4.5 Article

Expression, purification, and characterization of the intra-cellular domain of the ANP receptor

期刊

BIOCHIMIE
卷 91, 期 7, 页码 888-893

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.biochi.2009.04.011

关键词

Guanylyl cyclase; Atrial natriuretic peptide receptor; Second messenger cGMP signaling; Purification and enzymatic characterization; Kinase-like domain

资金

  1. AHA [SDG 0335159N]
  2. NIH [R01 HL075329]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The membrane-bound atrial natriuretic peptide receptor (GCA) catalyzes the formation of cGMP from GTP in response to natriuretic peptide hormones. Previous structural studies have focused on the extracellular hormone binding domain of this receptor whereas its intra-cellular domain has not yet been amenable to such studies. We report here the baculovirus expression and purification of the GCA intracellular domain construct GCA(ID) comprising the complete intra-cellular region which includes the kinase-homology domain, coiled-coil region, and catalytic cyclase domain. The intra-cellular domain was enzymatically characterized in terms of guanylyl cyclase activity and the effects of ATP, manganese, and Triton X-100. Our results indicate that the activity of the intra-cellular domain of the ANP receptor is about 2 fold less active compared to a truncated cyclase domain construct lacking the kinase-like domain that was also expressed and purified. In addition, unlike the full length receptor, the intra-cellular domain could not be activated by Triton X-100/Mn2+ or its activity stimulated by ATP. These data therefore indicate that the major part of the transition from the basal state to the fully, ANP/ATP-dependent, activated state as well its stimulation/enhancement by Triton X-100/Mn2+ requires the full length receptor. These receptor insights could aid in the development of novel therapeutics as the GCA receptor is a key drug target for cardiovascular diseases. (C) 2009 Elsevier Masson 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