1965
DOI: 10.1016/0006-291x(65)90204-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The mitochondrial structural proteins from wild-type and respiratory-deficient yeasts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
0
2

Year Published

1967
1967
1979
1979

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
2
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The results presented in this communication differ from those obtained by Iiatoh and Sanukida [15] who tested the reaction between SP and anti-SP antisera using immunodiffusion in agar gels and a passive cutaneous anaphylactic reaction and were unable to detect any difference between wSP and pSP. It is evident that the methods employed by these authors were not suited to reveal the subtle antigenic m e rence between the two otherwise very similar protein preparations.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The results presented in this communication differ from those obtained by Iiatoh and Sanukida [15] who tested the reaction between SP and anti-SP antisera using immunodiffusion in agar gels and a passive cutaneous anaphylactic reaction and were unable to detect any difference between wSP and pSP. It is evident that the methods employed by these authors were not suited to reveal the subtle antigenic m e rence between the two otherwise very similar protein preparations.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…It was thus reasonable to assume that this change would be reflected in an altered composition of the mitochondrial structural protein. Previous studies, however, which involved amino-acid analyses and immunological methods, failed to detect any difference between the structural protein from mitochondria of wild-type yeast (wSP) and that of a cytoplasmic ("petite colonie") mutant (pSP) [15]. The present work, in contrast, provides electrophoretic and immunological evidence for the absence from pSP of at least one of the components of WSP.…”
Section: 3contrasting
confidence: 80%
“…In the ultracentrifuge a solution of the protein prepared by the method of Richardson et al (1964) and dissolved in 0.5% sodium dodecyl sulfate shows a single symmetrical peak although there is some material which sediments very rapidly to the bottom of the cell. The average sedimentation velocity constant of the single peak (three runs) wass20lU = 1.96 ± 0.04 S which compares very closely with the value of s2o,« = 1.95 obtained by Katoh and Sanukida (1965) for yeast mitochondrial structural protein and with the values of Sio.u = 1.9-2.2 found by Criddle et al (1962) for beef heart mitochondrial structural protein and from which they estimated a molecular weight of 22,000 for the monomeric form of the proteins in sodium dodecyl sulfate.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Like mitochondrial structural proteins it is insoluble at neutral pH, in 8 m urea at pH 7.2, in 1% Triton X-100 at pH 7.2, but dissolves in 0.1% sodium dodecyl sulfate at pH 7.4 and in alkali in pH 11 (Criddle et al, 1962). It also binds phospholipids and values for the sedimentation velocity coefficient of the main protein component when dissolved in sodium dodecyl sulfate at pH 7.4 are extremely close to values reported for both beef heart and yeast mitochondrial structural protein (Criddle et al, 1962;Katoh and Sanukida, 1965). Like mitochondrial structural protein it is inhomogeneous when dissolved in phenol-acetic acid-2 m urea (MacLennan and Tzagoloff, 1968).…”
supporting
confidence: 61%