The cytochrome b6f complex, a member of the cytochrome bc family that mediates energy transduction in photosynthetic and respiratory membranes, is a hetero-oligomeric complex that utilizes two pairs of b-hemes in a symmetric dimer to accomplish trans-membrane electron transfer, quinone oxidation-reduction, and generation of a proton electrochemical potential. Analysis of electron storage in this pathway, utilizing simultaneous measurement of heme reduction, and of circular dichroism (CD) spectra, to assay heme-heme interactions, implies a heterogeneous distribution of the dielectric constants that mediate electrostatic interactions between the four hemes in the complex. Crystallographic information was used to determine the identity of the interacting hemes. The Soret band CD signal is dominated by excitonic interaction between the intramonomer b-hemes, bn and bp, on the electrochemically negative and positive sides of the complex. Kinetic data imply that the most probable pathway for transfer of the two electrons needed for quinone oxidation-reduction utilizes this intramonomer heme pair, contradicting the expectation based on heme redox potentials and thermodynamics, that the two higher potential hemes bn on different monomers would be preferentially reduced. Energetically preferred intramonomer electron storage of electrons on the intramonomer b-hemes is found to require heterogeneity of interheme dielectric constants. Relative to the medium separating the two higher potential hemes bn, a relatively large dielectric constant must exist between the intramonomer b-hemes, allowing a smaller electrostatic repulsion between the reduced hemes. Heterogeneity of dielectric constants is an additional structure-function parameter of membrane protein complexes.
The cytochrome b6f compn>lex, a member of the n>an class="Gene">cytochrome bc family that mediates energy transduction in photosynthetic and respiratory membranes, is a hetero-oligomeric complex that utilizes two pairs of b-hemes in a symmetric dimer to accomplish trans-membrane electron transfer, quinone oxidation-reduction, and generation of a proton electrochemical potential. Analysis of electron storage in this pathway, utilizing simultaneous measurement of heme reduction, and of circular dichroism (CD) spectra, to assay heme-heme interactions, implies a heterogeneous distribution of the dielectric constants that mediate electrostatic interactions between the four hemes in the complex. Crystallographic information was used to determine the identity of the interacting hemes. The Soret band CD signal is dominated by excitonic interaction between the intramonomer b-hemes, bn and bp, on the electrochemically negative and positive sides of the complex. Kinetic data imply that the most probable pathway for transfer of the two electrons needed for quinone oxidation-reduction utilizes this intramonomer heme pair, contradicting the expectation based on heme redox potentials and thermodynamics, that the two higher potential hemesbn on different monomers would be preferentially reduced. Energetically preferred intramonomer electron storage of electrons on the intramonomer b-hemes is found to require heterogeneity of interheme dielectric constants. Relative to the medium separating the two higher potential hemesbn, a relatively large dielectric constant must exist between the intramonomer b-hemes, allowing a smaller electrostatic repulsion between the reduced hemes. Heterogeneity of dielectric constants is an additional structure-function parameter of membrane protein complexes.
Photosynthetic and respiratory
electron transfer chains utilize
a series of membrane bound multisubunit protein compn>lexes.[1−4] Recent advances in membrane protein structural biology have described
static structure-related aspn>ects of such large membrane protein assemblies.
An expn>onential increase in the number of membrane protein structures
solved to high resolution (httpn>://blanco.biomol.un>an class="Chemical">ci.edu/mpstruc/),[5] including hetero-oligomeric electron
transfer complexes, has enhanced the understanding of the protein
architecture and the intraprotein environment of the associated prosthetic
groups. An important feature of the multisubunit membrane protein
complexes involved in electron transfer is the presence of ordered,
crystallographically resolvable lipids and lipid binding sites,[6−8] and the presence of cavities lined by hydrophobic residues within
the trans-membrane domain proposed to provide conduits for binding
and transport of redox substrates, such as quinones.[6,8−13] The redox prosthetic groups of membrane protein electron transfer
complexes are mostly embedded in the trans-membrane domain. Domains
of these complexes that contain an extended lipid matrix are assumed
to have a low dielectric constant, approximately 2.5.[14−16]
Investigation of the effects of dielectric heterogeneity in
membrane
protein function requires a system with unique measurable signals
across a medium with difn>an class="Chemical">ferent dielectric constants. The cytochrome b6f complex is a dimeric lipoprotein
integral membrane complex that catalyzes plastoquinone reduction–protonation
at the electrochemically negative (n) side of the thylakoid membrane
and plastoquinol deprotonation–oxidation on the electrochemically
positive (p) side.[11,17] The trans-membrane core of the
dimeric cytochrome b6f complex is associated with four b-hemes with separable
redox potentials between two of lower potential (bL or bp) and two of higher
potential (bH or bn).[18−20] The heme bp/bn pair is embedded in a protein environment, within the
monomeric unit of the b6f complex, while the two monomers are separated by a large cavity
(30 Å high, 15 Å deep, 25 Å wide on the n-side), which
is known to contain an appreciable lipid content.[21] The presence of an intramembrane, asymmetrically located
lipid-filled cavity in such a membrane protein complex is expected
to contribute significantly to the energetics of electron transfer
reactions, and perhaps to contribute to a heterogeneous distribution
of dielectric constants within the complex.
The structure of
the hetero-oligomeric lipoprotein cytochrome b6f compn>lex, which coupn>les proton
translocation and electron transpn>ort in n>an class="Chemical">oxygenic photosynthesis, has
been obtained from two filamentous cyanobacteria, Mastigocladus
laminosus (Figure 1A) and Nostoc sp. PCC 7120,[11−13,22,23] and the green alga, Chlamydomonas
reinhardtii.[24] The hydrophobic
core of the b6f complex
is similar[21] to the core of the related
cytochrome bc1 complex in the mitochondrial
respiratory chain and purple photosynthetic bacteria.[6,9,25−27] In this core,
the two trans-membrane b-hemes, bn and bp, respectively, on
the n- and p-sides of the complex, cross-link the “B”
and “D” TMH of the cytochrome b subunit
through bis-histidine ligation in each monomer of
a symmetric dimer,[28] a structure motif
also present in the cytochrome bc1 complex.[9,25,28] The b6f complex accepts electrons from plastoquinol, transfers
one electron to the plastocyanin or cytochrome c6 of higher oxidation–reduction potential on the p-side
of the complex, and can transfer the other to a lower potential trans-membrane
pathway involving the two b-hemesbp and bn directed to a plastoquinone
bound axially to the heme cn.[11,13] The electron transfer reactions are coupled to net proton transfer,
whose pathways have been described,[11] into
the aqueous phase on the p-side of the membrane, thereby contributing
to the trans-membrane electrochemical proton gradient utilized for
ATP synthesis. A summary of the net electron and proton transfer pathways
is shown (Figure S1, Supporting Information) along with edge–edge and center–center distances
between the trans-membrane b-hemes in the b6f complex (Figure 1B) and heme center (Fe)–center (Fe) distances
(Figure 1B, Table 1).
Figure 1
(A) Cytochrome b6f complex structure from Nostoc PCC 7120 (PDB ID 4H44). Ribbon diagram
of polypeptide subunits and redox active groups. Cytochrome b6 subunit, yellow; subunitIV, orange; cytochrome f, red; Rieske [2Fe–2S] iron–sulfur protein,
blue; PetG, pink; PetL, wheat; PetM, cyan; PetN, white. Hemes bp and bn (green,
red, and blue), cn (black, red, and blue), f (gray, red, and blue), chlorophyll-a (dark
green and blue), and β-carotene (yellow) are shown as sticks.
The components of the [2Fe–2S] cluster of the Rieske iron–sulfur
protein are depicted as spheres (Fe, brown; sulfur, yellow). (B) Geometry
of hemes within the trans-membrane domain of cytochrome b6f (PDB 4H44). Edge–edge and center–center
(Fe–Fe, in parentheses) distances are shown.
Table 1
Relative Contribution of b-Heme Pairs to the CD
Signal in the Dimeric Cytochrome b6f Complexa
heme pairb
center–center distance (Å)
interplanar
angle (deg)
relative
contribution to CD spectrum (%)
bp1–bn1
20.6
52.0
+50.8%
bp2–bn2
+50.8%
bp1–bp2
22.0
17.2
–3.5%
bp1–bn2
33.8
48.4
+3.2%
bp2–bn1
+3.2%
bn1–bn2
34.9
18.9
–4.5%
Center-to-center distances, interplanar
angles, and calculation of relative CD amplitudes determined from
the crystal structure (PDB ID 4H44).
Additional numerical subscripts
in b-heme notation used to distinguish the hemes
in the two monomers of the dimeric complex.
(A) Cytochrome b6f compn>lex structure from n>an class="Species">Nostoc PCC 7120 (PDB ID 4H44). Ribbon diagram
of polypeptide subunits and redox active groups. Cytochrome b6 subunit, yellow; subunitIV, orange; cytochrome f, red; Rieske [2Fe–2S] iron–sulfur protein,
blue; PetG, pink; PetL, wheat; PetM, cyan; PetN, white. Hemesbp and bn (green,
red, and blue), cn (black, red, and blue), f (gray, red, and blue), chlorophyll-a (dark
green and blue), and β-carotene (yellow) are shown as sticks.
The components of the [2Fe–2S] cluster of the Rieske iron–sulfur
protein are depicted as spheres (Fe, brown; sulfur, yellow). (B) Geometry
of hemes within the trans-membrane domain of cytochrome b6f (PDB 4H44). Edge–edge and center–center
(Fe–Fe, in parentheses) distances are shown.
The cytochrome b6f compn>lex, its structure determined from crystallograpn>hic
analysis
shown in ribbon format (Figure 1A), contains
five redox prosthetic groupn>s: the extra-membrane n>an class="Chemical">heme of cytochrome f; the two trans-membrane b-hemes; heme cn, which is electronically coupled to heme bn;[29,30] and the [2Fe–2S]
cluster in the iron–sulfur protein subunit at the p-side membrane
interface. The edge–edge distances between the trans-membrane b-hemes, which are a major determinant of the rate of intraprotein
electron transfer,[31−35] are, respectively, 8.1 and 12.8 Å (Figure 1B), between the intramonomer b-hemes, bp and bn, and the
intermonomer hemes, bp, as seen in the
crystal structure of the Nostoc PCC 7120cytochrome b6f complex (PDB ID 4H44).[11] Heme center–center distances, one determinant of
the strength of interheme exciton interactions, are shown in Figure 1B and summarized (Table 1).
In addition to conferring structure stability, an obligatory
function
in electron transn>an class="Chemical">fer of the dimeric structure of the cytochrome b6f complex has not been described,
and little is known about the physical interactions that govern the
pathways of trans-membrane electron transfer between bound quinone
molecules on the two sides of the membrane via the two b-type hemes. The electron transfer pathways in cytochrome bc complexes have been studied extensively in the respiratory
and photosynthetic bacterial cytochrome bc1 complex,[36−44] for which crystal structure information has been summarized.[21,45,46] It was inferred from the absence
of a sigmoidal dependence of flash-induced cytochrome b reduction in the presence of the inhibitor myxathiazol,[38] and the shorter distance between the intramonomer
hemesbp and bn compared to the distances between the intermonomer b-hemes,[42] that intramonomer electron transfer
from heme bp to heme bn is more likely than intermonomer transfer between the
two hemesbp. A different viewpoint is
that interheme transfer between hemesbp in the two monomers can occur with comparable likelihood,[36,41,43,47] described as “half sites reactivity”,[37,44] and proposed[48] in the context of the
first crystal structures of the mitochondrial bc1 complex. Efficient communication between the two monomers
at the level of the b-hemes was demonstrated through
mutagenesis of the bc1 complex in the
photosynthetic bacteria, Rhodobacter capsulatus(39,41,43) and Rb. sphaeroides.[49] The issue in the latter studies is
the pathway preferred for transfer of a single electron. The present
study concerns the most probable pathway for transfer of the pair
of electrons required for the complete two-electron reduction of the
quinone bound on the n-side of the cytochrome bc complex.
While low temperature spectra distinguish hemesn>an class="Chemical">bp and bn, the pathway of electrons
through the b6f dimer
cannot be determined, as the spectra of the two hemesbp (or bn) in the dimer cannot
be distinguished in kinetic studies at room temperature.[50] However, the asymmetric arrangement of the b-hemes within the b6f dimer results in unique interactions between various b-heme pairs. The existence of physical interactions between
the b-hemes involved in trans-membrane electron transfer
in mitochondrial and chloroplast membranes has previously been inferred
from excitonic circular dichroism (CD) spectra of dithionite-reduced
isolated cytochrome bc1(51) and b6f(52) complexes. In the Soret band region, the CD
spectra of dithionite-reduced cytochrome bc1 and b6f complex are
split, due to excitonic heme–heme interactions, into two lobes
of opposite sign around a node near the Soret band absorbance peak
(432 nm). The amplitude of the split CD spectrum is a function of
the geometry (interheme angle and distance) of the interacting hemes.
High resolution crystal structure information[11] can be utilized to identify the particular b-hemes
that are reduced in the dimeric b6f complex.
In the present study, the time course of b-heme
reduction in the n>an class="Chemical">b6f complex,
and of the increase in amplitude of the CD spectra associated with
excitonic heme interactions, has for the first time been measured
simultaneously. The amplitude of the absorbance spectra assays the
fraction of the total b-heme population in the cytochrome
complex that is reduced, while the split CD spectrum indicates the
particular b-heme pair that is reduced. A difference
between the midpoint redox potentials of the intramonomer hemesbn and bp of purified b6f complex has been described.[19,20,53,54] Two of the studies,[19,20] utilizing a crystallizable complex
from the green alga, C. reinhardtii,[24] that is characterized by physiological electron transfer
rates of approximately 200 electrons/cytochrome f-s, determined a midpoint potential difference between the two hemesbn and bp of 75–100
mV. In-situ titrations of thylakoid membranes indicated
that the midpoint redox potential difference could be as large as
50 mV.[55,56] Given access to and equilibration between
both monomers, thermodynamics dictates that the first electrons to
be transferred to the dimer would equilibrate to the higher potential b-heme in each of the two monomers. In the present study,
however, the combined spectrophotometric and circular dichroic analysis
of these electron transfer events implies that this expectation is
not correct. The preferred two-electron-reduced state of the complex
is the b-heme pair in the monomeric unit of the complex,
which consists of the “high” and “low”
potential hemes (bn and bp) defined in the redox titrations.[19,20] Consideration of the energetics implies that preferential pairwise
reduction of the two b-hemes in the monomer would
be favored only if the dielectric constant of the protein medium between
the intramonomer b-heme pair, bp and bn, which have different
redox potentials and which span the membrane from the electrochemically
positive and negative sides, is greater than the dielectric constant
ε = 2.5 which operates in the intermonomer space between the
two higher potential (greater electron affinity) hemesbn located in the different monomers of the complex. Thereby,
the protein medium between these b-hemes is more
polarizable than that between the two hemesbn, whose reduction would be considered to be thermodynamically
more favorable strictly on the basis of their redox potentials. Preferential
reduction of the intramonomer b-heme pair would collect
electrons into one monomer of the dimeric cytochrome b6f complex, resulting in a more efficient
reduction of the n-side bound quinone, and less efficient formation
of superoxide mediated by plastosemiquinone.[57]
Materials and Methods
Purification
of Cytochrome b6f Complex
The pan class="Gene">cytochrome b6f complex was isolated from
leaves of Spinacea as previously described.[58] The dimeric complex was separated from the monomer
by size exclusion chromatograpn>hy and n>an class="Chemical">sucrose density gradient centrifugation.[58] Densitometrry on Blue Native-PAGE to determine
the relative content of monomer and dimer fractions of the b6f complex was measured with
a FluorChem E densitometer. All assays were performed in 30 mM Tris–HCl
(pH 7.5), 50 mM NaCl, 0.2 mM EDTA, and 0.04% UDM (n-undecyl-β-d-maltopyranoside).
Electron
Transfer Activity
The spepan class="Chemical">cific
electron transn>an class="Chemical">fer activity of the purified cytochrome b6f complex was measured as described
previously.[59]
Measurement
of Absorbance Changes; Cytochrome
Difference Spectra
Absorbance spectra were measured with
a Cary 4000 spectrophotometer (Varian/Agilent) in single-beam mode.
For redox difference spn>ectra, the n>an class="Chemical">b6f complex was oxidized by potassium ferricyanide (50 μM).
Na-ascorbate (0.25 mM) was added to reduce the relatively high potential
(Em ≈ +0.36 V) cytochrome f. Reduction of the two lower potential hemesbn and bp associated with the
cytochrome b6 subunit of the complex was
achieved by addition of an aliquot of 1 M dithionite, freshly prepared
using a degassed solution of 0.1 M Tris, pH 8.0, yielding a final
concentration in the cuvette of 3–4 mM (Em7 ≈ −0.5 V[60]). Sufficient
buffer was added to prevent a decrease in pH during the course of
the measurements. A decrease in the medium pH resulted in a significantly
increased rate of b-heme reduction (>10-fold at
pH
< 6.0). The state associated with complete heme reduction is stable
for 30 min, indicating maintenance of anaerobic conditions. Concentrations
of cytochromes f and b6 were calculated from the amplitude of the redox difference absorbance
spectrum (ascorbate-reduced minusferricyanide-oxidized) at 554 or
563 nm (dithionite-reduced minusascorbate-reduced), respectively,
using extinction coefficients of 25 and 23–25 mM–1 cm–1 determined for difference spectra of cytochromes f(61) and b6.
Low Temperature (77 K) Determination of b-Heme Spectra
Upon addition of pan class="Chemical">dithionite to n>an class="Chemical">b6f complex suspended in a detergent
solution containing 50% glycerol, small aliquots (0.8 mL) were frozen
in liquid nitrogen. The absorbance was monitored using a UV–vis
Cary 300 Bio (Varian) spectrometer with a measuring beam half-bandwidth
of 0.2 nm.
Simultaneous Measurement
of Circular Dichroism
and Absorbance Spectra
Soret band pan class="Disease">CD spn>ectra and absorbance
spn>ectra of the n>an class="Chemical">b6f complex
were measured simultaneously in a cuvette with 1 cm optical path length
and magnetic stirring, with a half-bandwidth of 1 nm, using a “Chirascan”
(Applied Photophysics, Ltd., U.K.) spectropolarimeter equipped with
thermal control and magnetic stirring of samples. Dithionite as reductant
was added as described above in section 2.3, and consecutive spectra were collected at intervals of approximately
16 s.
Structure-Based Calculation of Circular Dichroism
Spectra Derived from the Set of Heme–Heme Excitonic Interactions
Simulations of CD spn>ectra for all four possible pairs of reduced n>an class="Chemical">b-hemes of the dimeric cytochrome b6f complex were performed using a formalism
previously described.[51] The dipole–dipole
coupling potential, V12 (in cm–1), between the optical transitions of two spectroscopically identical
chromophores can be expressed as eq 1:where R12 is the
center–center distance (in Å) between the two hemes, r̂ is a unit vector in the direction of R12, and and are the transition dipole moments of the
two interacting hemes expressed in Debye units, 3.34 × 10–30 C-m. The numerical coefficient 5040 in eq 1 results from the use of Debye units and expression
of the coupling potential, V, in cm–1.[51] The interaction between the two hemes
causes a separation of the absorbance band into two excitonically
split bands with maxima at energies v and v, as described by eq 2:where v0 is the
transition energy of a noninteracting heme. Following the notation
of Palmer et al.,[51] the rotational strength,
in Debye units, of the two transitions is described by eq 3:where
λ is the optical transition wavelength,
in Å. The optical CD signal as a function of wavelength was calculated
by adding two Gaussian bands that mimic the shape of the b-heme absorbance. One of amplitude R is centered at v, and the other of amplitude R– is centered at v. Equations 1–3 have been used to derive expressions for CD signal strength expressed
in terms of the interplanar angles between the b-hemes.[51] The angular information required for eqs 1–3 for calculation of
the interaction energy and the CD signal was derived from the crystal
structure of the b6f complex
(PDB ID 4H44). The Q and Q transitions of the reduced b-hemes are known
to point along the directions between nitrogens, NA–NC and NB–ND (Table S1, Supporting Information), respectively, and the
distances between the pairs of b-hemes were calculated
as Fe–Fe distances derived from the crystallographic structure
(PDB ID 4H44) (Figure 1B; Table 1). The transition moment of each transition was set to be 4.6 D.[51] Since the heme Q and Q transitions are degenerate, the
CD spectra of all four interacting transitions between two b-hemes (Q–Q, Q–Q, Q–Q, Q–Q) were calculated separately and then combined. As
the goal of these simulations was estimation of the relative contribution
of each b-heme pair to the CD spectrum, the absorbance
spectrum of each b-heme was modeled as a Gaussian
band with a half-width of approximately 10 nm.
Center-to-center distances, interplanar
angles, and calculation of relative pan class="Disease">CD amplitudes determined from
the crystal structure (n>an class="Disease">PDB ID 4H44).
Additional numerical subscripts
in pan class="Chemical">b-heme notation used to distinguish the n>an class="Chemical">hemes
in the two monomers of the dimeric complex.
Results
Purified
predominantly dimeric cytochrome b6f compn>lex, prepn>ared as described, was obtained
by hydropn>hobic chromatograpn>hy and sepn>arated from inactive monomer
by size exclusion chromatograpn>hy (Materials and Methods). The dimeric character of the isolated compn>lex was confirmed by
clear native gel electropn>horesis analysis, its subunit compn>osition
defined by n>an class="Chemical">SDS-PAGE analysis (Figure S2A, Supporting
Information), and its electron transfer rate from donordecyl-plastoquinol
to the plastocyanin/ferricyanide determined (150–200 electrons-cyt f–1-s–1). Monomeric b6f complex prepared as described
in the Materials and Methods section, and
displayed by native gel electrophoresis in Figure S2B of the Supporting Information, was inactive.
Dithionite Reduction of Hemes bn and bp; Room Temperature and 77 K
The pan class="Chemical">b-hemes
in the dimeric n>an class="Chemical">b6f complex
are completely reduced in a pH-dependent reaction
by dithionite (3–4 mM) in 10–12 min (room temperature,
23 °C) at pH 7.5 (Figure 2A and B). The
rate of heme b reduction by dithionite at pH 8.0
was approximately 100-fold slower compared with that at pH 5. The
fully reduced state was stable for at least 30 min. Absorbance spectra
measured at 77 K resolve the presence of hemes f, bn, and bp (Figure
S3, Supporting Information), with the dithionite-minus-ascorbate
difference spectrum defining the spectra of hemesbn and bp. Dithionite addition
was performed under anaerobic conditions. On the basis of the area
under the domains of the low temperature (77 K) difference spectra
in the α-band region that arise from hemes b6 and f (Figure S3, Supporting Information), the measured molar ratio of heme b to heme f was 2.0:1.
Figure 2
Absorbance spectra of
dithionite-reduced cytochrome b6f complex; simultaneous kinetics of
reduction of hemes bn and bp in dimeric b6f complex. (A) Room temperature α-band absorbance spectra of
cytochromes f and b6,
with room temperature absorbance spectra, respectively, at 554 and
563 nm, as a function of time of dimeric b6f complex initially oxidized by ferricyanide (FeCy;
20 μM), reduced by ascorbate (Asc; 0.1 mM), and reduced subsequently
by dithionite (Dth, final concentration 2–3 mM). Buffer, 30
mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 50 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA, 0.045% UDM. Dimeric b6f complex containing 0.8 μM
cytochrome f. (B, C) Time course of (B) heme b reduction by dithionite and (C) increase in amplitude
of the split CD spectrum in dimeric b6f complex; kinetics of heme b reduction
by dithionite. The dimeric b6f complex contained 1.6 μM cytochrome f. Dithionite
was added to a concentration of 3–4 mM, and 27 consecutive
OD and CD spectra (420–440 nm) were simultaneously measured
(16 s per spectrum). Measurement of all CD and OD difference spectra
was started 10 (blue), 74 (pink), 138 (green), 234 (red), and 410
(brown) s after addition of dithionite. (D) Measured kinetics induced
by dithionite addition to the dimeric b6f complex: absorbance increase at 432 nm (triangles,
black); amplitude of Soret band circular dichroism (CD) signals at
428 nm (circles, blue) and 437 nm (squares, blue).
Absorbance spectra of
pan class="Chemical">dithionite-reduced n>an class="Gene">cytochrome b6f complex; simultaneous kinetics of
reduction of hemesbn and bp in dimeric b6f complex. (A) Room temperature α-band absorbance spectra of
cytochromes f and b6,
with room temperature absorbance spectra, respectively, at 554 and
563 nm, as a function of time of dimeric b6f complex initially oxidized by ferricyanide (FeCy;
20 μM), reduced by ascorbate (Asc; 0.1 mM), and reduced subsequently
by dithionite (Dth, final concentration 2–3 mM). Buffer, 30
mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 50 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA, 0.045% UDM. Dimeric b6f complex containing 0.8 μM
cytochrome f. (B, C) Time course of (B) heme b reduction by dithionite and (C) increase in amplitude
of the split CD spectrum in dimeric b6f complex; kinetics of heme b reduction
by dithionite. The dimeric b6f complex contained 1.6 μM cytochrome f. Dithionite
was added to a concentration of 3–4 mM, and 27 consecutive
OD and CD spectra (420–440 nm) were simultaneously measured
(16 s per spectrum). Measurement of all CD and OD difference spectra
was started 10 (blue), 74 (pink), 138 (green), 234 (red), and 410
(brown) s after addition of dithionite. (D) Measured kinetics induced
by dithionite addition to the dimeric b6f complex: absorbance increase at 432 nm (triangles,
black); amplitude of Soret band circular dichroism (CD) signals at
428 nm (circles, blue) and 437 nm (squares, blue).
Simultaneous Measurement
of Circular Dichroism
(CD) and Absorbance Spectra
Soret band CD spn>ectroscopn>y, utilized
as described elsewhere[51] and in section 2.6 in the Materials and Methods section, has been previously used to describe exciton interactions
between b-hemes of respiratory cytochrome bc1,[51,62,63] and in studies on the C. reinhardtii photosynthetic b6f complex,[52] although the identity of the interacting hemes was not
determined. The basis for the method rests on the net transition dipole
moment of two or more individual transition moments in a molecular
array resulting from superposition of the individual moments. The
net polarization of circularly polarized light results from preferential
absorption of right- and left-hand polarized light by the array.[64]The time course of b-heme reduction measured by the Soret band absorbance change at room
tempn>erature (Figure 2A and B) and of n>an class="Chemical">heme–heme
exciton interaction, assayed by CD spectra (Figure 2C) of active dimer, are experimentally indistinguishable (Figure 2D). As in the previous CD studies on the bc1(51) and b6f(52) complexes, the amplitude of the short wavelength (428 nm) positive
lobe of the split CD spectrum is approximately 20% larger than the
longer wavelength negative lobe centered at 436 nm[52] (Figure 2C). In the b6f complex, this asymmetry could be a
consequence of a CD signal arising from the reduction of the unique
heme cn, identified in refs (12, 24, and 29), whose
Soret band maximum in the reduced state is approximately 424 nm.[19] However, neither heme cn nor any
features unique to b6f compared to bc1 are likely to be the
source of this asymmetry, as the asymmetry is similar in the CD spectra
of the bc1 complex[51] in which heme cn is absent.
The normalized CD spectra of monomer and dimer are similar (Figures 3, Figure S4, Supporting Information), implying that the major excitonic interaction responsible for
the split CD spectrum arises from the two intramonomer hemes, bp and bn. This conclusion
is in excellent agreement with the CD spectra calculated from the
information available from crystal structures on interheme distances
and dihedral angles (Materials and Methods, section 2.6), shown in Figure 3. The major source of the split CD signal (Figure 2C, Figure S4, Supporting Information) is the interaction between the intramonomer b-heme
pairs on the electrochemically positive (p) and negative (n) sides
of the membrane, p1–n1 and p2–n2 (red trace). Significantly
smaller CD signals are expected from all other b-heme
pairs (Figure 3, Table 1). Table 1 summarizes the relative intensities
of CD signals from all six interacting pairs formed by the four b-hemes.
Figure 3
Calculated CD interaction between all reduced heme pairs:
p1–n1
or p2–n2 (red trace), which are the dominant interactions;
calculated spectra are shown for the other heme pairs, p1–n2,
p2–n1 (purple), p1–p2 (blue), and n1–n2 (green).
Calculated pan class="Disease">CD interaction between all reduced n>an class="Chemical">heme pairs:
p1–n1
or p2–n2 (red trace), which are the dominant interactions;
calculated spectra are shown for the other heme pairs, p1–n2,
p2–n1 (purple), p1–p2 (blue), and n1–n2 (green).
Preferential
Reduction of the Intramonomer bn–bp Pair;
Mechanism of Dithionite Reduction
Using a common measuring
beam in the combined spectrophotometer/polarimeter described in Materials and Methods, simultaneous measurement
was made of the kinetics of the absorbance changes (Figure 2D) at 432 nm (red, triangles) associated with b-n>an class="Disease">heme reduction, and of the ellipticity changes of the
Soret band split CD signal, measured at 428 nm (circles) and 437 nm
(blue, squares), associated with heme–heme excitonic interactions.
The similarity of these kinetics indicates that the two processes
are occurring coincidentally on the time scale of the measurement.
The slow time course of dithionite reduction of the b-hemes is attributed to the electrostatic barrier presented to anionic
dithionite by the low dielectric medium of the protein interior of
the complex, which can also be observed as a Stark effect sensed by
the chlorophyll-a molecule present in each monomer.[65] It is noted that dithionite is much less permeable
in the hydrophobic cytochrome complex than is the physiological protonated
plastoquinol or semiquinone reductant, which are also substantially
weaker reductants.
The ratio of the slow and fast kinetic components
characterizing the kinetics of the absorbance and CD changes (Figure 2D) is similar to the ratio of monomer to dimer compn>lex
in the fractions sepn>arated by size exclusion chromatograpn>hy and analyzed
by n>an class="Chemical">SDS-PAGE and native gel electrophoresis (Figures S2A and B, Supporting Information). The absorbance data
is described by a double exponential, having rate constants for fast
and slow components of 0.18 ± 0.02 s–1 (22%)
and 0.006 ± 0.001 s–1 (78%). In addition, to
explain the coincident time course of the CD and absorbance changes,
an explanation is needed of the mechanism by which four electrons
are transferred to the complex.
Model
of the Observed CD and Absorbance Dynamics
The rate of electron
transfer to the n>an class="Gene">cytochrome complex, k, is assumed
to be limited by the diffusion rate of the
donor molecule (dithionite) to the complex and thus is independent
of the redox state of the complex. Assuming that dithionite is a one-electron
donor, four electron transfer steps are required to completely reduce
the initially oxidized four b-heme complex, as described
by eq 4 below:N(t) represents the time-dependent population
state of the dimeric complex with subscript i denoting
the number of reduced b-hemes. The system of kinetic
equations can be solved analytically, as shown for the case of one-electron
transfer (eq S3, Supporting Information). Since the time scale of reduction of the complex by the donor
(∼100 s) is much slower than intracomplex electron transfer
between the b-hemes (∼1 ms), it is assumed
that the electrons in the complex adopt the thermodynamically most
probable configuration, i.e., that with the lowest free energy. The
absorbance (OD) signal, OD(t), reflects the total
population of the reduced b-hemes, i.e., OD(t) ∼ [N1(t) + 2N2(t) + 3N3(t) + 4N4(t)], and does not depend on the order in
which the b-hemes are reduced. The CD signal kinetics,
CD(t), however, depend on the order in which the b-hemes are reduced, because reduction of the intramonomer bn and bp hemes is
uniquely required for a CD signal of significant amplitude (Table 1, Figure 3). If these two
intramonomer b-hemes are the first to be reduced,
the CD signal will increase faster than if any other heme pair is
populated first (Figure 4). Thus, two models
are considered:
Figure 4
CD (circles, squares, blue) and optical density changes (triangles,
black) were measured simultaneously, as described in the Materials and Methods section. Solid curves are
kinetic simulations as described in the Results section, with the assumption that dithionite acts as a one-electron
donor; the predicted time course for dithionite acting as a two-electron
donor is shown in Figure S7 (Supporting Information). Electron transfer to the b6f dimer is described by two rate constants: k1 = 0.017 s–1 (70%) and k2 = 0.33 s–1 (30%); the larger rate
constant is attributed to “contaminant” monomer complex
in the dimer preparation (Figure S2B, Supporting
Information, native gel). Black curve: fit to measured absorbance
changes (triangles). Blue curve: expected CD kinetics in the “n–p”
model where the intermediate doubly reduced intramonomer (Figure 5B; state N2) dimer has a lower free energy
than the intermonomer doubly reduced state in which heme bn is reduced in both monomers (Figure 5A; state N2). Red function: expected time course
of the CD change in the “n–n” model in which
the intramonomer n1–n2 doubly reduced state has the lowest
free energy.
“n–n” model (Figure 5A): the lowest doubly reduced
state of the dimer corresponds to two electrons residing on the two pan class="Chemical">bn hemes on the electrochemically negative side
of the membrane that belong to difn>an class="Chemical">ferent subunits. In that case, three
electron transfer steps are needed to observe a significant increase
in the CD signal that would arise from a reduced n–p pair.
Figure 5
Summary of possible electron
transfer routes and heme reduction
states in the b6f complex.
Two different models are considered: (A) n1–n2 model: the doubly
reduced state of lowest energy of the dimer corresponds to two electrons
residing on the two bn hemes belonging
to different subunits (this state produces a weak negative CD signal
(Figure 3). (B) n–p model: the lowest
doubly reduced state of the dimer corresponds to two electrons residing
on the bn and bp hemes belonging to the same subunit (in this state, the amplitude
of the positive CD signal is significantly larger than that of any
other heme pair). The sequence of four electron transfer events in
these two models is illustrated. Reduced hemes are shown as red spheres.
State N0 in panels A and B denotes fully oxidized hemes
in dimeric complex. N represent states
of the dimeric complex in which subscript “i” represents the number of reduced hemes. States N1 and N3 are bypassed if dithionite acts as a 2 e– donor. (C) Summary of conceivable two electron half-reduced states,
of which the three states marked by “X” are inferred
to be substantially less probable, although they have been documented
to exist (refs (14), (15), (17), (19), (21), and (26)).
“n–p”
model
(Figure 5B): the lowest doubly reduced state
of the dimer corresponds to two electrons residing on the pan class="Chemical">bn and n>an class="Chemical">bp hemes belonging
to the same monomer. In this case, two electron transfer events will
result in a significant increase of the CD signal.
pan class="Disease">CD (n>an class="Chemical">circles, squares, blue) and optical density changes (triangles,
black) were measured simultaneously, as described in the Materials and Methods section. Solid curves are
kinetic simulations as described in the Results section, with the assumption that dithionite acts as a one-electron
donor; the predicted time course for dithionite acting as a two-electron
donor is shown in Figure S7 (Supporting Information). Electron transfer to the b6f dimer is described by two rate constants: k1 = 0.017 s–1 (70%) and k2 = 0.33 s–1 (30%); the larger rate
constant is attributed to “contaminant” monomer complex
in the dimer preparation (Figure S2B, Supporting
Information, native gel). Black curve: fit to measured absorbance
changes (triangles). Blue curve: expected CD kinetics in the “n–p”
model where the intermediate doubly reduced intramonomer (Figure 5B; state N2) dimer has a lower free energy
than the intermonomer doubly reduced state in which heme bn is reduced in both monomers (Figure 5A; state N2). Red function: expected time course
of the CD change in the “n–n” model in which
the intramonomer n1–n2 doubly reduced state has the lowest
free energy.
Summary of possible electron
transpan class="Chemical">fer routes and n>an class="Disease">heme reduction
states in the b6f complex.
Two different models are considered: (A) n1–n2 model: the doubly
reduced state of lowest energy of the dimer corresponds to two electrons
residing on the two bn hemes belonging
to different subunits (this state produces a weak negative CD signal
(Figure 3). (B) n–p model: the lowest
doubly reduced state of the dimer corresponds to two electrons residing
on the bn and bp hemes belonging to the same subunit (in this state, the amplitude
of the positive CD signal is significantly larger than that of any
other heme pair). The sequence of four electron transfer events in
these two models is illustrated. Reduced hemes are shown as red spheres.
State N0 in panels A and B denotes fully oxidized hemes
in dimeric complex. N represent states
of the dimeric complex in which subscript “i” represents the number of reduced hemes. States N1 and N3 are bypassed if dithionite acts as a 2 e– donor. (C) Summary of conceivable two electron half-reduced states,
of which the three states marked by “X” are inferred
to be substantially less probable, although they have been documented
to exist (refs (14), (15), (17), (19), (21), and (26)).
The pan class="Disease">CD signal kinetics for difn>an class="Chemical">ferent models are calculated
according
to the population of different pairs of b-hemes and
their CD yields (Table 1, eq S5 and Figure
S5, Supporting Information). The measured
absorbance difference was fit using kinetic scheme 4, assuming the presence of two different pools of b6f complexes with different
rate constants, k. The best fit is shown in Figure 4. In addition, the CD signals expected for the two
models are plotted and compared against the measured CD kinetics.
The faster rate, which is comparable with the time resolution of the
experiment, is attributed to “contaminant” monomer complex
in the dimer preparation (Figure S2A, Supporting
Information, native gel), and the slower rate is assigned to
the reduction dynamics of the dimeric complex. The “n–n”
model predicts that the CD signal from the dimer should be significantly
delayed (∼100 s, Figure 4, red curve),
which contradicts the experimental measurement. A reasonable agreement
with experiment is observed only for the “n–p”
model (Figure 4, blue curve).
pan class="Chemical">Dithionite
can also act as a two-electron n>an class="Species">donor[66] (Figure 5A and B), in which case
the following kinetic scheme (eq 5) describes
the OD and CD signals:
The analytical solution for the respective
system of kinetic difpan class="Chemical">ferential
equations is provided in the Supporting Information (eq S7), and the respn>ective fit of OD and n>an class="Disease">CD signals for the “n–p”
and “n–n” models is shown (Figure S6, Supporting Information). The predicted delay
in the time course of the CD signal in the “n–n”
model is almost identical for the case of a one- and two-electron
donor (compare Figure 4 and Figure S6, Supporting Information), and disagrees with the
experimental data. It is important to note that, if dithionite acts
as a mixture of one- and two-electron donors,[66] a close fit of the time course of OD and CD signals can be achieved
within the “n–p” model, while the “n–n”
model contradicts the data (Figure S7, Supporting
Information).
Thus, independently of whether dithionite
donates one or two electrons,
the “n>an class="Chemical">bn–bp” model (“n–p” in Figure 5) uniquely predicts the relative time course of
the absorbance and CD signals. Thus, in the most stable two electron-reduced
state of the dimeric cytochrome b6f complex, the two electrons preferentially reside in the
intramonomer b-heme pair, bn–bp. The half-reduced mixed
intermonomer states summarized in Figure 5C,
panels a, c, and d (states marked “X”), are relatively
improbable at thermal equilibrium, although certainly realizable in
studies on the time course and mutational alteration of electron transport
in the cytochrome bc1 complex.[36,39−41,43,47]
Discussion
The Preferential
“bn–bp” (n–p)
Model; Thermodynamic Considerations Modified by Electrostatic Interactions
The contradiction to the expectation, based on elementary thermodynamics,
that the two higher potential pan class="Chemical">b-hemes (n>an class="Chemical">bn) provide the most stable two-electron-reduced state
of the heme pairs in the dimeric cytochrome complex lies in the electrostatic
interactions that result from injection of electronic charge into
a low dielectric medium. The preferred residence of electron pairs
on one monomer is not a consequence of electron transfer to the other
monomer in the dimer being blocked in any conceivable way but results
from the reduced intramonomer b-heme configuration
being the lowest energy state for the two-electron-reduced dimer.
Consequences for Heterogeneity of Dielectric
Constant in the Cytochrome b6f Complex
The prepan class="Chemical">ferential reduction by n>an class="Chemical">dithionite of the
intramonomer hemesbn and bp can be explained only if the dielectric constants are
not equivalent between the different b-heme pairs
summarized in Figure 5, and if the local dielectric
constant between the intramonomer hemesbn and bp is relatively high (Figure 6). Thus, the structure of the photosynthetic b6f complex is characterized
by internal dielectric heterogeneity. The nature of the dielectric
phenomena in the interior of proteins has been discussed.[67] Dielectric heterogeneity in hetero-oligomeric
membrane protein complexes involved in photosynthetic energy transduction
has been inferred previously in the hetero-oligomeric bacterial[33,68−70] and photosystem I reaction centers.[33,71]
Figure 6
Description
of dielectric heterogeneity in the cytochrome b6f complex (PDB ID 4H44). Four interheme
dielectric constants, which have different values, are shown: (i)
the reference dielectric constant, εn1,n2 ≡ 2.5[15] between the two n-side
hemes that bridge the major intermonomer cavity (yellow) that contains
a high concentration of lipid (Hasan et al., submitted for publication),
(ii) εn1,p1 = εn2,p2 between the intramonomer hemes, (iii) εp1,n2 = εp2,n1 between the p-side heme on one monomer
and the n-side heme on the other, and (iv) εp1,p2 between the two p-side hemes. The minimum values of ε
necessary for the energetically favored reduction of a particular
heme pair among the four possible pairs in the dimeric complex, dependent
upon the midpoint redox potential difference (ΔEm) between hemes bn and bp (50, 75, and 100 mV), calculated to the nearest
half-integral values using the reference dielectric constant for εn1,n2 of 2.5 and eq 9 are, respectively,
εn1,p1 = εn2,p2 > 6.1, 7.8, and
10.8 (Table 2). The corresponding values for
the electrostatic interaction between the two hemes on different monomers
on opposite sides of the complex, εn1,p2 = εn2,p1, are >3.7, 4.7, and 6.6. Energetically preferred reduction
of the p-side heme pair, p1 and p2, corresponding to a ΔEm between hemes bn and bp of 50 and 75 mV, respectively,
would require dielectric constants >10.1 and >43.6.
Description
of dielectric heterogeneity in the cytochrome b6f compn>lex (n>an class="Disease">PDB ID 4H44). Four interheme
dielectric constants, which have different values, are shown: (i)
the reference dielectric constant, εn1,n2 ≡ 2.5[15] between the two n-side
hemes that bridge the major intermonomer cavity (yellow) that contains
a high concentration of lipid (Hasan et al., submitted for publication),
(ii) εn1,p1 = εn2,p2 between the intramonomer hemes, (iii) εp1,n2 = εp2,n1 between the p-side heme on one monomer
and the n-side heme on the other, and (iv) εp1,p2 between the two p-side hemes. The minimum values of ε
necessary for the energetically favored reduction of a particular
heme pair among the four possible pairs in the dimeric complex, dependent
upon the midpoint redox potential difference (ΔEm) between hemesbn and bp (50, 75, and 100 mV), calculated to the nearest
half-integral values using the reference dielectric constant for εn1,n2 of 2.5 and eq 9 are, respectively,
εn1,p1 = εn2,p2 > 6.1, 7.8, and
10.8 (Table 2). The corresponding values for
the electrostatic interaction between the two hemes on different monomers
on opposite sides of the complex, εn1,p2 = εn2,p1, are >3.7, 4.7, and 6.6. Energetically preferred reduction
of the p-side heme pair, p1 and p2, corresponding to a ΔEm between hemesbn and bp of 50 and 75 mV, respectively,
would require dielectric constants >10.1 and >43.6.
Table 2
Threshold Interheme Dielectric Constants
(ε) in the Dimeric Cytochrome b6f Complexa
εn1,n2 = 2.5
ΔEm (mV)
εn1,p1
εn1,p2
εp1,p2
50
≥6.1
≥3.7
≥10.1
75
≥7.8
≥4.7
≥43.6
100
≥10.8
≥6.6
*
As shown in Figure 6: εn1,n2, dielectric constant between hemes bn1 and bn2, εn1,p1 (=εn2,p2), dielectric constant between
hemes bn1 (or bn2) and bp1 (or bp2); εn1,p2 (=εn2,p1), dielectric
constant between hemes bn1 (or bn2) and bp2 (or bp1); εp1,p2, dielectric constant
between hemes bp1 and bp2; ΔEm, mid-point redox
potential difference between hemes bp and bn; *, given an unfavorable redox potential difference
for storage of two electrons on the two hemes bp, there is no value of the dielectric constant that will satisfy
this state.
As shown in Figure 6: εn1,n2, dielectric constant between hemesn>an class="Chemical">bn1 and bn2, εn1,p1 (=εn2,p2), dielectric constant between
hemesbn1 (or bn2) and bp1 (or bp2); εn1,p2 (=εn2,p1), dielectric
constant between hemesbn1 (or bn2) and bp2 (or bp1); εp1,p2, dielectric constant
between hemesbp1 and bp2; ΔEm, mid-point redox
potential difference between hemesbp and bn; *, given an unfavorable redox potential difference
for storage of two electrons on the two hemesbp, there is no value of the dielectric constant that will satisfy
this state.
Boundary Conditions for Dielectric Heterogeneity
The
data indicate that the two electrons transpan class="Chemical">ferred to a monomer
(Figure 5B; N2 panel) do not spn>ill
over to the neighboring monomer (Figure 5C)
within the several minute time spn>an of the measurements. Because intermonomer
electron transn>an class="Chemical">fer between the two bp-hemes
in the dimer is expected to be on the order of microseconds (edge-to-edge
distance, 12.8 Å), there is sufficient time for energetic equilibration
between all possible forms of a doubly reduced dimer (Figure 5C), unless there is an energetic mechanism that
precludes electron transfer between the monomers. Since the latter
is improbable, it is inferred that the intramonomer reduced heme bp–bn pair
(Figure 5B, N2 panel; Figure 5C, state b) corresponds to the lowest energy configuration.
The total energy E of
this pair can be expressed as eq 6:where E and E are the
energies of noninteracting electrons in sites i and j, respectively, and are defined by the redox potentials
of the respective b-hemes. V is the Coulombic interaction energy between
these two electrons, which, as shown below, can be comparable or larger
than the difference in redox energy between the two hemes in the complex.
If the dielectric constant is ε = 2, then the electrostatic
interaction energy between two hemes in the complex is on the order
of 0.2–0.3 eV.
The indices i and j correspond to the reduction of one of the four b-hemes: i, j = n1, p1,
n2, p2, where n1, p1 denote n>an class="Chemical">hemesbn and bp in one monomer and n2, p2, the pair in the
second monomer of the dimeric complex. The electrostatic interaction
energy in a point-charge approximation, described by Coulomb’s
law, is obtained from eq 7 below:where e is the charge
of
an electron, R is the
distance between two electrons, ε0 is the permittivity
of free space, and ε are the effective
dielectric constants that operate between any heme pair, b and b. The above eq 7 can then be
rewritten as eq 8:with the units of R in Å, the resulting V expressed in electron-volts (eV), and the
dimensions of the numerator, Å·eV. The R are the center-to-center distances
between the respective hemes: Rn1,p1 =
21 Å, Rn1,p2 = 34 Å, Rn1,n2 = 35 Å, and Rp1,p2 = 22 Å (Table 1); ε is the corresponding dielectric constant
between these heme pairs. The consensus values of midpoint redox potentials, Em, of hemesbp and bn in isolated active (≥200 electrons
transferred/cytochrome f-s) cytochrome b6f complex, measured in vitro and in
situ, differ by 0.05–0.1 V, with heme bp having the more negative potential.[19,20,55,56,72] In intact thylakoid membranes, ΔEm has been found to be approximately 0.1 V[72] or as large as 0.05 V.[55,73] Thus, defining the energy of the reduced heme bn as En1 = En2 = 0, the energy of the reduced heme bp will be Ep1 = Ep2 = 0.05–0.1 eV corresponding to the difference,
ΔEm, in midpoint potential of hemesbn and bp. Using
formulas 6 and 8, and taking ΔEm into account, the energies (in electron-volts,
eV) for all possible doubly reduced states of the dimeric complex
shown in Figure 5C are obtained from eq 9.
The equations for states (b–d) contain two terms: the
first
term describes the difpan class="Chemical">ference in midpoint redox potential, ΔEm, in units of eV (states b, c), between the
n- and p-side n>an class="Chemical">b-hemes, and 2ΔEm (state d), the total difference in midpoint potential
between the two p-side and n-side b-hemes in the
complex. The second term on the right-hand side of the formulas for
states b–d, and the term on the right sides of the formula
for state a, describes the Coulombic interaction between the b-hemes in a point charge approximation.
The constraint
on the dielectric constants that result in a Coulombic
interaction energy En1,p1 or n>an class="Gene">En2,p2 level between the two trans-membrane hemesbn and bp in each
monomer being lower than that between the two high potential hemes, En1,p1, iswhere εn1,n2 is the dielectric
constant between the two hemesbn. εn1,n2 is assumed to be close to the minimum value inferred
to exist in a protein, ε = 2.5,[15] because (i) the protein is embedded in a membrane, and (ii) the
intermonomer cavity between the hemesbn contains a significant lipid content, as depicted in Figure 6. Values of En1,p1 = En2,p2 that satisfy this inequality for ΔEm values of 0.05, 0.075, and 0.1 V are >6.1,
7.8, and 10.8 (Table 2). For the same set of
ΔEm values, the local dielectric
constants that would render most probable (a) the intermonomer, interheme
pathways, are εn1,p2 = εn2,p1 >
3.7, 4.7, and 6.6; for ΔEm values
of 0.05 and 0.075 V, εp1,p2 > 10.1 and 44. It
is
important to note that the energetic preference for reduction of the
intramonomer heme pairs (bn1, bp1 and bn2, bp2) implies that the values of the dielectric
constants, ε, between the other heme pairs, bn1, bp2, bn2, bp1, and bp1, bp2 are smaller than the
values presented in Table 2.
The Preferential Intramonomer Electron Transfer
Pathway; Interheme Distance Considerations
If the elevated
dielectric constant (>6.1) between the intramonomer hemesn>an class="Chemical">bn and bp provides
the explanation for the preferential heme reduction of the intramonomer
heme pair, the question arises as to why reduction of the intermonomer
heme pair, bp1–bn2 or bp2–bn1, is disfavored if the constraint on this interheme
dielectric constant, ε > 4, is less stringent. The low probability
of utilization of the latter electron transfer pathway is a consequence
of the steep donor–acceptor distance dependence of intraprotein
electron transfer[31−35] and the much greater distance, 22.3 Å, between the intermonomer
heme rings compared to 8.1 Å between the intramonomer pair (Figure 1B). Although the interheme distance, 12.8 Å
(Figure 1B), does not preclude interheme electron
transfer, preferred reduction of the heme bp1–bp2 pair is rendered extremely
unlikely because of the requirement of a dielectric constant of ≥44,
substantially approaching that of bulk water. This extreme constraint
is a consequence of the large free energy surplus in the two hemesbp, resulting from the appreciable (75 mV in
this calculation) redox potential difference between hemesbp and bn. See the
note in Table 2 regarding the case of ΔEm = 100 mV. It should be noted that the above
dielectric constants are not absolute but are referenced to an assumed
dielectric constant of 2.5 in the lipid-containing intermonomer space
between the two hemesbn, whose rationale
is discussed above.
Origin of Heterogeneous
Dielectric Constants:
Reorganization Energy Associated with Electron Transfer; Heterogeneity
in the Structure
The existence of heterogeneous dielectric
constants in electron transferring membrane proteins is not unpn>recedented.
The local dielectric constants in the electron transn>an class="Chemical">fer pathways of
the multisubunit hetero-oligomeric photosynthetic reaction centers
can be higher[74] than the values (ε
≈ 2.5–4) assigned to a dry folded protein.[15] A value of ∼7 was found for the region
of the protein surrounding the electron transfer chain in PS I,[71] and local values of 4.5–4.7[70] and 10[69] inferred
along the active electron transfer branch of the bacterial photosynthetic
reaction center complex. The heterogeneity can be a consequence of
structure reorganization associated with electron transfer, described
locally in an electron transfer pair by a reorganization energy.[75,76]
The structural origin of the heterogeneity of the dielectric
constant of the cytochrome b6f compn>lex can be attributed to several n>an class="Chemical">features of the protein complex:
(a) The arrangement of the α-helices in the structure is intrinsically
anisotropic, as is true of all helical membrane proteins; (b) a heterogeneous
environment could arise from the nonuniformity introduced by lipids
intercalated between subunits in these proteins, as documented for
the b6f(77) and bc1(7) complexes. In the case of the dimeric b6f complex, the intramonomer hemesbp and bn are embedded within
a protein environment, while the two bn-hemes are separated by a large, apolar intermonomer cavity (Figure 6), which is expected to lower the effective dielectric
constant between the bn-hemes. Thus, it
is expected that the reduction of the intramonomer heme bp–bn pair would be
energetically more favorable than the reduction of the intermonomer
heme bn–bn pair.
Consequences of Dielectric
Heterogeneity for
Efficiency of the Trans-Membrane Electron Transfer Pathway
It has been found that electrons can cross over from one monomer
to the other in the dimeric cytochrome bc1 compn>lex.[40,41,43,47] In the present study, it is inn>an class="Chemical">ferred that
the most probable pathway for transfer of the two electrons donated
by plastoquinol on the p-side of the complex to the n-side, where
they are utilized for quinone reduction, is via a transfer that is
effectively pairwise through the heme pair, bp and bn. The existence of a preferred
intramonomer pathway does not contradict the experimental documentation
that electrons can cross over between the two monomers of the dimeric
complex[40,41,43,47] at the level of heme bp. Electrons injected into different monomers in the dimeric complex
on the p-side are expected to merge to one of the monomers, the most
stable doubly reduced thermodynamic state.
Further
Consequences for Function
It is concluded that, if two electrons
are injected into different
monomers of the dimeric compn>lex, the electrons tend to cross over
into one monomer, which repn>resents the most stable thermodynamic state.
Thus, electron transn>an class="Chemical">fer across the trans-membrane domain of the b6f complex is expected to proceed
through the monomer to the quinone bound on the n-side, whose reduction
would then require only two p-side quinol oxidation events. Alternatively,
if reduction of the two bn-hemes represented
the most stable thermodynamic state of a two-electron-reduced b6f dimer, then up to three
p-side quinol oxidation events could be required to provide two electrons
for n-side quinone reduction. The p-side quinol deprotonation–oxidation
reactions are known to contain the slow, millisecond rate-limiting
charge transfer step in cytochrome bc complexes.[78,79] Due to the more stable environment for an electron pair within the b6f monomer, the requirement
for slow p-side quinol reactions is decreased from three to two, thereby
increasing the efficiency of the complex. As described elsewhere,
electron transfer within the cytochrome complex may thus be essential
to reducing the lifetime of unpaired electrons, which can leak to
oxygen to form possibly deleterious superoxide.[57]
Authors: Anna I Zatsman; Huamin Zhang; William A Gunderson; William A Cramer; Michael P Hendrich Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2006-11-08 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Rachna Agarwal; S Saif Hasan; LaDonna M Jones; Jason T Stofleth; Christopher M Ryan; Julian P Whitelegge; David M Kehoe; William A Cramer Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2015-05-12 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: S Saif Hasan; Elizabeth A Proctor; Eiki Yamashita; Nikolay V Dokholyan; William A Cramer Journal: Biophys J Date: 2014-10-07 Impact factor: 4.033
Authors: Marcin Sarewicz; Sebastian Pintscher; Rafał Pietras; Arkadiusz Borek; Łukasz Bujnowicz; Guy Hanke; William A Cramer; Giovanni Finazzi; Artur Osyczka Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2021-01-19 Impact factor: 60.622
Authors: Matthew S Proctor; Lorna A Malone; David A Farmer; David J K Swainsbury; Frederick R Hawkings; Federica Pastorelli; Thomas Z Emrich-Mills; C Alistair Siebert; C Neil Hunter; Matthew P Johnson; Andrew Hitchcock Journal: Biochem J Date: 2022-07-15 Impact factor: 3.766