4.8 Article

High-pressure NMR reveals close similarity between cold and alcohol protein denaturation in ubiquitin

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1212222110

关键词

protein unfolding; thermodynamics; protein dynamics; heteronuclear NMR

资金

  1. SNF [31-132857]
  2. Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Proteins denature not only at high, but also at low temperature as well as high pressure. These denatured states are not easily accessible for experiment, because usually heat denaturation causes aggregation, whereas cold or pressure denaturation occurs at temperatures well below the freezing point of water or pressures above 5 kbar, respectively. Here we have obtained atomic details of the pressure-assisted, cold-denatured state of ubiquitin at 2,500 bar and 258 K by high-resolution NMR techniques. Under these conditions, a folded, native-like and a disordered state exist in slow exchange. Secondary chemical shifts show that the disordered state has structural propensities for a native-like N-terminal beta-hairpin and cc-helix and a nonnative C-terminal alpha-helix. These propensities are very similar to the previously described alcohol-denatured (A-)state. Similar to the A-state, N-15 relaxation data indicate that the secondary structure elements move as independent segments. The close similarity of pressure-assisted, cold-denatured, and alcohol-denatured states with native and nonnative secondary elements supports a hierarchical mechanism of folding and supports the notion that similar to alcohol, pressure and cold reduce the hydrophobic effect. Indeed, at nondenaturing concentrations of methanol, a complete transition from the native to the A-state can be achieved at ambient temperature by varying the pressure from 1 to 2,500 bar. The methanol-assisted pressure transition is completely reversible and can also be induced in protein G. This method should allow highly detailed studies of protein-folding transitions in a continuous and reversible manner.

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