ライフサイエンスコーパス: chew

1 chemoreceptors, CheA and an adapter protein CheW.

2 s regulatory domain is homologous to that of CheW.

3 the His kinase CheA, and the adaptor protein CheW.

4 of the interaction between chemoreceptor and CheW.

5 t mimics that observed with the P5 homologue CheW.

6 A kinase via the scaffold or coupler protein CheW.

7 ne autokinase CheA, and the coupling protein CheW.

8 , histidine kinase CheA and coupling protein CheW.

9 ine kinase CheA through the coupling protein CheW.

10 ractions of the signaling molecules CheA and CheW.

11 ed by increasing cellular levels of CheA and CheW.

12 dine autokinase CheA and the adapter protein CheW.

13 tively accommodated by the universal adaptor CheW.

14 binds the histidine kinase CheA and adaptor CheW.

15 assays, despite similar binding to CheA and CheW.

16 mer in a trimer contacts kinase and only one CheW.

17 he chemoreceptor and kinase binding sites of CheW.

18 nger (P < 0.05) after 40 chews than after 25 chews.

19 icate brain regions involved with initiating chewing.

20 evaluate brain activity in humans during gum chewing.

21 groups, with no complications related to gum chewing.

22 ation of SF and SFN occurred during in vitro chewing.

23 gies is better adapted for either gnawing or chewing.

24 ic behaviours such as walking, breathing and chewing.

25 acking (a rhythmic facial expression) versus chewing.

26 z rhythm during lip-smacking, but not during chewing.

27 which entails swallowing food whole without chewing.

28 ely well suited to efficient (high-leverage) chewing.

29 ivation both during resting state and during chewing.

30 of Lyme disease, has three cheW homologues (cheW(1) , cheW(2) and cheW(3) ).

31 In contrast to cheW(1) and cheW(3) , cheW(2) is dispensable for chemota

32 Collectively, our results indicate that CheW(1) and CheW(3) are incorporated into one chemosenso

33 ctron tomography studies suggested that both CheW(1) and CheW(3) are involved in the assembly of chem

34 rst, genetic studies indicated that both the cheW(1) and cheW(3) genes are essential for chemotaxis,

35 e three CheWs interact with different CheAs: CheW(1) and CheW(3) interact with CheA(2) whereas CheW(2

36 CI, 1.67-6.43) with >10 years paternal betel chewing, 1.62 (95% CI, 0.88-2.96) for 5 to 9 years, and

37 isease, has three cheW homologues (cheW(1) , cheW(2) and cheW(3) ).

38 1) and CheW(3) interact with CheA(2) whereas CheW(2) binds to CheA(1) .

39 In contrast to cheW(1) and cheW(3) , cheW(2) is dispensable for chemotaxis and assembly of th

40 three cheW homologues (cheW(1) , cheW(2) and cheW(3) ).

41 In contrast to cheW(1) and cheW(3) , cheW(2) is dispensable for chemotaxis and asse

42 ively, our results indicate that CheW(1) and CheW(3) are incorporated into one chemosensory pathway t

43 aphy studies suggested that both CheW(1) and CheW(3) are involved in the assembly of chemoreceptor ar

44 studies indicated that both the cheW(1) and cheW(3) genes are essential for chemotaxis, as the mutan

45 s interact with different CheAs: CheW(1) and CheW(3) interact with CheA(2) whereas CheW(2) binds to C

46 s with mature clusters containing about 1000 CheW(3) proteins.

47 To evaluate whether chewing a loading dose (LD) of ticagrelor, 180 mg, vs tr

48 rativity increases with increasing levels of CheW, a key adapter protein.

49 Edentulous individuals have reduced chewing ability and lower fruit and vegetable consumptio

50 Perceived chewing ability explained approximately 4% variance in i

51 f this study were to: determine if perceived chewing ability was predictive of fruit and vegetable in

52 , psychosocial factors, as well as perceived chewing ability, must be addressed.

53 Perceived chewing ability, sociodemographic, and psychosocial fact

54 ved to be significantly superior in terms of chewing ability, when compared with zero-degree posterio

55 ry complexes with CheA histidine kinases and CheW adaptor proteins.

56 Gutka chewing alone, chewing among individuals with prediabete

57 wing among individuals with prediabetes, and chewing among healthy controls did not significantly inc

58 Gutka chewing alone, chewing among individuals with prediabetes, and chewing

59 Chewing an LD of ticagrelor, 180 mg, in patients with ST

60 atients with STEMI were randomized to either chewing an LD of ticagrelor, 180 mg, or standard oral ad

61 creases bilateral masseter activation during chewing, an effect driven by the expression of TeNT in S

62 or chemotaxis: CheW and CheV1, a hybrid of a CheW and a phosphorylatable receiver domain.

63 mers, each trimer binding a coupling protein CheW and a protomer of the kinase dimer.

64 the ternary complex: one involving Tm14 and CheW and another involving Tm14 and CheA.

65 n support of this possibility, we found that CheW and CheV1 interact with each other and with CheA in

66 nredundant coupling proteins for chemotaxis: CheW and CheV1, a hybrid of a CheW and a phosphorylatabl

67 bes have modified array formation to require CheW and CheV1.

68 ry pathways by controlling the expression of CheW and CheW*, which interact with the Tar (aspartate)

69 in interactions in the ternary complex, CheA-CheW and CheW-receptor interactions were studied previou

70 ers that associate with the coupling protein CheW and the histidine kinase CheA to form an ultrasensi

71 rto unknown, hydrophobic interaction between CheW and the homologous P5 domain of CheA in an adjacent

72 xis form high-order signaling complexes with CheW and the kinase CheA.

73 protein complex of known structure formed by CheW and the P4-P5 fragment of CheA, both from Thermotog

74 ugh a unique interface 2 interaction between CheW and the P5 domain of CheA.

75 icates a primary site of interaction between CheW and Tm14 that agrees well with previous biochemical

76 occurred specifically while recipients were chewing and hence emitting the most potent chemical cues

77 sely related to the native oak received more chewing and mining damage than distantly related oaks, a

78 otably including ingestive behaviors such as chewing and nursing.

79 riodontal inflammatory conditions with gutka chewing and prediabetes.

80 Longer duration of paternal betel quid chewing and smoking, prefatherhood, independently predic

81 ression in insects, and the function of both chewing and sucking mouthparts in insects.

82 salivary hypofunction exhibit difficulty in chewing and swallowing foods, tooth decay, periodontal d

83 ptors, which, along with an adaptor protein (CheW) and kinase (CheA), form large hexagonal arrays.

84 CheW* and Tsr* each contain a mutation at their protein-

85 onal PDS restraints among spin-labeled CheA, CheW, and an engineered single-chain receptor labeled at

86 vidual three-dimensional structures of CheA, CheW, and chemoreceptors have been determined, the inter

87 chemotaxis kinase CheA, the coupling protein CheW, and chemoreceptors.

88 ed interactions among the P5 domain of CheA, CheW, and chemoreceptors.

89 the chemotaxis scaffolding proteins CheV and CheW, and comparative genomic analysis indicates a likel

90 formed by Thermotoga maritima CheA (TmCheA), CheW, and receptor signaling domains.

91 chemoreceptor in a manner similar to that of CheW, and the receptor binding site of CheA's regulatory

92 generated by other people eating, drinking, chewing, and breathing [1-8].

93 mammals, e.g., walking, swimming, suckling, chewing, and breathing, inhibition is often hypothesized

94 in stepping, jaw opening and closing during chewing, and inspiration-expiration in breathing, which

95 activities of daily living (e.g., speaking, chewing, and swallowing).

96 r the effects of paternal smoking, areca nut chewing, and their duration prefatherhood on age of dete

97 ent, lower educational level, and pan masala chewing appear to be risk factors of GERD symptoms for t

98 that the kinase CheA and the adapter protein CheW are integral for receptor connectivity, the exact c

99 nate cultivar (intense sweetness and easy-to-chew arils); however, arils have pale pink colour and fl

100 o predict volatile induction: feeding guild (chewing arthropods > sap feeders), diet breadth (special

101 , histidine kinase CheA, and adaptor protein CheW, as well as a density map of the core-signaling uni

102 iations in the expression levels of CheA and CheW at a constant receptor density in the membrane.

103 with chemoreceptors and the coupling protein CheW at the poles of bacterial cells.

104 d to enable both gnawing at the incisors and chewing at the molars.

105 ever, cytoplasmic clusters comprise two CheA/CheW baseplates sandwiching two opposed receptor arrays.

106 ants, honeydew-producing membracids and leaf-chewing beetles on perennial host plants in field experi

107 that the receptor determinants for CheA and CheW binding probably lie outside the hairpin tip of the

108 g may reflect the close proximity of the two CheW binding surfaces near the receptor tip or further,

109 es for receptor oligomerization and for CheA-CheW binding.

110 the receptor axis with respect to P3 and the CheW-binding P5 domains is bound by two limits differing

111 h receptor-CheW titrations, we estimate that CheW binds about four times tighter to its first binding

112 motor events associated with the end of the chew-block.

113 We also divided the 25-second chew-blocks into 5 segments of equal 5-second durations

114 rapidly after 25 and 40 chews than after 10 chews (both P < 0.05).

115 y higher after 10 chews than after 25 and 40 chews (both P < 0.05).

116 histidine-kinase CheA, and coupling protein CheW, but it is unknown how these three core proteins ar

117 feeding guilds (piercing aphids, generalist chewing caterpillars and specialist chewing caterpillars

118 neralist chewing caterpillars and specialist chewing caterpillars).

119 may not be a direct binding determinant for CheW/CheA at the trimer periphery.

120 ophobic amino acid replacement, may not bind CheW/CheA because they form conformationally frozen or d

121 In the absence of CheA and CheW, chemoreceptors do not form observable clusters and

122 ning an arabinose-inducible FimE controlling CheW/CheW* (and constitutively expressed tar/tsr*) is tr

123 xis system consisting of CheAY, three CheVs, CheW, CheY(HP) and the putative CheZ to colonize the hos

124 s issue in the network-driven, gastric mill (chewing) circuit in the crab stomatogastric nervous syst

125 provide distance restraints within the CheA:CheW complex in the absence and presence of a soluble re

126 The receptor-CheW complex shares a similar binding interface to that

127 vely, the receptor binding sites in the CheA-CheW complex suggest that conformational changes in CheA

128 the receptor structure relative to the CheA:CheW complex.

129 almonds, which were consumed under the same chewing conditions.

130 alternating CheA regulatory domains (P5) and CheW couplers.

131 rray in concert with the CheA kinase and the CheW coupling factor.

132 eceptors, the CheA histidine kinase, and the CheW coupling protein assemble into signaling complexes

133 The chemoreceptor-CheA kinase-CheW coupling protein complex, with ancillary associated

134 rane receptors, histidine kinases (CheA) and CheW coupling proteins.

135 is latter situation, using the gastric mill (chewing) CPG in the crab (Cancer borealis) stomatogastri

136 s in early cladotherians that indicate their chewing cycles included significant transverse movement,

137 mprised one-third of the diet, the number of chewing cycles per year would have declined by nearly 2

138 ith increased yaw rotation of the jaw during chewing cycles.

139 We found high phylogenetic signal in chewing damage but not mining damage and all traits exce

140 milarity in leaf traits also received higher chewing damage but not mining damage.

141 own defoliating herbivores and suggests that chewing damage on mountain birch foliage could significa

142 the core signaling complex, in which a CheA/CheW dimer bridges two adjacent receptor trimers via mul

143 tributions are most consistent with only one CheW directly engaging one dimeric Tm14.

144 CheV consists of a CheW domain fused to a receiver domain that is capable o

145 , sex, duration and daily frequency of gutka chewing, duration of gutka placement in the mouth, and d

146 ividuals generally experience a reduced food-chewing efficiency.

147 ar provides direct evidence of the effect of chewed food particles on tooth enamel surfaces and refle

148 ained two receptor trimers of dimers and two CheW for each CheA dimer, consistent with the approximat

149 Palaeolithic processing technologies affect chewing force production and efficacy in humans consumin

150 Tooth roots provide support to counter chewing forces and so it is advantageous to grow roots q

151 histidine kinase CheA, and coupling protein CheW form clusters of chemotaxis signaling complexes.

152 eria, transmembrane chemoreceptors, CheA and CheW form the core signalling complex of the chemotaxis

153 Previous studies on chewing frequency across animal species have focused on

154 e maximum force of muscle, so that the upper chewing frequency scales as the -1/3 power of body mass

155 xcess of saliva describes the lower limit of chewing frequency, scaling approximately as the -1/6 pow

156 roused without elucidating the variations in chewing frequency.

157 e the interaction modes of chemoreceptor and CheW from Thermotoga maritima.

158 Platelet reactivity in the chewing group was significantly reduced by 24% at 30 min

159 erwent an fcMRI scanning protocol while they chewed gum.

160 Patients in the intervention arm received chewing gum 4 times a day postoperatively.

161 Lastly, the role of vagal signaling or chewing gum as potential treatment strategies of allevia

162 amplitude was significantly decreased after chewing gum containing 4 mg of nicotine.

163 tude responses decreased significantly after chewing gum containing both 2 and 4 mg of nicotine.

164 Sham feeding with chewing gum has been shown to accelerate the return of g

165 ng diluted samples, computer keyboard swabs, chewing gum, and cigarette butts.

166 and could be used as an active component in chewing gums or mouthwashes for both caries and gingivit

167 tent of TiO(2) included candies, sweets, and chewing gums.

168 duals with prediabetes irrespective of gutka-chewing habit (P <0.05).

169 age, sex, duration of prediabetes, and gutka-chewing habits was collected using a questionnaire.

170 Although R62A CheW had essentially the same affinity for chemoreceptor

171 We report that CheV1 and CheW have largely redundant abilities to interact with c

172 e show that a specialist caterpillar (biting-chewing herbivore) and a specialist aphid (phloem feeder

173 lants were independently challenged with (1) chewing herbivores (Manduca sexta), (2) piercing-sucking

174 It is well known that plant damage by leaf-chewing herbivores can induce resistance in neighbouring

175 ng, which likely reduces plant resistance to chewing herbivores due to its negative cross-talk with J

176 Leaf-chewing herbivores fluxed 6.2 g m(-2) yr(-1) of frass an

177 a the salicylic acid pathway, whereas biting-chewing herbivores induce plant resistance mainly via th

178 Simultaneously, however, these chewing herbivores stimulated JA production, demonstrati

179 The growth of various chewing herbivores was not significantly affected by the

180 suite of proteins that defend maize against chewing herbivores.

181 e causative agent of Lyme disease, has three cheW homologues (cheW(1) , cheW(2) and cheW(3) ).

182 On multivariate analysis, heavy-areca nut chewing (HR = 2.18, 95% CI: 1.37-3.47), current smoking

183 postoperative oscillopsia that occurred upon chewing in 29 of 34 patients (85%) and upon walking in 8

184 nce for specific brain areas associated with chewing in humans and demonstrated that brain activation

185 ilized to investigate the roles of the three cheWs in chemotaxis of B. burgdorferi.

186 nds of diet-how often or how hard one had to chew-in human populations worldwide.

187 (Solanum lycopersicum) defenses against the chewing insect beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua; BAW).

188 g is required for host plant resistance to a chewing insect herbivore.

189 nase that is a key defensive protein against chewing insect pests in maize (Zea mays).

190 syringae pv tomato DC3000, and larvae of the chewing insect tobacco hornworm (Manduca sexta).

191 may influence JA-dependent defenses against chewing insects and SA-dependent defenses against aphids

192 Here we provide evidence that chewing insects differentially alter the oxylipin profil

193 ws the elaborate behaviors exhibited by leaf-chewing insects that appear to function specifically to

194 ors of Nicotiana attenuata responses against chewing insects, a 26-nucleotide tag matching the HSPRO

195 complex responses against pathogens and leaf-chewing insects.

196 y impaired by both generalist and specialist chewing insects.

197 which they serve as toxic compounds against chewing insects.

198 pitation studies demonstrated that the three CheWs interact with different CheAs: CheW(1) and CheW(3)

199 eptor arrays that are known to form via CheA-CheW interactions.

200 CheW is a scaffold protein that mediates the association

201 e receptor, whereas the binding interface of CheW is placed between the beta-strand 8 of domain 1 and

202 d, the interaction between chemoreceptor and CheW is still unclear.

203 We conclude that a key feature of CheW is to maintain the specific geometry between the tw

204 In the present study we show that vigorous chewing is limited by the maximum force of muscle, so th

205 It is known that gutka chewing jeopardizes periodontal health; however, severit

206 n parasite systems and to the pocket gophers-chewing lice system, and demonstrate that both host shif

207 s and have played a minor role in the gopher-chewing lice system.

208 acial behaviors such as breathing, sniffing, chewing, licking, swallowing, vocalizing, and in rodents

209 a hybrid protein consisting of an N-terminal CheW-like adaptor domain and a C-terminal response regul

210 epting chemotaxis protein [MCP]-like), DifC (CheW-like), and DifE (CheA-like) stimulate whereas DifD

211 tion to quitting smoking, quitting areca nut chewing may also reduce the risk of first recurrence in

212 The findings suggest that areca nut chewing may jeopardize the defensive functions of neutro

213 the well-described chemotaxis elements CheY, CheW, MCP, and CheA.

214 ominins would have improved their ability to chew meat into smaller particles by 41%, reduced the num

215 (STG), where they activate the gastric mill (chewing) motor circuit.

216 OC) neurons trigger a specific gastric mill (chewing) motor pattern in the stomatogastric ganglion so

217 arthria, dysphagia, sialorrhea and excessive chewing/mouthing behaviors) have not been fully explored

218 e other is a roachoid with long antennae and chewing mouthparts very similar in form to the most gene

219 quamosal jaw joint, which allows a posterior chewing movement, and must have evolved independently fr

220 Using vacuous chewing movements (VCMs) induced by chronic haloperidol

221 showed that speech movements are faster than chewing movements, and the functional coordination betwe

222 in having relatively smaller teeth, reduced chewing muscles, weaker maximum bite force capabilities,

223 ctions, we found that nonchemotactic cheY or cheW mutants were less likely than the wild type to be i

224 l, we constructed and characterized CheA and CheW mutants with amino acid replacements at key interfa

225 tes even after controlling for sex and gutka chewing (odds ratio = 13.2; 95% CI = 4.3 to 40.7).

226 Chewing of areca quid increases the prevalence of period

227 tional effects of paternal Areca catechu nut chewing on offspring metabolic syndrome (MetS) risk in h

228 t the patient had a long-standing history of chewing on toilet bowl deodorizing cakes.

229 variables, with a special focus on areca nut chewing, on disease recurrence and progression in patien

230 e the effects of paternal smoking, and betel chewing, on the risks of early MetS in human offspring.

231 ge as explanation for the recently suggested CheW-only linker structures.

232 ceived gingival bleeding (P <0.001), pain on chewing (P <0.001), dry mouth (P <0.001), and oral burni

233 y losses after 10 and 25 chews than after 40 chews (P < 0.005).

234 ificantly lower after 25 chews than after 40 chews (P < 0.05), and insulin concentrations declined mo

235 y higher after 25 chews than after 10 and 40 chews (P < 0.05).

236 ller particles by 41%, reduced the number of chews per year by another 5%, and decreased masticatory

237 mia, smoking, alcohol consumption, betel nut chewing, physical activity, income, and education level,

238 ions of population and is related to certain chewing practices that involve direct exposure of the gi

239 des the first experimental evidence that two CheW proteins coexist in one chemosensory pathway and th

240 ctions in the ternary complex, CheA-CheW and CheW-receptor interactions were studied previously, wher

241 n CheA are required for assembly of the CheA-CheW-receptor ternary complex and CheA activation.

242 findings have clinical significance in betel-chewing regions and broader implications for theory of m

243 ructure, suggest that CheV proteins conserve CheW residues that are crucial for coupling.

244 hasic (protraction/retraction) gastric mill (chewing) rhythm driven by the projection neuron MCN1 in

245 oceptor neuron on the biphasic gastric mill (chewing) rhythm driven by the projection neuron modulato

246 nin (PK) peptides activate the gastric mill (chewing) rhythm without the participation of the project

247 asic (protraction, retraction) gastric mill (chewing) rhythm, triggered in the isolated stomatogastri

248 erved 12-nm hexagonal lattice linked by CheA/CheW rings.

249 iodontal surgery in the past 2 years?," and "Chewing satisfaction?," were added to the model.

250 ture, as well as comparisons of the CheV and CheW sequence and structure, suggest that CheV proteins

251 ns may dynamically change over the course of chewing sequences.

252 conservation patterns suggests that CheV and CheW share the same binding spot on the chemoreceptor st

253 ypothesis is that monkey lip-smacking versus chewing should also exhibit these differences.

254 vivo, during VCN-triggered and POC-triggered chewing, show that the lateral teeth protraction movemen

255 Notably, chewing, sucking and gall-making herbivores were more af

256 oximity of the CheA and Tsr binding sites on CheW suggests the formation of a composite CheW-Tsr surf

257 the affinity tag, we successfully identified CheW surfaces responsible for CheA-Tsr interaction.

258 She can smile, chew, swallow, and blow normally whereas pouting and kis

259 ontract in response to self-generated noise (chewing, swallowing) and non-auditory stimuli.

260 ons among activated brain areas during a gum-chewing task.

261 satisfaction with appearance, and ability to chew/taste.

262 The Tar chemoreceptor-CheA-CheW ternary complex of Escherichia coli is a transmembr

263 that guinea pigs are more efficient at molar chewing than squirrels.

264 er levels were significantly higher after 25 chews than after 10 and 40 chews (P < 0.05).

265 ations declined more rapidly after 25 and 40 chews than after 10 chews (both P < 0.05).

266 excretion was significantly higher after 10 chews than after 25 and 40 chews (both P < 0.05).

267 ed above baseline longer (P < 0.05) after 40 chews than after 25 chews.

268 d higher fecal energy losses after 10 and 25 chews than after 40 chews (P < 0.005).

269 entrations were significantly lower after 25 chews than after 40 chews (P < 0.05), and insulin concen

270 footprinting was used to map the surfaces of CheW that interact with the large multidomain histidine

271 istidine kinase, CheA, and a linker protein, CheW, that couples CheA activity to receptor control.

272 nge chemical shifts associated with receptor-CheW titrations, we estimate that CheW binds about four

273 into the five domains of the CheA dimer and CheW to provide distance restraints within the CheA:CheW

274 coli, but the ratios of the coupling protein CheW to the CheA dimer are nearly identical in the two o

275 to (i) measure saturable binding of CheA and CheW to the smallest kinase-activating groups of recepto

276 On the other hand, gentle chewing to mix food uniformly without excess of saliva d

277 tionary link documenting the transition from chewing to piercing mouthparts in relation to suction fe

278 any bacteria have more than one homologue of CheW, to our knowledge, this report provides the first e

279 f and only 61 cases and 96 controls had used chewing tobacco in the absence of cigarettes, precluding

280 ncy of use, and duration of use of snuff and chewing tobacco separately for never and ever cigarette

281 state of residence, applicator license type, chewing tobacco use, and total lifetime days of all pest

282 om India on cigarette smoking, bidi smoking, chewing tobacco, and secondhand smoke.

283 cavity, whereas associations were weaker for chewing tobacco.

284 th snuff being more strongly associated than chewing tobacco.

285 n CheW suggests the formation of a composite CheW-Tsr surface for the recruitment of the signaling ki

286 ovative saliva reactor, which imitated human chewing under temperature control.

287 ve inhibition of platelet aggregation in the chewing vs the standard group were 51% vs 10% (95% CI, 1

288 Chewing was associated with activations in the cerebellu

289 Betel chewing was associated with tobacco use but not with can

290 Betel chewing was not associated with global health, social fu

291 Although ever (versus never) tobacco chewing was weakly associated with HNC among never cigar

292 gion might promote interactions with CheA or CheW, we constructed and characterized mutant receptors

293 Further, those with a habit of pan masala chewing were more likely to develop GERD compared with t

294 ys by controlling the expression of CheW and CheW*, which interact with the Tar (aspartate) and Tsr*

295 anism Escherichia coli, the coupling protein CheW, which bridges the chemoreceptors and histidine kin

296 ling complexes with the CheA kinase and with CheW, which couples CheA to receptor control.

297 uperstructure depends on the adaptor protein CheW, which mediates a functionally important bridging i

298 terial chemotaxis systems replace or augment CheW with a related protein, CheV, which is less well un

299 rs by interaction of one CheA protomer and a CheW with each trimer, an organization for which specifi

300 The effects of replacing conserved Arg62 of CheW with other residues suggested that the scaffold pro