Christopher T. Walsh
Other affiliations: Florida State University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Duisburg-Essen ...read more
Bio: Christopher T. Walsh is an academic researcher from Stanford University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Nonribosomal peptide & Active site. The author has an hindex of 139, co-authored 819 publications receiving 74314 citations. Previous affiliations of Christopher T. Walsh include Florida State University & Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Papers published on a yearly basis
TL;DR: The emergence of multidrug resistance among the latest generation of pathogens suggests that the discovery of new scaffolds should be a priority, and promising approaches to scaffold discovery are emerging.
Abstract: Antibiotic-resistant strains of pathogenic bacteria are increasingly prevalent in hospitals and the community. New antibiotics are needed to combat these bacterial pathogens, but progress in developing them has been slow. Historically, most antibiotics have come from a small set of molecular scaffolds whose functional lifetimes have been extended by generations of synthetic tailoring. The emergence of multidrug resistance among the latest generation of pathogens suggests that the discovery of new scaffolds should be a priority. Promising approaches to scaffold discovery are emerging; they include mining underexplored microbial niches for natural products, designing screens that avoid rediscovering old scaffolds, and repurposing libraries of synthetic molecules for use as antibiotics.
Alternatives1, John Innes Centre2, University of Bonn3, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill4, University of Wisconsin-Madison5, University of Utah6, University of Southern California7, University of Edinburgh8, University of Warwick9, Harvard University10, University College Cork11, University of Queensland12, University of Hertfordshire13, University of Potsdam14, University of California, San Diego15, Goethe University Frankfurt16, University of California, San Francisco17, University of Delaware18, Uppsala University19, Medical University of Vienna20, J. Craig Venter Institute21, University of Hawaii at Manoa22, Leibniz Association23, University of Iowa24, University of Aberdeen25, Georgia Institute of Technology26, University of California, Berkeley27, University of Groningen28, Princeton University29, University of Marburg30, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign31, Saarland University32, Norwegian University of Life Sciences33, Massey University34, Toyama Prefectural University35, ETH Zurich36, University of Saskatchewan37, Rutgers University38, Scripps Research Institute39, University of Helsinki40, Texas A&M University41, National Institutes of Health42, Technical University of Berlin43, University of Otago44, University of Cambridge45, University of Alberta46, Michigan State University47, Hofstra University48
TL;DR: This review presents recommended nomenclature for the biosynthesis of ribosomally synthesized and post-translationally modified peptides (RiPPs), a rapidly growing class of natural products.
Abstract: This review presents recommended nomenclature for the biosynthesis of ribosomally synthesized and post-translationally modified peptides (RiPPs), a rapidly growing class of natural products. The current knowledge regarding the biosynthesis of the >20 distinct compound classes is also reviewed, and commonalities are discussed.
TL;DR: The authors live in an era when antibiotic resistance has spread at an alarming rate and dire predictions concerning the lack of effective antibacterial drugs occur with increasing frequency, so it is apposite to ask a few simple questions about these life-saving molecules.
Abstract: Antibiotics--compounds that are literally 'against life'--are typically antibacterial drugs, interfering with some structure or process that is essential to bacterial growth or survival without harm to the eukaryotic host harbouring the infecting bacteria. We live in an era when antibiotic resistance has spread at an alarming rate and when dire predictions concerning the lack of effective antibacterial drugs occur with increasing frequency. In this context it is apposite to ask a few simple questions about these life-saving molecules. What are antibiotics? Where do they come from? How do they work? Why do they stop being effective? How do we find new antibiotics? And can we slow down the development of antibiotic-resistant superbugs?
TL;DR: Christopher T. Walsh is the Hamilton Kuhn Professor of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology (BCMP) at Harvard Medical School and has had extensive experience in academic administration, including Chairmanship of the MIT Chemistry Department and the HMS Biological Chemistry & molecular Pharmacology Department.
Abstract: biotics of the penicillin and cephalosporin families, 3,4 as well as the glycopeptides of the vancomycin family 5 (Figure 1a). * To whom correspondence should be addressed: christopher_walsh@ hms.harvard.edu. † Harvard Medical School. ‡ Harvard University. Christopher T. Walsh is the Hamilton Kuhn Professor of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology (BCMP) at Harvard Medical School. He has had extensive experience in academic administration, including Chairmanship of the MIT Chemistry Department (1982−1987) and the HMS Biological Chemistry & Molecular Pharmacology Department (1987−1995) as well as serving as President and CEO of the Dana Farber Cancer Institute (1992−1995). His research has focused on enzymes and enzyme inhibitors, with recent specialization on antibiotics. He and his group have authored over 590 research papers, a text (Enzymatic Reaction Mechanisms), and two books (Antibiotics: Origins, Actions, Resistance and Posttranslational Modification of Proteins: Expanding Nature’s Inventory). He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Medicine, and the American Philosophical Society.
TL;DR: An understanding of the scope and pattern of the many posttranslational modifications in eukaryotic cells provides insight into the function and dynamics of proteome compositions.
Abstract: The diversity of distinct covalent forms of proteins (the proteome) greatly exceeds the number of proteins predicted by DNA coding capacities owing to directed posttranslational modifications. Enzymes dedicated to such protein modifications include 500 human protein kinases, 150 protein phosphatases, and 500 proteases. The major types of protein covalent modifications, such as phosphorylation, acetylation, glycosylation, methylation, and ubiquitylation, can be classified according to the type of amino acid side chain modified, the category of the modifying enzyme, and the extent of reversibility. Chemical events such as protein splicing, green fluorescent protein maturation, and proteasome autoactivations also represent posttranslational modifications. An understanding of the scope and pattern of the many posttranslational modifications in eukaryotic cells provides insight into the function and dynamics of proteome compositions.
TL;DR: There is, I think, something ethereal about i —the square root of minus one, which seems an odd beast at that time—an intruder hovering on the edge of reality.
Abstract: There is, I think, something ethereal about i —the square root of minus one. I remember first hearing about it at school. It seemed an odd beast at that time—an intruder hovering on the edge of reality. Usually familiarity dulls this sense of the bizarre, but in the case of i it was the reverse: over the years the sense of its surreal nature intensified. It seemed that it was impossible to write mathematics that described the real world in …
28 Jul 2005
TL;DR: There is growing evidence that aging involves, in addition, progressive changes in free radical-mediated regulatory processes that result in altered gene expression.
Abstract: At high concentrations, free radicals and radical-derived, nonradical reactive species are hazardous for living organisms and damage all major cellular constituents. At moderate concentrations, how...
TL;DR: The new generations of qdots have far-reaching potential for the study of intracellular processes at the single-molecule level, high-resolution cellular imaging, long-term in vivo observation of cell trafficking, tumor targeting, and diagnostics.
Abstract: Research on fluorescent semiconductor nanocrystals (also known as quantum dots or qdots) has evolved over the past two decades from electronic materials science to biological applications. We review current approaches to the synthesis, solubilization, and functionalization of qdots and their applications to cell and animal biology. Recent examples of their experimental use include the observation of diffusion of individual glycine receptors in living neurons and the identification of lymph nodes in live animals by near-infrared emission during surgery. The new generations of qdots have farreaching potential for the study of intracellular processes at the single-molecule level, high-resolution cellular imaging, long-term in vivo observation of cell trafficking, tumor targeting, and diagnostics.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macro-autophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes.
Abstract: In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.