The conformation in solution of alpha-D-glucopyranosyl alpha-D-glucopyranoside (alpha,alpha-trehalose, 1), alpha-D-glucopyranosyl alpha-D-mannopyranoside (3) and their corresponding 1-thioglycosyl analogs, alpha-D-glucopyranosyl 1-thio-alpha-D-glucopyranoside (1-thio-alpha,alpha-trehalose, 2) and alpha-D-glucopyranosyl 1-thio-alpha-D-mannopyranoside (4) were established from high-resolution 1H-NMR and 13C-NMR measurements. These experimental results are in good agreement with the conformations as inferred from hard-sphere calculations. The dihedral angles phi H and psi H are not significantly different for the O-glycosyl disaccharides 1 and 3 compared with their 1-thioglycosyl analogs 2 and 4; however, the internuclear H-1--H-1' and H-1--H-5' distances appear to be longer for 1-thiodisaccharides. This may account for the differences in affinities of cockchafer trehalase which have been observed. This enzyme exhibits less affinity for the competitive inhibitor alpha-D-glucopyranosyl 1-thio-alpha-D-mannopyranoside (4) than for its O-glycosyl analog 3 (Ki 0.055 mM versus 0.0057 mM). From the similarity in Ki between 1-thio-alpha, alpha-trehalose and alpha-D-glucopyranosyl 1-thio-alpha-D-mannopyranoside (0.050 mM versus 0.055 mM), it is possible to assume a similar decrease in the enzymic affinity between the natural substrate (1) and the corresponding 1-thioglycosyl inhibitor (2), which can together be ascribed to the aforementioned difference in the conformation of the molecules.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bock et al. (1983) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: