A COMPARISON OF THE ENZYMOLOGICAL AND BIOPHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF 2 DISTINCT CLASSES OF DEHYDROQUINASE ENZYMES

This paper compares the biophysical and mechanistic properties of a typical type I dehydroquinase (DHQase), from the biosynthetic shikimate pathway of Escherichia coli, and a typical type II DHQase, from the quinate pathway of Aspergillus nidulans. C.d. shows that the two proteins have different secondary-structure compositions; the type I enzyme contains approx. 50% alpha-helix while the type II enzyme contains approx. 75% alpha-helix. The stability of the two types of DHQase was compared by denaturant-induced unfolding, as monitored by c.d., and by differential scanning calorimetry. The type II enzyme unfolds at concentrations of denaturant 4-fold greater than the type I and through a series of discrete transitions, while the type I enzyme unfolds in a single transition. These differences in conformational stability were also evident from the calorimetric experiments which show that type I DHQase unfolds as a single co-operative dimer at 57-degrees-C whereas the type II enzyme unfolds above 82-degrees-C and through a series of transitions suggesting higher orders of structure than that seen for the type I enzyme. Sedimentation and M(r) analysis of both proteins by analytical ultracentrifugation is consistent with the unfolding data. The type I DHQase exists predominantly as a dimer with M(r) = 46000 +/- 2000 (a weighted average affected by the presence of monomer) and has a sedimentation coefficient s0(20.W) = 4.12 (+/- 0.08) S whereas the type II enzyme is a dodecamer, weight-average M(r) = 190 000 +/- 10000 and has a sedimentation coefficient, s0(20.W) = 9.96 (+/- 0.21) S. Although both enzymes have reactive histidine residues in the active site and can be inactivated by diethyl pyrocarbonate, the possibility that these structurally dissimilar enzymes catalyse the same dehydration reaction by the same catalytic mechanism is deemed unlikely by three criteria: (1) they have very different pH/log k(cat.) profiles and pH optima; (2) imine intermediates. which are known to play a central role in the mechanism of type I enzymes, could not be detected (by borohydride reduction) in the type II enzyme; (3) unlike Schiff's base-forming type I enzymes, there are no conserved lysine residues in type II amino acid sequences.