Moser Christopher C, Page Christopher C, Dutton P Leslie
Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, The Johnson Research Foundation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6059, USA.
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2006 Aug 29;361(1472):1295-305. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1868.
Biological electron transfer is designed to connect catalytic clusters by chains of redox cofactors. A review of the characterized natural redox proteins with a critical eye for molecular scale measurement of variation and selection related to physiological function shows no statistically significant differences in the protein medium lying between cofactors engaged in physiologically beneficial or detrimental electron transfer. Instead, control of electron tunnelling over long distances relies overwhelmingly on less than 14 A spacing between the cofactors in a chain. Near catalytic clusters, shorter distances (commonly less than 7 A) appear to be selected to generate tunnelling frequencies sufficiently high to scale the barriers of multi-electron, bond-forming/-breaking catalysis at physiological rates. We illustrate this behaviour in a tunnelling network analysis of cytochrome c oxidase. In order to surmount the large, thermally activated, adiabatic barriers in the 5-10 kcal mol-1 range expected for H+ motion and O2 reduction at the binuclear centre of oxidase on the 10(3)-10(5) s-1 time-scale of respiration, electron access with a tunnelling frequency of 10(9) or 10(10) s-1 is required. This is provided by selecting closely placed redox centres, such as haem a (6.9 A) or tyrosine (4.9 A). A corollary is that more distantly placed redox centres, such as CuA, cannot rapidly scale the catalytic site barrier, but must send their electrons through more closely placed centres, avoiding direct short circuits that might circumvent proton pumping coupled to haems a to a3 electron transfer. The selection of distances and energetic barriers directs electron transfer from CuA to haem a rather than a3, without any need for delicate engineering of the protein medium to 'hard wire' electron transfer. Indeed, an examination of a large number of oxidoreductases provides no evidence of such naturally selected wiring of electron tunnelling pathways.
生物电子传递旨在通过氧化还原辅因子链连接催化簇。以批判性眼光审视与生理功能相关的变异和选择的分子尺度测量的已表征天然氧化还原蛋白的综述表明,参与生理有益或有害电子传递的辅因子之间的蛋白质介质在统计学上没有显著差异。相反,长距离电子隧穿的控制绝大多数依赖于链中辅因子之间小于14埃的间距。在催化簇附近,似乎选择了更短的距离(通常小于7埃)以产生足够高的隧穿频率,从而以生理速率缩放多电子、键形成/断裂催化的势垒。我们在细胞色素c氧化酶的隧穿网络分析中说明了这种行为。为了克服在氧化酶双核中心预期的5-10千卡/摩尔范围内的大的、热激活的绝热势垒,这是在呼吸的10³-10⁵秒时间尺度上H⁺运动和O₂还原所需的,需要隧穿频率为10⁹或10¹⁰秒⁻¹的电子接入。这是通过选择紧密排列的氧化还原中心来实现的,例如血红素a(6.9埃)或酪氨酸(4.9埃)。一个必然结果是,距离更远的氧化还原中心,如CuA,不能迅速跨越催化位点势垒,而是必须通过更紧密排列的中心传递它们的电子,避免可能规避与血红素a到a3电子传递耦合的质子泵的直接短路。距离和能量势垒的选择引导电子从CuA转移到血红素a而不是a3,而无需对蛋白质介质进行精细工程设计来“硬连线”电子传递。事实上,对大量氧化还原酶的检查没有提供这种自然选择的电子隧穿途径布线的证据。