4.8 Article

Mitochondrial carbonic anhydrase CA VB: Differences in tissue distribution and pattern of evolution from those of CA VA suggest distinct physiological roles

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.97.4.1677

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A cDNA for a second mouse mitochondrial carbonic anhydrase (CA) called CA VB was identified by homology to the previously characterized murine CA V, now called CA VA. The full-length cDNA encodes a 317-aa precursor that contains a 33-aa classical mitochondrial leader sequence. Comparison of products expressed from cDNAs for murine CA VB and CA VA in COS cells revealed that both expressed active CAs that localized in mitochondria, and showed comparable activities in crude extracts and in mitochondria isolated from transfected COS cells. Northern blot analyses of total RNAs from mouse tissues and Western blot analyses of mouse tissue homogenates showed differences in tissue-specific expression between CA VB and CA VA. CA VB was readily detected in most tissues, while CA VA expression was limited to liver, skeletal muscle, and kidney. The human orthologue of murine CA VB was recently reported also. Comparison of the CA domain sequence of human CA VB with that reported here shows that the CA domains of CA VB are much more highly conserved between mouse and human (95% identity) than the CA domains of mouse and human CA VAs (78% identity). Analysis of phylogenetic relationships between these and other available human and mouse CA isozyme sequences revealed that mammalian CA VB evolved much more slowly than CA VA, accepting amino acid substitutions at least 4.5 times more slowly since each evolved from its respective human-mouse ancestral gene around 90 million years ago. Both the differences in tissue distribution and the much greater evolutionary constraints on CA VB sequences suggest that CA VB and CA VA have evolved to assume different physiological roles.

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