Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
From the Department of Biochemistry, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
It is widely accepted that urea and guanidine act as protein osinasc, liver alcohol dehydrogenase, yeast alcohol dehydro-
denaturants by breaking intramolecular hydrogen bonds (1). genase, uricase, and carboxypeptidase were obtained from
Loss of catalytic activity in the presence of urea is thought to Worthington Biochemical Corporation. The other enzymes
occur by elimination of bonds contributing to the tertiary struc- were prepared as described below.
ture of enzyme molecules. Subsequent restoration of structural Xanthine Ox&se-This enzyme was purified as previously
and catalytic properties by removal of the denaturant, “re- described (13). Assays were conducted in 0.05 M potassium
versible denaturation,” is usually interpreted as evidence of the phosphate, pH 7.8, containing 0.005% Versene Fe-3l, at 25” un-
1059
1060 Competitive Inhibition of Enzyme Activity by Urea Vol. 236, No. 4
Yeast alcohol dehydrogenase was assayed according to Racker sulfate fractionation of a homogenate which had been subjected
(20) with 5 x 10e3 M DPN and varying levels of ethanol. to basic lead acetate treatment (23). The procedure of Siirbo
Peroxidase was assayed spectrophotometrically by measuring (24) was used for assay.
the increase in absorbancy at 460 rnp when o-dianisidine was Sulfite-cytochrome c red&use (25) was prepared from dog liver
used as the substrate in 0.01 M phosphate buffer, pH 6.0. by the method developed in this laboratory. It was assayed
Bllcaline Phosphatase-Intestinal alkaline phosphatase was spectrophotometrically by following the change in absorbancy
assayed spectrophotometrically at 298 rnp with o-carboxyphenyl at 550 rnp when cytochrome c is reduced by the enzyme in pres-
phosphate as substrate (21) in 0.13 M glycine buffer, pH 9.1, ence of sulfite, in 0.05 M potassium phosphate buffer, pH 7.8.
containing 3.3 X 1O-3 M MgCl*. Uridine diphosphate glucose dehydrogenase, obtained from Dr.
Acid Phosphatase-The principle and method of assay were E. A. Davidson of this laboratory, was assayed by measuring the
similar to those for alkaline phosphatase. However, MgClt was increase in absorbancy when DPN is reduced in the presence of
omitted from the medium and 0.05 M acetate buffer, pH 5.0, uridine diphosphate glucose, in 0.1 M glycine buffer, pH 9.6.
was used in place of glycine. Cytochrome Oxidase-Two preparations, one made according
Hexokinase, obtained from the Sigma Chemical Company, was to Smith and Stotz (26) and the other a purified soluble prepara-
assayed by the method of Crane and Sols (22) with glucose as tion (27) generously donated by Dr. D. E. Green, were used.
the variable substrate. Activity assays were performed with p-phenylenediamine as
Rhodanese was prepared from fresh beef liver by ammonium reductant for cytochrome c (28) in 0.1 M phosphate buffer, pH
6.0.
Carboxypeptidase was assayed with carbobenzoxyglycyl-n-
Enzyme Substrate K, Ki
inhibition is dependent on the enzyme. In general, inhibition
is of the competitive type with respect to organic substrates but 34 M
is not competitive with those enzymes which catalyze reactions Xanthine oxidase Xanthine 3 x 10-e 0.2
involving inorganic substrates. Table I lists the enzymes Xanthine oxidase Salicylaldehyde 8 x 10-d 0.2
studied for which urea is a competitive inhibitor; Ki is shown Uridine diphosphate Uridine diphosphate 1.1 x IO-4 0.3
for each case. It is noteworthy that urea appears to be most glucose dehydrogen- glucose
effective as an inhibitor of enzymes acting on larger substrates ase
such as xanthine, uridine diphosphate glucose, and the pyruvate- Lactic dehydrogenase Pyruvate 4 x 10-b 0.6
Histidase n-Histidine 5.1 x 10-S 0.7
DPNH system. Aldehyde oxidase N’-Methylnicotina- 3 x 10-4 0.8
Two of the enzymes studied, milk xanthine oxidase and hepatic mide
aldehyde oxidase, can each catalyze the oxidation of two widely Aldehyde oxidase Salicylaldehyde 1.5 x 10-4 0.8
differing types of substrates. As shown in Table I, in each in- L-Amino acid oxidase L-Leucine 1 x IO-3 1.4
stance the Ki for urea is independent of the type of substrate. Acid phosphatase o-carboxyphenyl- 1.1 x 10-d 1.5
Thus, Ki for urea is 0.2 M when xanthine oxidase is acting on phosphate
either xanthine or salicylaldehyde whereas the K, values for the Tyrosinase L-Tyrosine 1.7 x 10-d 1.7
two substrates differ by two orders of magnitude. Similarly, Ki Uricase Uric acid 3.4 x IO-6 2.2
Carboxypeptidase Carbobenzoxy gly-
TABLE II
Enzymes not competitively inhibited by urea
M M
Alcohol dehydrogenase (liver) Ethanol Uncompetitive 8.7 x 10-4 0.35
Alcohol dehydrogenase (liver) Cyclohexanol Uncompetitive 4 x 10-d 0.48
Alcohol dehydrogenase (yeast). Ethanol Uncompetitive 3.3 x 10-e 0.6
Pyrophosphatase . Pyrophosphate Uncompetitive 1.6 X 1OW 4.3
Sulfite-cytochrome c reductase. Sulfite Uncompetitive 2.8 x 10-E 7.0
Catalase Hydrogen peroxide ?
Rhodanese Thiosulfate ? 1.6 X lo-”
Rhodanese Cyanide ? 3.8 X 1OW
Hexokinase................................ Glucose, ATP None
Cytochrome oxidase, Ferrocytochrome c None
Hexose diphosphatase. Fructose 1,6-diphosphate None
Alkaline phosphatase o-Carboxyphenylphosphate None
Peroxidase . Hydrogen peroxide, o-dianisidine None
TABLE IV
Effect of temperature on Ki for urea inhibition
K, Ki
Enzyme Substrate
* Values at 15”.
April 1961 .K. V. Rajagopalan, I. Fridovich, and P. Handler 1063
ularly significant if formation of the complex is accomplished by of the protein as urea molecules displace intramolecular hydro-
an “induced fit” as proposed by Koshland (43). gen-bonded groups.
The difference between the strength of the hydrogen bond and
SUMMARY
that of the deuterium bond is very small (44). If urea inhibition
is accomplished by displacement of hydrogen-bonded water, Xanthine oxidase has been found to be competitively inhibited
there should then be no significant difference in its ability to by low levels of urea. Analysis of urea inhibition of a series of
“compete” with Hz0 or DzO. The nonvariance of K, for xan- diverse enzymes indicates that urea is, in general, a competitive
thine (34) and Ki for urea inhibition when determined in a 99.5% inhibitor of enzymes which act upon organic substrates. Guani-
D20 medium is in accord with this hypothesis. dine is much more effective than urea as a competitive inhibitor
Urea Inhibition of fifetallo-enzymes--From the data here of the same group of enzymes. Relatively higher concentrations
presented, it appears that, in general, urea is relatively ineffective of urea are required to effect inhibition of enzymes which act
as an inhibitor of those metallo-enzymes whose metal component upon inorganic substrates and such inhibitions are either “non-
is involved in the formation of the enzyme-substrate complex. competitive” or “uncompetitive.”
Thus, hexokinase and alkaline phosphatase which show an ab- In general, enzymes which require metal ions as cofactors or
solute dependence upon the presence of Mg++, and the ferri- which contain a metal as an integral part of the enzyme molecule
porphyrin proteins, peroxidase and cytochrome oxidase, are com- were found to be resistant to inhibition by urea.
pletely unaffected by urea even at 2 M concentration. Uricase, K; for urea inhibition decreases with decreasing temperature.
a copper-protein (45), carboxypeptidase, a zinc protein (46), Urea inhibition remains competitive in 99.5% D20, in 50%
catalase, a hemoprotein, and inorganic pyrophosphatase which glycerol, and in the presence of inhibitory levels of dodecyl sul-
fate. A number of anions enhance the inhibition of xanthine
24. SBRBO, B. H., Acta Chem. Stand., 7, 1129 (1953). 39. CITRI, N., AND GARBER, N., Biochim. et Biophys. Acta, 38,
25. MACLEOD, R. M., FARKAS, W. F., FRIDOVICH, I., AND HAND- 50 (1960).
LER, P., ~&‘i-UtiO?Z P?-OC., 18, 279 (1959). 40. JOHNSON, F. H., EYRING, H., AND WILLIAMS, R. W., J. Cellu-
26. SMITH, L., AND STOTZ, E., J. Biol. Chem., 209, 819 (1954). lar Comp. Physiol., 20, 247 (1942).
27. AMBE, K. S., AND VEN~ATARAMAN, K., Biochem. and Biophys. 41. KLOTZ, I. M., AND LUBORSKY, S. W., J. Am. Chem. Sot., 81,
Reskarch Communs., 1, 133 (1959). 5119 (1969).
28. SMITH. L.. J. Biol. Chem.. 216. 833 (1956). 42. LUMRY, R., in P. D. BOYER, H. LARDY, AND K. MYRBBCK
29. FOLK, >. E., AND GLADNER; J. A., J. kol. k’hem., 236, 60 (1960). (Editors), The enzymes, Vol. I, 2nd edition, Academic Press,
30. FISKE, C. H., AND SUBBAROW, Y., J. Biol. Chem., 66, 375 Inc., New York, 1959, p. 157.
(1925). 43. KOSHLAND, D. E., JR., in P. D. BOYER, H. LARDY, AND K.
31. LINEWEAVER, H., AND BURK, D., J. Am. Chem. Sot., 66, 658 MYRB~CK (Editors), The enzymes, Vol. I, 2nd edition, Aca-
(1934). demic Press, Inc., New York, 1959, p. 305.
32. DIXON, M., Biochem. J., 66, 170 (1953). 44. TAYLOR, M. D., AND TEMPLEMAN, M. B., J. Am. Chem. Sot.,
33. GUTFREUND, H., AND STURTEVANT, J. M., Biochem. J., 73, 1 78, 2950 (1956).
(1959). 45. MAHLER. H. R.. HUBSCHER. G.. AND BAUM. I H.. I J. Biol. Chem..
34. PUTNAM, F. W., in M. L. ANSON, K. BAILEY, AND J. T. EDSALL 216, 6i5 (196;). ’ ’
(Editors), Advances in protein chemistry, Vol. .$, Academic 46. VALLEE, B. L., AND NEURATH, H., J. Biol. Chem., 217, 253
Press, Inc., New York, 1948, p. 80. (1955).
35. WILLS, E. D., Biochem. J., 67, 109 (1964). 47. WILLIAMS, R. J. P., in P. D. BOYER, H. LARDY, AND K. MYR-
36. MARROW, T. U., AND MORELAND, F. B., Enzymologia, 6, 226 BHCK (Editors), The enzymes, Vol. I, 2nd edition, Academic
(1939). Press, Inc., New York, 1959, p. 391.
37. INAGAKI, M., J. Biochem. Tokyo, 46, 893 (1959). 48. BURK, N. F., J. Phys. Chem., 47, 104 (1943).
38. NOZAKI, M., SEKUZU, I., HAGIHARA, B., YONETANI, T., NAKAI, 49. SIMPSON, R. B., AND KAUZMANN, W., J. Am. Chem. Sot., 76,
Alerts:
• When this article is cited
• When a correction for this article is posted