3.9 Article

Roles of quaternary structure and cysteine residues in the activity of human serine racemase

期刊

BMC BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2091-12-63

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute on Aging (USA) [P01AG012411]
  2. Lanzhou Univ. in Gansu, P.R. China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: D-serine is an important coagonist at the NR1 subunit of the NMDA receptor class of glutamate receptors. It is chiefly synthesized in the CNS by serine racemase (SR). Regulation of SR activity is still poorly understood. As step toward developing reagents and methods for investigating SR in vitro, we analyzed structure-function relationships of a recombinant enzyme of human sequence. Results: Michaelis-Menten kinetic analysis indicated a KM value of 14 mM and V-max value of 3.66 mu mol.mg(-1).hr(-1) when L-serine was used as a substrate for purified SR. Gel-filtration chromatography and protein cross-linking experiments revealed that dimer is the major oligomeric form of recombinant SR in aqueous solution, though the proportions of monomer, tetramer, and larger aggregates differed somewhat with the specific buffer used. These buffers also altered activity in a manner correlating with the relative abundance of dimer. Activity assays showed that the dimeric gel-filtration fraction held the highest activity. Chemical reduction with DTT increased the activity of SR by elevating V-max; cystamine, a reagent that blocks sulfhydryl groups, abolished SR activity. Gel-filtration chromatography and western blot analysis indicated that DTT enhanced the recovery of noncovalent SR dimer. Conclusions: These data suggest that SR is most active as a noncovalent dimer containing one or more free sulfhydryls in the enzyme's active center or a modulatory site. Buffer composition and reduction/oxidation status during preparation can dramatically impact interpretations of SR activity. These findings also highlight the possibility that SR is sensitive to oxidative stress in vivo.

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

3.9
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