4.4 Article

In Silico Characterization of Alkaline Proteases from Different Species of Aspergillus

期刊

APPLIED BIOCHEMISTRY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
卷 166, 期 1, 页码 243-257

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12010-011-9420-y

关键词

Alkaline serine protease; Aspergillus; Homology; Multiple sequence alignment; Phylogenetic tree; Motif; Superfamily

资金

  1. UGC, India [37-133/2009-SR]
  2. DST, India [FT/LS-125/2008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A total of 49 protein sequences of alkaline proteases retrieved from GenBank representing different species of Aspergillus have been characterized for various physiochemical properties, homology search, multiple sequence alignment, motif, and super family search and phylogenetic tree construction. The sequence level homology was obtained among different groups of alkaline protease enzymes, viz alkaline serine protease, oryzin, calpain-like protease, serine protease, subtilisin-like alkaline proteases. Multiple sequence alignment of alkaline protease protein sequence of different Aspergillus species revealed a stretch of conserved region for amino acid residues from 69 to 110 and 130-204. The phylogenetic tree constructed indicated several Aspergillus species-specific clusters for alkaline proteases namely Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus oryzae, Aspergillus clavatus. The distributions of ten commonly observed motifs were analyzed among these proteases. Motif 1 with a signature amino acid sequence of 50 amino acids, i.e., ASFSNYGKVVDIFAPGQDILSCWIGSTTATNTISGTSMATPHIVGLSCYL, was uniformly observed in proteases protein sequences indicating its involvement with the structure and enzymatic function. Motif analysis of acidic proteases of Aspergillus and bacterial alkaline proteases has revealed different signature amino acid sequences. The superfamily search for these proteases revealed the presence of subtilases, serine-carboxyl proteinase, calpain large subunit, and thermolysin-like superfamilies with 45 representing the subtilases superfamily.

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