Skip to main content
. 2010 Apr 7;98(7):1327–1336. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2009.12.4272

Table 2.

Dissociation of Mpro and its mutants with and without substrates

Protein Nonlinear fitting
AUC analysis
Kd (μM) No substrate
With 600 μM substrate
Kd (μM) koff (s−1) Kd (μM) koff (s−1)
Wild-type 0.8 ± 0.4 2.0 ± 0.01 0.1 ± 0.007 1.7 ± 0.03 0.1 ± 0.002
R298A 11.4 ± 9.7 81.1 ± 3.3 0.1 ± 0.004 4.7 ± 0.1 0.08 ± 0.001
R298L 13.8 ± 8.7 30.8 ± 0.4 0.1 ± 0.001 2.6 ± 0.1 0.1 ± 0.003
R298A/Q299A NDc 85.7 ± 3.1 0.1 ± 0.004 115.0 ± 4.4 0.05 ± 0.002
E166A ND 3.7 ± 0.2 0.04 ± 0.001 0.4 ± 0.01 0.1 ± 0.002
E166A/R298A ND 141.1 ± 12.7 0.1 ± 0.009 103.7 ± 8.3 0.06 ± 0.005

Kd was calculated by nonlinear dependence equation (Eq. 3).

Parameters were derived from a global fit of the SV and SE data to a monomer-dimer self-association model by SEDPHAT. The SE experiments for the assay were obtained at protein concentrations of 5.7–28.6 μM, whereas SV experiments were at 1.4–57.2 μM.