4.5 Article

Comparison of physico-chemical characteristics of four laccases from different basidiomycetes

期刊

BIOCHIMIE
卷 86, 期 9-10, 页码 693-703

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.biochi.2004.08.005

关键词

basidiomycete; laccase; redox potential; T1 site; active site

向作者/读者索取更多资源

New strains of basidiomycetes producing extracellular laccases (Trametes ochracea 92-78, and Trametes hirsuta 56) have been found by screening of isolates of Trametes fungi. The laccases from T. hirsuta 56 and T. ochracea 92-78 as well as two laccases from previously found and described strains of basidiomycetes, namely Cerrena maxima and Coriolopsis fulvocinerea, were purified to homogeneity. The standard redox potentials of type 1 copper in the enzymes were determined and found to be 780, 790, 750, and 780 mV, respectively. The spectral and biochemical studies showed that the enzymes had no significant differences between the structures of their active sites (T1, T2, and T3). In spite of this fact, the basic biochemical properties as well as the redox potentials of the T 1 sites of the enzymes were found to be different. The molecular weights of the laccases range from 64 to 70 kDa, and their pl values range from 3.5 to 4.7. The pH-optima are in the range 3.5-5.2. The temperature optimum for activity is about 50 C. The thermal stabilities of the enzymes were studied. The catalytic and Michaelis constants for catechol, guaiacol, hydroquinone, sinapinic acid, and K4Fe(CN)(6) were determined. Based on these results as well as results obtained by comparing with published properties of several laccases, it could be concluded that T. hirsuta and Cerrena maxima laccases have some superior characteristics such as high stability, high activity, and low carbohydrate content, making them attractive objects for further investigations as well as for application in different areas of biotechnology. (C) 2004 Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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