Joe M. McCord 2026-11-05
Joe M. McCord helped identify the enzymatic activity called superoxide dismutase. His 1981 first-person research recollection describes how an unexpected inhibition of cytochrome c reduction led to a different explanation of oxygen-dependent enzyme chemistry.[ref]
Citation Classic commentary on Superoxide dismutase by Joe M. McCord. Page1, account of the1968 experiments and1969 isolation/assay paper
The system contained xanthine oxidase, oxygen and a cytochrome c reporter. McCord initially sought direct binding between xanthine oxidase and an inhibitory protein. The eventual explanation involved freely diffusible superoxide: its competing removal could inhibit the reporter without the proposed binding. Preparations of other proteins contained a small amount of the catalytically active contaminant.[ref]
Citation Classic commentary on Superoxide dismutase by Joe M. McCord. Page1, unsuccessful binding hypothesis, solution intermediate and contaminating dismutase
The superoxide dismutase reaction is a disproportionation:In an original stoichiometry example, reaction of 40 superoxide equivalents produces 20 oxygen and 20 hydrogen peroxide equivalents. Decreasing the superoxide signal therefore need not mean producing only water. Likewise, a smaller cytochrome c reporter signal can reflect a competing reaction rather than less activity of the source enzyme. This is why a reporter's measured change must be connected to a reaction mechanism before interpreting an enzyme assay.
Joe McCord, portrait identified in the Pathways Bioscience scientific-team profile
. For oxygen, eight valence electrons occupy bonding orbitals and four occupy antibonding orbitals. Its bond order isThe additional electron in superoxide enters a antibonding orbital, givingReduced bond order weakens and lengthens the bond, consistent with the longer bond in superoxide. The diagram explains the direction of the change; it does not predict the two numerical bond lengths without a quantitative electronic-structure calculation.
Past exam of the zoology course of the University of Cambridge 2025 Paper zl6 3 b Solution 2026-10-20
reactive oxygen species can alter competitive fitness, but neither high ROS nor an antioxidant response universally identifies a loser. cell competition is relative: cells that survive in one neighbourhood are preferentially lost in another, with fitter neighbours occupying their place. An experiment showing oxidant-induced death in a homogeneous tissue establishes toxicity, not necessarily cell competition. In epithelia, loss can occur through apoptosis, extrusion or differentiation followed by departure from a proliferative layer.
reactive oxygen species include superoxide and hydrogen peroxide, which differ in reactivity, localization and transport. They can arise from mitochondrial metabolism or regulated oxidase activity. At controlled levels they participate in redox signalling; excess or poorly buffered production damages DNA, proteins and membranes. Competitive fitness can therefore change through altered damage, stress responses, growth or differentiation. NRF2 and its fly counterpart CncC regulate antioxidant and detoxification programmes. Their activation is an integrated response to cellular conditions, not a direct quantitative measurement of one ROS species.
An instructive fly study compared prospective losers carrying a ribosomal-protein defect or loss of Mahjong protein. Both activated antioxidant-response genes before elimination. In ribosomal-protein-deficient cells, two ROS dyes did not reveal a uniform increase, whereas reduced-thiol staining was lower. Mild CncC activation was tolerated across an entire disc but caused boundary-enriched death in clones surrounded by normal cells; those clones survived better among less-fit neighbours. Conversely, reducing CncC impaired stressed-cell survival. Thus a protective response can also confer relative loser status. The study separated this module from JNK signalling effects on growth and from JAK-STAT signalling effects on tissue expansion; it did not establish a compulsory linear chain from ROS through JNK to elimination.[ref]
Chronic activation of JNK JAK/STAT and oxidative stress signalling causes the loser cell status by Iwo Kucinski and others. Figures 5–7, redox measurements and neighbourhood-dependent CncC experiments
This distinction prevents two errors. First, a high antioxidant-response reporter can coexist with successful buffering and relatively low measured oxidant levels. Second, knocking down a protective factor may kill cells autonomously, making their apparent competitive loss worse even if that factor also participates in neighbour-dependent recognition. To identify a competitive mechanism, compare the same genotype in a homogeneous tissue, in a mosaic with normal neighbours and in a mosaic with an alternative neighbour genotype. Quantify clone growth, death at boundaries and in centres, and replacement by neighbours, normalized to the corresponding cell numbers or areas. A clone that is small because its cells divide slowly has not necessarily been actively eliminated.
The adult mammalian oesophagus supplies a striking environmental example. In transgenic mouse epithelium, low-dose ionizing radiation induced an oxidative response that shifted normal basal cells toward differentiation. Cells carrying mutant p53 were relatively insensitive and expanded at their neighbours' expense. Combining antioxidant treatment with irradiation reversed the population outcome, promoting normal-cell proliferation and mutant-cell differentiation. The selective advantage was consequently conditional on the redox environment, not a fixed property of the mutation. This also shows that competitive replacement need not be executed primarily by apoptosis.[ref]
A separate mouse experiment generated a mosaic of NRF2-deficient and NRF2-intact oesophageal cells. Deficient cells persisted under unstressed conditions but accumulated damage and were preferentially lost during exposure to the carcinogen 4-nitroquinoline 1-oxide. Tumours predominantly arose from the surviving NRF2-intact population. This supports a context-dependent role for stress protection in population selection, while not proving that every disappearing cell was directly recognized and killed by a neighbour. Carcinogen detoxification and DNA damage are additional variables, so the experiment is not a chemically pure ROS titration.[ref]
Cellular Nrf2 Levels Determine Cell Fate during Chemical Carcinogenesis in Esophageal Epithelium by Makoto Horiuchi and others. Mosaic deletion, unstressed controls and 4NQO exposure experiments
To test a proposed ROS mechanism in an epithelial mosaic, image a calibrated, compartment-targeted redox biosensor before clone loss, along with cell boundaries, a proliferation readout and a death or differentiation reporter. Include sensor controls for pH, expression level and dynamic range; general oxidant dyes have loading, localization and chemical-specificity limitations. Perturb the source and scavenging machinery independently and restrict the perturbation to prospective losers or winners. For example, a validated catalase manipulation tests peroxide buffering, while a source-specific perturbation tests whether that peroxide is required. A matched rescue should restore both the measured redox change and the competitive outcome. Monitor cellular energy and survival in homogeneous controls because a mitochondrial perturbation can affect fitness independently of ROS. Perturb downstream stress signalling separately to distinguish oxidant production, stress detection and execution of cell loss.
The tissue consequences can be beneficial or harmful. Elimination of damaged cells can preserve a barrier, but a stress-resistant mutant can also exploit environmental oxidants to displace normal cells. Persistent stress signals from damaged or dying cells may alter neighbour proliferation and inflammation, producing further changes in fitness. The experimentally supported conclusion is that redox state reshapes the conditions under which cells persist, differentiate or are eliminated. A universal prescription to raise ROS or administer antioxidants does not follow: the relevant species, tissue compartment, neighbour genotype and exposure history determine the direction of selection.
Superoxide dismutase 2026-11-05
A superoxide dismutase is an enzyme that catalyzes disproportionation of superoxide:One superoxide equivalent is oxidized and the other reduced. The enzyme activity is EC1.15.1.1; different metal-containing protein families perform it.[ref]
For an original stoichiometric example, consuming superoxide by this reaction produces oxygen and hydrogen peroxide. Removing superoxide therefore does not mean that every reactive product has become water. Other reactions, including those catalyzed by catalase, handle the peroxide.
The discovery illustrates an indirect assay's explanatory power. A researcher's later first-person account describes how a protein preparation inhibited cytochrome c reduction in a xanthine oxidase system. The explanation shifted from a supposed protein–protein blockage to catalytic removal of a freely diffusible superoxide intermediate. The same account relates this to the 1969 isolation and definition of the enzyme activity.[ref]
Citation Classic commentary on Superoxide dismutase by Joe M. McCord. single-page research recollection and original-paper citation
In a model readout, decreasing a reporter slope from 0.060 to 0.030 absorbance units per minute gives 50-percent inhibition of that reporter change. It does not imply that 50 percent of the enzyme molecules were active or that a universal enzyme amount has been measured. Coupled-assay conditions and calibration determine the activity inference.
Xanthine oxidase 2026-11-05
Xanthine oxidase is an enzyme that oxidizes xanthine while using molecular oxygen as an electron acceptor. Its activity is classified as EC1.17.3.2. The IUBMB gives the overall reactionThe products are urate and hydrogen peroxide in this stated reaction. Other conditions can favor superoxide formation, so the equation does not specify every oxygen-reduction product in every assay.[ref]
Xanthine oxidase in IUBMB Enzyme Nomenclature. Reaction and Comments, peroxide and superoxide routes
For an idealized peroxide-route inventory, four micromoles of xanthine and ten micromoles of molecular oxygen, with sufficient water and no competing reactions, can yield four micromoles each of urate and hydrogen peroxide. Six micromoles of molecular oxygen remain. This is a stoichiometric limit; it does not predict the reaction rate or completion under a particular set of conditions.
Xanthine dehydrogenase instead couples the oxidation to reduction of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide. Mammalian enzyme preparations can convert between the two forms. A 2000 comparison determined bovine dehydrogenase and oxidase structures at and , respectively. Changes near the flavin adenine dinucleotide region helped explain altered access of the NAD substrate and electron-acceptor preference.[ref]
Crystal structures of bovine milk xanthine dehydrogenase and xanthine oxidase: Structure-based mechanism of conversion by C. Enroth and others. Abstract and primary indexed structural comparison
Relating structure to both donor and acceptor chemistry is more informative than identifying the purine substrate alone.