1989
DOI: 10.1042/bj2610197
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Photoaffinity labelling of isopenicillin N synthetase by laser-flash photolysis

Abstract: Isopenicillin N synthetase (IPNS) from Acremonium chrysogenum was photolabelled by laser-flash photolysis in the presence of a diazirinyl-containing substrate, 2-[3-(3-trifluoromethyl-3H-diazirin-3-yl)-phenoxy]acetyl-S- methyloxycarbonylsulphenyl-L-cysteinyl-D-valine (DCV). Labelling of IPNS by DCV is partially inhibited in the presence of an excess of L-alpha-aminoadipoyl-L-cysteinyl-D-valine (ACV), the natural substrate. In the absence of light, DCV is converted into the corresponding penicillin with compara… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

1990
1990
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thereafter, the relative influence of substrate binding, cofactor release and product release can be investigated to help in solving the mechanistic function of the enzyme. The milieu towards this target has been concentrated on studying the primary structure of IPNS [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15], its protein interaction with other molecules to determine the number of binding ligands involved [4][5][6][7], the functional characteristics of ligand binding sites through affinity labelling [24], chemical modification of reactive groups [3], and finally, specific modification of protein structure through site-directed mutagenesis [27]. So far, only site-directed mutagenesis of cysteine residues in clPNS [27] has been carried out in view of their conserved presence in IPNS obtained from various sources.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thereafter, the relative influence of substrate binding, cofactor release and product release can be investigated to help in solving the mechanistic function of the enzyme. The milieu towards this target has been concentrated on studying the primary structure of IPNS [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15], its protein interaction with other molecules to determine the number of binding ligands involved [4][5][6][7], the functional characteristics of ligand binding sites through affinity labelling [24], chemical modification of reactive groups [3], and finally, specific modification of protein structure through site-directed mutagenesis [27]. So far, only site-directed mutagenesis of cysteine residues in clPNS [27] has been carried out in view of their conserved presence in IPNS obtained from various sources.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The activity of IPNS in cell-free extracts was determined by bioassay using Micrococcus luteus ATCC 318 as the test organism and ACV (a generous gift from Professor J.E. Baldwin of Oxford University, UK) as the substrate [24]. One unit of activity is the amount of enzyme required to form the equivalent of 1 /xmol of isopenicillin N in 1 min.…”
Section: Assay Of Ipns Activitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Bioassay of products: Microbiological assays were performed by the hole‐plate method with the test organism Staphylococcus aureus N.C.T.C. 6571 or E. coli X580.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although an attempt to increase the peroxide loading density by coupling UHMWPE 4c with diazonium salt 7b gave material 8 , when converted into adduct 9 it did not exhibit any higher loading than the base material. That these loading levels had potential application was suggested by incubation of modified XAD 6a , UHMWPE 6c , and PP 6f with Streptococcus aureus overnight, and these demonstrated substantial levels of antibacterial activity, with kill zones of 38, 37, and 22 mm (a zone of 11 mm is considered to be inactive) (Figure ). That this bioactivity resulted from the combination of surface modification and the presence of hydrogen peroxide was established from appropriate controls; thus, modified polymers 4a , c and f which were not treated with hydrogen peroxide, and unmodified polystyrene XAD‐4, UHMWPE, and PP which were all treated with hydrogen peroxide followed by washing, displayed no biocidal activity in identical assays.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%