![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 280, Issue 7, 5803-5811, February 18, 2005
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

From the Structure-Fun Laboratory, Eppley Institute for Research in Cancer and Allied Diseases, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska 68198-6805
To understand the functional differences between a nontoxic membrane anchor corresponding to the N-terminal sequence of the Escherichia coli enzyme IIAGlc and a toxic antimicrobial peptide aurein 1.2 of similar sequence, a series of peptides was designed to bridge the gap between them. An alteration of a single residue of the membrane anchor converted it into an antibacterial peptide. Circular dichroism spectra indicate that all peptides are disordered in water but helical in micelles. Structures of the peptides were determined in membrane-mimetic micelles by solution NMR spectroscopy. The quality of the distance-based structures was improved by including backbone angle restraints derived from a set of chemical shifts (1H
, 15N, 13C
, and 13C
) from natural abundance two-dimensional heteronuclear correlated spectroscopy. Different from the membrane anchor, antibacterial peptides possess a broader and longer hydrophobic surface, allowing a deeper penetration into the membrane, as supported by intermolecular nuclear Overhauser effect cross-peaks between the peptide and short chain dioctanoyl phosphatidylglycerol. An attempt was made to correlate the NMR structures of these peptides with their antibacterial activity. The activity of this group of peptides does not correlate exactly with helicity, amphipathicity, charge, the number of charges, the size of the hydrophobic surface, or hydrophobic transfer free energy. However, a correlation is established between the peptide activity and membrane perturbation potential, which is defined by interfacial hydrophobic patches and basic residues in the case of cationic peptides. Indeed, 31P solid state NMR spectroscopy of lipid bilayers showed that the extent of lipid vesicle disruption by these peptides is proportional to their membrane perturbation potential.
Received for publication, September 2, 2004 , and in revised form, November 19, 2004.
The atomic coordinates and NMR restraints (codes 1VM2, 1VM3, 1VM4, and 1VM5) have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank, Research Collaboratory for Structural Bioinformatics, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ (http://www.rcsb.org/).
* This work was supported by the startup fund from the Eppley Institute, University of Nebraska Medical Center (to G. W.). The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Eppley Institute, Rm. 3018, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 986805 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-6805. Tel.: 402-559-4176; Fax: 402-559-4651; E-mail: gwang{at}unmc.edu.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
Y.-L. Pan, J. T.-J. Cheng, J. Hale, J. Pan, R. E. W. Hancock, and S. K. Straus Characterization of the Structure and Membrane Interaction of the Antimicrobial Peptides Aurein 2.2 and 2.3 from Australian Southern Bell Frogs Biophys. J., April 15, 2007; 92(8): 2854 - 2864. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| All ASBMB Journals | Molecular and Cellular Proteomics |
| Journal of Lipid Research | ASBMB Today |