4.6 Article

Comparative analysis of carbohydrate-binding properties of two tandem repeat-type Jacalin-related lectins, Castanea crenata agglutinin and Cycas revoluta leaf lectin

期刊

FEBS JOURNAL
卷 272, 期 11, 页码 2784-2799

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-4658.2005.04698.x

关键词

carbohydrate binding specificity; frontal affinity chromatography; Jacalin-related lectin family; lectin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lectins belonging to the jacalin-related lectin family are distributed widely in the plant kingdom. Recently, two mannose-specific lectins having tandem repeat-type structures were discovered in Castanea crenata (angiosperm) and Cycas revoluta (gymnosperm). The occurrence of such similar molecules in taxonomically less related plants suggests their importance in the plant body. To obtain clues to understand their physiological roles, we performed detailed analysis of their sugar-binding specificity. For this purpose, we compared the dissociation constants (K-d) of Castanea crenata agglutinin (CCA) and Cycas revoluta leaf lectin (CRLL) by using 102 pyridylaminated and 13 p-nitrophenyl oligosaccharides with a recently developed automated system for frontal affinity chromatography. As a result, we found that the basic carbohydrate-binding properties of CCA and CRLL were similar, but differed in their preference for larger N-linked glycans (e.g. Man7-9 glycans). While the affinity of CCA decreased with an increase in the number of extended alpha 1-2 mannose residues, CRLL could recognize these Man7-9 glycans with much enhanced affinity. Notably, both lectins also preserved considerable affinity for mono-antennary, complex type N-linked glycans, though the specificity was much broader for CCA. The information obtained here should be helpful for understanding their functions in vivo as well as for development of useful probes for animal cells. This is the first systematic approach to elucidate the fine specificities of plant lectins by means of high-throughput, automated frontal affinity chromatography.

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