4.6 Article

Kinetic study of the HIV-1 DNA 3′-end processing -: Single-turnover property of integrase

期刊

FEBS JOURNAL
卷 273, 期 6, 页码 1137-1151

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-4658.2006.05139.x

关键词

3 '-processing; fluorescence anisotropy; integrase; protein-DNA interactions; single-turnover kinetics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The 3'-processing of viral DNA extremities is the first step in the integration process catalysed by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 integrase (IN). This reaction is relatively inefficient and processed DNAs are usually detected in vitro under conditions of excess enzyme. Despite such experimental conditions, steady-state Michaelis-Menten formalism is often applied to calculate characteristic equilibrium/kinetic constants of IN. We found that the amount of processed product was not significantly affected under conditions of excess DNA substrate, indicating that IN has a limited turnover for DNA cleavage. Therefore, IN works principally in a single-turnover mode and is intrinsically very slow (single-turnover rate constant = 0.004 min(-1)), suggesting that IN activity is mainly limited at the chemistry step or at a stage that precedes chemistry. Moreover, fluorescence experiments showed that IN-DNA product complexes were very stable over the time-course of the reaction. Binding isotherms of IN to DNA substrate and product also indicate tight binding of IN to the reaction product. Therefore, the slow cleavage rate and limited product release prevent or greatly reduce subsequent turnover. Nevertheless, the time-course of product formation approximates to a straight line for 90 min (apparent initial velocity), but we show that this linear phase is due to the slow single-turnover rate constant and does not indicate steady-state multiple turnover. Finally, our data ruled out the possibility that there were large amounts of inactive proteins or dead-end complexes in the assay. Most of complexes initially formed were active although dramatically slow.

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