4.2 Article

Comparative study on dihydrofolate reductases from Shewanella species living in deep-sea and ambient atmospheric-pressure environments

Journal

EXTREMOPHILES
Volume 15, Issue 2, Pages 165-175

Publisher

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s00792-010-0345-0

Keywords

Deep-sea; DHFR; High pressure; Molecular adaptation; Shewanella species

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japan [16657031]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16657031] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To examine whether dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) from deep-sea bacteria has undergone molecular evolution to adapt to high-pressure environments, we cloned eight DHFRs from Shewanella species living in deep-sea and ambient atmospheric-pressure environments, and subsequently purified six proteins to compare their structures, stabilities, and functions. The DHFRs showed 74-90% identity in primary structure to DHFR from S. violacea, but only 55% identity to DHFR from Escherichia coli (ecDHFR). Far-ultraviolet circular dichroism and fluorescence spectra suggested that the secondary and tertiary structures of these DHFRs were similar. In addition, no significant differences were found in structural stability as monitored by urea-induced unfolding and the kinetic parameters, K-m and k(cat); although the DHFRs from Shewanella species were less stable and more active (2- to 4-fold increases in k(cat)/K-m) than ecDHFR. Interestingly, the pressure effects on enzyme activity revealed that DHFRs from ambient-atmospheric species are not necessarily incompatible with high pressure, and DHFRs from deep-sea species are not necessarily tolerant of high pressure. These results suggest that the DHFR molecule itself has not evolved to adapt to high-pressure environments, but rather, those Shewanella species with enzymes capable of retaining functional activity under high pressure migrated into the deep-sea.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available