Don't worry invert. It's not like there is anyone serious left to respond to this crap.
That's not actually true, Spurious.
Look. Charonz showed up to the party.
Hercules is still around from time to time as well.
Umm. I guess them and you are the only ones who really have much microbiological know-how... Used to be more. But, like you say, they don't come around anymore....
Anyway, the opening post isn't completely crap although it is vague about certain issues. At least one of the papers referenced is real.
My question is is the opening post actually Fausto's work or did he plagiarize it? I tend to believe it is his work because of the confusing nature of it. If he plagiarized it, you'd think it's be a bit more clear and less obfuscatory.
The main problem with the post is that it seems to be talking about some form of genetic memory or something... I'm not entirely sure, actually. I asked him about it in that other forum but he never answered...
Fuck it.
I'll repost it here just for good measure:
=======================
Polyribosomes in neurons are selectively positioned beneath synaptic junctions,hence providing individual synapses with a protein synthesis machinery (Steward and Levy, 1982).
Technically, the paper states that polyribosomes are preferentially found at the base of dendritic spines or mounds (which are then conjectured to be part of the base of a dendritic spine).
And, the area of the brain mentioned is the dentate gyrus of the rat brain.
However,if novel RNA,or ribosomes,or proteins,are funnelled into only selected synapses,then what marks these synapses in the first place?
Good question. But probably answered by the same mechanism which marks the destination of any protein. Although, there would seem to be a larger number of addresses needed for the huge number of dendritic spines.
However, each spine need not be uniquely addressed. Perhaps they are separated into groups of some sort?
Interesting line of research.
But what of the axonal side of things?
And what of soma synapses?
And if such a primary long-term change occurs in the synapse,why is gene regulation needed at all?
This and:
If the cell's genome is altered in memory,then either all the synapses of the neuron are altered or,alternatively,some mechanism exists that enduringly restricts the effect of the new gene product(s) to selected synapses.
Are probably the two most difficult things to understand about your post (aside from the tangled jargon, of course.)
What does 'If the cell's genome is altered in memory' mean?
And why wouldn't you expect gene regulation in synapses?
Seems to me that the polyribosomes might serve several purposes.
For one, the dendritic spines shift about quite often and the polyribosomes would likely create the protein machinery to regulate this whole process (although I wouldn't be suprised to find more than simple RNA and proteins involved. miRNA and the like probably play key roles as well.)
It seems to be more efficient to have the machinery in place rather than to necessitate the physical transport of multiple proteins and etc when changes need to be made. This way, only RNA of various flavors need be transported en masse.
Still. Addressing is a problem.
Interesting line of thought.
A pity you couldn't try stating these things in ordinary language.
Question: Is this your work or did you copy it from a journal somewhere?
Furthermore,structural alterations may then occur retrogradely from the synapse towards the cell body,directing the transport of newly synthesized mRNA or proteins only to the modified synapse
Structural alterations such as...?
Finally,the possibility that synapses have autonomous DNA,for example in mitochondria,should not be neglected.
A novel notion. But one which would surely have been discovered by now, I should think. Still something to look into. I would doubt that every synapse could have its own DNA overlord, but perhaps a few key junctures might have its own DNA which would ease the strain of addressing problems.
This would be a huge change in cellular function. A huge paradigm shift.
Unlikely. But an interesting notion.
Couldn't find the Davis et al paper.
But the other one is here:
http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/content/abstract/2/3/284
[/url][/IMG]
