Mitochondrial translation in trypanosomatids: a novel target for chemotherapy?

Trypanosomatids cause widespread disease in humans and animals. Treatment of many of these diseases is hampered by the lack of efficient and safe drugs. New strategies for drug development are therefore urgently needed. It has long been known that the single mitochondrion of trypanosomatids exhibits many unique features. Recently, the mitochondrial translation machinery of trypanosomatids has been the focus of several studies, which revealed interesting variations to the mammalian system. It is the aim of this article to review these unique features and to discuss them in the larger biological context. It is our opinion that some of these features represent promising novel targets for chemotherapeutic intervention that should be studied in more detail.

Mitochondrial tRNA import and its consequences for mitochondrial translation

The mitochondrial genomes of most eukaryotes lack a variable number of tRNA genes. This lack is compensated for by import of a small fraction of the corresponding cytosolic tRNAs. There are two broad mechanisms for the import of tRNAs into mitochondria. In the first one, the tRNA is coimported together with a mitochondrial precursor protein along the protein import pathway. It applies to the yeast tRNA(Lys) and has been elucidated in great detail. In the second more vaguely defined mechanism, which is mainly found in plants and protozoa, tRNAs are directly imported independent of cytosolic factors. However, results in plants indicate that direct import of tRNAs may nevertheless require some components of the protein import machinery. All imported tRNAs in all systems are of the eukaryotic type but need to be functionally integrated into the mitochondrial translation system of bacterial descent. For some tRNAs, this is not trivial and requires unique evolutionary adaptations.

Conservation of the RNA Transport Machineries and Their Coupling to Translation Control across Eukaryotes

Restriction of proteins to discrete subcellular regions is a common mechanism to establish cellular asymmetries and depends on a coordinated program of mRNA localization and translation control. Many processes from the budding of a yeast to the establishment of metazoan embryonic axes and the migration of human neurons, depend on this type of cell polarization. How factors controlling transport and translation assemble to regulate at the same time the movement and translation of transported mRNAs, and whether these mechanisms are conserved across kingdoms is not yet entirely understood. In this review we will focus on some of the best characterized examples of mRNA transport machineries, the "yeast locasome" as an example of RNA transport and translation control in unicellular eukaryotes, and on the Drosophila Bic-D/Egl/Dyn RNA localization machinery as an example of RNA transport in higher eukaryotes. This focus is motivated by the relatively advanced knowledge about the proteins that connect the localizing mRNAs to the transport motors and the many well studied proteins involved in translational control of specific transcripts that are moved by these machineries. We will also discuss whether the core of these RNA transport machineries and factors regulating mRNA localization and translation are conserved across eukaryotes.

No difference in anterior tibial translation with and without posterior cruciate ligament in less invasive total knee replacement

The relative advantages of cruciate retaining or cruciate resecting total knee replacement are still controversial. If the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) is preserved, it should be properly balanced. In a previous study, it was demonstrated that increasing the flexion gap leads to an anterior translation of the tibia relative to the femur. Based on these results, we hypothesized that cutting the PCL increases the flexion gap and lessens anterior tibial translation.

Eukaryotic translation elongation factor 1A (eEF1A) domain I from S. cerevisiae is required but not sufficient for inter-species complementation

Ethanolamine phosphoglycerol (EPG) is a protein modification attached exclusively to eukaryotic elongation factor 1A (eEF1A). In mammals and plants, EPG is linked to conserved glutamate residues located in eEF1A domains II and III, whereas in the unicellular eukaryote Trypanosoma brucei, only domain III is modified by a single EPG. A biosynthetic precursor of EPG and structural requirements for EPG attachment to T. brucei eEF1A have been reported, but nothing is known about the EPG modifying enzyme(s). By expressing human eEF1A in T. brucei, we now show that EPG attachment to eEF1A is evolutionarily conserved between T. brucei and Homo sapiens. In contrast, S. cerevisiae eEF1A, which has been shown to lack EPG is not modified in T. brucei. Furthermore, we show that eEF1A cannot functionally complement across species when using T. brucei and S. cerevisiae as model organisms. However, functional complementation in yeast can be obtained using eEF1A chimera containing domains II or III from other species. In contrast, yeast domain I is strictly required for functional complementation in S. cerevisiae.

Translation from research to applications

The article summarizes the collective views expressed at the fourth session of the workshop Tissue Engineering-the Next Generation, which was devoted to the translation of results of tissue engineering research into applications. Ernst Hunziker described the paradigm of a dual translational approach, and argued that tissue engineering should be guided by the dimensions and physiological setting of the bodily compartment to be repaired. Myron Spector discussed collagen-glycosaminoglycan (GAG) scaffolds for musculoskeletal tissue engineering. Jeanette Libera focused on the biological and clinical aspects of cartilage tissue engineering, and described a completely autologous procedure for engineering cartilage using the patient's own chondrocytes and blood serum. Arthur Gertzman reviewed the applications of allograft tissues in orthopedic surgery, and outlined the potential of allograft tissues as models for biological and medical studies. Savio Woo discussed a list of functional tissue engineering approaches designed to restore the biochemical and biomechanical properties of injured ligaments and tendons to be closer to that of the normal tissues. Specific examples of using biological scaffolds that have chemoattractants as well as growth factors with unique contact guidance properties to improve their healing process were shown. Anthony Ratcliffe discussed the translation of the results of research into products that are profitable and meet regulatory requirements. Michael Lysaght challenged the proposition that commercial and clinical failures of early tissue engineering products demonstrate a need for more focus on basic research. Arthur Coury described the evolution of tissue engineering products based on the example of Genzyme, and how various definitions of success and failure can affect perceptions and policies relative to the status and advancement of the field of tissue engineering.