4.3 Article

Characterization of reconstituted F-o from wild-type Escherichia coli and identification of two other fluxes co-purifying with F-o

期刊

CELL BIOCHEMISTRY AND BIOPHYSICS
卷 34, 期 3, 页码 305-320

出版社

HUMANA PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1385/CBB:34:3:305

关键词

F1Fo ATPase; reconstitution; H+ channel; proton channel; lipids; bilayer

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM54108] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [MH50003] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [R01GM054108] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [R01MH050003, R29MH050003] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We purified the ATPase F-o sector from a nonoverexpressing strain of Escherichia coli, reconstituted it into lipid vesicles made of either asolectin or two different mixtures of purified lipids, and measured proton flux through the reconstituted proton channel. We measured single-channel conductances and found that F-o activity depends on both lipids and reconstitution methods. In asolectin vesicles, F-o has a single-channel conductance of about 0.2 fS. Additionally, the relatively impure F-o prepared from cells carrying single-copy ATPase genes allowed us to observe two other fluxes, a nonselective cation leak (C-L) and a slow H+ flux (H-s). Unlike the F-o flux, these fluxes could not be blocked by the F-o inhibitor DCCD. The C-L reduces the total apparent trapped volume inside vesicles and therefore must equilibrate both H+ and K+ in the vesicles that contain it. When reconstituted into bilayers, these F-o preparations displayed a 120 pS cation channel with characteristics consistent with C-L flux. The H-s conducts only H+ but at a slower rate than the F-o. We were therefore able to: 1) quantitate the single-channel conductance of the F-o, 2) demonstrate that our F-o purification method co-purified other membrane proteins that have ion-conduction properties, and 3) show that certain lipids are necessary for functional reconstitution of F-o.

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

4.3
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