Thermodynamic Analysis of the Binding of Aromatic Hydroxamic Acid Analogues to Ferric Horseradish Peroxidase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peroxidases typically bind their reducing substrates weakly, with K(d) values in the millimolar range. The binding of benzhydroxamic acid (BHA) to ferric horseradish peroxidase isoenzyme C (HRPC) [K(d) = 2.4 microM; Schonbaum, G. R. (1973) J. Biol. Chem. 248, 502-511] is a notable exception and has provided a useful tool for probing the environment of the peroxidase aromatic-donor-binding site and the distal heme cavity. Knowledge of the underlying thermodynamic driving forces is key to understanding the roles of the various H-bonding and hydrophobic interactions in substrate binding. The isothermal titration calorimetry results of this study on the binding of aromatic hydroxamic acid analogues to ferric HRPC under nonturnover conditions (no H(2)O(2) present) confirm the significance of H-bonding interactions in the distal heme cavity in complex stabilization. For example, the binding of BHA to HRPC is enthalpically driven at pH 7.0, with the H-bond to the distal Arg38 providing the largest contribution (6.74 kcal/mol) to the binding energy. The overall relatively weak binding of the hydroxamic acid analogues to HRPC is due to large entropic barriers (-11.3 to -37.9 eu) around neutral pH, with the distal Arg38 acting as an "entropic gate keeper". Dramatic enthalpy-entropy compensation is observed for BHA and 2-naphthohydroxamic acid binding to HRPC at pH 4.0. The enthalpic loss and entropic gain are likely due to increased flexibility of Arg38 in the complexes at low pH and greater access by water to the active site. Since the Soret absorption band of HRPC is a sensitive probe of the binding of hydroxamic acids and their analogues, it was used to investigate the binding of six donor substrates over the pH range of 4-12. The negligible pH dependence of the K(d) values corrected for substrate ionization suggests that enthalpy-entropy compensation is operative over a wide pH range. Examination of the thermodynamics of binding of ring-substituted hyrazides to HRPC reveals that the binding affinities of aromatic donors are highly sensitive to the position and nature of the ring substituent.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".