Cell Fine Structure: An Atlas of Drawings of Whole-Cell Structure.

1973 ◽  
Vol 131 (2) ◽  
pp. 310
Author(s):  
George D. Lundberg

Mendel discovered the particulate nature of hereditary factors and the rules of their transmission without knowledge of chromosomes. Indeed, much of the classical knowledge of heredity was obtained without reference to any cell structure. When, in the 1920’s, chromosomes were established as the carriers of the linear order of genes, many questions beyond the formal analysis of order and transmission could be tackled. Structural analysis, it was hoped, would soon reveal the mechanism of genetic crossing-over and chromosome replication and chemical studies of chromosomes were expected to give information on the nature of the gene. It turned out, however, that the light microscope could not reveal the organization of chromosomes and that their chemical nature was so complex that it prevented the recognition of the substance of the gene. Progress in chemical genetics became possible only after genetic analysis was extended to viruses and bacteria, organisms which do not have true chromosomes but a much simpler genetic system. Now DNA , already suspected of having something to do with the gene because of its constant association with chromosomes, could be established as the molecular basis of heredity. Above all, it was the recognition of the molecular structure of DNA which provided the understanding of the nature of genetic specificity and its expression in cellular synthesis, and suggested mechanisms for its replication. Viruses and bacteria provided the ideal material for analysis of the basic properties of a genetic system since here the genome consists of a single DNA molecule. It has been recognized for some time that bacteria and the related blue-green algae possess an unusual nuclear organization. The term prokaryotes has been used to distinguish these organisms, from the eukaryote animal and plant cells with typical chromosomes and mitotic division (Dougherty 1957; Ris & Chandler 1963). These terms are useful since they stress a real difference in the complexity of the genetic systems of the two cell types. How has the knowledge gained from the study of micro-organisms helped us in understanding the chromosome? It appears that the basic properties of the genetic system such as the coding for amino acids by the nucleotide sequence of the DNA and its transcription into RNA are alike in prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Nevertheless, the great difference in structural complexity of the two kinds of nuclei must signify some interesting modifications in their operations. It seems to me Important that this difference be recognized in terminology. Since the term chromosome' has been applied to the complex nucleoprotein structure of the ekaryote nucleus, it is unwise to use it also for the DNA molecule of viruses or cteria. I have, therefore, suggested ‘genophore’ as a general term to designate e physical counterpart of a linkage group (Ris 1961). How does a chromosome ffer from the genophore of a bacterial cell? From chemical studies, we know at in addition to DNA a chromosome contains considerable amounts of protein, particularly basic proteins of relatively small molecular weight (histones). In most nuclei, more complex proteins are also associated with chromosomes in variable amounts. What are the roles of these proteins? The chromosome complement of mammals contains about a thousand times as much DNA as a bacterial genophore. Does the histone serve to reversibly coil and condense the long DNA read into a manageable form? It has been suggested that histones act to repress ecific genes. What controls their specific association with DNA and how does is affect chromosome structure? In the light microscope, the chromosome appears ultistranded, and yet during replication it seems to behave in a semi-concervative manner analogous to a single DNA molecule. How can the DNA in a chromosome replicate in the same way as a bacterial genophore since it is many mes longer and in a complex association with protein? Obviously, before we can understand the basic processes of chromosomes, such as their replication and conformational changes during activation of RNA synthesis, we must have a clear understanding of chromosome organization at the molecular level. When the ectron microscope began to reveal the fine structure of cytoplasmic organelles, was hoped that it would soon solve the problems of chromosome organization. While it has shown some interesting details, we must admit that it has not yet answered any of the basic questions. As Porter said some years ago: ‘The nucleus both during interphase and mitosis has come to be regarded as one of the most difficult of biological objects to study by methods of electron microscopy' (Porter 1960). Other methods such as X-ray diffraction and polarizing microscopy have also offered promise here or there without giving final answers to the basic questions. Even though it is as yet impossible to propose a satisfactory model for the chromosome, it might prove useful to review what sort of structures have been revealed by these techniques, how these structures might be related to chromosome function, and what major problems remain unsolved.


2001 ◽  
Vol 668 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor Konovalov ◽  
Jürgen Penndorf ◽  
Michael Winkler ◽  
Olaf Tober

ABSTRACTThin film solar cells obtained by the “CIS on copper tape” technique are investigated. This technique promises a high throughput capability, but the efficiency of the cells is still about 5 % only. The model of the band structure of the absorber has been introduced into the model of the whole cell. Parameters of the model were determined experimentally by use of quantitative EBIC profiling, C-V doping profiling, Hall measurements, and AFM. The structure has been simulated using SCAPS-1D software. Results of the simulation show a good correlation to the measured I-V and DSR data of the cell. The benefits and drawbacks of the cell structure as well as factors limiting its efficiency are discussed.


2013 ◽  
Vol 53 (supplement1-2) ◽  
pp. S261
Author(s):  
Rina Nagai ◽  
Keisuke Ohta ◽  
Kazuhiro Aoyama ◽  
Akinobu Togo ◽  
Akihiro Kawamoto ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
V. P. COLLINS ◽  
U. T. BRUNK ◽  
B.-A. FREDRIKSSON ◽  
B. WESTERMARK

BMJ ◽  
1971 ◽  
Vol 4 (5783) ◽  
pp. 371-371
Author(s):  
W. J. Hamilton
Keyword(s):  

2005 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 381-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel T. Noble ◽  
Stephen B. Weisberg

Monitoring of recreational beaches for fecal indicator bacteria is currently performed using culture-based technology that can require more than a day for laboratory analysis, during which time swimmers are at risk. Here we review new methods that have the potential to reduce the measurement period to less than an hour. These methods generally involve two steps. The first is target capture, in which the microbial group of interest (or some molecular/chemical/or biochemical signature of the group) is removed, tagged or amplified to differentiate it from the remaining material in the sample. We discuss three classes of capture methods: 1) Surface and whole-cell recognition methods, including immunoassay techniques and molecule-specific probes; 2) Nucleic acid methods, including polymerase chain reaction (PCR), quantitative PCR (Q-PCR), nucleic acid sequence based amplification (NASBA) and microarrays; and 3) Enzyme/substrate methods utilizing chromogenic or fluorogenic substrates. The second step is detection, in which optical, electrochemical or piezoelectric technologies are used to quantify the captured, tagged or amplified material. The biggest technological hurdle for all of these methods is sensitivity, as EPA's recommended bathing water standard is less than one cell per ml and most detection technologies measure sample volumes less than 1 ml. This challenge is being overcome through addition of preconcentration or enrichment steps, which have the potential to boost sensitivity without the need to develop new detector technology. The second hurdle is demonstrating a relationship to health risk, since most new methods are based on measuring cell structure without assessing viability and may not relate to current water quality standards that were developed in epidemiology studies using culture-based methods. Enzyme/substrate methods may be the first rapid methods adopted because they are based on the same capture technology as currently-approved EPA methods and their relationship to health risk can be established by demonstrating equivalency to existing procedures. Demonstration of equivalency may also be possible for some surface and whole-cell recognition methods that capture bacteria in a potentially viable state. Nucleic acid technologies are the most versatile, but measure nonviable structure and will require inclusion in epidemiological studies to link their measurement with health risk.


Parasitology ◽  
1967 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gwendolen Rees

The cyst wall of Parorchis acanthus Nicoll, consists of an outer wall of three layers and an inner wall of two layers. The outer wall is hemispherical, complete, attached to the substratum and extends as a flange around the margin. The composition of its three layers differ dorsally and ventrally. Dorsally the layers are: (1) acid mucopolysaccharide and neutral mucopolysaccharide, (2) protein and lipoprotein, (3) acid mucopolysaccharide, neutral mucopolysaccharide and glyco-protein. Ventrally the layers are: (1) acid mucopolysaccharide, protein and lipoprotein, (2) acid mucopolysaccharide. The middle layer in both is secreted by the ventral granular cystogenous glands and the outer and inner layers, dorsally and ventrally, by the dorsal and ventral agranular cystogenous glands respectively.The inner cyst wall is oval in surface view. It consists of two layers, both of neutral mucopolysaccharide, the outer giving a more pronounced reaction. Both are secreted by the dorsal granular cystogenous glands. The ventral wall is strengthened by a secretion from the plug-forming gland cells and consists of neutral mucopolysaccharide. All the layers of the cyst wall show the same histochemical reactions as the glands which secrete them.Studies on the fine structure of the cercaria have revealed mammalian-type synapses in the neuropile of the central nervous system, rind cells around the ganglia, an elaborate arrangement of muscles in the wall of the oral sucker, the flame cell structure and the structure of the granules contributing to the formation of the cyst wall.


PeerJ ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. e2363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Buket Yazicioglu ◽  
Přemek Hamr ◽  
Pavel Kozák ◽  
Antonín Kouba ◽  
Hamid Niksirat

The ultrastructure of spermatozoa in three species of cambarid crayfish,Cambarus robustus,Orconectes propinquus, andOrconectes rusticus, were studied and compared with eight previously studied species from different crayfish families using morphological features and biometrical data. The ultrastructure of spermatozoa show a generally conserved pattern including an acrosome and nucleus in the anterior and posterior parts of the cell, respectively, radial arms that wrap around the nucleus, and the whole cell is enclosed by an extracellular capsule. The most outstanding morphological feature in spermatozoa of three studied cambarid crayfish is the crest-like protrusions in the anterior part of the acrosome that can be used as one of the features for distinguishing the members of this family. Results of biometrical data reveal that acrosome size in the representatives of Parastacidae are the smallest, while representatives of Astacidae show the biggest acrosome. The acrosome size in species belonging to Cambaridae occupy an intermediate position between the two other families of freshwater crayfish. In conclusion, a combination of morphological features and biometrical data of spermatozoa can help distinguishing different species of the freshwater crayfish.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document