1965
DOI: 10.1016/s0022-2836(65)80285-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the nature of allosteric transitions: A plausible model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

180
4,172
12
19

Year Published

1979
1979
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8,412 publications
(4,383 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
180
4,172
12
19
Order By: Relevance
“…Similarly, mannose is likely to stabilize the closed conformation of the clamp segment. Classic models of allostery focused on whether allosteric conformational changes happen sequentially40 or whether they must happen simultaneously in a concerted fashion 2. The mechanism of the lectin domain is a combination of both.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Similarly, mannose is likely to stabilize the closed conformation of the clamp segment. Classic models of allostery focused on whether allosteric conformational changes happen sequentially40 or whether they must happen simultaneously in a concerted fashion 2. The mechanism of the lectin domain is a combination of both.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Protein allostery is generally described as the regulation of the active site of a protein through an effector binding to a distal location and triggering or stabilizing a conformational transition across the protein 1, 2. As a result, allosterically regulated proteins can be found natively in two distinct states depending whether the effector is bound or not.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first component, MCP complex, was represented with a Monod–Wyman–Changeux (MWC) model52 to describe the allosteric effects of receptor clusters with identical receptors. Each MCP complex switched rapidly between active (on) and inactive (off) states, determined by a free‐energy difference F as follows37, 41, 42 F(m,[L])=fm(m)+ln1+false[Lfalse]Kaln1normal +normal false[Lfalse]Kiwhere m is the total methylation level of the receptor complex, [ L ] indicates the ligand concentration, K a and K i are the dissociation constants of active and inactive receptors, respectively, and f m ( m ) = α( m 0 − m ), with α ≈ 1.7 and m 0 ≈ 1,53 is the methylation level‐dependent free energy difference.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At phosphoenolpyruvate concentrations as low as 0.02 mM this requirement cannot be easily fulfilled. For L4 pyruvate kinase from human liver the model would reduce to a simple R # T model [8]. The 1~ form would be stabilized by phosphoenolpyruvate and fructose 1,6-diphosphate, the T form by ATP.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%