Radioisotope-induced radioactivity in a protein molecule

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the feasibility of inducing measurable radioactivity in a protein molecule through the use of a radio-labeled substrate that interacts with the protein. Participants explore various methods and isotopes that could be employed in this context, addressing both theoretical and practical aspects of the approach.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Igor proposes using a radio-labeled organic substrate to trace interactions with a transmembrane protein, questioning the measurability of the induced signal and the most effective methods and isotopes for this purpose.
  • One participant argues that radioisotopes typically emit radiation that does not induce radioactivity in other atoms, suggesting that the energy and intensity may be insufficient for the desired outcome.
  • Another participant mentions that if the protein does not chemically react with the substrate, it will not become radioactive, but suggests that marking the protein could be an alternative approach.
  • Igor clarifies that the transport protein does not chemically react with the substrate, raising concerns about unspecific cross-linking when attempting to tag the protein with the radio-labeled substrate.
  • Some participants suggest that observing the behavior of the protein, such as its migration speed in relation to the substrate, could provide insights into the interaction.
  • Discussion includes the potential of using hydrogen as a marker due to its easier incorporation into molecules compared to other elements like carbon, nitrogen, or oxygen.
  • Igor expresses the need to isolate the transport protein for sequencing to identify its genetic code, emphasizing the challenge of distinguishing it from numerous other proteins present in the biological membrane.
  • One participant discusses the exchange of oxygen in carboxylic acids and its implications for the experiment, raising questions about the timing and concentration of isotopes in the experimental setup.
  • Igor considers cross-linking radio-labeled homocitrate to proteins encountered during transport as a method to identify the transport protein.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the practicality of inducing radioactivity in proteins through the proposed methods. While some raise concerns about the feasibility and effectiveness of the approach, others suggest alternative strategies. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on the topic.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential for unspecific cross-linking, the dependence on the chemical behavior of the protein and substrate, and the challenges associated with distinguishing the target protein from a large number of other proteins in the membrane.

Igor 77
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Dear Forum Members,

I am a molecular biologist. One of my projects is focused on the identification of a protein that interacts with a known organic molecule. Namely, I try to chase a transmembrane protein that is known to transport one organic acid. If possible, I would like to get an idea on whether it is possible to induce measurable radioactivity in a protein molecule by subjecting it to a radio-labeled interacting substrate. My idea is to label the transport substrate with a radioisotope, then isolate the whole spectrum of proteins from a given biological membrane, and finally identify the protein that physically interacted with the radiolabeled substrate (namely, transported it) by tracing the induced radiation in that protein.

Specifically, my questions are as follows:

1. Would the strength of the induced signal be measurable?
2. If yes, which method would be the most sensitive?
3. Which isotope would be the most efficient in the induction (out of N, C, O, or H)?

Finally, do you see any alternative way of inducing a measurable change in a target protein?

Thank you in advance!

Igor.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No this is not practicable. AFAIK all radioisotopes used for labeling emit gamma/x-radiation or beta particles which will not induce radioactivity in other atoms. The reasons being that they are usually too low in energy and way too low in intensity. Another issue might be if the intensity and appropriate decay products where available the radiation level would probably damage the target material (radiolysis).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Igor 77
If your protein doesn't pick up atoms from the substrate it won't get radioactive. If it picks up some atoms you can work with them.

If the protein deposits some atoms you can do the reverse, mark the protein.

A sketch of the system would help.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Igor 77
Dear Gleem, dear Mfb,

Thank you for your informative replies.

Since in our system the transport protein does not chemically react with the transport substrate, we have no means to transfer the radiolabel from the substrate to the transporter. Currently I try to figure out if chemical cross-linking between the protein and the transported organic acid would do the trick. The problem in this approach is unspecific cross-linking of the radio-labeled organic acid to many other proteins on the membrane surface. There is hope that the preferential interaction of the acid with its dedicated transport protein would result in measurably higher radioactivity associated with that particular protein.

Kind regards,

Igor.
 
What does that interaction do then?

If your protein spends more time at the substrate (migrates slower across the surface?) this would also be something you could look for.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Igor 77
mfb said:
What does that interaction do then?

If your protein spends more time at the substrate (migrates slower across the surface?) this would also be something you could look for.

Dear Mfb,

Essentially, the substrate passes through a channel-like protein embedded into a lipid bi-layer (cell membrane). The substrate spends only very short time in the protein, but is physically very close to its surface. Also, more than one molecule passes through in a short period of time, which resembles a steady flow.

Thank you,

Igor.
 
What do you want to learn? Which protein let it flow through? Can you prepare substances with a different concentration of different proteins?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Igor 77
A candidate would be hydrogen.
Marking C, N or O would usually be hard, because changing C, N or O requires breaking the molecular backbone.
What is slightly easier is marking hydrogens. There are several hydrogen exchange regions that do not break the molecular backbone and are not visible when all are H.
Note that it is not necessary to use a radioactive marker here (T). D is stable and can be traced by infrared and NMR spectroscopy - and IR or NMR observations of D show its location in molecule, not just its existence as radioactivity of T.
In case of organic acid, though...
Acid hydrogen is promptly exchanged in water. How about oxygen? How quick is the reaction
R-CO(17)O(17)H+H2O(16)=R-CO(17)O(16)H+H2O(17)?
O(17) should be conspicuous because unlike O(16) and O(18) it has a spin (although also a quadrupole moment).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Igor 77
Dear Mfb, dear Snorkack,

Thank you for your informative replies.

Unfortunately, for my application, it would be insufficient to visualize the interaction between homocitrate and its transport protein in the membrane. My goal is to tag the transport protein upon contact with its substrate, so that it can be recognized from thousands of other proteins after the purification step. Actually, isolation of this protein is needed for learning its polypeptide sequence. This way we can see which gene in our model organism codes for this important protein.

In short, we try to learn which protein out of very many (over 100,000) present in a given plant organism can transport homocitrate. So far, no protein with the ability to transport homocitrate has been described in nature. But we know that it exists and we know in which part of the cell it is located. We just need to learn its polypeptide sequence.

Thank you,

Igor.
 
  • #10
Found out that carboxylic acid oxygen exchange in water is in a decent timescale... of days.
And can be measurably catalyzed by enzymes.

Oxygen 17 natural concentration is 0.037 %.
Given surplus of water with 100 % oxygen 17, it should be easy to produce homocitrate which is 90+ oxygen 17.
Put it in ordinary water, say 1 % - well, a few days later you might have 50 % oxygen 17 homocitrate dissolved in water that is now 0,5 % oxygen 17. But if your experiment with membrane is done in hours?

You might identify, say water that is 0,05 % oxygen 17 (up from the 0,037 before you added homocitrate) and uninvolved enzymes which are 0,04 % oxygen 17 (exchanging oxygen from water into enzymes takes time in its turn) - and one enzyme, one position in molecule, which is 0,06 % oxygen 17.
Is that the correct approach?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Igor 77
  • #11
Dear Snorkack,

Thank you for this suggestion. Since our unknown membrane protein does not exchange atoms/groups with the transported substrate (homocitrate), I consider cross-linking radio-labeled homocitrate to all proteins which it encounters while on the way to its "gate" trough the membrane. Maybe we can detect the cross-linked product and sequence it, to learn its molecular identity.

Just for the case, I attach a figure that explains the situation in the living system. It is from the following paper:

Hakoyama T, Niimi K, Watanabe H, Tabata R, Matsubara J, Sato S, Nakamura Y, Tabata S, Jichun L, Matsumoto T, Tatsumi K, Nomura M, et al (2009). Host plant genome overcomes the lack of a bacterial gene for symbiotic nitrogen fixation. Nature 462: 514-517

Igor.
 

Attachments

  • Figure 1.jpg
    Figure 1.jpg
    37.3 KB · Views: 379

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
9K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
4K