Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
To understand the differences resulting from the presence of an α- or β-amino acid in a peptide, we used two sets of amino acids corresponding to Asp/isoAsp and Ala/isoAla in two types of host peptides: one containing Gly (with no side chains) and the other containing Ala (representing amino acids with side chains), and measured their tendency to form fibrils. The peptides with a β-amino acid formed fibrils, while those with an α-amino acid did not exhibit this proclivity, as inferred from the thioflavin T (ThT) fluorescence intensity measurements. The fibrillation of the hexapeptide with isoAsp (the β-amino acid corresponding to Asp) was inhibited by protein-l-isoaspartyl methyltransferase (PIMT), a repair enzyme that converts the abnormal isoAsp residue to normal Asp. Isothermal Titration Calorimetry revealed the exothermic mode of binding of A6-isoAsp (Ala-based host hexapeptide) with PIMT. Far-UV CD spectroscopy revealed a β-sheet to α-helix transformation of isoAsp-containing peptides in the presence of PIMT. The hydrophobicity of the peptides was measured by noting their distribution in a mixture of water and octanol, where the β-amino acid exhibits a more positive hydrophobicity value than the α-amino acid. This may suggest that the hydrophobic forces bring chains containing β-amino acids together to enable nucleation for fibril formation. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations indicated that isoAsp-based host peptides, formed into fibrils, have stable structures over the course of simulations, whereas the equivalent peptide with Asp disintegrated. Models of a single β-strand of these peptides bound to the active site of the enzyme were stable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chatterjee et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: