4.4 Article

Hydrogen-deuterium exchange in free and prodomain-complexed subtilisin

期刊

BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 46, 期 3, 页码 652-658

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/bi061601r

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM42560] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Residue-specific exchange rates of 223 amide protons in free and prodomain-complexed subtilisin were determined in order to understand how the prodomain binding affects the energetics of subtilisin folding. In free subtilisin, amide protons can be categorized according to exchange rate: 74 fast exchangers (rates >= 1 h(-1)); 52 medium exchangers (rates between 1 h(-1) and 1 day(-1)); 31 slow exchangers (rates between 1 day(-1) and 0.001 day(-1)). The remaining 66 amide proteins did not exchange detectibly over 9 months (k(obs) < year(-1)) and were denoted as core protons. Core residues occur throughout the main structural elements of subtilisin. Prodomain binding results in high protection factors (100-1000) in the central beta-sheet, particularly in the vicinity of beta-strands S5, S6, and S7 and the connecting loops between them. These connecting loops provide the ligands to the cation at metal site B. Overall, prodomain binding seems to facilitate the organization of the entire central beta-sheet and alpha-helix C in the left-handed crossover connection between beta-strands two and three. It also appears to facilitate the isomerization of multiple prolines late in folding, allowing the formation of metal site B. The gain of stability region around site B comes at the cost of stability in regions more distal to prodomain binding: the C-terminal alpha-helix H and the N-terminal alpha-helices A and B. The acceleration of exchange in these regions by prodomain binding reveals an antagonism between the folding intermediate and the full native structure. This antagonism helps to explain why the prodomain is needed to stabilize the folding intermediate as well as why the unfolding of free subtilisin seldom occurs via this intermediate.

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

4.4
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