4.4 Article

Moritella cold-active dihydrofolate reductase:: Are there natural limits to optimization of catalytic efficiency at low temperature?

期刊

JOURNAL OF BACTERIOLOGY
卷 185, 期 18, 页码 5519-5526

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JB.185.18.5519-5526.2003

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adapting metabolic enzymes of microorganisms to low temperature environments may require a difficult compromise between velocity and affinity. We have investigated catalytic efficiency in a key metabolic enzyme (dihydrofolate reductase) of Moritella profunda sp. nov., a strictly psychrophilic bacterium with a maximal growth rate at 2degreesC or less. The enzyme is monomeric (M-r = 18,291), 55% identical to its Escherichia coli counterpart, and displays T-m and denaturation enthalpy changes much lower than E. coli and Thermotoga maritima homologues. Its stability curve indicates a maximum stability above the temperature range of the organism, and predicts cold denaturation below 0degreesC. At mesophilic temperatures the apparent K-m value for dihydrofolate is 50- to 80-fold higher than for E. coli, Lactobacillus casei, and T. maritima dihydrofolate reductases, whereas the apparent K-m value for NADPH, though higher, remains in the same order of magnitude. At 5degreesC these values are not significantly modified. The enzyme is also much less sensitive than its E. coli counterpart to the inhibitors methotrexate and trimethoprim. The catalytic efficiency (k(cat)/K-m) with respect to dihydrofolate is thus much lower than in the other three bacteria. The higher affinity for NADPH could have been maintained by selection since NADPH assists the release of the product tetrahydrofolate. Dihydrofolate reductase adaptation to low temperature thus appears to have entailed a pronounced trade-off between affinity and catalytic velocity. The kinetic features of this psychrophilic protein suggest that enzyme adaptation to low temperature may be constrained by natural limits to optimization of catalytic efficiency.

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