PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 18, 2003European Journal of Biochemistry116 citationsOpen Access

Structure and positioning comparison of two variants of penetratin in two different membrane mimicking systems by NMR

View Full Paper
MLMattias F. LindbergAvid Bioservices (United States)HBHenrik BiverståhlStockholm UniversityAGAstrid GräslundStockholm University

Structured PICO

P
Population
Membrane mimicking systems (negatively charged bicelles and SDS micelles) interacting with penetratin (residues 43-58 of Antennapedia homeodomain) and its variant penetratin(W48F,W56F)
I
Intervention
Penetratin and penetratin(W48F,W56F) variant
C
Comparator
Comparison between wild-type penetratin and the variant, as well as comparison between bicelles and SDS micelles
O
Outcome
Secondary structure and positioning of the peptides within the membrane mimeticssurrogate

The study demonstrates that penetratin and its variant interact differently with bicelles versus SDS micelles, highlighting the importance of using realistic membrane mimetics for investigating peptide-membrane interactions.

Abstract

The Antennapedia homeodomain protein of Drosophila has the ability to penetrate biological membranes and the third helix of this protein, residues 43-58, known as penetratin (RQIKIWFQNRRMKWKK-amide) has the same translocating properties as the entire protein. The variant, RQI KIFFQNRRMKFKK-amide, here called penetratin (W48F,W56F) does not have the same ability. We have determined a solution structure of penetratin and investigated the position of both peptides in negatively charged bicelles. A helical structure is seen for residues Lys46 through Met54. The secondary structure of the variant penetratin(W48F,W56F) in bicelles appears to be very similar. Paramagnetic spin-label studies and analysis of NOEs between penetratin and the phospholipids show that penetratin is located within the bicelle surface. Penetratin (W48F,W56F) is also located inside the phospholipid bicelle, however, with its N-terminus more deeply inserted than that of wild-type penetratin. The subtle differences in the way the two peptides interact with a membrane in an equilibrium situation could be important for their translocating ability. As a comparison we have also investigated the secondary structure of penetratin(W48F,W56F) in SDS micelles and the results show that the structure is very similar in SDS and bicelles. In contrast, penetratin(W48F,W56F) and penetratin appear to be located differently in SDS micelles. This clearly shows the importance of using realistic membrane mimetics for investigating peptide-membrane interactions.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Lindberg et al. (2003) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a740c79ca963d7f80391759https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1432-1033.2003.03685.x
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Penetratin: Structure and Interactions with Lipid Membranes of Various Compositions2026
  2. 2Penetratin an Old Player in the Field of Cell-Penetrating Peptides Is in New Custom—Effect of Aromatic Non-Natural Amino Acid Substitutions2026
  3. 3Translocation of penetratin-like peptides involving calcium-dependent interactions between glycosaminoglycans and phosphocholine headgroups of the membrane lipid bilayer2025 · 2 citations
  4. 4Sequence Patterning Governs Lipid-Selective Insertion and Membrane Perturbation of Antimicrobial Peptoids2026
  5. 5Influence of Aza-Glycine Substitution on the Internalization of Penetratin2024 · 1 citations