Abstract
Thanks to the increasing availability of the parasitic Platyhelminthes genomes in recent years, several studies have been directed to the identification of the nuclear receptors set expressed by these organisms. Nevertheless, important gaps in our knowledge remain to be addressed, concerning their mechanism of action, ligands, co-regulator proteins, and DNA binding sequences on target genes. The proposed review chapter will be an account of research into the nuclear receptors field of parasitic Platyhelminthes. Several in vitro effects of host steroid hormones on Taenia and Echinococcus species were observed, however, the classical mammalian estrogen, androgen, or progesterone receptors could not be identified in databases. Nonetheless, novel nuclear receptors and related proteins and genes, are being identified and characterized. The elucidation of their target genes as well as ligands in parasitic Platyhelminthes could allow discovery of new and specific pathways differing from those of their hosts. In this sense, these parasitic proteins seem to be good putative targets of new drugs.
Keywords
- nuclear receptors
- parasitic Platyhelminthes
- host–parasite relationship
1. Introduction
Since the biochemical identification of the first nuclear receptor (NR) more than 60 years ago [1], the study of these proteins has been increasing. In particular, the cloning of the first NR was a milestone [2], ushering in a new chapter in research into the regulation of cell function and metabolism [3]. NRs are transcription factors that modulate numerous physiological processes such as metabolism, development, reproduction, and inflammation [4, 5, 6], through the regulation of target genes transcription by binding to specific DNA response elements [3, 6]. Unlike other transcription factors, the activity of nuclear receptors can be modulated by the binding of specific ligands, these being mainly small lipophilic molecules that easily penetrate biological membranes [7], providing a direct link between the cellular signals and the transcriptional responses of a cell. These lipophilic ligands can be fatty acids, steroids, retinoids, and phospholipids. This protein family also contains “orphan” members for which no ligand has yet been identified [8].
Despite the diversity of functions presented by the different NRs, they share a common modular structure, with various degrees of conservation among their respective domains. A typical nuclear receptor contains an N-terminal domain (NTD or A/B region), a highly conserved DNA binding domain (DBD or C region), a poorly conserved hinge domain (region D), a ligand-binding domain (LBD or E region), and a C-terminal region (F region) [9, 10]. The A/B region is a poorly structured domain that shows a low percentage of conservation at size and sequence level and may not be present in some NRs [6]. This domain is regulated by the interaction with co-regulatory proteins and also contains an autonomous transactivation region 1 (AF-1, Activation Factor 1) independent of ligand binding [11]. The DBD is the most conserved region compared to the other domains [12] and it is responsible for the binding of the NR to specific DNA sequences, named response element (RE) [13]. Structural studies have determined that the DBD has two subdomains that each contain four cysteine residues that coordinate a zinc ion to create the typical DNA-binding zinc finger motif [14, 15, 16]. The hinge domain is the region with the lowest sequence conservation and it constitutes a flexible linker between the DBD and the LBD [10], giving the connecting domains some independent mobility [17]. The LBD regulates the receptor activity through ligand binding and direct interaction with co-regulatory proteins [18, 19]. This region contains functionally related interaction surfaces: a dimerization surface, which mediates interaction with another LBD [20]; a hydrophobic ligand-binding pocket (LBP) that interacts with lipophilic small molecules [21]; and an activation function surface called AF-2 (Activation Function-2), essential for the ligand-dependent transcription activation [22, 23]. Finally, the F domain is a poorly conserved region, and even many members of the family lack this domain. However, when this domain is present, its deletion or mutation alters transactivation, dimerization, and the receptor response after ligand binding [24].
More than 900 nuclear receptor genes have been identified throughout the animal kingdom [25, 26]. The NRs have a common ancestral origin and a high conservation rate in all animal taxa and therefore are considered strong phylogenetic markers of animal evolution [27]. This protein group shows an interesting complexity probably driven by gene duplication and gene loss [28], for example, 2 members have been identified from sponges, 48 in mammals and up to more than 250 in nematodes [29, 30, 31, 32]. Phylogenetic studies demonstrated that NRs emerged long before the divergence of vertebrates and invertebrates, during the earliest metazoan evolution [33]. The nomenclature currently used to name the NRs is based on phylogenetic relationships, generated from conserved DBD sequence alignment and the construction of phylogenetic trees. This classification, which was approved by the Nuclear Receptor Nomenclature Committee in 1999 [34], subdivides the nuclear receptor family into six subfamilies (NR1-NR6). The subfamily NR0 was added later and includes atypical nuclear receptors that contain only DBD (NR0A, identified in arthropods and nematodes) or only LBD (NR0B, present in some vertebrates) [34]. In the last decades, the existence of a new NR subgroup called 2DBD-NR was evidenced in parasitic Platyhelminthes; whose members present two DBDs and one LBD [35, 36]. This new group has not yet been included in the classification system described by the NR Nomenclature Committee [21, 34]. However, recent publications already classify it as a subfamily NR7 [37]. Furthermore, nuclear receptors can be classified according to their mechanism of action into four types (I-IV). This classification groups the NRs according to the signaling mechanisms, taking into account the subcellular site where NR-ligand binding occurs (cytosol or nucleus) and the mode of DNA binding (homodimer, heterodimer, or monomer) [6]. Briefly, type I NRs reside in the cytosol and upon ligand binding are trafficked into the nucleus where they typically bind to palindromic REs in promoters as a homodimer. Type II NRs are localized in the nucleus and generally form heterodimeric complexes with RXR; in their unliganded state, are inactive and upon ligand binding, they activate by the co-regulators exchange. Type III NRs are similar to Type II, however, these receptors bind to direct repeat REs as homodimers. Type IV NRs have a similar mechanism of action to Type II and III NRs but instead, bind to DNA as a monomer and recognize extended half-sites within RE [6].
Platyhelminthes are a phylum of bilaterian, unsegmented, soft-bodied invertebrates, but also, they are acoelomates and lack specialized circulatory and respiratory organs. These characteristics make these organisms have a flattened shape that allows the exchange of gases and nutrients throughout the body [38]. Platyhelminthes are traditionally divided into four classes: Rhabditophora, Monogenea, Cestoda (tapeworms), and Trematoda (flukes). The class Rhabditophora includes all free-living flatworms, while all members in classes of Monogenea, Trematoda, and Cestoda are parasitic flatworms [39]. The Platyhelminthes or flatworms include more than 20,000 species [40, 41].
Parasitic Platyhelminthes are a large group of parasites that can affect both human and animal health, causing neglected diseases such as Schistosomiasis, Paragonimiasis and Cestodiasis that can be fatal and are difficult to treat. These infections generally lead to pain, physical disabilities, etc., impeding economic development through human disability and billions of dollars of lost production in the livestock industries [42, 43].
In the last decade, the advent of genome projects has allowed the identification of the nuclear receptors expressed in the different parasitic Platyhelminthes [21, 44]. Nevertheless, only a few NRs have been characterized in these organisms and their biological function continues to be unknown. The first parasitic Platyhelminthes NRs were identified in
2. Parasitic Platyhelminthes nuclear receptors
2.1 Subfamily 1
The most characterized proteins of this group are SmTRα and SmTRβ from
Screening
In 2011, Förster and collaborators characterized for the first time a cestode NR, named EmNHR1. The isolated
The second NR characterized in cestodes was EgHR3 of
2.2 Subfamily 2
Several members of subfamily 2 nuclear receptors were isolated and characterized in Platyhelminthes: SmTR2/4, SmRXR1, SmRXR, HNF4, and HR78. SmTR2/4 is a protein of 223 kDa with extremely large A/B and hinge domains. It shares sequence identity with the DBD of other members of this group of NRs ranging from 69 to 88%, while with de LBD shares from 16 to 38% of similarity. The corresponding gene is expressed in all
Homologous proteins of vertebrate retinoid-X-receptor (RXR) were identified in
Four more members of this family were also identified in
Finally, the orthologues of fax-1 and NHR236 receptors were recently identified in free-living and parasitic flatworms, respectively. It is the first time that an orthologue of NHR236 has been shown to exist in parasitic Platyhelminthes [49].
2.3 Subfamily 3
For a long time, it has not been possible to identify subfamily 3 NRs in Platyhelminthes [21, 72], so this class of proteins seems to have been lost in this phylum. However, recent genome sequence analysis studies identified several ERRs (estrogen-related receptor) belonging to subfamily 3 [37, 49].
Several reports strongly indicate that host steroid sex hormones affect the biology, and in particular reproduction and growth, of parasitic flatworms. However, to date, it has not been possible to identify steroid hormone receptors similar to those of mammalian hosts in the available genomes. It was demonstrated through
It was
The above-cited scientific papers point to a better understanding of the host–parasite molecular cross-communication, providing new information which could be useful in designing anti-helminthic drugs. The strategy consists in the designing of new drugs specifically directed to inhibit or block key parasite molecules, such as hormone-binding proteins, transduction proteins, transcription factors, or nuclear receptors involved in the parasite establishment, growth, and proliferation in the host. In addition, it is a requirement that the new drug specifically recognize parasite cells with minimal secondary effects to the host, so the search has to be directed toward molecules that are differentially expressed in the parasitic Platyhelminthes.
2.4 Subfamily 4 and 6
NR4A was the only subfamily 4 member identified in parasitic platyhelminths. Phylogenetic analysis suggested that it is orthologue of
Concerning subfamily 6 of NRs, only one member of subfamily 6 (MlNR6) identified belongs to the free-living flatworm
2.5 Subfamily 5
Until now the only two receptors of subfamily 5 characterized in parasitic Platyhelminthes are Ftz-F1 (Fushi Tarazu-factor 1) NRs from
SmFtz-F1 was the first member of this subfamily to be characterized from a lophotrochozoan [48]. Subfamily 5 only contains orphan receptors that bind to their response element as monomers, the most studied members being mammalian SF-1 (steroidogenic factor-1) and LRH-1 (liver receptor homolog-1), both involved in embryonic development. The first member of the subfamily was isolated from
Although Ftz-F1 protein and mRNA expression are detected during all life cycles, expression levels differed according to the developmental stage. The higher expression of SmFtz-F1 was observed in the larval stages of miracidia, sporocysts, and cercaria, while the protein highest level was found in cercaria, schistosomula, and male adult work suggesting a role during host invasion and adaptation. The transcription behavior of SmFtz-F1α makes a difference between the two NRs since the higher mRNA level was detected in the schistosoma egg stage. A similar gonad distribution was also observed in several Ftz-F1 homologues [82, 83].
Taken together these events, it was hypothesized that target genes of both receptors exert different roles during the parasite development and these two receptors also have different ligands or co-activators. Co-activators characterization could start to decipher the transcriptional regulation complex formed by each nuclear receptor. In this sense, the search of transcription regulators of SmFtz-F1 was performed. The transcription co-activator CREB-binding protein (CBP) homologs from
Finally, an interesting finding was the identification of the first target gene of SmFtz-F1, the micro-exon gene
2.6 New subfamily 7
A very interesting finding for the biology of parasitic Platyhelminthes was the identification in
Recently, molecular docking studies showed that unsaturated long-chain fatty acids, in particular oleic, linoleic, and arachidonic acids, are the Eg2DBDα.1 preferred ligands [89]. It is worth mentioning that this ligand’s preference is similar to that of the EgFABP1 protein, previously characterized and studied by our research group [90, 91]. EgFABP1 is a fatty acid-binding protein which was localized in the nuclei of
Acknowledgments
This work was financially supported by the Sectorial Commission for Scientific Research (CSIC, Grants N° C206-348, and N° C112-347) (UdelaR) and the National Agency for Research and Innovation (Grant N° ANII-FCE 2017_1_136527).
References
- 1.
Jensen EV. On the mechanism of Estrogen action. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine. 1962; 6 :47-60. DOI: 10.1353/pbm.1963.0005 - 2.
Govindan MV, Devic M, Green S, Gronemeyer H, Chambon P. Cloning of the human glucocorticoid receptor cDNA. Nucleic Acids Research. 1985; 13 :8293-8304. DOI: 10.1093/nar/13.23.8293 - 3.
Evans RM, Mangelsdorf DJ. Nuclear receptors, RXR, and the big bang. Cell. 2014; 157 :255-266. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.03.012 - 4.
Kininis M, Kraus WL. A global view of transcriptional regulation by nuclear receptors: Gene expression, factor localization, and DNA sequence analysis. Nuclear Receptor Signaling. 2008; 6 :e005. DOI: 10.1621/nrs.06005 - 5.
Gustafsson JA. Historical overview of nuclear receptors. The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. 2016; 157 :3-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsbmb.2015.03.004 - 6.
Weikum ER, Liu X, Ortlund EA. The nuclear receptor superfamily: A structural perspective. Protein Science. 2018; 27 :1876-1892. DOI: 10.1002/pro.3496 - 7.
Novac N, Heinzel T. Nuclear receptors: Overview and classification. Current DrugTarget -Inflammation & Allergy. 2004; 3 :335-346. DOI: 10.2174/1568010042634541 - 8.
Benoit G, Cooney A, Giguere V, Ingraham H, Lazar M, Muscat G, et al. International Union of Pharmacology. LXVI. Orphan Nuclear Receptors. Pharmacological Reviews. 2006; 58 :798-836. DOI: 10.1124/pr.58.4.10 - 9.
Giguère V, Hollenberg SM, Rosenfeld MG, Evans RM. Functional domains of the human glucocorticoid receptor. Cell. 1986; 46 :645-652. DOI: 10.1016/0092-8674 - 10.
Pawlak M, Lefebvre P, Staels B. General molecular biology and architecture of nuclear receptors. Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry. 2012; 12 :486-504. DOI: 10.2174/156802612799436641 - 11.
Kumar R. Thompson EB, Transactivation functions of the N-terminal domains of nuclear hormone receptors: Protein folding and coactivator interactions. Molecular Endocrinology. 2003; 17 :1-10. DOI: 10.1210/me.2002-0258 - 12.
Danielsen M. Bioinformatics of nuclear receptors. Methods in Molecular Biology (Clifton, N.J.). 2001; 176 :3-22. DOI: 10.1385/1-59259-115-9:3 - 13.
Kumar V, Gree S, Staub A, Chambon P. Localisation of the oestradiol-binding and putative DNA-binding domains of the human oestrogen receptor. The EMBO Journal. 1996; 5 :2231-2236. DOI: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1986.tb04489.x - 14.
Luisi BF, Xu WX, Otwinowski Z, Freedman LP, Yamamoto KR, Sigler PB. Crystallographic analysis of the interaction of the glucocorticoid receptor with DNA. Nature. 1991; 352 :497-505. DOI: 10.1038/352497a0 - 15.
Schwabe JWR, Chapman L, Finch JT, Rhodes D. The crystal structure of theestrogen receptor DNA-binding domain bound to DNA: How receptors discriminate between their response elements. Cell. 1993; 75 :567-578. DOI: 10.1016/0092-8674(93)90390-c - 16.
Gronemeyer H, Moras D. How to finger DNA. Nature. 1995; 375 :190-191. DOI: 10.1038/375190a0 - 17.
Aggarwal P, Bhavesh NS. Hinge like domain motion facilitates human RBMS1 protein binding to proto-oncogene c-myc promoter. Nucleic Acids Research. 2021; 49 :5943-5955. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab363 - 18.
Moras D, Gronemeyer H. The nuclear receptor ligand-binding domain: Structureand function. Current Opinion in Cell Biology. 1998; 10 :384-391. DOI: 10.1016/s0955-0674(98)80015-x - 19.
Weatherman RV, Fletterick RJ, Scanlan TS. Nuclear-receptor ligands and ligand-binding domains. Annual Review of Biochemistry. 1999; 68 :559-581. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.biochem.68.1.559 - 20.
Wurtz JM, Bourguet W, Renaud JP, Vivat V, Chambon P, Moras D, et al. A canonical structure for the ligand-binding domain of nuclear receptors. Nature Structural Biology. 1996; 3 :87-94. DOI: 10.1038/nsb0196-87 - 21.
Wu W, LoVerde PT. Nuclear hormone receptors in parasitic Platyhelminths. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology. 2019; 233 :111218. DOI: 10.1016/j.molbiopara.2019.111218 - 22.
Barettino D, Ruiz MMV, Stunnenberg HG. Characterization of the ligand dependent transactivation domain of thyroid hormone receptor. The EMBO Journal. 1994; 13 :3039-3049. DOI: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1994.tb06603.x - 23.
Bourguet W, Ruff M, Chambon P, Gronemeyer H, Moras D. Crystal structure of the ligand-binding domain of the human nuclear receptor RXR-α. Nature. 1995; 375 :377-382. DOI: 10.1038/375377a0 - 24.
Patel SR, Skafar DF. Modulation of nuclear receptor activity by the F domain. Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology. 2015; 418 :298-305. DOI: 10.1016/j.mce.2015.07.009 - 25.
Sladek FM. What are nuclear receptor ligands? Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology. 2022; 334 :3-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.mce.2010.06.018 - 26.
Mazaira GI, Zgajnar NR, Lotufo CM, Daneri-Becerra C, Sivils JC, Soto OB, et al. The nuclear receptor field: A historical overview and future challenges. Nuclear Receptor Research. 2018; 5 :101320. DOI: 10.11131/2018/101320 - 27.
Escrivá H, Laudet V, Robinson-Rechavi M. Nuclear receptors are markers of animal genome evolution. Journal of Structural and Functional Genomics. 2003; 3 :177-184. DOI: 10.1023/a:1022638706822 - 28.
Fonseca E, Machado AM, Vilas-Arrondo N, Gomes-dos-Santos A, Verissimo A, Esteves P, et al. Cartilaginous fishes offer unique insights into the evolution of the nuclear receptor gene repertoire in gnathostomes. General and Comparative Endocrinology. 2020; 295 :113527. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2020.113527 - 29.
Bertrand S, Brunet FG, Escriva H, Parmentier G, Laudet V, Robinson-Rechavi M. Evolutionary genomics of nuclear receptors: From twenty-five ancestral genes to derived endocrine systems. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 2004; 21 :1923-1937. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msh200 - 30.
Bridgham JT, Eick GN, Larroux C, Deshpande K, Harms MJ, Gauthier MEA, et al. Protein evolution by molecular tinkering: Diversification of the nuclear receptor superfamily from a ligand-dependent ancestor. PLoS Biology. 2010; 8 :e1000497. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000497 - 31.
Cheng Y-Y, Tao W-J, Chen J-L, Sun L-N, Zhou L-Y, Song Q , et al. Genome-wide identification, evolution and expression analysis of nuclear receptor superfamily in Nile tilapia, Oreochromisniloticus. Gene. 2015; 569 :141-152. DOI: 10.1016/j.gene.2015.05.057 - 32.
Yang P-J, Chen E-H, Song Z-H, He W, Liu S-H, Dou W, et al. Molecular characterization and expression profiling of nuclear receptor gene families in oriental fruit Fly, Bactrocera Dorsalis (Hendel). Insects. 2020; 11 :126. DOI: 10.3390/insects11020126 - 33.
Escrivá H, Bertrand S, Laudet V. The evolution of the nuclear receptor superfamily. Essays in Biochemistry. 2004; 40 :11-26. DOI: 10.1042/bse0400011 - 34.
Laudet V, Auwerx J, Gustafsson J, Wahli WA. Unified nomenclature system for the nuclear receptor superfamily. Cell. 1999; 97 :161-163. DOI: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)80726-6 - 35.
Wu W, Niles EG, Hirai H, LoVerde PT. Evolution of a novel subfamily of nuclear receptors with members that each contain two DNA binding domains. BMC Evolutionary Biology. 2007; 7 :27. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-7-27 - 36.
Alvite G, Riera X, Cancela S, Paulino M, Esteves A. Bioinformatic analysis of anovel Echinococcus granulosus nuclear receptor with two DNA binding domains. PLoS One. 2019;14 :e0224703. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224703 - 37.
Cheng Y, Chen J, Mukhtar I, Chen J. Genome-wide characterization of the nuclear receptor gene family in Macrostomum lignano imply its evolutionary diversification. Frontiers in Marine Science. 2021;8 :653447. DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2021.653447 - 38.
Walker JC, Anderson DT. The Platyhelminthes. In: Anderson DT, editor. Invertebrate Zoology. England: Oxford University Press; 2001. pp. 58-80 - 39.
Norena C, Damborenea C, Brusa F. Phylum Platyhelminthes. Ecology and general biology. In: Thorp JH, Rogers C, editors. Thorp and Covich’s Freshwater Invertebrates. 4th ed. Vol. I. Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press; 2015. pp. 181-203 - 40.
Riutort M, Álvarez-Presas M, Lázaro E, Solà E, Paps J. Evolutionary history of the Tricladida and the Platyhelminthes: An up-to-date phylogenetic and systematic account. The International Journal of Developmental Biology. 2012; 56 :5-17. DOI: 10.1387/ijdb.113441mr - 41.
Adell T et al. Platyhelminthes. In: Wanninger A, editor. Evolutionary Developmental Biology of Invertebrates 2: Lophotrochozoa (Spiralia). Vienna: Springer Vienna; 2015. pp. 21-40 - 42.
G.B.D. 2015 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 310 diseases and injuries, 1990-2015: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2015. Lancet. 2016; 388 :1545-1602 - 43.
International Helminth Genomes Consortium. Comparative genomics of the major parasitic worms. Nature Genetics. 2019; 51 :163-174. DOI: 10.1038/s41588-018-0262-1 - 44.
Brehm K, Koziol U. Echinococcus–host interactions at cellular and molecular levels. Advances in Parasitology. 2017; 95 :147-212. DOI: 10.1016/bs.apar.2016.09.001 - 45.
Freebern WJ, Niles EG, LoVerde PT. RXR-2, a member of the retinoid x receptor family in Schistosoma mansoni . Gene. 1999;233 :33-38. DOI: 10.1016/s0378-1119(99)00161-4 - 46.
Freebern WJ, Osman A, Niles EG, Christen L, LoVerde PT. Identification of a cDNA encoding a retinoid X receptor homologue from Schistosoma mansoni . Evidence for a role in female-specific gene expression. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 1999;274 :4577-4585. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.274.8.4577 - 47.
De Mendonca RL, Escriva H, Bouton D, Zelus D, Vanacker JM, Bonnelye E, et al. Structural and functional divergence of a nuclear receptor of the RXR family from the trematode parasite Schistosoma mansoni . European Journal of Biochemistry. 2000;267 :3208-3219. DOI: 10.1046/j.1432-1327.2000.01344.x - 48.
De Mendonca RL, Bouton D, Bertin B, Escrivá H, Noel C, Vanacker JM, et al. A functionally conserved member of the FTZ-F1 nuclear receptor family from Schistosoma mansoni . European Journal of Biochemistry. 2002;269 :5700-5711. DOI: 10.1046/j.1432-1033.2002.03287.x - 49.
Wu W, LoVerde PT. Identification and evolution of nuclear receptors in Platyhelminths. PLoS One. 2021; 16 :e0250750. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250750 - 50.
Wendt G, Zhao L, Chen R, Liu C, O’Donoghue AJ, Caffrey CR, et al. A single-cell RNA-seq atlas of Schistosoma mansoni identifies a key regulator of blood feeding. Science. 2020;25 (369):1644-1649. DOI: 10.1126/science.abb7709 - 51.
Wang J, Collins JJ 3rd. Identification of new markers for the Schistosoma mansoni vitelline lineage. International Journal for Parasitology. 2016;46 :405-410. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2016.03.004 - 52.
Wang J, Chen R, Collins JJ 3rd. Systematically improved in vitro culture conditions reveal new insights into the reproductive biology of the human parasiteSchistosoma mansoni . PLoS Biology. 2019;17 :e3000254. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000254 - 53.
Spiliotis M, Brehm K. Axenic in vitro cultivation ofEchinococcus multilocularis metacestode vesicles and the generation of primary cell cultures. Methods in Molecular Biology. 2009;470 :245-262. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-59745-204-5_17 - 54.
Spiliotis M, Tappe D, Sesterhenn L, Brehm K. Long-term in vitro cultivation of Echinococcus multilocularis metacestodes under axenic conditions. Parasitology Research. 2004;92 :430-432. DOI: 10.1007/s00436-003-1046-8 - 55.
Spiliotis M, Lechner S, Tappe D, Krohne G, Brehm K. Transient transfection of Echinococcus multilocularis primary cells and completein vitro regeneration of metacestode vesicles. International Journal for Parasitology. 2008;38 :1025-1039. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2007.11.002 - 56.
Spiliotis M, Mizukami C, Oku Y, Kiss F, Brehm K, Gottstein B. Echinococcus multilocularis primary cells: Improved isolation, small-scale cultivation and RNA interference. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology. 2010;174 :83-87. DOI: 10.1016/j.molbiopara.2010.07.001 - 57.
Forster S, Gunthel D, Kiss F, Brehm K. Molecular characterisation of a serumresponsive, DAF-12-like nuclear hormone receptor of the fox-tapeworm Echinococcus multilocularis . Journal of Cellular Biochemistry. 2011;112 (6):1630-1642. DOI: 10.1002/jcb.23073 - 58.
Yang M, Li J, Wu J, Wang H, Guo B, Wu C, et al. Cloning and characterization of an Echinococcus granulosus ecdysteroid hormone nuclear receptor HR3-like gene. Parasite. 2017;24 :36. DOI: 10.1051/parasite/2017037 - 59.
Hoffmann J, Porchet M. Biosynthesis, Metabolism and Mode of Action of Invertebrate Hormones. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1984 - 60.
Mercer JG, Munn AE, Rees HH. Echinococcus granulosus : Occurrence of ecdysteroids in protoscoleces and hydatid cyst fluid. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology. 1987, 1987;24 :203-214. DOI: 10.1016/0166-6851(87)90107-1 - 61.
Zheng H, Zhang W, Zhang L, Zhang Z, Li J, Lu G, et al. The genome of the hydatid tapeworm Echinococcus granulosus . Nature Genetics. 2013;45 :1168-1175. DOI: 10.1038/ng.2757 - 62.
Tsai IJ, Zarowiecki M, Holroyd N, Garciarrubio A, Sanchez-Flores A, Brooks KL, et al. The genomes of four tapeworm species reveal adaptations to parasitism. Nature. 2013; 496 :57-63. DOI: 10.1038/nature12031 - 63.
Hu R, Wu W, Niles EG, LoVerde PT. SmTR2/4, a Schistosoma mansoni homologue of TR2/TR4 orphan nuclear receptor. International Journal for Parasitology. 2006;36 :1113-1122. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2006.06.003 - 64.
Escrivá H, Safi R, Hänni C, et al. Ligand binding was acquired during evolution of nuclear receptors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1997; 94 :6803-6808. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.94.13.6803 - 65.
Freebern WJ, Osman A, Niles EG, Christen L, LoVerde PT. Identification of a cDNA encoding a retinoid X receptor homologue from Schistosoma mansoni . Evidence for a role in female-specific gene expression. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 1999;274 :4577-4585. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.274.8.4577 - 66.
Mendonça RL, Escrivá H, Vanacker JM, Bouton D, Delannoy S, Pierce RJ, et al. Nuclear hormone receptors and evolution. American Zoologist. 1999; 27 :704-713 - 67.
Mendonça RL, Escriva H, Bouton D, Zelus D, Vanacker JM, Bonnelye E, et al. Structural and functional divergence of a nuclear receptor of the RXR family from the trematode parasite Schistosoma mansoni . European Journal of Biochemistry. 2000;267 :3208-3219. DOI: 10.1046/j.1432-1327.2000.01344.x - 68.
Mangelsdorf DJ, Evans RM. RXR heterodimers and orphan receptors. Cell. 1995; 83 :841-850. DOI: 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90200-7 - 69.
Bertin B, Caby S, Oger F, Sasorith S, Wurtz JM, Pierce RJ. The monomeric orphan nuclear receptor Schistosoma mansoni Ftz-F1 dimerizes specifically and functionally with the schistosome RXR homologue, SmRXR1. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 2005;327 :1072-1082. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2004.12.101 - 70.
Wendt G, Zhao L, Chen R, Liu C, O’Donoghue AJ, Caffrey CR, et al. A single-cell RNA-seq atlas of Schistosoma mansoniidentifies a key regulator of blood feeding. Science. 2020; 25 (369):1644-1649. DOI: 10.1126/science.abb7709 - 71.
Wu W, Niles EG, El-Sayed N, Berriman M, LoVerde PT. Schistosoma mansoni (Platyhelminthes, Trematoda) nuclear receptors: Sixteen new members and a novel subfamily. Gene. 2006;366 :303-315. DOI: 10.1016/j.gene.2005.09.013 - 72.
Taubenheim J, Kortmann C, Fraune S. Function and evolution of nuclear receptors in environmental-dependent postembryonic development. Frontiers in Cell and Development Biology. 2021 Jun; 10 (9):653792. DOI: 10.3389/fcell.2021.653792 - 73.
Ibarra-Coronado EG, Escobedo G, Nava-Castro K, Jesús Ramses CR, Hernández-Bello R, García-Varela M, et al. A helminth cestode parasite express an estrogen-binding protein resembling a classic nuclear estrogen receptor. Steroids. 2011; 10-11 :1149-1159. DOI: 10.1016/j.steroids. 2011.05.003 - 74.
Nicolao MC, Elissondo MC, Denegri GM, Goya AB, Cumino AC. In vitro andin vivo effects of tamoxifen against larval stageEchinococcus granulosus . Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. 2014;58 :5146-5154 - 75.
Stadelmann B, Aeschbacher D, Huber C, Spiliotis M, Muller J, Hemphill A. Profound activity of the anti-cancer drug bortezomib against Echinococcus multilocularis metacestodes identifies the proteasome as a novel drug target for cestodes. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. 2014;8 :e3352 - 76.
Escobedo G, Camacho-Arroyo I, Hernandez-Hernandez OT, Ostoa-Saloma P, Garcia-Varela M, Morales-Montor J. Progesterone induces scolex evagination of the human parasite Taeniasolium : Evolutionary implications to the host-parasite relationship. Journal of Biomedicine & Biotechnology. 2010;2010 :591079 - 77.
Aguilar-Díaz H, Nava-Castro KE, Escobedo G, Domínguez-Ramírez L, García-Varela M, Del Río-Araiza VH, et al. A novel progesterone receptor membrane component (PGRMC) in the human and swine parasite Taeniasolium : Implications to the host-parasite relationship. Parasites & Vectors. 2018;11 :161. DOI: 10.1186/s13071-018-2703-1 - 78.
Lu C, Wu W, Niles EG, LoVerde PT. Identification and characterization of a novel fushitarazu factor-1 (FTZ-F1) nuclear receptor in Schistosoma mansoni . Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology. 2006;150 :25-36 - 79.
Lu C, Niles EG, LoVerde PT. Characterization of the DNA-binding properties and the transactivation activity of Schistosoma mansoni nuclear receptor fushitarazu-factor 1α(SmFTZ-F1α). Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology. 2006;150 :72-82 - 80.
Ueda H, Sonoda S, Brown JL, Scott MP, Wu C. Asequence-specific DNA-binding protein that activates fushitarazu segmentation gene expression. Genes & Development. 1990; 4 :624-635.3 - 81.
Lavorgna G, Ueda H, Clos J, Wu C. FTZ-F1, a steroid hormone receptor-like protein implicated in the activation of fushitarazu . Science. 1991;252 :848-851 - 82.
Gissendanner CR, Sluder AE. Nhr-25, the Caenorhabditis elegans ortholog of ftz-f1, is required for epidermal and somatic gonad development. Developmental Biology. 2000;221 :259-272 - 83.
Ramayya MS, Zhou J, Kino T, Segars JH, Bondy CA, Chrousos GP. Steroidogenic factor 1 messenger ribonucleic acid expression in steroidogenic and nonsteroidogenic human tissues: Northern blot and in situ hybridization studies. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. 1997; 82 :1799-1806 - 84.
Bertin B, Oger F, Cornette J, Caby S, Noel C, Capron M, et al. Schistosoma mansoni CBP/p300 has a conserved domain structure and interacts functionally with the nuclear receptor SmFtz-F1. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology. 2006; 146 :180-191 - 85.
Oger F, Bertin B, Caby S, Dalia-Cornette J, Adams M, Vicogne J, et al. Molecular cloning and characterization of Schistosoma mansoni Ftz-F1 interacting protein-1 (SmFIP-1), a novel corepressor of the nuclear receptor SmFtz-F1. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology. 2006;148 :10-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.molbiopara.2006.02.016 - 86.
Romero AA, Cobb SA, Collins JNR, Kliewer SA, Mangelsdorf DJ, Collins JJ 3rd. The Schistosoma mansoninuclear receptor FTZ-F1 maintains esophageal gland function via transcriptional regulation ofmeg-8.3. PLOS Pathogens. 2021; 17 :e1010140. DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1010140 - 87.
Lee J, Chong T, Newmark PA. The esophageal gland mediates host immune evasion by the human parasite Schistosoma mansoni . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2020;117 :19299-19309. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2006553117 - 88.
Wu W, LoVerde PT. Nuclear hormone receptors in parasitic helminths. Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology. 2011; 334 :56-66. DOI: 10.1016/j.mce.2010.06.011 - 89.
Cancela S, Esteves A, Alvite G, Paulino M. Modeling, molecular dynamics and docking studies of a full-length Echinococcus granulosus 2DBD nuclear receptor. Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics. 2022:1-10. DOI: 10.1080/07391102.2021.2023641 [Epub ahead of print] - 90.
Alvite G, Pietro SMD, Santome JA, Ehrlich R, Esteves A. Binding properties of Echinococcus granulosus fatty acid binding protein. Biochim Biophys Acta - Molecular and Cell Biology of Lipids. 2001;1533 :293-302. DOI: 10.1016/s1388-1981(01)00164-0 - 91.
Jakobsson E, Alvite G, Bergfors T, Esteves A, Kleywegt GJ. The crystal structure of Echinococcus granulosus fatty-acid-binding protein 1. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 2003;1649 :40-50. DOI: 10.1016/s1570-9639(03)00151-1 - 92.
Alvite G, Esteves A. Echinococcus granulosus fatty acid binding proteins subcellular localization. Experimental Parasitology. 2016;164 :1-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.exppara.2016.02.002 - 93.
Alvite G, Garrido N, Kun A, Paulino M, Esteves A. Towards an understanding of Mesocestoides vogae fatty acid binding proteins’ roles. PLoS One. 2014;9 :e111204. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111204 - 94.
Hostetler HA, McIntosh AL, Atshaves BP, Storey SM, Payne HR, Kier AB, et al. L-FABP directly interacts with PPARα in cultured primary hepatocytes. Journal of Lipid Research. 2009; 50 :1663-1675. DOI: 10.1194/jlr.m900058-jlr200 - 95.
McIntosh AL, Atshaves BP, Hostetler HA, Huang H, Davis J, Lyuksyutova OI, et al. Liver type fatty acid binding protein (L-FABP) gene ablation reduces nuclear ligand distribution and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-alpha activity in cultured primary hepatocytes. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics. 2009; 485 :160-173. DOI: 10.1016/j.abb.2009.03.004 - 96.
Wolfrum C, Borrmann CM, Borchers T, Spener F. Fatty acids and hypolipidemic drugs regulate peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors alpha - and gamma-mediated gene expression via liver fatty acid binding protein: A signaling path to the nucleus. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2001; 98 :2323-2328. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.051619898 - 97.
Tan NS, Shaw NS, Vinckenbosch N, Liu P, Yasmin R, Desvergne B, et al. Selective cooperation between fatty acid binding proteins and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors in regulating transcription. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 2002; 22 :5114-5127. DOI: 10.1128/MCB.22.14.5114-5127.2002