode voltage-clamp recording. All substances under study – integral venom, argiopin, argiopinine 1, argiopinine 2 – demonstrated similar properties. The amplitudes of ionic currents activated by glutamate, kainate and quisqualate decreased after the application of these antagonists to the rat hippocampal membrane under the voltage-clamp conditions. The kinetics of currents’ activation and desensitization (in case of glutamate and quisqualate) were not affected by the antagonists. The effects of argiopin and integral venom were investigated within the concentrations of 5.10-8–1.10-2 mol/L and 10-4 g/mL, respectively. At these concentrations, neither integral venom, nor argiopin suppressed glutamate-, kainate-, quisqualate-activated currents completely. The amplitude of non-blocked integral venom components averaged 14.4% of the original value for kainate-activated currents. Argiopin reduced the amplitudes of kainate-activated currents to 19% of the control values. Argiopinine 1 and argiopinine 2 acted in a very similar way. Both substances caused reducing of glutamate- and kainate-activated ion currents amplitudes acting in small quantities of 10-5–10-6 mol/L. The differences between them were in the quantitative characteristics of the blocking action. Such effects as “dose–effect” dependency, the antagonists’ influences on activated and inactivated receptor; kinetics of the antagonists’ action and their removal, analysis of dissociation constants were studied under the antagonists’ influence. Conclusions about the mechanisms of the antagonists’ influence on glutamate channel-receptor complex, as well as a comparison of the caused effects were made.


Keywords


Araneidae, venom, toxin, glutamate receptor antagonist, transmemb­rane electric current

Full Text:

PDF

References


1. Akaike N., Kawai N., Kiskin N.I., Kljuchko E.M., Krishtal O.A., Tsyndrenko A.Ya. Spider toxin blocks excitatory amino acid responses in isolated hippocampal pyramidal neurons. Neurosci. Lett., 1987; 79: 326-330.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

2. Aramaki Y., Yashuhara T., Higashijima T., Yoshioka M, Miwa A. Kawai N., Nakajima T. Chemi­cal characterization of spider toxins JSTX and NSTX. Proc. Japan Academy, 1986; 62(9): 359-362.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

3. Bateman A., Boden P., Dell A., Duce I.R., Quicke D.L., Usherwood P.N.R. Postsynaptic block of a glutaminergic synapse by low molecular weight fraction of spider venom. Brain Res., 1985; 339(2): 237-244.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

4. Biner O., Trachsel C., Moser A., Kopp L., Langenegger N., Kämpfer U., von Ballmoos C., Nentwig W., Schürch S., Schaller J., Kuhn-Nentwig L. Isolation, N-glycosylations and Function of a Hyaluronidase-Like Enzyme from the Venom of the Spider Cupiennius salei. PLoS One, 2015; 10(12): e0143963.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

5. Budd T., Clinton P., Dell A., Duce I.R., Johnson S.J., Quicke D.L.J., Usherwood P.N.R., Usoh G. Isolation and characterisation of glutamate receptor antagonists from venoms of orb-web spiders. Brain Res., 1988; 448(2): 30-39.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

6. Casewell N.R., Wüster W., Vonk F.J., Harrison R.A., Fry B.G. Complex cocktails: the evolutionary novelty of venoms. Trends Ecol Evol, 2013; 28(4): 219-29.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

7. Cavigliasso F., Mathé-Hubert H., Kremmer L., Rebuf C., Gatti J.L., Malausa T., Colinet D., Poirié M. Rapid and Differential Evolution of the Venom Composition of a Parasitoid Wasp Depending on the Host Strain. Toxins (Basel), 2019; 11(11); 629.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

8. Cordell G.A., Brossi A. (Eds.). Chemistry and Pharmacology. The Alkaloids. USA: Acade­mic Press, 1994. 280 p.

9. Daly N.L., Wilson D. Structural diversity of arthropod venom toxins. Toxicon, 2018; 152: 46-56.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

10. Fortschritte der Chemie organischer Naturstoffe. In: Progress in the Chemistry of Organic Natural Products. (Ed.) W. Herz, G. W. Kirby, R. E. Moore, W Steglich, Ch. Tamm. USA: Springer Science & Business Media, 2012; 66: 332 p.

11. Grishin E. Spider toxins active on purinergic P2X3 receptor. Toxicon, 2016; 116: 72.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

12. Grishin E.V., Volkova T.M., Arseniev A.S. Antagonists of glutamate receptors from the venom of Argiope lobata spider. Bioorganicheskaya chimia, 1988; 14(7): 883-892. (In Russian)

13. Grishin E.V., Volkova T.M. Arsenyev A.S., Reshetova O.S., Onoprienko V.V., Magazanik L.G., Antonov S.M., Fedorova I.M. Structural and functional characteristics of argiopin - ion channel blocker from venom of spider Argiope lobata. Bioorganicheskaya chimia, 1986; 12(8): 1121-1124. (In Russian)

14. Hashimoto Y., Endo Y., Shudo K., Aramaki Y., Kawai N., Nakajima T. Synthesis of spider toxin JSTX-3 and its analogs. Tetrah. Lett., 1987; 28(30): 3511-3514.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

15. Herzig V. Arthropod assassins: Crawling biochemists with diverse toxin pharmacopeias. Toxi­con, 2019; 158: 33-37.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

16. Jackson H., Usherwood F.N.R. Spider toxins as tools for dissecting elements of excitatory amino acids transmission. Trends in Neurosci., 1988; 11(6): 278-283.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

17. Kachel H.S., Buckingham S.D., Sattelle D.B. Insect toxins - selective pharmacological tools and drug/chemical leads. Curr Opin Insect Sci, 2018; 30: 93-98.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

18. Kiskin N.I., Krishtal J.A., Tsyndrenko A.Ya. Excitatory amino acid receptors in hippocampal neurons: kainate fails to desensitize them. Neurosci Lett., 1986; 63(2): 225-230.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

19. Klyuchko O. M. Method of cells' dissociation. - Patent UA 130672 U, G01N 33/00, C12Q 1/02, C12N 15/00. Priority: 27.04.18, u201804668, Issued: 26.12.2018, Bull. 24, 7 p. (In Ukrainian)

20. Klyuchko O.M. Comparative analysis of Araneidae venoms and toxins: chemical structures and electrophysiological effects. Biol. Stud., 2020: 14(1); 89-104.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

21. Klyuchko O.M., Biletsky A.Ya. Computer recognition of chemical substances based on their electrophysiological characteristics. Biotechnologia Acta, 2019; 12(5): 5-28.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

22. Klyuchko O.M., Tsyndrenko A.Ya. Method of dissociation of hippocampal cells. Patent USSR 1370136, С12N 5/00. Priority: 31.01.1986; Issued: 30.01.1988, Bull. 4, 3 p. (In Russian)

23. Klyuchko O.M., Biletsky A.Ya., Navrotskyi D.O. Method of bio-sensor test system application. - Patent UA 129923 U, G01N33/00, G01N33/50, C12Q 1/02. Priority: 22.03.2018, u201802896, Issued: 26.11.2018, Bull. 22, 7p. (In Ukrainian)

24. Kusano T., Suzuki H. Polyamines: A Universal Molecular Nexus for Growth, Survival, and Specialized Metabolism. USA: Springer, 2015. 336 p.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

25. Lajoie D.M., Zobel-Thropp B.A., Delahaye J., Roberts S., Kumirov V.K., Bandarian V., Binford G.J., Cordes M.H.J. The chemistry and functional diversity of spider phospholipase D toxins. Toxicon, 2016; 116: 79.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar

26. Lee S.Y., Kim S.T., Jung J.K., Lee J.H. A comparison of spider communities in Bt and non-Bt rice fields. Environ Entomol, 2014; 43(3): 819-827.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

27. Murúa M.G., Vera M.A., Michel A., Casmuz A.S., Fatoretto J., Gastaminza G. Performance of Field-Collected Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Strains Exposed to Different Transgenic and Refuge Maize Hybrids in Argentina. J Insect Sci, 2019; 19(6): 21.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

28. Rádis-Baptista G., Konno K. Arthropod Venom Components and Their Potential Usage. Toxins (Basel), 2020; 12(2): 82.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

29. Senji Laxme R.R., Suranse V., Sunagar K. Arthropod venoms: biochemistry, ecology and evolution. Toxicon, 2019; 158: 84-103.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

30. Schwartz E.F., Mourão C.B., Moreira K.G., Camargos T.S., Mortari M.R. Arthropod venoms: a vast arsenal of insecticidal neuropeptides. Biopolymers, 2012; 98(4): 385-405.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

31. Walker A.A., Robinson S.D., Yeates D.K., Jin J., Baumann K., Dobson J., Fry B.G., King G.F. Entomo-venomics: the evolution, biology and biochemistry of insect venoms. Toxicon, 2018; 154: 15-27.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

32. Walker A.A., Rosenthal M., Undheim E.E.A., King G.F. Harvesting Venom Toxins from Assassin Bugs and Other Heteropteran Insects. J. Vis. Exp., 2018; (134): e57729.
CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2020 Studia Biologica

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.