Article · Wikipedia archive · Last revised Jun 3, 2026

Cry1Ac

Cry1Ac is a delta endotoxin crystal protein that is produced by gram-positive soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) during sporulation, which is dependent on the bacterial strain in numbers and types 5,19, and 43. Bt bacterium spores are toxic if they are ingested by the members of the Lepidoptera order, as the bacterium acts as an insecticide to the larvae.

Last revised
Jun 3, 2026
Read time
≈ 8 min
Length
1,837 w
Citations
29
Source
Cry1Ac
Toxin Cry1Ac from Bacillus thuringiensis ssp. kurstaki HD-73. PDB entry 4arx
Identifiers
OrganismBacillus thuringiensis
SymbolCry1Ac
UniProtP05068
Search for
StructuresSwiss-model
DomainsInterPro
Gram-positive soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) source ↗

Cry1Ac is a delta endotoxin crystal protein that is produced by gram-positive soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) during sporulation, which is dependent on the bacterial strain in numbers and types 5,19, and 43. Bt bacterium spores are toxic if they are ingested by the members of the Lepidoptera order, as the bacterium acts as an insecticide to the larvae.1

Because of this, the genes for these have been introduced into commercially important crops by genetic engineering in order to confer pest resistance on those plants234

Mode of action

An accepted model of the toxin is when it becomes ingested by lepidoptera, the larvae becomes activated due to the gut enzymes and the crystal's solubility characteristics. Initially the crystals are inactive and therefore insoluble, until they are in alkaline conditions. When ingested by lepidoptera larvae, they are susceptible to Bt because the pH of their midguts meet the alkaline conditions for the protoxin to become active.1 The activation follows a series of steps that evidently leads to the death of the insect. Beginning in the insect's gut, when the bacterium enters the gut the crystals dissolve and the protoxins activate because of the insect's midgut protease, then its followed by the recognition of the binding site on the midgut's brush border membrane, leading to the pore formation that disrupts the transport of the membrane, resulting in the protoxin becoming entomocidal.56

Receptor binding in lepidopteran larvae

Cry1A toxins in different lepidopteran insects contain different binding receptors. Four binding sites have been identified7:

  • Cadherin-like protein (CADR)
  • Glycosylphosphatidyl-inositol (GPI)-anchored aminopoptidase-N (APN)
  • GPI-anchored alkaline phosphatase (ALP)
  • Glycoconjugate

Structure

Three domain structure of Cry1Ac boxed in blue lines to showcase the visual representation of Domains I, II, and III source ↗

The structure of the protein is similar to others of the Cry family, as seen through x-ray diffractions. Proteins Cry1Aa, Cry3A, and CytB to be specific, share a similar globular molecules that contain a three domain structure that are connected by singular links.57

  • Domain I, is composed of hydrophobic and amphipathic alpha helices. The domain is located at the activated protein's end of the N-terminal and where pore formation of the cell membrane takes place.
  • Domain II, is composed of anti-parallel beta sheets. Cry1Ac and other similar toxins contain fragments that determine the specificity and receptor binding sites to a number of toxins in domain II.
  • Domain III, is also composed of beta sheets and is involved in specificity as domain II, but also is involved in structural stability

Due to the similarities of Domain II and III to those of carbohydrate binding proteins, it has been suggested that carbohydrate moieties might have a role in the mode of action in Cry toxins that contain three domain structures.7

Applications of cry toxins

Bt toxins are used as insecticides on lepidoptera larvae but the toxin its self has achieved three major applications7:

  1. Control of pests in the forest
  2. Controlling of vectors for human diseases
  3. Development of insect resistant plants

The control of forest pests is the most successful applications of the three. The success of pest control in forests is mostly reflected in the United States and Canada. The use of the insecticides relied on the Bt strain of HD-1, which produces a variety of Cry toxins such as: Cry1Aa, Cry1Ab, Crys1Ac, and Cry2Aa. The success of Bt application is not only dependent on the susceptibility of the bacterium on the larvae but also outside factors such as, weather conditions, timing, and dosage of the insecticide spray. A proper combination determines the likelihood of the larvae ingesting the toxins.7

Environmental impact

Cry1Ac is considered more environmentally friendly since it is a soil dwelling bacterium, it had greatly reduced the use of chemical insecticides for pest control. This is beneficial because it targets specific insect groups without affecting other organisms and the overall ecosystem of the forests and other vegetation. Making them safe to use since that are nontoxic to humans, livestock, and other wildlife.7

The success of the substitution of chemical insecticides for environmental alternatives can be seen in the development of transgenic crops. Bt Cry proteins in transgenic crops is continuously being produced, which in turn is protecting the toxin form degrading. Notably, the rise of insect-resistant crops has had a positive effect on crop yield, specifically on Bt cotton, Bt brinjal, Bt soybean, and Bt rice.7

Rice yellow steam borer source ↗

An example of the success of crop yield, rice is one of the most important and essential crops for many countries. Before the use of insecticide, many members of the lepidopteran group would affect indica rice plants. Specifically Yellow steam borer (YSB), Scipophaga incertulas, as the larvae would cut holes into the steams of the rice plants and then enter into the tissues of the plants. Resulting in mass damages to the plants and in turn effecting the yield of crop production. But the introduction of Cry1Ac to the transgenic rice plant significantly reduced the amount of damage YSB did to the rice yield.8 Although transgenic crops have received attention due to a number of issues, including genetically modified food controversies,91011 and the Séralini affair.1213

Resistance

In addition it does rise some concerns for long term use. With eventual long term use the level of effectiveness will come into question as resistance will begin to develop as well as the gene flow of the crops and insects. The use of the insecticide on Bt cotton fields in Australia, China, Spain, and the United States had created a major potential for insect resistance.14 Potential reasons for resistance could be mutations that affect binding receptors, protease, or immune response. It is also believed that the hydrophobic tail and GPI-linked of the Bt toxins can affect the insects' resistance to the insecticide.15

Medical use

Cry1Ac has also been used to develop medical uses, as Bt is an immunogen and a mucosal adjuvant in mammals.161718

A vaccine use for Cry1Ac is it could act as a carrier for the development of oral vaccines (drops or capsules). Since it can target gut-associated lymphoid tissue (GALT) naturally, it is best suited for mucosal immunity. Considering most pathogens enter the body through the respiratory tract, mucosa, and gut the administration being given orally potentially provides advantages in safety for medical providers and patients and lower costs.19

In trials, when administered orally it resulted in systemic and mucosal antibody responses. While also showing no significant toxicity being observed. Which can lead to new and unique medical applications in the future.19

In a more recent study, Cry1Ac has proven it is mucosal adjuvant meaning that it can provide protective immunity against lethal diseases. Specifically against primary amoebic meningoencephalitis (PAM) due to brain eating amoeba, Naegleria fowleri. This amoeba can invade and attack the human nervous system and brain, which is nearly always fatal. When a Naegleria fowleri infection is usually contracted it begins in the nasal mucosa, making the use if Cry1Ac ideal. When Cry1Ac is administered it alone proved to provide 60% protection against the disease. The high protection rate proposes Cry1Ac could stimulate the immune response and the adaptive antibodies.20

See also

See also

References

References

  1. Nickerson, Kenneth W. (July 1980). "Structure and function of the Bacillus thuringiensis protein crystal". Biotechnology and Bioengineering. 22 (7): 1305–1333. Bibcode:1980BiotB..22.1305N. doi:10.1002/bit.260220704. ISSN 0006-3592.
  2. Acharjee S, Sarmah BK (2013). "Biotechnologically generating 'super chickpea' for food and nutritional security". Plant Sci. 207: 108–16. Bibcode:2013PlnSc.207..108A. doi:10.1016/j.plantsci.2013.02.003. PMID 23602105.
  3. McLean M (2011). "A review of the environmental safety of the Cry1Ab protein". Environ Biosafety Res. 10 (3): 51–71. doi:10.1051/ebr/2012003. PMID 22541994.
  4. Liu YB, Li JS, Zhao CY, Xiao NW, Guan X (2012). "[Occurrence and ecological consequences of transgenic rice gene flow: a review]". Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao (in Chinese). 23 (6): 1713–20. PMID 22937665.
  5. Rang, Cécile; Vachon, Vincent; de Maagd, Ruud A.; Villalon, Mario; Schwartz, Jean-Louis; Bosch, Dirk; Frutos, Roger; Laprade, Raynald (July 1990). "Interaction between Functional Domains of Bacillus thuringiensis Insecticidal Crystal Proteins". Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 65 (7): 2918–2925. doi:10.1128/AEM.65.7.2918-2925.1999. PMC 91437. PMID 10388684.
  6. Evdokimov, Artem G.; Moshiri, Farhad; Sturman, Eric J.; Rydel, Timothy J.; Zheng, Meiying; Seale, Jeffrey W.; Franklin, Sonya (November 2014). "Structure of the full-length insecticidal protein C ry1 A c reveals intriguing details of toxin packaging into in vivo formed crystals". Protein Science. 23 (11): 1491–1497. doi:10.1002/pro.2536. ISSN 0961-8368. PMC 4241100. PMID 25139047.
  7. Bravo, Alejandra; Gill, Sarjeet S.; Soberón, Mario (2007-03-15). "Mode of action of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry and Cyt toxins and their potential for insect control". Toxicon. Insecticidal Toxins and their Potential for Insect Pest Control. 49 (4): 423–435. Bibcode:2007Txcn...49..423B. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2006.11.022. ISSN 0041-0101. PMC 1857359. PMID 17198720.
  8. Nayak, P.; Basu, D.; Das, S.; Basu, A.; Ghosh, D.; Ramakrishnan, N. A.; Ghosh, M.; Sen, S. K. (1997). "PNAS". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 94 (6): 2111–2116. doi:10.1073/pnas.94.6.2111. PMC 20049. PMID 9122157.
  9. Shipman, M. (2015). Carolinas field study: Is Bt corn losing against corn earworm? Southeast Farm Press.
  10. Ledford, Heidi (2009-07-06). "Pests could overcome GM cotton toxins". Nature. doi:10.1038/news.2009.629. ISSN 1476-4687.
  11. Arya S, Shrivastav S (June 8, 2015). "Seeds of doubt: Monsanto never had Bt cotton patent". The Times of India.
  12. Genetic Literacy Project. The Industry Funding Behind Anti-GMO Activist Gilles-Éric Séralini. June 19, 2015.
  13. Entine J (June 24, 2014). "Profile of Gilles-Éric Séralini, Author Of Republished Retracted GMO Corn Rat Study". Forbes.
  14. Tabashnik, Bruce E.; Gassmann, Aaron J.; Crowder, David W.; Carriére, Yves (February 2008). "Insect resistance to Bt crops: evidence versus theory". Nature Biotechnology. 26 (2): 199–202. doi:10.1038/nbt1382. ISSN 1546-1696. PMID 18259177.
  15. Gill, Sarjeet S.; Cowles, Elizabeth A.; Francis, Vidyasagar (November 1995). "Identification, Isolation, and Cloning of a Bacillus thuringiensis CryIAc Toxin-binding Protein from the Midgut of the Lepidopteran Insect Heliothis virescens". Journal of Biological Chemistry. 270 (45): 27277–27282. Bibcode:1995JBiCh.27027277G. doi:10.1074/jbc.270.45.27277. ISSN 0021-9258. PMID 7592988.
  16. Vázquez-Padrón, Roberto I.; Moreno-Fierros, Leticia; Neri-Bazán, Leticia; de la Riva, Gustavo A.; López-Revilla, Rubén (April 1999). "Intragastric and intraperitoneal administration of Cry1Ac protoxin from Bacillus thuringiensis induces systemic and mucosal antibody responses in mice". Life Sciences. 64 (21): 1897–1912. doi:10.1016/S0024-3205(99)00136-8. PMID 10353588.
  17. Rodriguez-Monroy, M. A.; Moreno-Fierros, L. (March 2010). "Striking Activation of NALT and Nasal Passages Lymphocytes Induced by Intranasal Immunization with Cry1Ac protoxin". Scandinavian Journal of Immunology. 71 (3): 159–168. doi:10.1111/j.1365-3083.2009.02358.x. ISSN 0300-9475. PMID 20415781.
  18. Pabst, Reinhard (August 2015). "Mucosal vaccination by the intranasal route. Nose-associated lymphoid tissue (NALT)—Structure, function and species differences". Vaccine. 33 (36): 4406–4413. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.07.022. PMID 26196324.
  19. Vázquez-Padrón, Roberto I.; Moreno-Fierros, Leticia; Neri-Bazán, Leticia; de la Riva, Gustavo A.; López-Revilla, Rubén (1999-04-16). "Intragastric and intraperitoneal administration of Cry1Ac protoxin from Bacillus thuringiensis induces systemic and mucosal antibody responses in mice". Life Sciences. 64 (21): 1897–1912. doi:10.1016/S0024-3205(99)00136-8. ISSN 0024-3205. PMID 10353588.
  20. Rojas-Hernández, Saúl; Rodríguez-Monroy, Marco A.; López-Revilla, Rubén; Reséndiz-Albor, Aldo A.; Moreno-Fierros, Leticia (August 2004). "Intranasal coadministration of the Cry1Ac protoxin with amoebal lysates increases protection against Naegleria fowleri meningoencephalitis". Infection and Immunity. 72 (8): 4368–4375. doi:10.1128/IAI.72.8.4368-4375.2004. ISSN 0019-9567. PMC 470623. PMID 15271892.