CONFORMATION OF 2 PEPTIDES CORRESPONDING TO HUMAN APOLIPOPROTEIN-C-I RESIDUES 7-24 AND 35-53 IN THE PRESENCE OF SODIUM DODECYL-SULFATE BY CD AND NMR-SPECTROSCOPY

被引:65
作者
ROZEK, A
BUCHKO, GW
CUSHLEY, RJ
机构
[1] SIMON FRASER UNIV,INST MOLEC BIOL & BIOCHEM,BURNABY,BC V5A 1S6,CANADA
[2] SIMON FRASER UNIV,DEPT CHEM,BURNABY,BC V5A 1S6,CANADA
关键词
D O I
10.1021/bi00022a013
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Peptides corresponding to the proposed lipid-binding domains of human apolipoprotein C-I, residues 7-24 (ALDKLKEFGNTLEDKARE) and 35-53 (SAKMREWFSETFQKVKEKL), were studied by CD and two-dimensional H-1 NMR spectroscopy. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) was used to model the lipoprotein environment. Analysis of the CD data shows that both peptides lack well-defined structure in aqueous solution but adopt helical, ordered structures upon the addition of SDS. The helical nature of the peptides in the presence of SDS was confirmed by H-alpha secondary shifts. A total of 199 (apoC-I(7-24)) and 266 (apoC-I(35-53)) distance restraints were used in distance geometry and simulated annealing calculations to generate average structures for both peptides in aqueous solutions containing SDS. The backbone (N, C-alpha, C=O) RMSD from the average structure of an ensemble of 20 structures was 0.73 +/- 0.22 and 0.48 +/- 0.14 Angstrom for apoC-I(7-24) and apoC-I(35-53), respectively. In the presence of SDS, the distance geometry and simulated annealing calculations show that both peptides adopt well-defined amphipathic helices with distinct hydrophobic and hydrophilic faces. The calculated structures are discussed relative to predicted structures. Comparing our CD and NMR results for the apoC-I fragments in SDS with CD results of others obtained in the presence of dimyristoylphosphatidylcholine indicates that SDS may be a better model of the lipoprotein environment.
引用
收藏
页码:7401 / 7408
页数:8
相关论文
共 49 条
[1]  
Albers J.J., Lin J.T., Roberts G.P., Artery, 5, pp. 61-75, (1979)
[2]  
Bairaktari E., Mierke D.F., Mammi S., Peggion E., Biochemistry, 29, pp. 10090-10096, (1990)
[3]  
Baker E.N., Hubbard R.E., Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol., 44, pp. 97-179, (1984)
[4]  
Bax A., Davis D.G., J. Magn. Reson., 65, pp. 355-360, (1985)
[5]  
Brasseur R., Lins L., Vanloo B., Ruysschaert J.-M., Rosseneu M., Proteins: Struct., Fund., Genet., 13, pp. 246-257, (1992)
[6]  
Braunschweiler L., Ernst R.R., J. Magn. Reson., 53, pp. 521-528, (1983)
[7]  
Bruch M.D., Dhingra M.M., Gierasch L.M., Proteins: Struct., Funct., Genet., 10, pp. 130-139, (1991)
[8]  
Clark-Lewis I., Aebersold R.A., Ziltner H., Schrader J.W., Hood L.A., Kent S.B.H., Science, 231, pp. 134-139, (1986)
[9]  
Epand R.M., Surewicz W.K., Hughes D.W., Mantsch H., Segrest J.P., Allen T.M., Anantharamaiah G.M., J. Biol. Chem., 255, pp. 4628-4635, (1989)
[10]  
Fielding C.J., Shore V.G., Fielding P.E., Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun., 46, pp. 1493-1498, (1972)