4.4 Article

Continued Protein Synthesis at Low [ATP] and [GTP] Enables Cell Adaptation during Energy Limitation

期刊

JOURNAL OF BACTERIOLOGY
卷 191, 期 3, 页码 1083-1091

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JB.00852-08

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM060615, R01-GM60615] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

One of biology's critical ironies is the need to adapt to periods of energy limitation by using the energy-intensive process of protein synthesis. Although previous work has identified the individual energy-requiring steps in protein synthesis, we still lack an understanding of the dependence of protein biosynthesis rates on [ATP] and [GTP]. Here, we used an integrated Escherichia coli cell-free platform that mimics the intracellular, energy-limited environment to show that protein synthesis rates are governed by simple Michaelis-Menten dependence on [ATP] and [GTP] (K-m(ATP), 27 +/- 4 mu M; K-m(GTP), 14 +/- 2 mu M). Although the system-level GTP affinity agrees well with the individual affinities of the GTP-dependent translation factors, the system-level Km ATP is unexpectedly low. Especially under starvation conditions, when energy sources are limited, cells need to replace catalysts that become inactive and to produce new catalysts in order to effectively adapt. Our results show how this crucial survival priority for synthesizing new proteins can be enforced after rapidly growing cells encounter energy limitation. A diminished energy supply can be rationed based on the relative ATP and GTP affinities, and, since these affinities for protein synthesis are high, the cells can adapt with substantial changes in protein composition. Furthermore, our work suggests that characterization of individual enzymes may not always predict the performance of multicomponent systems with complex interdependencies. We anticipate that cell-free studies in which complex metabolic systems are activated will be valuable tools for elucidating the behavior of such systems.

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

4.4
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