Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jun 6.
Published in final edited form as: Inorg Chem. 2016 Apr 7;55(9):4233–4247. doi: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.5b03006

Figure 5.

Figure 5

X-band EPR spectra (solid lines) and overlaid simulated fits (dashed lines) for (A) T1 Cu(II) only, (B) T2 Cu(II) (T1 Hg(II)), and (C) T1 Cu(II) + T2 Cu(II) azurin variants, ~1 mM in 50% glycerol and 25 mM ammonium acetate pH 5.1 buffer. WT azurin (A) and free CuSO4 (B) in buffer are shown for comparison. The sharp derivative signal around g ≈ 2.0 is iron impurity in the EPR cavity.