Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Markert, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Arnold, U.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Markert, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Arnold, U.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Protein Engineering vol. 16 no. 12 pp. 1041-1046, 2003
© 2003 Oxford University Press

Proline versus charge concept for protein stabilization against proteolytic attack

Yvonne Markert, Jens Köditz, Renate Ulbrich-Hofmann and Ulrich Arnold1

Department of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, Martin-Luther Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Kurt-Mothes Strasse 3, 06120 Halle, Germany

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed. e-mail: arnold{at}biochemtech.uni-halle.de

The virtue of the so-called ‘proline concept’ and the ‘charge concept’ for stabilizing protease-susceptible regions of a protein structure was compared on bovine pancreatic ribonuclease A. Alanine 20 and serine 21, both of which are located in a loop that is susceptible to the unspecific proteases subtilisin Carlsberg, subtilisin BPN', proteinase K and elastase, were replaced with proline or lysine by site-directed mutagenesis. The rate constant of proteolysis was decreased by up to three orders of magnitude for the proline mutants depending on the site of the mutation and the protease used. In contrast, substitution by lysine increased the proteolytic resistance by only one order of magnitude characterizing the ‘proline concept’ as superior to the ‘charge concept’. Although the four applied proteases are considered to be unspecific, the degree of stabilization of the ribonuclease molecule varied considerably, indicating the impact of individual differences in their substrate specificity on the proteolytic resistance and degradation pathway of the target protein.

Received May 12, 2003; revised October 23, 2003; accepted October 30, 2003


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J BiochemHome page
M. Sakaguchi, M. Matsuzaki, K. Niimiya, J. Seino, Y. Sugahara, and M. Kawakita
Role of Proline Residues in Conferring Thermostability on Aqualysin I
J. Biochem., February 1, 2007; 141(2): 213 - 220.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.