Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Guinea pig vasoactive intestinal peptide (gpVIP) differs from other mammalian VIPs in four of its 28 amino acid residues. In the present study, the gpVIP displaced 125I-labelled pig VIP (pVIP) binding by rat lung membranes with 7.7-fold lower potency than pVIP. Degradation of gpVIP by rat lung membranes, assessed by radioimmunoassay and h.p.l.c., was 1.9-fold greater than that of pVIP. This difference in degradation of the two peptides was not large enough to account for the lower receptor-binding potency of gpVIP. The amino acid residues that distinguish pVIP from gpVIP are likely to contribute to the interaction of VIP with receptors and peptide hydrolases in lung membranes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paul et al. (1988) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: