Search PubMedSearch

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “oxyester bond”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Analytical challenges for mapping non-canonical and non-protein ubiquitin/Ubl modifications by mass spectrometry.

INTRODUCTION: Covalent modification by ubiquitin via Lys isopeptide bonds is fundamental for regulating protein turnover and function. Additionally, ubiquitin esterification occurs on Ser/Thr/Tyr residues in proteins and on non-proteinaceous substrates including ribose, saccharides, lipids, and small molecule drugs. Ubiquitin posttranslational modifications may therefore be much more widespread across cell biological pathways. Recent literature (PubMed) reflects the increased interest in analytical methods for mapping of non-canonical substrates modified by ubiquitin and ubiquitin-like (UBL) proteins. AREAS COVERED: Mass spectrometry (MS)-based methodologies involve advanced proteomic techniques to identify ubiquitin modifications on amino acids other than Lys, such as Ser, Thr, Tyr and Cys as well as protein N-termini. After digestion, standard MS workflows identify canonical ubiquitination by detecting a ubiquitin C-terminal tag attached to the amine side chains of Lys residues of substrate-derived peptides suitable for MS/MS sequencing. For non-canonical modifications on proteins and substrates other than proteins, specialized strategies are required, such as using antibodies to enrich N-terminally modified peptides in combination with using high-resolution MS/MS based on softer fragmentation technologies to detect esterification and possibly other types of substrate modifications. EXPERT OPINION: Enabling such technologies will reveal a previously unrecognized angle of the ubiquitin code's complexity in cells.

Humans

A comparison of acyl-oxyester and acyl-thioester substrates for some lipolytic enzymes.

1. A comparison of 2-hexadecanoylthio-ethane-1-phosphocholine and 3-hexadecanoylthio-propane-1-phosphocholine and their oxyester counterparts as substrates for some lipolytic enzymes was made. 2. The critical micelle concentration and the transition temperature of the synthetic substrates were compared with the values for 1-hexadecanoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine. 3. All above-mentioned compounds were deacylated by lysophospholipases. Phospholipase A2 hydrolyzed only the acyl- sulfur- and oxygenester bond in 2-hexadecanoyl-ethane-1-phosphocholine. 4. Kinetic parameters, Km and V, for hydrolysis of these substrates were determined. Km values for thioester substrates were 5--10 fold lower than for the corresponding oxyesters. Maximal hydrolysis rates were 2--5 times higher for the thioesters. 5. Hydrolysis of thioesters by phospholipase A2, lipase and lysophospholipase was shown to proceed by an S-acyl cleavage mechanism. 6. Beef liver lysophospholipase II was rapidly and stoichiometrically inactivated by diisopropylfluorophosphate and bis(p-nitrophenyl) phosphate. Inactivation by the latter inhibitor showed burst-like kinetics. 7. Attempts to show burst-kinetics during the pre-steady state hydrolysis of 2-hexadecanoylthio-ethane-1-phosphocholine by lysophospholipase II were negative. These results are interpreted to indicated that a step prior to deacylation of the enzyme is rate-determining.

Animals