A comparative study of protoheme and heme d catalases : role of the heme and the heme pocket in catalysis and ligand binding

Catalase dismutes H20 2 to O2 and H20. In successive twoelectron reactions H20 2 induces both oxidation and reduction at the heme group. In the first step the protoheme prosthetic group of beef liver catalase forms compound I, in which the heme has been oxidized from Fe3+ to Fe4+=0 and a porphyrin radical has been created. Compound II is formed by the oneelectron reduction of comp I. It retains Fe4+=0 but lacks the porphyrin radical and is catalytically inert. Molecular structures are available for Escherichia coli Hydroperoxidase II, Micrococcus Iysodeiktus, Penicillium vitale and beef liver enzymes, which contain different hemes and heme pockets. In the present work, the pockets and substrate access channels of protoheme (beef liver & Micrococcus) and heme d (HPII of E. coli and Penicillium) catalases have been analysed using Quanta™ and CharmMTM molecular modeling packages on the Silicon Graphics Iris Indigo 2 computer. Experimental studies have been carried out with two catalases, HPII (and its mutants) and beef liver. Fluoride and formate' are inhibitors of both enzymes, and their binding is modulated by the heme and by distal residues N201 & H128. Both HPII and beef liver enzymes form compound I with H202 or peracetate. The reduction of beef liver enzyme compound I to II and the decay of compound II are accelerated by fluoride. The decay of compound II is also accelerated by formate, and this reagent acts as a 2-electron donor towards compound I of both enzymes. It is concluded that heme d enzymes (Penicillium and HPII of E. coli) are formed by autocatalytic transformation of protoheme in a modified pocket which contains a characteristic serine residue as well as a partially occluded heme channel. They are less active than protoheme enzymes but also do not form the inactive compound II species. Binding of peroxide as well as fluoride and formate is prevented by mutation of H128 and modulated by mutation of N201.

Synthesis of Chiral Benzimidazolylidenes from 1,10-Phenathrolines and 1,10-Phenathroline-2,9-dione /

A^-heterocyclic carbenes (NHCs) have become the focus of much interest as ancillary ligands for transition metal catalysts in recent years. Their structural variability and strong cy-donation properties have led to the preparation of demonstrably useful organometallic catalysts. Among the three general structural types of NHCs (imidazolylidenes, imidazolinylidenes, and benzimidazolylidenes), benzimidazolylidenes are the least investigated because of the limitation of current synthetic approaches. The preparation of chiral analogues is even more challenging. Previously, our group has demonstrated an alternative approach to synthesizing benzimidazolylidenes with a tetracyclic framework in three steps from 1,10-phenanthroline. This thesis is focused on approaches to chiral benzimidazolylidenes derived from substituted 1,10-phenanthrolines. A key step in the preparation of these ligands involves a reduction of the pyridyl rings in 1,10-phenanthrolines. Chirality can be introduced to phenanthrolines before, during, or after the reduction as illustrated by three approaches: 1) de novo construction of the phenanthroline from chiral ketones with endo and exo faces to provide a degree of diastereoselectivity during subsequent reduction; 2) introduction of substituents into the 2- and 2,9- position of phenanthroline by nucleophilic aromatic substitution, followed by a reduction-resolution sequence; and 3) use of the protected octahydrophenanthroline as a substrate for chiral induction a to nitrogen.

Unique and unifying themes in the mechanisms regulating the expression of the arabidopsis thaliana PR-1 and Solanum tuberosum PR-10a inducible defense genes

Arabidopsis is a model plant used to study disease resistance; Solanum tuberosum or potato is a crop species. Both plants possess inducible defense mechanisms that are deployed upon recognition of pathogen invasion. Transcriptional reprogramming is crucial to the activation of defense responses. The Pathogenesis-Related (PR) genes are activated in these defense programs. Expression of Arabidopsis PR-l and potato PR-10a serve as markers for the deployment of defense responses in these plants. PR-l expression indicates induction of systemic acquired resistance (SAR). Activation of SAR requires accumulation of salicylic acid (SA), in addition to the interaction of the non-expressor of pathogenesis-related genes I (NPRI), with the TGA transcription factors. The PR-10a is activated in response to pathogen invasion, wounding and elicitor treatment. PR-10a induction requires recruitment of the Whirly I (Whyl) activator to the promoter. This locus is also negatively regulated by the silencer element binding factor (SEBF). We established that both the PR-l and PR-10a are occupied by repressors under non-inducing conditions. TGA2 was found to be a constitutive resident and repressor of PR-l, which mediates repression by forming an oligomeric complex on the promoter. The DNA-binding activity of this oligomer required the TGA2 N-terminus (NT). Under resting conditions we determined that the PR-10a is bound by a repressosome containing SEBF and curiously the activator Pto interacting protein 4 (Pti4). In the context of this repressosome, SEBF is responsible for PR-10a binding, yet rWe also showed that PR-l and PR-10a are activated by different means. In PR-l activation the NPRI NT domain alleviates TGA2-mediated repression by interacting with the TGA2 NT. TGA2 remains at the PR-l but adopts a dimeric conformation and forms an enhanceosome with NPRl. In contrast, the PR-10a is activated by evicting the repressosome and recruiting Why! to the promoter. These results advance our understanding of the mechanisms regulating PR-l and PR-10a expression under resting and inducing conditions. This study also revealed that the means of regulation for related genes can differ greatly between model and crop s