Interactions between proteins are central to most biological processes; consequently, understanding the latter requires identification of all possible protein interactions within a cell. To extend ... Yeast Two-Hybrid Screen for Transcriptionally Active Proteins Understanding all possible protein-protein interactions in a living cell is essential to understanding biological processes. Möckli et ...

The Smg proteins Smg5, Smg6 and Smg7 are involved in nonsense-mediated RNA decay (NMD) in metazoans, but no orthologs have been found in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Sequence alignments reveal that yeast Ebs1p is similar in structure to the human Smg5-7, with highest homology to Smg7. We demonstrate here that Ebs1p is involved in NMD and behaves similarly to human Smg proteins. Indeed, both loss and overexpression of Ebs1p results in stabilization of NMD targets. However, Ebs1-loss in yeast or Smg7-depletion in human cells only partially disrupts NMD and in the latter, Smg7-depletion is partially compensated for by Smg6. Ebs1p physically interacts with the NMD helicase Upf1p and overexpressed Ebs1p leads to recruitment of Upf1p into cytoplasmic P-bodies. Furthermore, Ebs1p localizes to P-bodies upon glucose starvation along with Upf1p. Overall our findings suggest that NMD is more conserved in evolution than previously thought, and that at least one of the Smg5-7 proteins is conserved in budding yeast.

The difference between a non-living machine such as a vacuum cleaner and a living organism as a lion seems to be obvious. The two types of entities differ in their material consistence, their origin, their development and their purpose. This apparently clear-cut borderline has previously been challenged by fictitious ideas of “artificial organism” and “living machines” as well as by progress in technology and breeding. The emergence of novel technologies such as artificial life, nanobiotechnology and synthetic biology are definitely blurring the boundary between our understanding of living and non-living matter. This essay discusses where, at the borderline between living and non-living matter, we can position the future products of synthetic biology that belong to the two hybrid entities “synthetic organisms” and “living machines” and how the approaching realization of such hybrid entities affects our understanding of organisms and machines. For this purpose we focus on the description of three different types of synthetic biology products and the aims assigned to their realization: (1) synthetic minimal cells aimed at by protocell synthetic biology, (2) chassis organisms strived for by synthetic genomics and (3) genetically engineered machines produced by bioengineering. We argue that in the case of synthetic biology the purpose is more decisive for the categorization of a product as an organism or a machine than its origin and development. This has certain ethical implications because the definition of an entity as machine seems to allow bypassing the discussion about the assignment and evaluation of instrumental and intrinsic values, which can be raised in the case of organisms.