Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
group_3_presentation_3_-_snake_venom [2017/12/01 23:37] rajendaa [References] |
group_3_presentation_3_-_snake_venom [2018/01/25 15:18] (current) |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| How Venom Kills: {{youtube>Q87UkykCbvI?medium}} | How Venom Kills: {{youtube>Q87UkykCbvI?medium}} | ||
| - | ====== History ====== | + | ====== History of Snakes====== |
| Snakes are historically important creatures that have strong social and cultural significance (Boquet, 1979). They feature in many different religions and cultures across the globe and are considered omens of both good and evil (Boquet, 1979). It is this dichotomy of interpretations of the snake that make it a phenomenally interesting research topic. Although the focus of this wiki page is on snake venom in particular, it is important to consider the history of snakes in general. | Snakes are historically important creatures that have strong social and cultural significance (Boquet, 1979). They feature in many different religions and cultures across the globe and are considered omens of both good and evil (Boquet, 1979). It is this dichotomy of interpretations of the snake that make it a phenomenally interesting research topic. Although the focus of this wiki page is on snake venom in particular, it is important to consider the history of snakes in general. | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| - | ====== Evolution of Venom ====== | + | ====== Evolution of Snake Venom ====== |
| There is an evolutionary relationship within the clade containing snakes, anguimorphs, iguanians, and amphisbaenians, lacertids and teiioids (Fry et al., 2012). In particular, within the clade of Toxicofera, which contains snakes, anguimorphs, and iguanians it has been demonstrated that the evolution of venom has diversified the species within this clade. In fact, 170 million years ago, there was an actual point at which venom within all these species diversified (Fry et al., 2012). | There is an evolutionary relationship within the clade containing snakes, anguimorphs, iguanians, and amphisbaenians, lacertids and teiioids (Fry et al., 2012). In particular, within the clade of Toxicofera, which contains snakes, anguimorphs, and iguanians it has been demonstrated that the evolution of venom has diversified the species within this clade. In fact, 170 million years ago, there was an actual point at which venom within all these species diversified (Fry et al., 2012). | ||
| Line 208: | Line 208: | ||
| Anti-snake venom is a specific immunoglobulin treatment to manage venomous snakebites and is the only known antidote for snake venom (Ahmed et al., 2008). It is created by injecting a vertebrate organism, like a horse or a sheep, an immunization and then booster shots (“How do you make antivenom?”, n.d.). The idea is to allow the organism’s immune system to create antibodies to fight off whatever was injected into their bloodstream. The blood can then be extracted from this organism and be used to create antivenom (“How do you make antivenom?”, n.d.). | Anti-snake venom is a specific immunoglobulin treatment to manage venomous snakebites and is the only known antidote for snake venom (Ahmed et al., 2008). It is created by injecting a vertebrate organism, like a horse or a sheep, an immunization and then booster shots (“How do you make antivenom?”, n.d.). The idea is to allow the organism’s immune system to create antibodies to fight off whatever was injected into their bloodstream. The blood can then be extracted from this organism and be used to create antivenom (“How do you make antivenom?”, n.d.). | ||
| - | Although antivenom is a treatment for venomous snake bites (Ahmed et al., 2008), it raises the question: can the human body itself develop immunity to snake venom? One man that could provide interesting answers to this question is Steve Ludwin. Ludwin is a British man that has been injecting himself with a cocktail of venom from different snakes over several years (Marc, 2016). He believes that by doing so he can self-immunize himself (Marc, 2016). However, the scientific community is still skeptical of his claims (Marc, 2016). | + | Although antivenom is a treatment for venomous snake bites (Ahmed et al., 2008), it raises the question: can the human body itself develop immunity to snake venom? One man that could provide interesting answers to this question is Steve Ludwin. Ludwin is a British man that has been injecting himself with a cocktail of venom from different snakes over several years (Froissart, 2017). He believes that by doing so he can self-immunize himself (Froissart, 2017). The scientific community is interested in testing the veracity of his claims (Froissart, 2017). |
| ====== Traditional Venom Treatments ====== | ====== Traditional Venom Treatments ====== | ||
| Line 221: | Line 222: | ||
| {{:0000000000.png?800|}} | {{:0000000000.png?800|}} | ||
| - | **Figure 11: Timeline of Snake Venom Metalloproteinases (SVMPs) Research.** | + | **Figure 11: Timeline of Snake Venom Metalloproteinases (SVMPs) Research** |
| In particular, there has been, “significant progress…regarding the function, structure and role of the snake venom metalloproteinases (SVMPs) in viperid venom pathogenesis” (Fox and Serrano, 2009). As seen in Figure 11, since 1881 to the time of Fox and Serrano’s review paper in 2007, there have been several notable discoveries (Fox and Serrano, 2009). To begin with, in 1881 it was proposed that venoms could be proteolytic and in 1990 when it was seen that venom could coagulate blood, the proteolytic enzyme activity of venom was hinted at. Then around 1960, toxins extracted from snake venom were discovered to be proteinases and were shown to have a high metal content. Thus researchers came to know of snake venom metalloproteinases. Then over the next half century numerous SVMPs have been identified and their various roles and functions have been speculated upon. One of the key discoveries made was the connection between SVMPs and the ADAMs group of proteins. This led to the creation of the protein group: reprolysins. Current research, around 2007, focused on the evolutionary basis for SVMPs and future studies may focus on elucidating a better understanding of the structure and function of different SVMP types (Fox and Serrano, 2009). | In particular, there has been, “significant progress…regarding the function, structure and role of the snake venom metalloproteinases (SVMPs) in viperid venom pathogenesis” (Fox and Serrano, 2009). As seen in Figure 11, since 1881 to the time of Fox and Serrano’s review paper in 2007, there have been several notable discoveries (Fox and Serrano, 2009). To begin with, in 1881 it was proposed that venoms could be proteolytic and in 1990 when it was seen that venom could coagulate blood, the proteolytic enzyme activity of venom was hinted at. Then around 1960, toxins extracted from snake venom were discovered to be proteinases and were shown to have a high metal content. Thus researchers came to know of snake venom metalloproteinases. Then over the next half century numerous SVMPs have been identified and their various roles and functions have been speculated upon. One of the key discoveries made was the connection between SVMPs and the ADAMs group of proteins. This led to the creation of the protein group: reprolysins. Current research, around 2007, focused on the evolutionary basis for SVMPs and future studies may focus on elucidating a better understanding of the structure and function of different SVMP types (Fox and Serrano, 2009). | ||
| Line 251: | Line 252: | ||
| Froissart, P. (2017). Snake man's venom habit holds hope for new antidote. Phys.org. Retrieved 29 November 2017, from https://phys.org/news/2017-11-snake-venom-habit-antidote.html | Froissart, P. (2017). Snake man's venom habit holds hope for new antidote. Phys.org. Retrieved 29 November 2017, from https://phys.org/news/2017-11-snake-venom-habit-antidote.html | ||
| + | |||
| Fry, B. G., Casewell, N. R., Wüster, W., Vidal, N., Young, B., & Jackson, T. N. (2012). The structural and functional diversification of the Toxicofera reptile venom system. Toxicon, 60(4), 434-448. | Fry, B. G., Casewell, N. R., Wüster, W., Vidal, N., Young, B., & Jackson, T. N. (2012). The structural and functional diversification of the Toxicofera reptile venom system. Toxicon, 60(4), 434-448. | ||
