4.8 Article

Comparison of the binding of cadmium(II), mercury(II), and arsenic(III) to the de novo designed peptides TRI L12C and TRI L16C

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 124, 期 27, 页码 8042-8054

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja017520u

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIEHS NIH HHS [1F32 ES05888-01] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Designed alpha-helical peptides of the TRI family with a general sequence Ac-G(LKALEEK)(4)G-CONH2 were used as model systems for the study of metal-protein interactions. Variants containing cysteine residues in positions 12 (TRI L12C) and 16 (TRI L16C) were used for the metal binding studies. Cd(II) binding was investigated, and the results were compared with previous and current work on Hg(II) and As(Ill) binding. The metal peptide assemblies were studied with the use of UV, CD, EXAFS, Cd-113 NMR, and Cd-111m perturbed angular correlation spectroscopy. The metalated peptide aggregates exhibited pH-dependent behavior. At high pH values, Cd(II) was bound to the three sulfurs of the three-stranded a-helical coiled coils. A mixture of two species was observed, including Cd(II) in a trigonal planar geometry. The complexes have UV bands at 231 nm (20 600 M-1 cm(-1)) for TRI L12C and 232 nm (22 600 M-1 cm-1) for TRI L16C, an average Cd-S bond length of 2.49 Angstrom for both cases, and a Cd-113 NMR chemical shift at 619 ppm (Cd-II(TRI L12C)(3)(-)) or 625 ppm (Cd-II(TRI-L16C)(3)(-)). Nuclear quadrupole interactions show that two different Cd species are present for both peptides. One species with omega(0) = 0.45 rad/ns and low eta is attributed to a trigonal planar Cd-(Cys)(3) site. The other, with a smaller omega(0), is attributed to a four-coordinate Cd-(Cys)(3)(H2O) species. At low pH, no metal binding was observed, Hg(II) binding to TRI L12C was also found to be pH dependent, and a 3:1 sulfur-to-mercury(II) species was observed at pH 9.4. These metal peptide complexes provide insight into heavy metal binding and metalloregulatory proteins such as MerR or CadC.

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