Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Dec 19.
Published in final edited form as: Chem Biol. 2013 Nov 21;20(12):1441–1446. doi: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2013.10.010

Figure 3. Cleavage of cognate and noncognate adenylates.

Figure 3

(a) The pH profiles of BioW activity with pimelate (top), glutarate (middle) and suberate (bottom) in absence of CoA. Buffers of sodium acetate (pH 4 and pH 5), sodium 2-(N-morpholino)ethanesulfonic acid (pH 6), sodium HEPES (pH 7) and Tris-HCl (pH 8 and pH 9) were used to determine the pH profile of the BioW reaction for 1 h at 37°C. (b) BioW catalyzed glutaryl- and suberyl-adenylate hydrolysis was assayed by determining the rate of AMP production with time. Reactions with pimelate (C7) were included for comparison. At different time points 1 μl samples of BioW reactions performed at pH 7.0 and 37°C were spotted onto cellulose TLC plates followed by development and autoradiography. (c) Quantitation of the data points of panel b were used to show the rate of formation of AMP with increasing time with C7, C5 and C8 as substrates. The intensities of the spots were quantitated using the phosphor-imaging software of the Fujifilm FLA-3000 phosphoimager. The percent of photostimulated luminescence of AMP and acyl-AMP spots obtained from the reaction was compared to that of the ATP spot obtained from a control reaction lacking enzyme included on each cellulose TLC plate to derive the amounts of products generated. All reactions were repeated three times and the bars denote standard deviations.