4.8 Article

Surface charge of polyoxometalates modulates polymerization of the scrapie prion protein

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0812770106

关键词

2D crystal; amyloid; electron crystallography; ImmunoGold labeling; phosphotungstate

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [AG02132, AG10770, AG021601]
  2. Sherman Fairchild Foundation
  3. G. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Charitable Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Prions are composed solely of an alternatively folded isoform of the prion protein (PrP), designated PrPSc. N-terminally truncated PrPSc, denoted PrP 27-30, retains infectivity and polymerizes into rods with the ultrastructural and tinctorial properties of amyloid. We report here that some polyoxometalates (POMs) favor polymerization of PrP 27-30 into prion rods, whereas other POMs promote assembly of the protein into 2D crystals. Antibodies reacting with epitopes in denatured PrP 27-30 also bound to 2D crystals treated with 3 M urea. These same antibodies did not bind to either native PrPSc or untreated 2D crystals. By using small, spherical POMs with Keggin-type structures, the central heteroatom was found to determine whether prion rods or 2D crystals were preferentially formed. An example of a Keggin-type POM with a phosphorous heteroatom is the phosphotungstate anion (PTA). Both PTA and a Keggin-type POM with a silicon heteratom have low-charge densities and favor formation of prion rods. In contrast, POMs with boron or hydrogen heteroatoms exhibiting higher negative charges encouraged 2D crystal formation. The 2D crystals of PrP 27-30 produced by selective precipitation with POMs were larger and more well ordered than those obtained by sucrose gradient centrifugation. Our findings argue that the negative charge of Keggin-type POMs determines the quaternary structure adopted by PrP 27-30. The mechanism by which POMs function in competing prion polymerization pathways-one favoring 2D crystals and the other, amyloid fibrils-remains to be established.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据