These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Relationship between thiol group modification and the binding site for fructose 2,6-bisphosphate on rabbit liver fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase.
    Author: Liu F, Fromm HJ.
    Journal: J Biol Chem; 1988 Jul 15; 263(20):10035-9. PubMed ID: 2838468.
    Abstract:
    A thiol group present in rabbit liver fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase is capable of reacting rapidly with N-ethylmaleimide (NEM) with a stoichiometry of one per monomer. Either fructose 1,6-bisphosphate or fructose 2,6-bisphosphate at 500 microM protected against the loss of fructose 2,6-bisphosphate inhibition potential when fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase was treated with NEM in the presence of AMP for up to 20 min. Fructose 2,6-bisphosphate proved more effective than fructose 1,6-bisphosphate when fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase was treated with NEM for 90-120 min. The NEM-modified enzyme exhibited a significant loss of catalytic activity. Fructose 2,6-bisphosphate was more effective than the substrate in protecting against the thiol group modification when the ligands are present with the enzyme and NEM. 100 microM fructose 2,6-bisphosphate, a level that should almost saturate the inhibitory binding site of the enzyme under our experimental conditions, affords only partial protection against the loss of activity of the enzyme caused by the NEM modification. In addition, the inhibition pattern for fructose 2,6-bisphosphate of the NEM-derivatized enzyme was found to be linear competitive, identical to the type of inhibition observed with the native enzyme. The KD for the modified enzyme was significantly greater than that of untreated fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase. Examination of space-filling models of the two bisphosphates suggest that they are very similar in conformation. On the basis of these observations, we suggest that fructose 1,6-bisphosphate and fructose 2,6-bisphosphate occupy overlapping sites within the active site domain of fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase. Fructose 2,6-bisphosphate affords better shielding against thiol-NEM modification than fructose 1,6-bisphosphate; however, the difference between the two ligands is quantitative rather than qualitative.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]