Bioorganic Reactions

Author(s):  
Gary W. Morrow

It is not essential to have a background in enzymology or biochemistry to gain at least an introductory-level understanding of many biosynthetic processes, so this book does not deal with enzymology or enzyme structure or function in any significant way, even though much of the chemistry we will be examining depends almost entirely on enzyme catalysis. Nevertheless, we will refer to enzyme catalysis and the names of specific enzymes throughout the text as we examine biosynthetic processes and reactions in significant detail. So what exactly are enzymes? Simply put, enzymes are naturally occurring proteins that catalyze various biochemical reactions in living systems. As we will see, many of the reactions they catalyze are familiar organic reactions, but have specific purposes and target structures. Generally speaking, enzymes catalyze organic reactions by lowering transition state energies or raising ground state energies of reactants in much the same way as nonenzymatic catalysts in laboratory chemical reactions, though in the case of enzyme catalysis, rate enhancements of as much as 1023 have been reported, far exceeding rate enhancements currently achievable by conventional chemical means. Understanding the interaction of enzymes and substrates (reactants) to form an enzyme–substrate complex (E–S complex) is fundamental to having some appreciation for how enzymes carry out their work. While overly simplistic, the “lock-and-key” model of enzyme–substrate interaction provides an intuitive context for understanding the remarkable substrate specificity of enzyme-mediated reactions. Thus, so-called enzyme active sites or binding sites (the “lock”) will only accept certain specific substrate structures (the “key”), with shape, conformation, intermolecular forces, and other factors determining the lock-and-key fit. Enzymes not only catalyze specific kinds of reactions, they can act specifically on certain compounds or classes of compounds or functional groups, often showing remarkable selectivity and stereospecificity, especially in the recognition and/or introduction of chirality centers in organic molecules. In terms of nomenclature, enzyme names always end with an ase suffix and are typically named in accordance with the substrate they act upon and/or the kind of reaction process they catalyze.

1975 ◽  
Vol 53 (7) ◽  
pp. 747-757 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham J. Moore ◽  
N. Leo Benoiton

The initial rates of hydrolysis of Bz-Gly-Lys and Bz-Gly-Phe by carboxypeptidase B (CPB) are increased in the presence of the modifiers β-phenylpropionic acid, cyclohexanol, Bz-Gly, and Bz-Gly-Gly. The hydrolysis of the tripeptide Bz-Gly-Gly-Phe is also activated by Bz-Gly and Bz-Gly-Gly, but none of these modifiers activate the hydrolysis of Bz-Gly-Gly-Lys, Z-Leu-Ala-Phe, or Bz-Gly-phenyllactic acid by CPB. All modifiers except cyclohexanol display inhibitory modes of binding when present in high concentration.Examination of Lineweaver–Burk plots in the presence of fixed concentrations of Bz-Gly has shown that activation of the hydrolysis of neutral and basic peptides by CPB, as reflected in the values of the extrapolated parameters, Km(app) and keat, occurs by different mechanisms. For Bz-Gly-Gly-Phe, activation occurs because the enzyme–modifier complex has a higher affinity than the free enzyme for the substrate, whereas activation of the hydrolysis of Bz-Gly-Lys derives from an increase in the rate of breakdown of the enzyme–substrate complex to give products.Cyclohexanol differs from Bz-Gly and Bz-Gly-Gly in that it displays no inhibitory mode of binding with any of the substrates examined, activates only the hydrolysis of dipeptides by CPB, and has a greater effect on the hydrolysis of the basic dipeptide than on the neutral dipeptide. Moreover, when Bz-Gly-Lys is the substrate, cyclohexanol activates its hydrolysis by CPB by increasing both the enzyme–substrate binding affinity and the rate of the catalytic step, an effect different from that observed when Bz-Gly is the modifier.The anomalous kinetic behavior of CPB is remarkably similar to that of carboxypeptidase A, and is a good indication that both enzymes have very similar structures in and around their respective active sites. A binding site for activator molecules down the cleft of the active site is proposed for CPB to explain the observed kinetic behavior.


1997 ◽  
Vol 62 (8) ◽  
pp. 1150-1158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milan Šolc

The free intramolecular energy flow can be restricted by the presence of a heavy atom in the molecule. As a result of this restriction, adsorbed molecules bonded on the metal surface and/or substrate molecules in the enzyme-substrate complex with a metal atom near the binding site can have a higher vibrational energy than the surroundings. The reaction rate is then enhanced by this energy localization.


Author(s):  
Paul Engel

‘Structure for catalysis’ details the various patterns of enzyme mechanism and the various structural features helping to achieve catalysis. One of the striking features of enzyme catalysis is substrate specificity. In the lock-and-key hypothesis, the enzyme is viewed as a precisely shaped lock and only the right key, the substrate, can fit and turn it. The lock-and-key combination is the enzyme–substrate complex. A crucial ingredient of the enzyme’s equipment for achieving outstanding catalysis is the ‘catalytic groups’.


2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 515-521 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Glowacki ◽  
Jeremy N. Harvey ◽  
Adrian J. Mulholland

One of the most controversial questions in enzymology today is whether protein dynamics are significant in enzyme catalysis. A particular issue in these debates is the unusual temperature-dependence of some kinetic isotope effects for enzyme-catalysed reactions. In the present paper, we review our recent model [Glowacki, Harvey and Mulholland (2012) Nat. Chem. 4, 169–176] that is capable of reproducing intriguing temperature-dependences of enzyme reactions involving significant quantum tunnelling. This model relies on treating multiple conformations of the enzyme–substrate complex. The results show that direct ‘driving’ motions of proteins are not necessary to explain experimental observations, and show that enzyme reactivity can be understood and accounted for in the framework of transition state theory.


Biomolecules ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 552
Author(s):  
Irina A. Il’icheva ◽  
Konstantin M. Polyakov ◽  
Sergey N. Mikhailov

Nucleoside phosphorylases catalyze the reversible phosphorolysis of nucleosides to heterocyclic bases, giving α-d-ribose-1-phosphate or α-d-2-deoxyribose-1-phosphate. These enzymes are involved in salvage pathways of nucleoside biosynthesis. The level of these enzymes is often elevated in tumors, which can be used as a marker for cancer diagnosis. This review presents the analysis of conformations of nucleosides and their analogues in complexes with nucleoside phosphorylases of the first (NP-1) family, which includes hexameric and trimeric purine nucleoside phosphorylases (EC 2.4.2.1), hexameric and trimeric 5′-deoxy-5′-methylthioadenosine phosphorylases (EC 2.4.2.28), and uridine phosphorylases (EC 2.4.2.3). Nucleosides adopt similar conformations in complexes, with these conformations being significantly different from those of free nucleosides. In complexes, pentofuranose rings of all nucleosides are at the W region of the pseudorotation cycle that corresponds to the energy barrier to the N↔S interconversion. In most of the complexes, the orientation of the bases with respect to the ribose is in the high-syn region in the immediate vicinity of the barrier to syn ↔ anti transitions. Such conformations of nucleosides in complexes are unfavorable when compared to free nucleosides and they are stabilized by interactions with the enzyme. The sulfate (or phosphate) ion in the active site of the complexes influences the conformation of the furanose ring. The binding of nucleosides in strained conformations is a characteristic feature of the enzyme–substrate complex formation for this enzyme group.


2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (30) ◽  
pp. 7161-7165
Author(s):  
Stephen L. Bearne

Using the pKE-BH+a value of the Brønsted base catalyst in the enzyme–substrate complex can overestimate the extent to which an enzyme lowers the substrate's pKC–Ha value.


2005 ◽  
Vol 77 (11) ◽  
pp. 1873-1886 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fredric M. Menger

This paper begins with a brief review of theories and concepts that have influenced today's view of enzyme catalysis: transition-state stabilization, entropy, orbital steering, proximity, and intramolecularity. The discussion then launches into the "spatiotemporal" model of enzyme catalysis in which fast intramolecular and enzymatic rates are ascribed to short distances that are imposed rigidly upon the reacting entities. An equation relating rate and distance is set forth, as are experimental and computational data supporting this relationship. Finally, enzyme systems themselves are analyzed in terms of the distance parameter and the so-called "split-site" model in which ground-state geometries play a crucial role. Among the many surprising conclusions is a transition-state stabilization by noncovalent forces (e.g., hydrogen-bonding) that are positioned far away from the actual transition-state chemistry. The model also confronts and dismisses the claim in classical enzymology that the ubiquitous enzyme-substrate complex is either inconsequential or inhibitory to the overall reaction rate.


1980 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 427-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kveta Heinrichová ◽  
Rudolf Kohn

The effect of exo-D-galacturonanase from carrot on O-acetyl derivatives of pectic acid of variousacetylation degree was studied. Substitution of hydroxyl groups at C(2) and C(3) of D-galactopyranuronic acid units influences the initial rate of degradation, degree of degradation and its maximum rate, the differences being found also in the time of limit degradations of the individual O-acetyl derivatives. Value of the apparent Michaelis constant increases with increase of substitution and value of Vmax changes. O-Acetyl derivatives act as a competitive inhibitor of degradation of D-galacturonan. The extent of the inhibition effect depends on the degree of substitution. The only product of enzymic reaction is D-galactopyranuronic acid, what indicates that no degradation of the terminal substituted unit of O-acetyl derivative of pectic acid takes place. Substitution of hydroxyl groups influences the affinity of the enzyme towards the modified substrate. The results let us presume that hydroxyl groups at C(2) and C(3) of galacturonic unit of pectic acid are essential for formation of the enzyme-substrate complex.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 117863612110246
Author(s):  
Cheuk Yin Lai ◽  
Ka Lun Ng ◽  
Hao Wang ◽  
Chui Chi Lam ◽  
Wan Keung Raymond Wong

CenA is an endoglucanase secreted by the Gram-positive cellulolytic bacterium, Cellulomonas fimi, to the environment as a glycosylated protein. The role of glycosylation in CenA is unclear. However, it seems not crucial for functional activity and secretion since the unglycosylated counterpart, recombinant CenA (rCenA), is both bioactive and secretable in Escherichia coli. Using a systematic screening approach, we have demonstrated that rCenA is subjected to spontaneous cleavages (SC) in both the cytoplasm and culture medium of E. coli, under the influence of different environmental factors. The cleavages were found to occur in both the cellulose-binding (CellBD) and catalytic domains, with a notably higher occurring rate detected in the former than the latter. In CellBD, the cleavages were shown to occur close to potential N-linked glycosylation sites, suggesting that these sites might serve as ‘attributive tags’ for differentiating rCenA from endogenous proteins and the points of initiation of SC. It is hypothesized that glycosylation plays a crucial role in protecting CenA from SC when interacting with cellulose in the environment. Subsequent to hydrolysis, SC would ensure the dissociation of CenA from the enzyme-substrate complex. Thus, our findings may help elucidate the mechanisms of protein turnover and enzymatic cellulolysis.


1971 ◽  
Vol 246 (3) ◽  
pp. 561-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
William R. Nes ◽  
P.A. Govinda Malya ◽  
Frank B. Mallory ◽  
Karen A. Ferguson ◽  
Josephine R. Landrey ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document