2000
DOI: 10.1006/prep.2000.1225
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Expression, Refolding, and Activity of a Recombinant Nonhemorrhagic Snake Venom Metalloprotease

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
1

Year Published

2002
2002
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
5
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This amount can be considered quite satisfactory for a refolded protein. The data reported in the literature show a smaller, but equally efficient, yield compared to the one obtained in the present study, such as 0.01 mgAEmL )1 for recombinant snake venom metalloprotease [22] and 0.008 mgAEmL )1 for recombinant human promatrilysin [23]. Figure 3 shows the CD spectra for Th and Ch of the Nfrutalin, Ufrutalin, Rfrutalin and Mfrutalin forms.…”
Section: R E S U L T S a N D Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 51%
“…This amount can be considered quite satisfactory for a refolded protein. The data reported in the literature show a smaller, but equally efficient, yield compared to the one obtained in the present study, such as 0.01 mgAEmL )1 for recombinant snake venom metalloprotease [22] and 0.008 mgAEmL )1 for recombinant human promatrilysin [23]. Figure 3 shows the CD spectra for Th and Ch of the Nfrutalin, Ufrutalin, Rfrutalin and Mfrutalin forms.…”
Section: R E S U L T S a N D Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 51%
“…We chose mammalian cells for expression because SVSPs are often glycosylated and have a number of disulfide bonds, which present obstacles to effectively refold the recombinant proteins as active forms from E. coli -expressed insoluble inclusion bodies, even under conditions intended to favour disulfide bond formation [ 35 , 36 ]. Such refolding steps are crucial but are frequently unsuccessful and/or time-consuming to optimise sufficient yield recovery, as reported in several previous snake venom toxin expression studies [ 31 , 32 , 53 , 54 ]. Consequently, here we used mammalian HEK293F cells for the expression of three pathogenically relevant SVSP toxins sourced from geographically diverse medically important viperid snakes, specifically ancrod from C. rhodostoma , batroxobin from B. atrox and RVV-V from D. russelli .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We chose mammalian cells for expression because SVSPs are often glycosylated and have a number of disulfide bonds, which present obstacles to effectively refold the recombinant proteins as active forms from E. coli- expressed insoluble inclusion bodies, even under conditions intended to favour disulfide bond formation (35, 36). Such refolding steps are crucial but are frequently unsuccessful and/or time-consuming to optimise sufficient yield recovery, as reported in several previous snake venom toxin expression studies (31, 32, 54, 55). Consequently, here we used mammalian HEK293F cells for the expression of three pathogenically relevant SVSP toxins sourced from geographically diverse medically important viperid snakes, specifically ancrod from C. rhodostoma , batroxobin from B. atrox and RVV-V from D. russelli .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%