Slashdot Mirror
Bacteria More Virulent in Microgravity
Tortured Potato writes "Did you know that salmonella become more virulent in simulated microgravity? No one's sure why, either. Professor Cheryl Nickerson of Tulane University is hoping to find out why when an experiment with brewer's yeast gets sent up on a Russian Progress rocket to the Space Station next year."
Would it's ability to be more virulent possibly come from it's relative ease of travel with no gravity? Like somehow gravity 'slows' the virus down when it's on the planet or something...ok...this is where i trail off...
Go gentle on me.
May I be the first to volunteer to test the Brewers Yeast in space. Preferably in its fermented liquid state. I am especially interested if the space trip is free (as in Beer).
Ernie Dambach
"It is no small thing to celebrate a simple life -Tolkien
Life is a bit different in space, even for microbes. Research shows that the pattern of gene activity in some microbes differs in weightlessness, leading to differences in behavior. These differences could be behind a curious observation: the common food-borne pathogen salmonella becomes more virulent when grown in a form of simulated microgravity.
This news is little comfort to astronauts whose immune systems already function below par in weightlessness, making infection more likely. To help keep astronauts healthy and to better understand microbial infection in general, scientists want to know exactly which genes are affected by microgravity and why weightlessness--whether real or simulated--should cause these changes.
"Whenever you see the virulence of a microbe change in response to an environmental stimulus, that's a chance to learn something about how that pathogen causes disease," says Cheryl Nickerson, an expert in microbiology and immunology at Tulane University Health Sciences Center.
Nickerson and her colleagues hope that studying these changes could point out new ways to combat "bad" microbes with drugs and vaccines, both for the sake of astronauts and for people here on the ground. Using modern advances in biotechnology and the weightlessness provided by the International Space Station (ISS), they plan to explore the changes in gene expression experienced by microbes in the true weightlessness of spaceflight.
Their first experiment, called "Yeast GAP", will send genetically engineered brewer's yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) up to the space station aboard a Russian Progress rocket in 2004.
Brewer's yeast itself is not pathogenic. Nevertheless, "yeast cells make a great 'model organism' for this research because they're easily handled, thoroughly studied, and their genome has been completely mapped," says Nickerson, the principal investigator of Yeast GAP. Furthermore, brewer's yeast shares much of its DNA with infectious species of microscopic fungi and protozoans. "Also, the yeast's genome is relatively simple, which makes the results easier to analyze," she says.
Still, the challenge is formidable. The brewer's yeast genome contains 6,312 genes, each of which produces one of the proteins that constitute the molecular machinery of the cell. To get a grip on this immense complexity, the researchers will send up 6,312 variants of the single-celled yeast. Each variant has a different gene "knocked out" and replaced with a unique "barcode" pattern of custom-made DNA. This barcode DNA does not encode a protein; it merely serves as a tag distinguishing that particular variant from all the others.
"We mix all these different strains of yeast in a special growth apparatus (called the Group Activation Pack, hence the acronym GAP) and see which ones grow well in weightlessness," explains Timothy Hammond, co-investigator for Yeast GAP and a kidney specialist (nephrologist) at Tulane University Health Sciences Center and the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in New Orleans.
Suppose a yeast variant is missing some particular gene--let's call it "gene X." And suppose that variant fails to grow as well in space as it does on the ground. Such a result would imply that the missing gene X is an essential part of the yeast's response to microgravity.
That little nugget of knowledge would then help guide future research: scientists could target their experiments to see how the protein produced by gene X relates to the changes in various microbes' behaviors in space--including microbes that cause disease. It would also help to explain the explosion of STD's in the Ann Arbor MI area.
Why should any kind of cell behave differently in microgravity? No one's sure, but scientists have some ideas. For example: perhaps cells sense deformations in their sack-like membranes and respond to that signal. Cells cultured in 1-g normally settle to the bottom of their container and become flattened, while cells floating in weightlessness remain more round. That diff
CMDRTACO CHECK YOUR EMAIL!
Soon the biggest occupant of near space will be giant breweries, with giant pipes connecting them to the ground to feed beer-lovers all over the world.
You have to wonder if a russian rocket in outer space is the safest place for a "brewer's yeast experiment".
(apologies to russian readers for blatent stereotyping ;-)
If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
Comets are the interstellar sperm and planets are the eggs. The question is, where did the sperm come from and what sort of womb are we in?
If you want answers to these questions and more, visit Ron's page.
Anyone care to enlighten me as to what "Modeled Microgravity" is exactly? How do you simulate u-G?
Just wondering...
With the recent concerns regarding the overuse of antibiotics, when to take them, etc., knowing the difference between a virus and a bacteria is more important than ever.
Yet both of the articles use the term "virulent" to describe a bacteria.
Technically it's not wrong, but it's not real smart either. The world of biology needs an Asimov in my opinion. But what we continue to get are cross-eyed terms like "virulent bacteria", and/or sensationalist writing styles which conjure up images of mad scientists and mutant organisms, enough to cross the eyes of Joe Sixpack and Jane Soccermom, and jerk every knee in the Bible Belt.
Cosmology can't be the only branch that outputs an Elegant PR Guy from time to time can it?
Operator, give me the number for 911!
Less gravity = a larger three dimensional footprint within which to operate. It would be able to spread 'up' easier if you like.
Sure, thanks to microgravity you can now brew a new batch of beer every 6 hours. But be aware that your quality of life will take a huge nosedive if you drink it at that rate...
I'm sure we can't fully appreciate what blowing chunks in zero-gravity would be like, but suffice it to say it would be horrific, and you'd probably *never* be able to properly clean it up.
All in the name of curing a bacterial infection...
Just a thought...
What I would like to know is why more research isn't being done on artificial gravity. So many of the health problems encountered in LEO gravity cound be sidestepped if you just spin the damn craft.
I would love to know why some of the effort being spent on watching things get sick in 0g isn't being directed to something as simple as spinning a glorified beer keg in orbit with some mice in it.
Can someone tell me why this isn't being done?
Blaze a trail to the New World
an experiment with brewer's yeast gets sent up on a Russian Progress rocket to the Space Station next year
Next slashdot article:
Germans initiate a new space program, volunteer additional funding for the ISS.
"If you think you have things under control, you're not going fast enough." --Mario Andretti
Still not convinced that cells in a rotating bio-reactor are a good model for cells in an in vivo micro-gravitational environment, but at least "modeled micro-graviity" makes sense now!
Actually, the whole thing is discussed on the NASA page.
My question is one of money and priorities. While they're concerned about the shear effects, which don't take place in "real" microgravity, it seems like there would be better uses for the ISS' mass budget than an experiment which can be replicated to a large extent on the ground.
On the other hand, with only two crew members, the ISS isn't doing much these days other than maintaining its attitude. I guess an experiment like this, with minimal crew attention required, is all we can hope to achieve.
I'm rooting for the Chinese space program to start a new space race... 'cause until someone finds (and deploys) a way to make real money from manned space, the only space exploration my kids will be part of is watching communications satellites fly overhead.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
mmmm MicroGravity MicroBrew. Guess they'll have to skip the pretzels though and eat tortillas instead.
www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights
www.fairtax.org
Let's not forget these yeast are going to experience, what is it, 6.5 G's on launch? That's not the normal condition for yeast, so let's hope the control group gets some supergravity to make sure that it's really microgravity at work.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
If you could initiate negative g's, what would happen to the yeast? Sour beer?
How do you simulate u-G?
You use a rotating test chamber as shown in a figure from the fulltext. By rotating the chamber, gavity never acts in the same direction for very long and nothing settles out of solution. A second rotating chamber is oriented to let gravity work, while duplicating the effects of spin.
Personally, I am skeptical that bacteria really experience gravity. Bacteria are too small -- at that scale most "fluids" are effectively the consistency of molasses in January. I wonder if something as simple as light impacted their experiment. We shall see.....
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
prolly because they don't have to waste so much ...).
...
energy crawling around and can concentrate
more on reproducing (energy wise
prolly all da cell functions are also
more efficient because 70-90% of a cell
is water and in mcrogravity the molecules
are better "lubricated" / less friction
It would also help to explain the explosion of STD's in the Ann Arbor MI area.
Obviously not in article.