Hold on--did you add free NADPH into the top of the concentrator, and spec the 
sample pre-spinning? You need to be sure that you can see the NADPH in the 
sample before you spin it, because you are looking for a *loss* of NADPH 
absorbance in the flow-through.

A similar method uses a very low level of NADPH in the running buffer 
equilibrated on an SEC column. When you run your concentrated protein sample 
through, you should see a negative peak somewhere corresponding to the NADPH 
"sucked up" by your protein, and a robust NADPH peak co-eluting with your 
protein.

Jacob

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Xuan Yang 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 4:17 AM
  Subject: [ccp4bb] Summary: I-TASSER predicts NADPH binding, need to confirm 
with experiment


  Dear all,

  Here comes a late summary for the issue about NADPH.

  Considering the specific absoption at 340nm, UV spectrum was suggested as a 
nice way to check NADPH. Thanks to Vellieux Frederic. I recored the UV spectrum 
of freezed protein and fresh sample from 400nm to 240nm. The results were 
negative. No 340nm peak was observed at all (attachment 1 series).
  Jacob Keller & Markus Seeliger suggested a different way employing 
ultrafiltration. If the protein binds NADPH, the flowthrough should contain a 
significant amount of free NADPH for 340nm detection. I did not get it at 
first, now I consider it as a smart way. Unfortunately, the results were also 
negative (attachment 2). 

  Andrzej Lyskowski and Jürgen Bosch suggested another powerful way called 
DSF/Thermoflour. The basic idea is that a relevant cofactor should change the 
Tm of protein during heat denaturation. I found Sypro Orange and test the Tm 
shift of my protein in NADPH via RT-PCR. The results were also negative 
(attachment 3). But it should be interesting to test whether other cofactors 
might be effective. 

  Now I conclude that the prediction was wrong and the protein does not bind 
NADPH. Thanks for everybody involved. 

  ***************************Jacob's precedure***********************

  Jacob's precedure: "concentrate your protein to the highest stable 

  concentration possible

  figure out what is the lowest possible robustly-detectable nadph signal on 

  your nanodrop

  combine the two in such a way in the top of a microcon of appropriate MWCO to 

  acheive the highest possible protein concentration with the lowest possible 

  nadph concentration. Take a baseline spec reading before spinning.

  spin long enough to get enough flowthrough to measure on the nano (~10uL is 

  plenty.) Flowthrough should be the free nadph concentration L. Total L should 

  be known, as well as total P, so you can figure out bound concentrations PL 

  easily.

  you should probable do this in triplicate or so, with appropriate controls. I 

  found 50uL/microcon to be a good balance of pipette-ability and economy of 

  protein. If you want to get fancier, you can do more samples varying 

  concentrations (or do some other more sophisticated method.)"

  *******************DSF/Thermoflour Protocol*********************

  DSF/Thermoflour Protocol: 

  http://www.nature.com/nprot/journal/v2/n9/abs/nprot.2007.321.html.





   

  2010/8/4 Xuan Yang <[email protected]>

    Dear All,

    3D structure modeling server I-TASSER predicts a binding site for NADPH and 
I want to test this prediction. What would be the nice quick way to tell 
whether this protein bind NADPH or not, when I have a lot of recombinant 
protein? 

    Sincerely,

    Xuan Yang





*******************************************
Jacob Pearson Keller
Northwestern University
Medical Scientist Training Program
Dallos Laboratory
F. Searle 1-240
2240 Campus Drive
Evanston IL 60208
lab: 847.491.2438
cel: 773.608.9185
email: [email protected]
*******************************************

Reply via email to