* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download [Ru(NH 3 ) 5 (His33)] 2+ @ 18 Å from heme
Survey
Document related concepts
Protein domain wikipedia , lookup
Protein design wikipedia , lookup
List of types of proteins wikipedia , lookup
Bimolecular fluorescence complementation wikipedia , lookup
Protein mass spectrometry wikipedia , lookup
Protein structure prediction wikipedia , lookup
Protein folding wikipedia , lookup
Western blot wikipedia , lookup
Protein purification wikipedia , lookup
Protein–protein interaction wikipedia , lookup
Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy of proteins wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Electron Transfer Through Proteins: Harry Gray and Jay Winkler, Cal Tech “Aerobic respiration and photosynthesis work in concert: the oxygen that is evolved by PS organisms is the oxidant that sustains life in aerobic microbes and animals and in turn, the end products of aerobic respiratory metabolism ( CO2 and H2O) nourish photosynthetic organisms.” Important terms: kET, electron transfer rate l, reorganization energies, includes both inner sphere (bonds, angles) and outer sphere (solvent, dielectric, protein) DGo, free energy change between donor (reductant) and acceptor (oxidant) at infinite separation. Is the driving force. HAB, the electronic coupling matrix element, determine the frequency of crossing the transition state from (D + A) to (D+ + A-) A balance between nuclear reorganization and reaction driving force determines both the transition state configuration and the height of the barrier for the ET process. For the optimum driving force, DGo = l , the reaction is activationless. rgt prdt rgt prdt rgt Adiabatic system: where rgt and prdt prdt stay on lower electronic surface A very bad diagram!! Normal free energy region Inverted region A balance between nuclear reorganization and reaction driving force determines both the transition state configuration and the height of the barrier for the ET process. For the optimum driving force, DGo = l , the reaction is activationless. Example of the role of reorganization energy in ET rate: Fe(3+)aq + e- Fe(2+)aq +0.77V = Eo Activation Energy = 0.66 eV This corresponds to a 2.7 eV reorganization energy. 1.5 eV is change in Fe—O bond length (the inner sphere piece) (increases 0.14 Å after reduction) and 1.2 eV from solvent repolarization (the outer sphere piece). kET, ET rate = 100 milllisec if two species in contact. Separated by 20 Å in a vacuum: kET, = 1017 years Separated by 20 Å in water: kET, = 104 years Separated by 20 Å, and tunneling through hydrocarbon: kET, ~ msec - msec Hence, fast biological ET must be protein mediated. Studies of ET through proteins: 1. Attach Ru complexes to His residues on surface (“labeled redox active molecules”) 2. Photoexcite Ru with laser 3. Detect ET event to other metal center: measure rate of ET to protein metal site. [Ru(NH3)5(His33)]2+ @ 18 Å from heme; 16.8 Å Cytochrome c, oxidized, as Fe3+ driving force = +0.20 eV, ET rate = 30 sec -1 To compute reorganization energy, vary DGo of reaction (how?) From measurements on [RuL(NH3)4(His33)]2+ with Zn – cyt c (L = pyridine, ammonia, isonicotinamide) Result: hydrophilic Ru-ammine causes ~2/3 of reorganization energy [Ru(NH3)5(His33)]2+ @ 18 Å from heme; driving force = +0.20 eV for Ru(2+) Fe(3+) ET rate = 30 sec -1 l = 1.15 eV 16.8 Å [Ru(bpy)2(imid)(His3)]2+@ 18 Å from heme; l = 0.74 eV Reorganization energy for [Ru(bpy)2(imid)(His3)]2+ is about 2/3 x less reorganization energy for [Ru(NH3)5(His33)]2+ due to organization energy required by water on hydrophilic ammines vs hydrophobic bpy ligands. General rule: A hydrophilic site will lead to larger reorganization energies than a hydrophobic site. Therefore, ET reactive sites are very sensitive to active-site environment. But this isn’t really news, is it? Cu(Cys)(Met)(His)2 site in azurin [Ru(bpy)2(imid)(His) 2+ 3] labeled azurin Electron transfer with Cu(2+)(H2O)6 is very sluggish in water because of large structural change on reduction to Cu(+) (what does it want to be (….?). Hence, azurin creates a rigid Cu site that does not change on reduction, eliminating large reorganization energies. And, Cu strongly coupled through Cys by pi-bonding: effectively directs e- flow. The fact that the reorganization energy for electron exchange in Cu(phen)2 2+/+ is 2 eV greater than for azurin illustrates the important role played by the folded protein in lowering ET barriers. Studies of ET through proteins map the ET path: 1. Attach Ru complexes to His residues on surface (“labeled redox active molecules”). Photoexcite Ru, “watch” ET event, measure rate of ET to protein metal site. 2. When donors and acceptors are separated by > 10 Å, the electronic coupling term (HAB) is nearly zero due to vanishingly small overlap of their orbitals. Now the protein must mediate the ET event. 3. This is a modification of a “superexchange” model, where D and A are coupled through a bridging molecule and e is coupling decay parameter quantifying the effect of bridge. 4. The “superexchange” idea modified for a protein assumes that electronic coupling by tunneling is approximated as: HAB ~ ecovalent * e H bonds * e space interactions 5. Now one compares the ET calculated from a path through the protein, obtained from a search algorithm that charts a path of bonds and space in a protein, to observed ET rate. 6. From this, a proposed ET path is identified. 7. CONCLUSION: a-helices are slower paths than b-sheets A tunneling “timetable” plot, Illustrates how the tunneling time, equals 1/ kET , varies with distance between D and A. This calculated plot is for ET in Ru-modified myoglobin and cytochrome b. The lines show predicted ET tunneling times for a-helices vs b-sheet pathways. CONCLUSION: a-helices are slower paths than b-sheets kETthrough b sheets kETthrough a helices Note b-barrel: Efficient ET mediator Rates of reduction of Os(III), Ru(III), and Re(I) by Cu(I) in His83-modified Pseudomonas aeruginosa azurins (Az) (M-Cu distance approximately 17 Å) have been measured in single crystals, where protein conformation and surface solvation are precisely defined by high-resolution X-ray structure determinations. The rates for electron tunneling in crystals are roughly the same as those measured in solution, indicating very similar protein structures in the two states. High-resolution structures of the oxidized (1.5 Å) and reduced (1.4 Å) states of Ru(II)(tpy)(phen)(His83)-Az establish that very small changes in copper coordination accompany reduction. Although Ru(bpy)2(im)(His83)-Az is less solvated in the crystal, the reorganization energy for Cu(I) --> Ru(III) electron transfer falls in the same range determined experimentally for the reaction in solution. Cu Therefore this work suggests that outer-sphere protein reorganization is the dominant activation component required for electron tunneling. Ru2+(tpy)(phen)(His83)