4.8 Article

Time-resolved electrometric and optical studies on cytochrome bd suggest a mechanism of electron-proton coupling in the di-heme active site

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0405683102

关键词

oxidase; electron transfer reactions; respiratory chain

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [R37 HL016101, HL 16101, R01 HL016101] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Time-resolved electron transfer and electrogenic H+ translocation have been compared in a bd-type quinol oxidase from Escherichia coli and its E445A mutant. The high-spin heme b(595) is found to be retained by the enzyme in contrast to the original proposal, but it is not reducible even by excess of dithionite. When preincubated with the reductants, both the WT (b(558)(2+), b(595)(2+), d(2+)) and E445A mutant oxidase (b(558)(2+), b(595)(3+), d(2+)) bind O-2 rapidly, but formation of the oxoferryl state in the mutant is approximate to 100-fold slower than in the WT enzyme. At the same time, the E445A substitution does not affect intraprotein electron re-equilibration after the photolysis of CO bound to ferrous heme d in the one-electron-reduced enzyme (the so-called electron backflow). The backflow is coupled to membrane potential generation. Electron transfer between hemes d and b(558) is electrogenic. In contrast, electron transfer between hemes d and b(595) is not electrogenic, although heme b(595) is the major electron acceptor for heme d during the backflow, and therefore is not likely to be accompanied by net H+ uptake or release. The E445A replacement does not alter electron distribution between hemes b595 and din the one-electron reduced cytochrome bd [E-m(d) > E-m(b(595)), where E-m is the midpoint redox potential]; however, it precludes reduction of heme b595, given heme d has been reduced already by the first electron. Presumably, E445 is one of the two redox-linked ionizable groups required for charge compensation of the di-heme oxygen-reducing site (b(595), d) upon its full reduction by two electrons.

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