Hydration, conformational states and kinetics of yeast hexokinase PII /

The kinetic study of the coupled enzymatic reaction involving monomeric yeast hexokinase PII (HK) and yeast glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G-6-PDH) yields a Michaelis constant of 0.15 ± 0.01 mM for D-glucose. At pH 8.7 HK is present in monomeric form. The addition of polyethylene glycol (PEG), to the reaction mixture increased the affinity of HK for glucose, independent ofMW of the PEG from 2000 to 10000. The osmotic stress exerted by PEG can be used to measure the change in number of water molecules that accompany enzyme conformational changes (Rand, et al., 1993). Results indicate that the G-6-PDH is not osmotically sensitive and thus, the change in the number of PEG-inaccessible water molecules (ANw) measured in the coupled reaction is only the difference between the glucose-bound and glucosefree conformations of HK. ANw ~ 450 with PEGs of MW > 2000 under conditions for both binding (Reid and Rand, 1997) and kinetic assays. The contribution water may play in the binding of ATP (Km = 0.24 + 0.02 mM) has also been examined. It was found that in this case ANw = (for osmotic pressures < 2.8x10* dynes/cm^), suggesting no additional numbers of waters are displaced when ATP binds to HK. Osmotic pressure experiments were also performed with dimeric HK. It was determined that both the monomeric and dimeric forms of HK give the same ANw under low pressures. If this large ANw is due to conformational flexibility, it would appear that the flexibility is not reduced upon dimerization ofthe enzyme.

Glucosamine resistance in the yeast, Saccharomyces cerivisae [sic]

By using glucosamine resistant mutants of Saccharomyces ceriv~sa~ an attempt was made to discover the mechanisms which cause glucose repression and/or the Crabtree effect. The strains used are 4B2, GR6, lOP3r, GR8l and GRI08. 4B2 is a wild type yeast while the others are its mutants. To characterize the biochemical reactions which made these mutants resistant to glucosamine poisoning the following experiments were done~ 1. growth and respiration; 2. transport of sugars; 3. effect of inorganic phosphate (Pi): 4. Hexokinase; 5. In yivo phosphorylation. From the above experiments the following conclusions may be drawn: (i) GR6 and lOP3r have normal respiratory and fermentative pathways. These mutants are resistant to glucosamine poisoning due to a slow rate of sugar transport which is due to change in the cell membrane. (ii) GR8l has a normal respiratory pathway. The slow growth on fermentable carbon sourCEE indicates that in GR8l the lesion is in or associated with the glycolytic pathway. The lower rate of sugar transport may be due to a change in energy metabolism. The invivo phosphorylation rate indicates that in GR81 facilitated diffusion is the dominant transport mechanism. (iii) GR108 msa normal glycolytic pathway but the respiratory pathway is abnormal. The slow rate of sugar transport is due to a change in energy metabolism. The lower percentage of in vivo phosphorylation is probably due to a lowered availability of ATP because of the mitochondrial lesion. In all mutants resistance to glucosamine poisoning is due to a lower rate of utilization of ATP. which is caused by various mechanisms (see above), making less ADP available for phosphorylation via ATP synthase which utilizes inorganic phosphate. Because of the lower utilization of Pi, the concentration of intra-mitochondrial Pi does not go down thus protecting mutants from glucosamine poisoning.

The genetics of glucosamine in yeast : cytoplasmic determinants conferring resistance

Two cytoplasmic, glucosamine resistant mutants of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, GR6 and GR10, were examined to determine whether or not the lesions involved were located on mitochondrial DNA. Detailed investigation of crosses of GR6 and GR10 or their derivatives to strains bearing known mitochondrial markers demonstrated that: 1. the frequency of glucos~~ine resistance in diploids was independent of factors influencing mitochondrial marker output. 2. upon tetrad analysis a variety of tetrad ratios was observed for glucosamine resistance whereas mitochondrial markers segregated 4:0 or 0:4 (resistant:sensitive). 3. glucosamine resistance and mitochondrial markers segregated differentially with time. 4. glucosamine resistance persisted following treatment of a GRIO derivative with ethidium bromide at concentrations high enough to eliminate all mitochondrial DNA. 5. haploid spore clones displayed two degrees of glucosamine resistance, weak and strong, while growth due to mitochondrial mutations was generally thick and confluent. 6. a number of glucosamine resistant diploids and haploids, which also possessed a mithchondrial resistance mutation, were unable to grow on medium containing both glucosamine and the particular drug involved. 3 These observations 1~ 6 provided strong evidence that the cytoplasmic glucosamine resistant mutations present in GR6 and GRiO were not situated on mitochondrial DNA. Comparison of the glucosamine resistance mutations to some other known cytoplasmic determinants revealed that: 7. glucosamine resistance and the expression of the killer phenotype were separate phenomena. 8. unlike yeast carrying resistance conferring episomes GR6 and GR10 were not resistant to venturicidin or oligomycin and the GR factor exhibited genetic behaviour different from that of the episomal determinants. These results 7--+8 suggested that glucosamine resistance was not associated with the killer determinant nor with alleged yeast episomes. It is therefore proposed that a yeast plasmid(s), previously undescribed, is responsible for glucosamine resistance. The evidence to date is compatible with the hypothesis that GR6 and GR10 carry allelic mutations of the same plasmid which is tentatively designated (GGM).