The role of menaquinone in the nitrate reductase complex

Membrane bound, respiratory nitrate reductase in Escherichia coli is composed of three subunits, αβγ. The active complex is anchored to the membrane by membrane-integrated γ subunit and can reduce nitrate to nitrite with membrane quinones, (ubiquinone or menaquinone) as physiological electron donors. The transfer of electrons through the complex is thought to involve the sequence: membrane quinols → b-type hemes (γ subunit) → Fe-S centers (β subunit) → molybdopterin (α subunit) → nitrate. The enzyme can be assayed with the artificial electron donor reduced methyl viologen (MVH) which transfers electrons directly to the molybdopterin cofactor. These studies have focused on the possible role of protein-bound menaquinone in the structure and function of this multisubunit complex. ^ Nitrate reductase was purified as two distinct forms; after solubilization of membrane proteins with detergents, purification rendered an αβγ complex (holoenzyme) which catalyzes nitrate reduction with MVH or the quinols analogs, menadiol and duroquinol, as electron donors. Alternatively, heat-treatment of the membranes in the absence of detergents and subsequent purification of the active enzyme produced an αβ complex, which reduces nitrate only with MVH as electron donor. The active αβ dimer was also separated from γ subunit by heat treatment of the holoenzyme. ^ Menaquinone-9 was isolated directly from the purified αβ complex, and identified by mass spectrometry. Based on the composition of the membrane quinone pool, it was concluded that menaquinone-9 is sequestered from the membrane pool in a specifically protein-bound form. ^ The role of the bound menaquinone in the structure-function of nitrate reductase was also investigated, along with its participation in UV-light inactivation of the enzyme. Menaquinone-depleted nitrate reductase from a menaquinone deficient mutant retained activity with all electron donors and it remained sensitive to UV inactivation. However, the MVH-nitrate reductase activity and the rate of UV inactivation of the enzyme were significantly reduced and the optical properties of the enzyme were modified by the absence of the bound menaquinone-9. ^ Menaquinone-9 is not absolutely required for electron transfer in nitrate reductase but it appears to be specifically-bound during assembly of the complex and to enhance the transfer of electrons through the complex. The possible plasticity of the functional electron transfer pathway in nitrate reductase is discussed. ^

Bond strength of adhesives to dentin contaminated with smoker's saliva.

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of contamination with smoker's and non-smoker's saliva on the bond strength of resin composite to superficial dentin using different adhesive systems. The interfacial structure between the resin and dentin was evaluated for each treatment using environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM). Freshly extracted human molars were ground with 600-grit SiC paper to expose the superficial dentin. Adhesives [One-Up-Bond-F-Plus (OUFP) and Adper-Prompt-L-Pop (APLP)] and resin composite (TPHSpectrum) were bonded to the dentin (n = 8/group, 180 total specimens) under five surface conditions: control (adhesive applied following manufacturers' instructions); saliva, then 5-s air dry, then adhesive; adhesive, saliva, 5-s air dry; adhesive, saliva, 5-s water rinse, 5-s air dry (ASW group); and adhesive, saliva, 5-s water rinse, 5-s air dry, reapply adhesive (ASWA group). After storage in water at 37 degrees C for 24 h, the specimens were debonded under tension at a speed of 0.5 mm/min. ESEM photomicrographs of the dentin/adhesive interfaces were taken. Mean bond strength ranged from 8.1 to 24.1 MPa. Fisher's protected least significant difference (P = 0.05) intervals for critical adhesive, saliva, and surface condition differences were 1.3, 1.3, and 2.1 MPa, respectively. There were no significant differences in bond strength to dentin between contamination by smoker's and nonsmoker's saliva, but bond strengths were significantly different between adhesive systems, with OUFP twice as strong as APLP under almost all conditions. After adhesive application and contamination with either smoker's or nonsmoker's saliva followed by washing and reapplication of the adhesive (ASWA group), the bond strength of both adhesive systems was the same as that of the control group.