4.8 Article

Separating the contribution of translational and rotational diffusion to protein association

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 127, 期 43, 页码 15138-15144

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja053681c

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The association of two proteins is preceded by a mutual diffusional search in solution. The role of translational and rotational diffusion in this process has been studied theoretically for many years. However, systematic experimental verification of theoretical results is still lacking. We report here measurements of association rates of the proteins beta-lactamase (TEM) and P-lactamase inhibitor protein (BLIP) in solutions of glycerol and poly(ethylene glycol) of increasing viscosity. We also measured translational and rotational diffusion in the same solutions, using fluorescence correlation spectroscopy and fluorescence anisotropy, respectively. It is found that in glycerol both translational and rotational diffusion rates are inversely dependent on viscosity, as predicted by the classical Stokes-Einstein relations, while the association rate depends nonlinearly on viscosity. In contrast, the association rate depends only weakly on the viscosity of the polymer solutions, which results in a similar weak dependence of k(on) on viscosity. The data are modeled using the theory of diffusion-limited association. Deviations from the theory are explained by a short-range solute-induced repulsion between the proteins in glycerol solution and an attractive depletion interaction generated by the polymers. These results open the way to the creation of a unified framework for all nonspecific effects involved in the protein association process, as well as to better theoretical understanding of these effects. Further, they reflect on the complex factors controlling protein association within the crowded environment of cells and suggest that a high concentration of macromolecules does not significantly impede protein association.

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