ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2016
Substrate and Cofactor Range Differences of Two Cysteine Dioxygenases from Ralstonia eutropha H16.
Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Data describing the cofactor additives effect on bioelectrocatalytic activity of «crude» extracts.Data in brief · 2020Article
- Genome characteristics dictate poly-R-(3)-hydroxyalkanoate production in Cupriavidus necator H16.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cysteine dioxygenases (Cdos), which catalyze the sulfoxidation of cysteine to cysteine sulfinic acid (CSA), have been extensively studied in eukaryotes because of their roles in several diseases. In contrast, only a few prokaryotic enzymes of this type have been investigated. In Ralstonia eutropha H16, two Cdo homologues (CdoA and CdoB) have been identified previously. In vivo studies showed that Escherichia coli cells expressing CdoA could convert 3-mercaptopropionate (3MP) to 3-sulfinopropionate (3SP), whereas no 3SP could be detected in cells expressing CdoB. The objective of this study was to confirm these findings and to study both enzymes in detail by performing an in vitro characterization. The proteins were heterologously expressed and purified to apparent homogeneity by immobilized metal chelate affinity chromatography (IMAC). Subsequent analysis of the enzyme activities revealed striking differences with regard to their substrate ranges and their specificities for the transition metal cofactor, e.g., CdoA catalyzed the sulfoxidation of 3MP to a 3-fold-greater extent than the sulfoxidation of cysteine, whereas CdoB converted only cysteine. Moreover, the dependency of the activities of the Cdos from R. eutropha H16 on the metal cofactor in the active center could be demonstrated. The importance of CdoA for the metabolism of the sulfur compounds 3,3'-thiodipropionic acid (TDP) and 3,3'-dithiodipropionic acid (DTDP) by further converting their degradation product, 3MP, was confirmed. Since 3MP can also function as a precursor for polythioester (PTE) synthesis in R. eutropha H16, deletion of cdoA might enable increased synthesis of PTEs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.