Electron Transfer Precedes ATP Hydrolysis during Nitrogenase Catalysis

The biological reduction of N2 to NH3 catalyzed by Mo-dependent nitrogenase requires at least eight rounds of a complex cycle of events associated with ATP-driven electron transfer (ET) from the Fe protein to the catalytic MoFe protein, with each ET coupled to the hydrolysis of two ATP molecules. Although steps within this cycle have been studied for decades, the nature of the coupling between ATP hydrolysis and ET, in particular the order of ET and ATP hydrolysis, has been elusive. Here, we have measured first-order rate constants for each key step in the reaction sequence, including direct measurement of the ATP hydrolysis rate constant: kATP = 70 s−1, 25 °C. Comparison of the rate constants establishes that the reaction sequence involves four sequential steps: (i) conformationally gated ET (kET = 140 s−1, 25 °C), (ii) ATP hydrolysis (kATP = 70 s−1, 25 °C), (iii) Phosphate release (kPi = 16 s−1, 25 °C), and (iv) Fe protein dissociation from the MoFe protein (kdiss = 6 s−1, 25 °C). These findings allow completion of the thermodynamic cycle undergone by the Fe protein, showing that the energy of ATP binding and protein–protein association drive ET, with subsequent ATP hydrolysis and Pi release causing dissociation of the complex between the Feox(ADP)2 protein and the reduced MoFe protein

Negative Cooperativity in the Nitrogenase Fe Protein Electron Delivery Cycle

Nitrogenase catalyzes the ATP-dependent reduction of dinitrogen (N2) to two ammonia (NH3) molecules through the participation of its two protein components, the MoFe and Fe proteins. Electron transfer (ET) from the Fe protein to the catalytic MoFe protein involves a series of synchronized events requiring the transient association of one Fe protein with each αβ half of the α2β2 MoFe protein. This process is referred to as the Fe protein cycle and includes binding of two ATP to an Fe protein, association of an Fe protein with the MoFe protein, ET from the Fe protein to the MoFe protein, hydrolysis of the two ATP to two ADP and two Pi for each ET, Pi release, and dissociation of oxidized Fe protein-(ADP)2 from the MoFe protein. Because the MoFe protein tetramer has two separate αβ active units, it participates in two distinct Fe protein cycles. Quantitative kinetic measurements of ET, ATP hydrolysis, and Pi release during the presteady-state phase of electron delivery demonstrate that the two halves of the ternary complex between the MoFe protein and two reduced Fe protein-(ATP)2 do not undergo the Fe protein cycle independently. Instead, the data are globally fit with a two-branch negative-cooperativity kinetic model in which ET in one-half of the complex partially suppresses this process in the other. A possible mechanism for communication between the two halves of the nitrogenase complex is suggested by normal-mode calculations showing correlated and anticorrelated motions between the two halves

Evidence That the P\u3csub\u3ei\u3c/sub\u3e Release Event Is the Rate-Limiting Step in the Nitrogenase Catalytic Cycle

Nitrogenase reduction of dinitrogen (N2) to ammonia (NH3) involves a sequence of events that occur upon the transient association of the reduced Fe protein containing two ATP molecules with the MoFe protein that includes electron transfer, ATP hydrolysis, Pi release, and dissociation of the oxidized, ADP-containing Fe protein from the reduced MoFe protein. Numerous kinetic studies using the nonphysiological electron donor dithionite have suggested that the rate-limiting step in this reaction cycle is the dissociation of the Fe protein from the MoFe protein. Here, we have established the rate constants for each of the key steps in the catalytic cycle using the physiological reductant flavodoxin protein in its hydroquinone state. The findings indicate that with this reductant, the rate-limiting step in the reaction cycle is not protein–protein dissociation or reduction of the oxidized Fe protein, but rather events associated with the Pi release step. Further, it is demonstrated that (i) Fe protein transfers only one electron to MoFe protein in each Fe protein cycle coupled with hydrolysis of two ATP molecules, (ii) the oxidized Fe protein is not reduced when bound to MoFe protein, and (iii) the Fe protein interacts with flavodoxin using the same binding interface that is used with the MoFe protein. These findings allow a revision of the rate-limiting step in the nitrogenase Fe protein cycle

HST NICMOS Observations of the Polarization of NGC 1068

We have observed the polarized light at 2 micron in the center of NGC 1068 with HST NICMOS Camera 2. The nucleus is dominated by a bright, unresolved source, polarized at a level of 6.0 pm 1.2% with a position angle of 122degr pm 1.5degr. There are two polarized lobes extending up to 8'' northeast and southwest of the nucleus. The polarized flux in both lobes is quite clumpy, with the maximum polarization occurring in the southwest lobe at a level of 17% when smoothed to 0.23'' resolution. The perpendiculars to the polarization vectors in these two lobes point back to the intense unresolved nuclear source to within one 0.076'' Camera 2 pixel, thereby confirming that this is the illuminating source of the scattered light and therefore the probable AGN central engine. Whereas the polarization of the nucleus is probably caused by dichroic absorption, the polarization in the lobes is almost certainly caused by scattering, with very little contribution from dichroic absorption. Features in the polarized lobes include a gap at a distance of about 1'' from the nucleus toward the southwest lobe and a ``knot'' of emission about 5'' northeast of the nucleus. Both features had been discussed by ground-based observers, but they are much better defined with the high spatial resolution of NICMOS. The northeast knot may be the side of a molecular cloud that is facing the nucleus, which cloud may be preventing the expansion of the northeast radio lobe at the head of the radio synchrotron-radiation-emitting jet. We also report the presence of two ghosts in the Camera 2 polarizers. These had not been detected previously (Hines et al. 2000) because they are relatively faint and require observations of a source with a large dynamic range.Comment: 17 pages, 4 figure

Scleral Buckling for Primary Retinal Detachment: Outcomes of Scleral Tunnels versus Scleral Sutures

Purpose: There are primarily two techniques for affixing the scleral buckle (SB) to the sclera in the repair of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD): scleral tunnels or scleral sutures. Methods: This retrospective study examined all patients with primary RRD who were treated with primary SB or SB combined with vitrectomy from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 across six sites. Two cohorts were examined: SB affixed using scleral sutures versus scleral tunnels. Pre- and postoperative variables were evaluated including visual acuity, anatomic success, and postoperative strabismus. Results: The mean preoperative logMAR VA for the belt loop cohort was 1.05 ± 1.06 (Snellen 20/224) and for the scleral suture cohort was 1.03 ± 1.04 (Snellen 20/214, p = 0.846). The respective mean postoperative logMAR VAs were 0.45 ± 0.55 (Snellen 20/56) and 0.46 ± 0.59 (Snellen 20/58, p = 0.574). The single surgery success rate for the tunnel cohort was 87.3% versus 88.6% for the suture cohort (p = 0.601). Three patients (1.0%) in the scleral tunnel cohort developed postoperative strabismus, but only one patient (0.1%) in the suture cohort (p = 0.04, multivariate p = 0.76). All cases of strabismus occurred in eyes that underwent SB combined with PPV (p = 0.02). There were no differences in vision, anatomic success, or strabismus between scleral tunnels versus scleral sutures in eyes that underwent primary SB. Conclusion: Scleral tunnels and scleral sutures had similar postoperative outcomes. Combined PPV/SB in eyes with scleral tunnels might be a risk for strabismus post retinal detachment surgery

NSC23925, Identified in a High-Throughput Cell-Based Screen, Reverses Multidrug Resistance

Multidrug resistance (MDR) is a major factor which contributes to the failure of cancer chemotherapy, and numerous efforts have been attempted to overcome MDR. To date, none of these attempts have yielded a tolerable and effective therapy to reverse MDR; thus, identification of new agents would be useful both clinically and scientifically.To identify small molecule compounds that can reverse chemoresistance, we developed a 96-well plate high-throughput cell-based screening assay in a paclitaxel resistant ovarian cancer cell line. Coincubating cells with a sublethal concentration of paclitaxel in combination with each of 2,000 small molecule compounds from the National Cancer Institute Diversity Set Library, we identified a previously uncharacterized molecule, NSC23925, that inhibits Pgp1 and reverses MDR1 (Pgp1) but does not inhibit MRP or BCRP-mediated MDR. The cytotoxic activity of NSC23925 was further evaluated using a panel of cancer cell lines expressing Pgp1, MRP, and BCRP. We found that at a concentration of >10 microM NSC23925 moderately inhibits the proliferation of both sensitive and resistant cell lines with almost equal activity, but its inhibitory effect was not altered by co-incubation with the Pgp1 inhibitor, verapamil, suggesting that NSC23925 itself is not a substrate of Pgp1. Additionally, NSC23925 increases the intracellular accumulation of Pgp1 substrates: calcein AM, Rhodamine-123, paclitaxel, mitoxantrone, and doxorubicin. Interestingly, we further observed that, although NSC23925 directly inhibits the function of Pgp1 in a dose-dependent manner without altering the total expression level of Pgp1, NSC23925 actually stimulates ATPase activity of Pgp, a phenomenon seen in other Pgp inhibitors.The ability of NSC23925 to restore sensitivity to the cytotoxic effects of chemotherapy or to prevent resistance could significantly benefit cancer patients