Reaction of glucose catalyzed by framework and extraframework tin sites in zeolite beta

The isomerization of glucose into fructose is a large-scale reaction for the production of high-fructose corn syrup, and is now being considered as an intermediate step in the possible route of biomass conversion into fuels and chemicals. Recently, it has been shown that a hydrophobic, large pore, silica molecular sieve having the zeolite beta structure and containing framework Sn⁴⁺ (Sn-Beta) is able to isomerize glucose into fructose in aqueous media. Here, I have investigated how this catalyst converts glucose to fructose and show that it is analogous to that achieved with metalloenzymes. Specifically, glucose partitions into the molecular sieve in the pyranose form, ring opens to the acyclic form in the presence of the Lewis acid center (framework Sn⁴⁺), isomerizes into the acyclic form of fructose and finally ring closes to yield the furanose product. Akin to the metalloenzyme, the isomerization step proceeds by intramolecular hydride transfer from C2 to C1. Extraframework tin oxides located within hydrophobic channels of the molecular sieve that exclude liquid water can also isomerize glucose to fructose in aqueous media, but do so through a base-catalyzed proton abstraction mechanism. Extraframework tin oxide particles located at the external surface of the molecular sieve crystals or on amorphous silica supports are not active in aqueous media but are able to perform the isomerization in methanol by a base-catalyzed proton abstraction mechanism. Post-synthetic exchange of Na⁺ with Sn-Beta alters the glucose reaction pathway from the 1,2 intramolecular hydrogen shift (isomerization) to produce fructose towards the 1,2 intramolecular carbon shift (epimerization) that forms mannose. Na⁺ remains exchanged onto silanol groups during reaction in methanol solvent, leading to a near complete shift in selectivity towards glucose epimerization to mannose. In contrast, decationation occurs during reaction in aqueous solutions and gradually increases the reaction selectivity to isomerization at the expense of epimerization. Decationation and concomitant changes in selectivity can be eliminated by addition of NaCl to the aqueous reaction solution. Thus, framework tin sites with a proximal silanol group are the active sites for the 1, 2 intramolecular hydride shift in the isomerization of glucose to fructose, while these sites with Na-exchanged silanol group are the active sites for the 1, 2 intramolecular carbon shift in epimerization of glucose to mannose.

How resources control aggression in Drosophila

How animals use sensory information to weigh the risks vs. benefits of behavioral decisions remains poorly understood. Inter-male aggression is triggered when animals perceive both the presence of an appetitive resource, such as food or females, and of competing conspecific males. How such signals are detected and integrated to control the decision to fight is not clear. Here we use the vinegar fly, Drosophila melanogaster, to investigate the manner in which food and females promotes aggression.

In the first chapter, we explore how food controls aggression. As in many other species, food promotes aggression in flies, but it is not clear whether food increases aggression per se, or whether aggression is a secondary consequence of increased social interactions caused by aggregation of flies on food. Furthermore, nothing is known about how animals evaluate the quality and quantity of food in the context of competition. We show that food promotes aggression independently of any effect to increase the frequency of contact between males. Food increases aggression but not courtship between males, suggesting that the effect of food on aggression is specific. Next, we show that flies tune the level of aggression according to absolute amount of food rather than other parameters, such as area or concentration of food. Sucrose, a sugar molecule present in many fruits, is sufficient to promote aggression, and detection of sugar via gustatory receptor neurons is necessary for food-promoted aggression. Furthermore, we show that while food is necessary for aggression, too much food decreases aggression. Finally, we show that flies exhibit strategies consistent with a territorial strategy. These data suggest that flies use sweet-sensing gustatory information to guide their decision to fight over a limited quantity of a food resource.

Following up on the findings of the first chapter, we asked how the presence of a conspecific female resource promotes male-male aggression. In the absence of food, group-housed male flies, who normally do not fight even in the presence of food, fight in the presence of females. Unlike food, the presence of females strongly influences proximity between flies. Nevertheless, as group-housed flies do not fight even when they are in small chambers, it is unlikely that the presence of female indirectly increases aggression by first increasing proximity. Unlike food, the presence of females also leads to large increases in locomotion and in male-female courtship behaviors, suggesting that females may influence aggression as well as general arousal. Female cuticular hydrocarbons are required for this effect, as females that do not produce CH pheromones are unable to promote male-male aggression. In particular, 7,11-HD––a female-specific cuticular hydrocarbon pheromone critical for male-female courtship––is sufficient to mediate this effect when it is perfumed onto pheromone-deficient females or males. Recent studies showed that ppk23⁺ GRNs label two population of GRNs, one of which detects male cuticular hydrocarbons and another labeled by ppk23 and ppk25, which detects female cuticular hydrocarbons. I show that in particular, both of these GRNs control aggression, presumably via detection of female or male pheromones. To further investigate the ways in which these two classes of GRNs control aggression, I developed new genetic tools to independently test the male- and female-sensing GRNs. I show that ppk25-LexA and ppk25-GAL80 faithfully recapitulate the expression pattern of ppk25-GAL4 and label a subset of ppk23⁺ GRNs. These tools can be used in future studies to dissect the respective functions of male-sensing and female-sensing GRNs in male social behaviors.

Finally, in the last chapter, I discuss quantitative approaches to describe how varying quantities of food and females could control the level of aggression. Flies show an inverse-U shaped aggressive response to varying quantities of food and a flat aggressive response to varying quantities of females. I show how two simple game theoretic models, “prisoner’s dilemma” and “coordination game” could be used to describe the level of aggression we observe. These results suggest that flies may use strategic decision-making, using simple comparisons of costs and benefits.

In conclusion, male-male aggression in Drosophila is controlled by simple gustatory cues from food and females, which are detected by gustatory receptor neurons. Different quantities of resource cues lead to different levels of aggression, and flies show putative territorial behavior, suggesting that fly aggression is a highly strategic adaptive behavior. How these resource cues are integrated with male pheromone cues and give rise to this complex behavior is an interesting subject, which should keep researchers busy in the coming years.