Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Comparison of bacterial and animal rhodopsins by hydrogen exchange studies

Abstract

RHODOPSIN is deeply embedded in a hydrocarbon membrane, yet hydrogen exchange (HX) studies show that about 70% of its peptide hydrogens are freely exposed to solvent water1. This contrasts with other membrane-bound proteins and even aqueous proteins which generally involve about 70% of their peptide hydrogens in internal H-bonding. It has been suggested that the large fraction of disordered polypeptide chain indicated for rhodopsin resides in and acts to stabilise a channel of water penetrating into the membrane, and further that this channel must be quite large, perhaps 12 Å or more in diameter1. Unwin and Henderson2 described an electron diffraction model for the purple membrane protein of Halobacterium halobium (bacteriorhodopsin) which compares interestingly with the suggested structure of animal rhodopsin; membrane-embedded bacteriorhodopsin is arranged in a three-molecule circle surrounding an open space 20 Å in diameter. This space, however, is filled not with water but with lipid, and the protein walls of this blind channel are formed of a double rank of α helices which account for most of the bacteriorhodopsin polypeptide chain, so that bacteriorhodopsin, unlike animal rhodopsin, must be as extensively H-bonded as is the usual protein. We report here a HX study of bacteriorhodopsin. In agreement with the electron diffraction model, our HX results show that this protein, unlike animal rhodopsin, has about 75% of its peptides internally H-bonded. These and previous results, however, suggest a fundamental structural similarity between the two rhodopsins.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Downer, N. W., and Englander, S. W., Nature, 254, 625–627 (1975).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Henderson, R., and Unwin, P. N. T., Nature, 257, 28–32 (1975).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Yee, R. Y., Englander, S. W., and von Hippel, P. H., J. molec. Biol., 83, 1–16 (1974).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bridgen, J., and Walker, I., Biochemistry, 15, 792–798 (1976).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Osterhelt, D., and Stoeckenius, W., Nature new Biol., 233, 149–152 (1971).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Shichi, H., Lewis, M. S., Irrevere, F., and Stone, A. L., J. biol. Chem. 244, 529–536 (1969).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rothschild, K. J., Andrew, J. R., DeGrip, W. J., and Stanley, H. E., Science, 191, 1176–1178.

  8. Santillan, G. G., Schwarz, S., Dratz, E. A., and Blasie, J. K., J. molec. Biol. (in the press).

  9. Chen, Y. S., and Hubbell, W. L., Expl Eye Res., 17, 517–532 (1973).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Osterhelt, D., and Stoeckenius, W., Meth. Enzym., 21, 667–678 (1974).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Englander, S. W., and Englander, J. J., Meth. Enzym., 26 c, 406–413 (1972).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wald, G., and Brown, P. K., J. gen. Physiol., 37, 189–200 (1953).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Futterman, S., and Saslow, L. D., J. biol. Chem., 236, 1652–1657 (1961).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

ENGLANDER, J., ENGLANDER, S. Comparison of bacterial and animal rhodopsins by hydrogen exchange studies. Nature 265, 658–659 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1038/265658a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/265658a0

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing