The inositol phosphates are ubiquitous metabolites in eukaryotes, of which the most abundant are inositol hexakisphosphate (InsP 6) and inositol 1,3,4,5,6-pentakisphosphate [Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5)]. These two compounds, poorly understood functionally, have complicated complexation and solid formation behaviours with multivalent cations. For InsP 6, we have previously described this chemistry and its biological implications (Veiga et al. in J Inorg Biochem 100:1800, 2006; Torres et al. in J Inorg Biochem 99:828, 2005). We now cover similar ground for Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5, describing its interactions in solution with Na+, K+, Mg2+, Ca2+, Cu2+, Fe2+ and Fe3+, and its solid-formation equilibria with Ca2+ and Mg2+. Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5 forms soluble complexes of 1:1 stoichiometry with all multivalent cations studied. The affinity for Fe3+ is similar to that of InsP6 and inositol 1,2,3-trisphosphate, indicating that the 1,2,3-trisphosphate motif, which Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5 lacks, is not absolutely necessary for high-affinity Fe3+ complexation by inositol phosphates, even if it is necessary for their prevention of the Fenton reaction. With excess Ca2+ and Mg2+, Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5 also forms the polymetallic complexes [M4(H2L)] [where L is fully deprotonated Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5]. However, unlike InsP6, Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5 is predicted not to be fully associated with Mg2+ under simulated cytosolic/nuclear conditions. The neutral Mg2+ and Ca2+ complexes have significant windows of solubility, but they precipitate as [Mg4(H2L)] x 23H2O or [Ca4(H2L)] x 16H2O whenever they exceed 135 and 56 microM in concentration, respectively. Nonetheless, the low stability of the [M4(H2L)] complexes means that the 1:1 species contribute to the overall solubility of Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P 5 even under significant Mg2+ or Ca2+ excesses. We summarize the solubility behaviour of Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5 in straightforward plots.
The n class="Chemical">inositol phosphates are ubiquitous metabolites inpan> eukaryotes, of which the most abundant are inositol hexakisphosphate (InsP 6) andinositol 1,3,4,5,6-pentakisphosphate [Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5)]. These two compounds, poorly understood functionally, have complicatedcomplexation and solid formation behaviours with multivalent cations. For InsP 6, we have previously described this chemistry and its biological implications (Veiga et al. in J Inorg Biochem 100:1800, 2006; Torres et al. in J Inorg Biochem 99:828, 2005). We now cover similar ground for Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5, describing its interactions in solution with Na+, K+, Mg2+, Ca2+, Cu2+, Fe2+ andFe3+, and its solid-formation equilibria with Ca2+ andMg2+. Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5 forms soluble complexes of 1:1 stoichiometry with all multivalent cations studied. The affinity for Fe3+ is similar to that of InsP6 andinositol 1,2,3-trisphosphate, indicating that the 1,2,3-trisphosphate motif, which Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5 lacks, is not absolutely necessary for high-affinity Fe3+complexation by inositol phosphates, even if it is necessary for their prevention of the Fenton reaction. With excess Ca2+ andMg2+, Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5 also forms the polymetalliccomplexes [M4(H2L)] [where L is fully deprotonatedIns(1,3,4,5,6)P5]. However, unlike InsP6, Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5 is predicted not to be fully associated with Mg2+ under simulatedcytosolic/nuclear conditions. The neutral Mg2+ andCa2+complexes have significant windows of solubility, but they precipitate as [Mg4(H2L)] x 23H2O or [Ca4(H2L)] x 16H2O whenever they exceed 135 and 56 microM in concentration, respectively. Nonetheless, the low stability of the [M4(H2L)] complexes means that the 1:1 species contribute to the overall solubility of Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P 5 even under significant Mg2+ or Ca2+ excesses. We summarize the solubility behaviour of Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5 in straightforward plots.
Authors: P J French; C M Bunce; L R Stephens; J M Lord; F M McConnell; G Brown; J A Creba; R H Michell Journal: Proc Biol Sci Date: 1991-09-23 Impact factor: 5.349
Authors: David Mansell; Nicholas Rattray; Laura L Etchells; Carl H Schwalbe; Alexander J Blake; Elena V Bichenkova; Richard A Bryce; Christopher J Barker; Alvaro Díaz; Carlos Kremer; Sally Freeman Journal: Chem Commun (Camb) Date: 2008-09-29 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Aimee L Miller; Mythili Suntharalingam; Sylvia L Johnson; Anjon Audhya; Scott D Emr; Susan R Wente Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2004-09-30 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Christopher J Barker; Joanne Wright; Philip J Hughes; Christopher J Kirk; Robert H Michell Journal: Biochem J Date: 2004-06-01 Impact factor: 3.857
Authors: Nicolás Veiga; Julia Torres; Israel Macho; Kerman Gómez; Himali Y Godage; Andrew M Riley; Barry V L Potter; Gabriel González; Carlos Kremer Journal: Dalton Trans Date: 2013-05-07 Impact factor: 4.390