The specific activities of Shiga-like toxin type II (SLT-II) and SLT-II-related toxins of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli differ when measured by Vero cell cytotoxicity but not by mouse lethality
Characteristically, enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC) strains produce Shiga-like toxin type I (SLT-I), SLT-II, or both of these immunologically distinct cytotoxins. No antigenic or receptor-binding variants of SLT-I have been identified, but a number of SLT-II-related toxins have been described. Because EHEC O91:H21 strain B2F1, which produces two SLT-II-related toxins, is exquisitely virulent in an orally infected, streptomycin-treated mouse model (oral 50% lethal dose [LD50], < 10 organisms), we asked whether the pathogenicity of strain B2F1 was a consequence of SLT-II-related toxin production. For this purpose, we compared the lethality of orally administered E. coli DH5 alpha (Strr) strains that produced different cytotoxic levels of SLT-II, SLT-IIvha (cloned from B2F1), SLT-IIvhb (also cloned from B2F1), or SLT-IIc (cloned from EHEC O157:H7 strain E32511) on Vero cells. We also calculated the specific activities of purified SLT-IIvhb and SLT-II in intraperitoneally injected mice and on Vero cells. The two purified toxins were equally toxic for mice, but SLT-IIvhb was approximately 100-fold less active than SLT-II on Vero cells and bound to the glycolipid receptor Gb3 with lower affinity than did SLT-II. In addition, characterization of SLT-II-related toxin-binding (B) subunit mutants generated in this study revealed that the reduced in vitro cytotoxic levels of the SLT-II-related toxins were due to Asn-16 in the B subunit. Taken together, these findings do not support the idea that B2F1 is uniquely virulent because of the in vivo toxicity of SLT-II-related toxins but do demonstrate differences in in vitro cytotoxic activity among the SLT-II group produced by human EHEC isolates.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 September 2014.
All research outputs
#5,449,088
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Infection and Immunity
#1,922
of 13,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,716
of 72,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infection and Immunity
#15
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,522 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 72,140 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
