4.4 Article

Enzymatic Characterization and In Vivo Function of Five Terminal Oxidases in Pseudomonas aeruginosa

期刊

JOURNAL OF BACTERIOLOGY
卷 196, 期 24, 页码 4206-4215

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JB.02176-14

关键词

-

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS)
  2. Sapporo Bioscience Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ubiquitous opportunistic pathogen Pseudomonas aeruginosa has five aerobic terminal oxidases: bo(3)-type quinol oxidase (Cyo), cyanide-insensitive oxidase (CIO), aa(3)-type cytochrome c oxidase (aa(3)), and two cbb(3)-type cytochrome c oxidases (cbb(3)-1 and cbb(3)-2). These terminal oxidases are differentially regulated under various growth conditions and are thought to contribute to the survival of this microorganism in a wide variety of environmental niches. Here, we constructed multiple mutant strains of P. aeruginosa that express only one aerobic terminal oxidase to investigate the enzymatic characteristics and in vivo function of each enzyme. The K-m values of Cyo, CIO, and aa(3) for oxygen were similar and were 1 order of magnitude higher than those of cbb(3)-1 and cbb(3)-2, indicating that Cyo, CIO, and aa(3) are low-affinity enzymes and that cbb(3)-1 and cbb(3)-2 are high-affinity enzymes. Although cbb(3)-1 and cbb(3)-2 exhibited different expression patterns in response to oxygen concentration, they had similar Km values for oxygen. Both cbb(3)-1 and cbb(3)-2 utilized cytochrome c(4) as the main electron donor under normal growth conditions. The electron transport chains terminated by cbb(3)-1 and cbb(3)-2 generate a proton gradient across the cell membrane with similar efficiencies. The electron transport chain of aa(3) had the highest proton translocation efficiency, whereas that of CIO had the lowest efficiency. The enzymatic properties of the terminal oxidases reported here are partially in agreement with their regulatory patterns and may explain the environmental adaptability and versatility of P. aeruginosa.

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