4.6 Article

P450 reductase and cytochrome b5 interactions with cytochrome P450: Effects on house fly CYP6A1 catalysis

期刊

INSECT BIOCHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
卷 38, 期 11, 页码 1008-1015

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ibmb.2008.08.007

关键词

P450 reductase; Cytochrome b(5); Stoichiometry; Uncoupling; Xenobiotic metabolism; Reactive oxygen species

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [GM39014, ES06694]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The interactions of protein components of the xenobiotic-metabolizing cytochrome P450 system, CYP6A1, P450 reductase, and cytochrome b(5) from the house fly (Musca domestica) have been characterized. CYP6A1 activity is determined by the concentration of the CYP6A1-P450 reductase complex, regardless of which protein is present in excess. Both holo- and apo-b(5) stimulated CYP6A1 heptachlor epoxidase and steroid hydroxylase activities and influenced the regioselectivity of testosterone hydroxylation. The conversion of CYP6A1 to its P420 form was decreased by the addition of apo-b(5). The effects of cytochrome b5 may involve allosteric modification of the P450 enzyme that modify the conformation of the active site. The overall stoichiometry of the P450 reaction was substrate-dependent. High uncoupling of CYP6A1 was observed with generation of hydrogen peroxide, in excess over the concomitant testosterone hydroxylation or heptachlor epoxidation. Inclusion of cytochrome b5 in the reconstituted system improved efficiency of oxygen consumption and electron utilization from NADPH, or coupling of the P450 reaction. Depending on the reconstitution conditions, coupling efficiency varied from 8 to 25% for heptachlor epoxidation, and from 11 to 70% for testosterone hydroxylation. Because CYP6A1 is a P450 involved in insecticide resistance, this suggests that xenobiotic metabolism by constitutively overexpressed P450s may be linked to significant oxidative stress in the cell that may carry a fitness cost. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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