4.4 Article

The enigma of the liganded hemoglobin end state: A novel quaternary structure of human carbonmonoxy hemoglobin

期刊

BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 44, 期 23, 页码 8347-8359

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/bi050412q

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL04367, HL32793] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The liganded hemoglobin (Hb) high-salt crystallization condition described by Max Perutz has generated three different crystals of human adult carbonmonoxy hemoglobin (COHbA). The first crystal is isomorphous with the classical liganded or R Hb structure. The second crystal reveals a new liganded Hb quaternary structure, RR2, that assumes an intermediate conformation between the R form and another liganded Hb quaternary structure, R2, which was discovered more than a decade ago. Like the R2 structure, the diagnostic R state hydrogen bond between beta 2His97 and alpha 1Thr38 is missing in the RR2 structure. The third crystal adopts a novel liganded Hb conformation, which we have termed R3, and it shows substantial quaternary structural differences from the R, RR2, and R2 structures. The quaternary structure differences between T and R3 are as large as those between T and R2; however, the T -> R3 and T -> R2 transitions are in different directions as defined by rigid-body screw rotation. Moreover, R3 represents an end state. Compared to all known liganded Hb structures, R3 shows remarkably reduced strain at the alpha-heme, reduced steric contact between the beta-heme ligand and the distal residues, smaller alpha-and beta-clefts, and reduced alpha 1-alpha 2 and beta 1-beta 2 iron-iron distances. Together, these unique structural features in R3 should make it the most relaxed and/or greatly enhance its affinity for oxygen compared to the other liganded Hbs. The current Hb structure -function relationships that are now based on T -> R, T R -> R2, or T -> R2 -> R transitions may have to be reexamined to take into account the RR2 and R3 liganded structures.

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