4.8 Article

Minor Actinides Can Replace Essential Lanthanides in Bacterial Life

Journal

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/anie.202303669

Keywords

Actinides; Lanthanide-Binding Proteins; Lanthanide-Dependent Bacteria; Lanthanides; Methylotrophy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates the ability of actinides, the radioactive 5f elements, to replace the essential 4f elements in lanthanide-dependent bacterial metabolism. The results show that americium and curium can support growth in the absence of lanthanides, and that methylotrophic bacteria prefer actinides over late lanthanides when presented with a mixture of equal amounts of lanthanides together with americium and curium. This study establishes that methylotrophic bacteria can utilize actinides instead of lanthanides to sustain their one-carbon metabolism if they possess the correct size and a +III oxidation state.
Certain f-block elements-the lanthanides-have biological relevance in the context of methylotrophic bacteria. The respective strains incorporate these 4 f elements into the active site of one of their key metabolic enzymes, a lanthanide-dependent methanol dehydrogenase. In this study, we investigated whether actinides, the radioactive 5 f elements, can replace the essential 4 f elements in lanthanide-dependent bacterial metabolism. Growth studies with Methylacidiphilum fumariolicum SolV and the Methylobacterium extorquens AM1 Delta mxaF mutant demonstrate that americium and curium support growth in the absence of lanthanides. Moreover, strain SolV favors these actinides over late lanthanides when presented with a mixture of equal amounts of lanthanides together with americium and curium. Our combined in vivo and in vitro results establish that methylotrophic bacteria can utilize actinides instead of lanthanides to sustain their one-carbon metabolism if they possess the correct size and a +III oxidation state.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available