SUMMARY: The location of the glucosylated teichoic acid in whole cells and isolated walls of 8191 has been investigated using ruthenium red, gold-labelled concanavalin A and concanavalin A-peroxidase-diaminobenzidine. Dense laminae were revealed in sections of osmium-fixed walls stained with ruthenium red which corresponded to similar regions stained by uranyl and lead. Such regions were not seen after teichoic acid had been extracted, suggesting that the uptake of stain was by teichoic acid. However, these regions were not labelled on exposure to gold concanavalin A or concanavalin A-peroxidase-diaminobenzidine; these stains indicated that teichoic acid was situated between the dense laminae, although the distribution of stain could have been due to the inability of the concanavalin A stains to penetrate deeply. Chemical binding studies showed that the teichoic acid was the major uranyl binding component in isolated walls, from which it might be inferred that teichoic acid was located in the densely staining regions. However, since osmification significantly increased the binding of uranyl (and lead stains) to non-teichoic acid material, such an inference was not necessarily valid. It is concluded that the presence of teichoic acid can be demonstrated in certain regions of the wall by concanavalin A, but its presence in densely staining regions has not been established. These experiments therefore suggest that teichoic acid may not be intimately associated with the mechanisms that generate contrast patterns in stained sections of cell walls of


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Most cited this month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error