4.4 Article

Sulfide:quinone oxidoreductase in membranes of the hyperthermophilic bacterium Aquifex aeolicus (VF5)

期刊

ARCHIVES OF MICROBIOLOGY
卷 173, 期 4, 页码 233-244

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s002030000135

关键词

Aquifex aeolicus; sulfide oxidation; sulfide : quinone oxidoreductase hyperthermophiles; cytochrome bc complex

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The sulfide-dependent reduction of exogenous ubiquinone by membranes of the hyperthermophilic chemotrophic bacterium Aquifex aeolicus (VF5), the sulfide-dependent consumption of oxygen and the reduction of cytochromes by sulfide in membranes were studied. Sulfide reduced decyl-ubiquinone with a maximal rate of up to 3.5 mu mol (mg protein)(-1) min(-1) at 20 degreesC. Rates of 220 nmol (mg protein)-1 min-1 for the sulfide-dependent consumption of oxygen and 480 nmol (mg protein)(-1) min(-1) for the oxidation of sulfide at 20 degreesC were estimated. The reactions were sensitive towards 2-n-nonyl-4-hydroxyquinoline-N-oxide, but insensitive towards cyanide. Both reduction of decyl-ubiquinone and consumption of oxygen by sulfide rapidly increased with increasing temperature. For the sulfide-dependent respiratory activity, a sulfide-to-oxygen ratio of 2.3+/-0.2 was measured. This indicates that sulfide was oxidized to the level of zero-valent sulfur. Reduction of cytochromes by sulfide was monitored with an LED-array spectrophotometer. Reduction of cytochrome b was stimulated by 2-n-nonyl-4-hydroxyquinoline-N-oxide in the presence of excess sulfide under oxic conditions. This oxidant-induced reduction of cytochrome b suggests that electron transport from sulfide to oxygen in A. aeolicus employs the cytochrome bc complex via the quinone pool. Comparison of the amino acid sequence with the sequence of the sulfide:quinone oxidoreductase from Rhodobacter capsulatus and the flavocytochrome c from Allochromatium vinosum revealed that the sulfide:quinone oxidoreductase from A. aeolicus belongs to the glutathione reductase family of flavoproteins.

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