Nitrogen recycling through the gut and the nitrogen economy of ruminants: An asynchronous symbiosis

The extensive development of the ruminant forestomach sets apart their N economy from that of nonruminants in a number of respects. Extensive pregastric fermentation alters the profile of protein reaching the small intestine, largely through the transformation of nitrogenous compounds into microbial protein. This process is fueled primarily by carbohydrate fermentation and includes extensive recycling of N between the body and gut lumen pools. Nitrogen recycling occurs via blood and gut lumen exchanges of urea and NH3, as well as endogenous gut and secretory N entry into the gut lumen, and the subsequent digestion and absorption of microbial and endogenous protein. Factors controlling urea transfer to the gut from blood, including the contributions of urea transporters, remain equivocal. Ammonia produced by microbial degradation of urea and dietary and endogenous AA is utilized by microbial fermentation or absorbed and primarily converted to urea. Therefore, microbial growth and carbohydrate fermentation affect the extent of NH3 absorption and urea N recycling and excretion. The extensive recycling of N to the rumen represents an evolutionary advantage of the ruminant in terms of absorbable protein supply during periods of dietary protein deficiency, or asynchronous carbohydrate and protein supply, but incurs a cost of greater N intakes, especially in terms of excess N excretion. Efforts to improve the efficiency of N utilization in ruminants by synchronizing fermentable energy and N availability have generally met with limited success with regards to production responses. In contrast, imposing asynchrony through oscillating dietary protein concentration, or infrequent supplementation, surprisingly has not negatively affected production responses unless the frequency of supplementation is less than once every 3 d. In some cases, oscillation of dietary protein concentration has improved N retention compared with animals fed an equal amount of dietary protein on a daily basis. This may reflect benefits of Orn cycle adaptations and sustained recycling of urea to the gut. The microbial symbiosis of the ruminant is inherently adaptable to asynchronous N and energy supply. Recycling of urea to the gut buffers the effect of irregular dietary N supply such that intuitive benefits of rumen synchrony in terms of the efficiency of N utilization are typically not observed in practice.

Mechanisms of internalization and recycling of the chemokine receptor, CCR5

CCR5 is a G protein-coupled receptor that binds several natural chemokines but it is also a coreceptor for the entry of M tropic strains of HIV-1 into cells. Levels of CCR5 on the cell surface are important for the rate of HIV-1 infection and are determined by a number of factors including the rates of CCR5 internalization and recycling. Here we investigated the involvement of the actin cytoskeleton in the control of ligand-induced internalization and recycling of CCR5. Cytochalasin D, an actin depolymerizing agent, inhibited chemokine-induced internalization of CCR5 and recycling of the receptor in stably transfected CHO cells and in the monocytic cell line, THP-1. CCR5 internalization and recycling were inhibited by Toxin B and C-3 exoenzyme treatment in CHO and THP-1 cells, confirming activation of members of the RhoGTPase family by CCR5. The specific Rho kinase inhibitor Y27632, however, had no effect on CCR5 internalization or recycling. Ligand-induced activation of CCR5 leads to Rho kinase-dependent formation of focal adhesion complexes. These data indicate that CCR5 internalization and recycling are regulated by actin polymerization and activation of small G proteins in a Rho-dependent manner.

Lessons learnt about water use, harvesting, recycling and drainage

This Information Paper is the third in a four-part series that looks at the lessons learnt from the BRE Innovation Park concerning compliance with the Code for Sustainable Homes published in November 2006. It focuses on water use, harvesting, recycling and drainage. The other parts deal with: building fabric; energy sources, overheating and ventilation; architecture, construction and sourcing.

Endothelin-converting enzyme 1 degrades neuropeptides in endosomes to control receptor recycling

Neuropeptide signaling requires the presence of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) at the cell surface. Activated GPCRs interact with beta-arrestins, which mediate receptor desensitization, endocytosis, and mitogenic signaling, and the peptide-receptor-arrestin complex is sequestered into endosomes. Although dissociation of beta-arrestins is required for receptor recycling and resensitization, the critical event that initiates this process is unknown. Here we report that the agonist availability in the endosomes, controlled by the membrane metalloendopeptidase endothelin-converting enzyme 1 (ECE-1), determines stability of the peptide-receptor-arrestin complex and regulates receptor recycling and resensitization. Substance P (SP) binding to the tachykinin neurokinin 1 receptor (NK1R) induced membrane translocation of beta-arrestins followed by trafficking of the SP-NK1R-beta-arrestin complex to early endosomes containing ECE-1a-d. ECE-1 degraded SP in acidified endosomes, disrupting the complex; beta-arrestins returned to the cytosol, and the NK1R, freed from beta-arrestins, recycled and resensitized. An ECE-1 inhibitor, by preventing NK1R recycling in endothelial cells, inhibited resensitization of SP-induced inflammation. This mechanism is a general one because ECE-1 similarly regulated NK3R resensitization. Thus, peptide availability in endosomes, here regulated by ECE-1, determines the stability of the peptide-receptor-arrestin complex. This mechanism regulates receptor recycling, which is necessary for sustained signaling, and it may also control beta-arrestin-dependent mitogenic signaling of endocytosed receptors. We propose that other endosomal enzymes and transporters may similarly control the availability of transmitters in endosomes to regulate trafficking and signaling of GPCRs. Antagonism of these endosomal processes represents a strategy for inhibiting sustained signaling of receptors, and defects may explain the tachyphylaxis of drugs that are receptor agonists.