Skip to main content
. 2022 Jun 30;298(8):102217. doi: 10.1016/j.jbc.2022.102217

Table 1.

PDA analysis of oxidized (top) and reduced (bottom) PDI 88/467 WT and variants used in this study

Rates (ms−1) WT AA/AA CC/AA AA/CC R300H W396A
k1,2 4.50 ± 0.81 2.14 ± 0.14 4.43 ± 0.05 2.73 ± 0.36 1.97 ± 0.41 1.36 ± 0.14
k1,3 0.32 ± 0.31 0.63 ± 0.23 0.34 ± 0.13 0.26 ± 0.28 0.51 ± 0.47 1.38 ± 0.09
k2,1 2.38 ± 0.36 1.59 ± 0.13 2.39 ± 0.09 1.51 ± 0.11 1.35 ± 0.22 1.51 ± 0.39
k2,3 0.78 ± 0.26 1.03 ± 0.09 0.67 ± 0.06 0.68 ± 0.12 0.70 ± 0.55 0.80 ± 0.11
k3,1 0.15 ± 0.11 0.66 ± 0.15 0.12 ± 0.02 0.48 ± 0.24 0.09 ± 0.11 0.13 ± 0.04
k3,2 1.07 ± 0.24 0.95 ± 0.11 0.94 ± 0.06 0.66 ± 0.24 1.20 ± 0.16 0.93 ± 0.16
% state
O1(80 Å) 23 ± 1 29 ± 1 22 ± 1 26 ± 1 22 ± 2 20 ± 1
O2(57 Å) 44 ± 3 36 ± 2 43 ± 1 42 ± 2 39 ± 4 32 ± 2
C (42 Å) 34 ± 1 35 ± 2 35 ± 1 32 ± 1 39 ± 2 49 ± 1
χ2(global) 5.5 6.2 5.2 4.9 6.7 4.7

Rates (ms−1) WT AA/AA CC/AA AA/CC R300H W396A
k1,2 8.49 ± 1.95 2.12 ± 0.15 9.35 ± 0.30 4.33 ± 1.29 6.64 ± 0.21 4.49 ± 0.62
k1,3 0.36 ± 0.33 0.39 ± 0.34 0.99 ± 0.66 1.03 ± 1.04 0.94 ± 1.29 0.78 ± 0.09
k2,1 6.28 ± 1.07 1.45 ± 0.39 7.50 ± 1.95 3.52 ± 0.32 4.09 ± 0.18 4.72 ± 0.40
k2,3 0.11 ± 0.06 0.75 ± 0.59 0.75 ± 1.19 0.27 ± 0.09 0.17 ± 0.13 0.16 ± 0.05
k3,1 1.39 ± 0.84 0.48 ± 0.17 3.95 ± 4.47 0.79 ± 0.19 0.36 ± 0.55 0.25 ± 0.22
k3,2 0.40 ± 0.21 0.97 ± 0.23 2.05 ± 2.72 0.50 ± 0.50 0.68 ± 0.60 1.30 ± 0.11
% state
O1(80 Å) 39 ± 1 28 ± 1 41 ± 1 37 ± 3 33 ± 1 37 ± 1
O2(57 Å) 51 ± 3 37 ± 2 49 ± 3 45 ± 6 53 ± 1 40 ± 2
C (42 Å) 9 ± 2 35 ± 1 10 ± 2 18 ± 3 14 ± 1 23 ± 1
χ2(global) 4.5 5.1 4.2 5.2 6.1 5.1

PDA was performed on datasets binned at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, and 1 ms. To assess robustness of the fit, the PDA fit was repeated by systematically varying the initial value of the rate constants to 1, 0.5, and 0.75 ms−1 (min 0, max 10) while keeping the other settings identical. The results in the tables above represent the average of the three independent determinations.