4.7 Article

Mechanism of Cadmium Ion Substitution in Mammalian Zinc Metallothionein and Metallothionein α Domain: Kinetic and Structural Studies

期刊

INORGANIC CHEMISTRY
卷 49, 期 14, 页码 6525-6534

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ic1003148

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [ES-04026, ES-04184]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cellular metallothionein (MT) protects against Cd2+ exposure through direct binding of the metal ion. The model reaction between rabbit liver Zn-7-MT-2 with Cd2+ was studied with stopped flow kinetics. Four kinetic steps were observable. Comparison of this reaction with an analog utilizing the MT Zn-4-alpha domain revealed that only the fastest step involved the Zn-3-beta domain. Each step of the Zn-4-alpha domain reaction with Cd2+ displayed hyperbolic dependence of the observed rate constant on Cd2+ concentration, with the first step comprising 50% of the total reaction and each of the other two, 25%. The two constants extracted from each of these relationships were interpreted as the equilibrium constant for the initial binding of Cd2+ to the Zn(4-n),Cd-n-thiolate cluster (n = 0-3) of the alpha domain and the first order rate constant for the exchange of Cd2+ for Zn2+ in the cluster. Activation enthalpies and entropies were determined for each constant. A suite of Zn(4-n),Cd-n-thiolate clusters (n = 0-3) was prepared by titration of the Zn-4-alpha domain with Cd-113(2+). The products were analyzed by one-dimensional Cd-113(2+) NMR spectroscopy to define the distribution of Cd-113(2+) among the four cluster binding sites. Each of these species was also reacted with Cd2+. The properties of these reactions were similar to those extracted from the reaction of Cd2+ with the overall domain. Thus, the kinetic results were linked to Cd-113(2+) occupancy among the cluster metal binding sites. In turn, this linkage permitted the interpretation of the various constants determined for the reaction of Cd2+ with the Zn-4-alpha domain in relation to the alpha domain cluster structure.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据