3.9 Article

Engineering stability in NADPH oxidases: A common strategy for enzyme production

期刊

MOLECULAR MEMBRANE BIOLOGY
卷 34, 期 3-8, 页码 67-76

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09687688.2018.1535141

关键词

NADPH oxidase; protein engineering; reactive oxygen species; membrane protein

资金

  1. Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro [AIRC] [IG19808]
  2. Italian Ministry for University and Research [PRIN2015-20152TE5PK_004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

NADPH oxidases (NOXs) are membrane enzymes whose sole function is the generation of reactive oxygen species. Humans have seven NOX isoenzymes that feature distinct functions in immune response and cell signaling but share the same catalytic core comprising a FAD-binding dehydrogenase domain and a heme-binding transmembrane domain. We previously described a mutation that stabilizes the dehydrogenase domain of a prokaryotic homolog of human NOX5. The thermostable mutant exhibited a large 19 degrees C increase in the apparent melting temperature (app T-m) and a much tighter binding of the FAD cofactor, which allowed the crystallization and structure determination of the domain holo-form. Here, we analyze the transferability of this mutation onto prokaryotic and eukaryotic full-length NOX enzymes. We found that the mutation exerts a significative stabilizing effect on the full-length NOX5 from both Cylindrospermum stagnale (app T-m increase of 8 degrees C) and Homo sapiens (app Delta T-m of 2 degrees C). Enhanced thermal stability resulted in more homogeneous preparations of the bacterial NOX5 with less aggregation problems. Moreover, we also found that the mutation increases the overall expression of recombinant human NOX4 and NOX5 in mammalian cells. Such a 2-5-fold increase is mainly due to the lowered cell toxicity, which leads to higher biomasses. Because of the high sequence identity of the catalytic core within this family of enzymes, this strategy can be a general tool to boost the production of all NOXs.

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

3.9
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