4.6 Article

Membrane Protein Activity Induces Specific Molecular Changes in Nanodiscs Monitored by FTIR Difference Spectroscopy

期刊

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmolb.2022.915328

关键词

photoswitchable lipids; rhodopsin; cytochrome c oxidase; hydrogen bonding; lateral pressure; protein structural changes; lipid-protein interaction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the interaction between membrane proteins and the lipid bilayer by analyzing changes in lipid vibrational bands. The results show that the activation of membrane proteins leads to structural changes and perturbs the lipidic environment. Isotopologue analysis also reveals changes in the collective state of lipids.
It is well known that lipids neighboring integral membrane proteins directly influence their function. The opposite effect is true as well, as membrane proteins undergo structural changes after activation and thus perturb the lipidic environment. Here, we studied the interaction between these molecular machines and the lipid bilayer by observing changes in the lipid vibrational bands via FTIR spectroscopy. Membrane proteins with different functionalities have been reconstituted into lipid nanodiscs: Microbial rhodopsins that act as light-activated ion pumps (the proton pumps NsXeR and UmRh1, and the chloride pump NmHR) or as sensors (NpSRII), as well as the electron-driven cytochrome c oxidase RsCcO. The effects of the structural changes on the surrounding lipid phase are compared to mechanically induced lateral tension exerted by the light-activatable lipid analogue AzoPC. With the help of isotopologues, we show that the nu(C = O) ester band of the glycerol backbone reports on changes in the lipids' collective state induced by mechanical changes in the transmembrane proteins. The perturbation of the nanodisc lipids seems to involve their phase and/or packing state. C-13-labeling of the scaffold protein shows that its structure also responds to the mechanical expansion of the lipid bilayer.

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

4.6
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