2001
DOI: 10.1002/1097-0134(20010301)42:4<512::aid-prot90>3.0.co;2-m
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Major differences in stability and dimerization properties of two chimeric mutants of human stefins

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2). Salt was added to 0.2 M to shield electrostatic interactions, which makes the data more comparable to those in GuHCl (Žerovnik et al 1992; Kenig et al 2001). The free energies of unfolding of −44 ± 5 kJ/mol obtained for both the G4R mutant and the wild‐type protein (Table 2) show that stefin B and the G4R mutant are stable proteins.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 60%
“…2). Salt was added to 0.2 M to shield electrostatic interactions, which makes the data more comparable to those in GuHCl (Žerovnik et al 1992; Kenig et al 2001). The free energies of unfolding of −44 ± 5 kJ/mol obtained for both the G4R mutant and the wild‐type protein (Table 2) show that stefin B and the G4R mutant are stable proteins.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 60%
“…The use of chimeras to evaluate contributions of protein segments to the stability and folding of the whole protein poses its own challenges and complications. Packing defects, resulting from creation of new interfaces between protein fragments, often reduce the overall thermodynamic stability (Kenig et al 2001). This masks any potential positive contribution of the studied fragment to the stability of the parent protein.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%