| Quick navigation: | Home | Site Map || References | Biography || Copyright | Other copyright | Contact us | | |
|
[ccp4bb] Selenomethionine reduction v.s. disulfide bond |
|
CCP4bb navigationCCP4bb <-- 2007 <-- April 2007 <-- 16 April 2007Subject: Selenomethionine reduction v.s. disulfide bond From: Tiancen Hu tony_htc {- at -} 126 {- dot -} COM Date: 2007-04-16 Sorry for the non-CCP4 question. We're working on selenomethionine substitution of a protein (4 Met/185 a.a.) containing two disulfide bonds. The protein was expressed in E.Coli. with non-reduced cytoplasm (OrigamiB). Now we're in a dilemma of deciding whether to add DTT during the purification of SeMet proteins. On one hand, we're informed to keep the SeMet as reduced as possbile during purification however risking damaging our disulfide bond. But on the other hand, some papers have reported that oxidized SeMet could enhance the anamolous signals. (Acta Cryst. D (2000) D56, 785-788, Oxidation of selenomethionine: some MADness in the method!; Acta Cryst. D (2001) D57, MAD on threonine synthase: the phasing power of oxidized selenomethionine). We've tested the effect of DTT on breaking down the disulfide bonds and found that even 50mM DTT can only reduce part of our protein at 37 degree celsius for 10 minutes. My question is that is oxidation destined to breakdown or cause instability of SeMet? Will it be f! easible that we purify and crystallize the SeMet protein in a non-reduced enviroment just like our unlabelled native protein? Any suggestions, experience or references will be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance! Tiancen Hu Shanghai Institue of Materia Medica Rm. 2107, #555, ZuChongzhi Rd., PuDong Shanghai 201203 P.R. China CCP4bb navigationCCP4bb <-- 2007 <-- April 2007 <-- 16 April 2007 |
| ProteinCrystallography.org: Copyright 2006-2007 by Quid United Ltd |