Skip navigation
  • Home
  • Browse
    • Communities
      & Collections
    • Browse Items by:
    • Publication Date
    • Author
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Department
  • Sign on to:
    • My MacSphere
    • Receive email
      updates
    • Edit Profile


McMaster University Home Page
  1. MacSphere
  2. Open Access Dissertations and Theses Community
  3. Digitized Open Access Dissertations and Theses
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11375/22788
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorChan, W. W. -C-
dc.contributor.authorPickering, Darryl-
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-03T12:50:35Z-
dc.date.available2018-05-03T12:50:35Z-
dc.date.issued1985-12-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11375/22788-
dc.description.abstractThe active site of porcine kidney microsomal aminopeptidase was investigated using single, multiple and EDTA inactivation kinetic studies. Good inhibitors invariably contained a zinc-coordinating group such as the mercapto moiety, which proved to be the best ligand for aminopeptidase. Due to the potency of β -mercaptoethylamine, derivatives of this compound were examined for aminopeptidase inhibition. (S)-2-amino-4-methyl-l-pentanethiol (L-leucinthiol) exhibited the largest potency and specificity towards aminopeptidase when compared against carboxypeptidase A and thermolysin, two similar zinc-peptidases. The presence of a zinc-coordination subsite, two hydrophobic pocket subsites and a second amine-binding subsite (distinct from that responsible for substrate recognition) were discerned and the binding modes of amino acid hydroxamates and mercaptoamines compared using Yonetani-Theorell inhibition kinetics. Aminopeptidase does not show virtually any stereoselectivity between L-and D-leucine hydroxamate while greater than a 1,000-fold preference is seen for L-leucinthiol over the D isomer. Also, the amino group of mercaptoamines is crucial to the binding of these inhibitors whereas that of the hydroxamate compounds does not seen to contribute much to their binding. The differences in binding between hydroxamates and mercaptoamines are postulated to be a consequence of the product analogue nature of the former and transition state analogue character of the latter. L-leucine hydroxamate is proposed to bind in a backwards orientation while the D isomer binds in the normal substrate-like position. Similarly, L-leucinthiol is proposed to bind in the same fashion as substrate. Design of future inhibitors should endeavour to: (1) lower the pᵏₐ of the α-amino group, (2) include an extended chain structure capable of binding to additional hydrophobic pockets, (3) incorporate a second amine moiety into the structure to interact with the second amine-binding subsite and (4) replace the mercapto group with a more potent zinc ligand such as the selenol group.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectmicrosomalen_US
dc.subjectaminopeptidaseen_US
dc.subjectactive siteen_US
dc.subjectactiveen_US
dc.subjectporcineen_US
dc.subjectpigen_US
dc.titleActive Site Studies on Microsomal Aminopeptidaseen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.contributor.departmentBiochemistryen_US
dc.description.degreetypeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeMaster of Science (MSc)en_US
Appears in Collections:Digitized Open Access Dissertations and Theses

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
pickering_darryl_s_1985Dec_masters.pdf
Open Access
3.38 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record Statistics


Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Sherman Centre for Digital Scholarship     McMaster University Libraries
©2022 McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L8 | 905-525-9140 | Contact Us | Terms of Use & Privacy Policy | Feedback

Report Accessibility Issue