3.9 Article

Substitution of methionine 63 or 83 in S100A9 and cysteine 42 in S100A8 abrogate the antifungal activities of S100A8/A9: potential role for oxidative regulation

期刊

FEMS IMMUNOLOGY AND MEDICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 55, 期 1, 页码 55-61

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-695X.2008.00498.x

关键词

Candida albicans; antifungal; calprotectin; S100A8; S100A9; oxidation

资金

  1. NIH [PO1 DE 07946, K16 DE 00386, T32 DE07204, K22DE017161-02]
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DENTAL &CRANIOFACIAL RESEARCH [K16DE000386, K22DE017161, P01DE007946, T32DE007204] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

S100A8 and S100A9 and their heterocomplex calprotectin (S100A8/A9) are abundant cytosolic constituents in human neutrophils previously shown to possess antifungal activity. This study was designed to investigate mechanisms involved in the modulation of the antifungal properties of S100A8/A9. S100A8, S100A9 and site-directed mutants of both proteins were tested for their antifungal effect against Candida albicans in microplate dilution assays. Whereas S100A8 alone did not inhibit fungal growth, S100A9 by itself had a moderate antifungal effect. Combining both proteins had the strongest effect. Supporting a potential role for oxidation in S100A8/A9, substitution of methionine 63 or 83 of S100A9 resulted in the loss of antifungal activity. Additionally, the substitution to alanine of cysteine 42 of S100A8 also caused a loss of S100A8's ability to enhance S100A9's antifungal effect. Overall, our data indicate that both S100A8 and S100A9 are required for their fully active antifungal effect and that oxidation regulates S100A8/A9 antifungal activity through mechanisms that remain to be elucidated and evaluated. Finally, together with our previous work describing the oxidation-sensitive anti-inflammatory effects of S100A8/A9, we propose that S100A8/A9 exerts an anti-inflammatory activity in healthy state and that conditions associated with oxidative stress activate the antifungal activity of S100A8/A9.

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