|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Institute of Bioinformatics and Structural Biology, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan 300, Republic of China
Reprint requests to: Yuh-Ju Sun, Institute of Bioinformatics and Structural Biology, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan 300, Republic of China; e-mail: yjsun{at}life.nthu.edu.tw; fax: 886-3-571-5934.
(RECEIVED April 8, 2004; FINAL REVISION May 31, 2004; ACCEPTED June 1, 2004)
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Keywords: rice nonspecific lipid transfer protein; fatty acid binding; antifungal activity; hydrophobic cavity
Abbreviations: DMPG, dimyristoyl-phosphatidylglycerol LMPC, lysomyristoyl-phosphatidylcholine LTP, lipid transfer protein MYR, myristic acid NMR, nuclear magnetic resonance NsLTP, nonspecific lipid transfer protein PAL, palmitic acid PCoA, palmitoyl coenzyme A r.m.s., root-mean-square STE, stearic acid
Article published online ahead of print. Article and publication date are at http://www.proteinscience.org/cgi/doi/10.1110/ps.04799704.
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Additional biological functions have been suggested for nsLTPs. They might participate in the transport of phospholipids from liposomes or microsomes to mitochondria (Breu et al. 1989) and regulate the beta-oxidation of fatty acids in glyoxysomes (Tsuboi et al. 1992). NsLTPs share the same biological receptor with elicitins that bind sterol molecules and are known elicitors of plant defense (Blein et al. 2002). A putative lipid transfer protein from Arabidopsis has been implicated in the signaling pathway of a plant defense system that resists avirulent and virulent pathogens (Maldonado et al. 2002). Moreover, nsLTP1s can be upsed as carriers and transporters in drug delivery applications (De Wolf and Brett 2000; Pato et al. 2001).
Plant nsLTP1s have high sequence identity (Fig. 1
). There are two highly conserved regions (40T/S-X-X-D-R/K44 and 78P-Y-X-I-S82 of rice nsLTP1; Douliez et al. 2000a) that contribute significantly to lipid binding. The binding property of wheat nsLTP1 for various lipid molecules has been investigated with fluorescence spectroscopy (Douliez et al. 2000b). Several crystal and solution structures of unliganded and liganded nsLTP1s have also been elucidated (Shin et al. 1995; Lee et al. 1998; Lerche and Poulsen 1998; Charvolin et al. 1999; Han et al. 2001). They all share a common protein fold with a four-helix bundle structure. The crystal structure of unliganded rice nsLTP1 has the same overall structure as that of other nsLTP1s but a relatively smaller hydrophobic cavity (Lee et al. 1998). However, no liganded rice nsLTP structure has ever been reported. In order to understand the lipid-binding properties of rice nsLTP1, we determined the rice nsLTP1 crystal structures in complex with myristic, palmitic, or stearic acid.
|
| Results and Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
-helices. The hydrocarbon tails of the lipids are inserted into the hydrophobic cavity of nsLTP1 while the head groups of the lipids protrude out of the binding pocket and point towards the solvent. The central regions (about ten aliphatic carbons) of MYR, PAL1, and STE (except PAL2) are superimposed well in Figure 3B
|
|
|
|
Unliganded and liganded rice nsLTP1s
The hydrophobic cavity of unliganded rice nsLTP1 is occupied by two water molecules and considerably smaller than that of other nsLTP1s (Lee et al. 1998). In our study, the binding pockets of the liganded rice nsLTP1 complexes are fully occupied by lipid molecules with no observable solvent molecule.
Structural superimposition among unliganded and liganded rice nsLTP1s (Fig. 3A
) gives a C
r.m.s. deviation of 1.59, 1.65, 1.19, and 1.22 Åfor the nsLTP1MYR, the nsLTP1PAL, the A and B molecules of the nsLTP1STE complexes, respectively. The nsLTP1PAL complex binds two lipid molecules and has the biggest structural deviation from the unliganded nsLTP1. The nsLTP1STE complexes have the smallest C
r.m.s. deviation among the three rice nsLTP1 complexes. This might be due to the fact that the STE ligands are completely buried inside the protein-binding pocket and have the most van der Waals interactions (Table 1
). The major structural difference between liganded and unliganded rice nsLTP1s is localized in the C-terminal loop region (residue numbers 7782; Fig. 3A
). The C-terminal loop points toward the hydrophobic cavity and blocks the lipid-binding pocket in the unliganded rice nsLTP1.
Based on the unliganded rice nsLTP1 structural model, Arg44, Tyr79, and Ile81 have been inferred to be directly involved in lipid binding (Lee et al. 1998). Indeed, these residues exhibit significant structural deviations between the liganded and the unliganded rice nsLTP1s (Fig. 6
). These conformational changes are necessary because they create more space to accommodate the lipid molecules. Arg44 is within the conserved motif (40T/S-X-X-D-R/K44) of helix H3 and located close to the head group of the lipid. Tyr79 and Ile81 are in the other conserved region (78P-Y-X-I-S82) of the C-terminal loop.
|
Residue Tyr79 has been found to be the key residue in the lipid binding of plant nsLTP1s (Lee et al. 1998; Charvolin et al. 1999; Han et al. 2001). In the unliganded rice nsLTP1, Tyr79 locates around the middle of the binding pocket. It segments the binding pocket into two and totally breaks down the lipid-binding environment (Fig. 6
). In the liganded rice nsLTP1s, Tyr79 orientates away from the binding pocket in order to create a binding site. The distances between Tyr79 and the fatty acids change from the unliganded to liganded states: 0.68 to 6.42 Å (Tyr79 CE1MYR C7), 0.89 to 10.30 Å (Tyr79 OHPAL1 C5), and 0.92 to 4.90 Å (Tyr79 OHSTE A C2; Fig. 6
). This conformational change creates a binding pocket for the occupation of the lipid molecule. In the nsLTP1PAL complex, Tyr79 has to shift much further in order to accommodate the second lipid molecule (PAL2).
In the unliganded rice nsLTP1, Ile81 is situated near the bottom of the lipid-binding pocket and interferes with lipid binding. In the liganded rice nsLTP1, Ile81 has to readjust so as not to block the lipid binding (Fig. 6
). The distances between Ile81 and fatty acids differ from the unliganded to liganded states: 0.84 to 6.56 Å (Ile81 CD1 MYR C14), 0.48 to 7.59 Å (Ile81 CD1PAL1 C15), and 1.01 to 4.83 Å (Ile81 CBSTE A C12; Fig. 6
). Upon binding, Ile81 is involved in significant van der Waals interactions with lipid molecules in these three rice nsLTP1 complexes (Table 1
).
The structural differences between the single (the nsLTP1MYR and nsLTP1STE complexes) and dual (the nsLTP1PAL complex) binding modes of the rice nsLTP1 complexes appear to be minor (Fig. 3
). Even though the rice nsLTP1 is in a single binding mode in the nsLTP1MYR and nsLTP1STE complexes, the space corresponding to the second PAL2 binding site in the nsLTP1PAL complex is not blocked. Therefore, the second lipid-binding site (such as PAL2) of the rice nsLTP1 complex is probably available even in the single lipid-binding mode. The filling of the second lipid-binding site possibly depends on the availability and concentration of the lipids.
The hydrophobic cavity of rice nsLTP1
The van der Waals volumes of the hydrophobic cavities of the rice nsLTP1 complexes were measured by CASTp (Liang et al. 1998) and the numbers obtained are: 1082 Å3 for the nsLTP1MYR complex, 1345 Å3 for the nsLTP1PAL complex, and 783 Å3 and 515 Å3 for the nsLTP1STE complex A and B molecules. In these calculations, the fatty acid has been removed from the binding cavity. The hydrophobic cavity of unliganded rice nsLTP1 is only 249 Å3, small and discontinuous (Lee et al. 1998). The difference in the van der Waals volume of the hydrophobic cavity between unliganded and liganded rice nsLTP1 is noteworthy in that it displays an elasticity of the rice nsLTP1 for forming complexes. The nsLTP1PAL dual lipid-bound complex has the biggest hydrophobic cavity among the three rice nsLTP1 complexes. However, it is only slightly bigger than that of the nsLTP1MYR complex, a single lipid-bound complex. The conformational change between the unliganded and liganded rice nsLTP1s is more significant than that between the single and dual lipid-binding modes of rice nsLTP1 complexes.
Among these three complexes in this study, the nsLTP1-STE complex has the smallest hydrophobic cavity and the strongest interaction between the ligand and the protein. Probably STE has the longest aliphatic chain among the three fatty acid molecules. There are two molecules per asymmetric unit in the nsLTP1STE complex and each molecule binds one fatty acid. STE A and STE B are the two fatty acids observed in the asymmetric unit for two nsLTP1 molecules. The tails of STE A and STE B (C17C18) are in different orientations (Figs. 2F
, 3B
). STE A stretches out of the binding pocket and has fewer ligandprotein interactions than those detected for STE B (Table 1
). In contrast, the tail of STE B folds back and form several extra interactions with the rice nsLTP1 (Table 1
). It implies that the STE B molecule in the nsLTP1STE complex has the most favorable lipid-binding conformation among the rice nsLTP1 complexes.
Comparisons with other plant nsLTP1s
Several plant nsLTP1 complexes, such as the barley and maize nsLTP1 complexes, have been reported in the single lipid-binding mode (Lerche and Poulsen 1998; Han et al. 2001). These structures are similar to the rice nsLTP1s in this study and can be superimposed (Fig. 7A, B
). The four
-helices (H1H4) of nsLTP1s are almost aligned. The major conformational disparities occur in loop 1 (between helix H1H2), loop 3 (between helix H3H4), and the C-terminal loop of the proteins. The C
r.m.s. displacement between the rice nsLTP1MYR and the barleyPAL complex (solution structure) is 2.12 Åand that for the rice nsLTP1MYR and the maizePAL complex (crystal structure) is 1.24Å. All lipids bind in a similar position of the nsLTP1-binding pocket. The central hydrophobic parts (about seven aliphatic carbons) of the lipids are overlapped well, however the head groups display various orientations. These structural variations do not affect lipid binding, since hydrophobic interactions within the pocket contribute the main adhesion force.
|
Dual lipid biding in rice and wheat nsLTP1 complexes
In forming the rice nsLTP1PAL complex, a higher molar ratio of protein to lipid (1:4) was used and a dual lipid-binding mode was observed. Similarly, using a molar ratio of 1:4 (protein:lipid) led to the best crystal formation of a wheat nsLTP1LMPC complex (Charvolin et al. 1999), and the dual lipid-binding mode was detected. However, maize nsLTP1 was complexed with various lipid molecules at molar ratios 1:11.5 and the dual lipid-binding mode was not observed (Han et al. 2001).
The rice nsLTP1PAL (this study) and the wheat nsLTP1LMPC complexes (Charvolin et al. 1999) are superimposed and presented in Figure 8A
. The ligands, PALs and LMPCs, are located in similar positions but orientated in opposite directions (Fig. 8B
). Even though LMPC is much longer than PAL, their corresponding aliphatic chains are in the same location and both proteins use similar hydrophobic residues in lipid binding. Several lipidlipid interactions have been found in both complexes. Fifteen van der Waals interactions (
4.5Å) can be detected in the rice nsTLP1PAL complex. However, only three interactions were found in the wheat nsLTP1LMPC complex (Fig. 8C
). These interactions might be important for the dual lipid-binding mode in nsLTP1s, since two lipid molecules have to share one binding pocket. The closest distance between the two lipid molecules is 3.2 Åand 4.0 Åin the rice nsTLP1PAL and the wheat nsTLP1LMPC complexes, respectively.
|
Conclusion
Three rice nsLTP1 crystals in complex with myristic, palmitic or stearic acids were obtained. The proteins fold into four
-helices and a long C-terminal loop region. They share a common structural fold with other plant nsLTP1s. The structural flexibility of the C-terminal loop facilities the binding of various lipid molecules to the rice nsLTP1. The protein has a tunnel-like hydrophobic cavity with space sufficient for the binding of one or two lipid molecules. A single and a dual lipid-binding mode are identified for the nsLTP1PAL complexes. Binding of the second lipid molecule possibly depends on the availability of the lipids during complex formation. Hydrophobic interactions are the major forces in lipid binding, which is also stabilized by the hydrophilic interactions between the head group of the lipid molecule and the protein. These hydrophilic interactions are crucial to some but not all of the lipid bindings in the rice nsLTP1 complexes. Our results indicate that structural deviations between the single and dual lipid-binding modes of rice nsLTP1s are minor. However, the conformational changes between unliganded and liganded rice nsLTP1s are significant.
| Materials and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Crystallization of rice nsLTP1 complexes
The concentration of the rice nsLTP1 used in crystallization was 20 mg/mL. To prepare the nsLTP1lipid complexes, fatty acids were dissolved in methanol, and then added to protein solutions at various molar ratios. Three fatty acids, myristic (C14:0), palmitic (C16:0), and stearic (C18:0) acids were used to form the nsLTP1 complexes. Palmitic and stearic acids belong to the cutin monomer C16 and C18 families, respectively. Complex crystals were grown by the hanging drop vapor diffusion method from 45~60% (v/v) polyethylene glycol 600 and 0.2 M ammonium dihydrogen phosphate in a buffer of 0.1 M sodium acetate and pH 5.6. The nsLTP1MYR (C14) complex crystals were grown at a molar ratio of 1:2 (nsLTP1:myristate), the nsLTP1PAL (C16) complex crystals were grown at a molar ratio of 1:4 (nsLTP1:palmitate), and the nsLTP1STE (C18) complex crystals were grown at a molar ratio of 1:1.6 (nsLTP1:stearate).
Data collection for rice nsLTP1 complexes
X-ray diffraction data were collected on a Rigaku R-AXIS IV++ imaging plate system, using CuK
x-ray radiation generated from a Rigaku RU-H3R rotating anode operating at 50 kV and 100 mA. All data sets were indexed, integrated, and scaled by means of DENZO and SCALEPACK software packages (Otwinowski and Minor 1997). The nsLTP1MYR (C14) complex crystals have the unit-cell parameters of a = 49.65Å, b = 74.49Å, and c = 49.73Å, with a space group C2221 (Table 2
). These crystals diffracted to 2.5Å. The VM (Matthews 1968) was calculated to be 2.58 Å3Da1 and the solvent content was estimated to be 52%, containing one molecule per asymmetric unit. The nsLTP1PAL (C16) complex crystals have the unit-cell parameters of a =48.03Å, b =72.7Å, and c 349.75Å, with a space group C2221 and diffracted to 2.1 Å (Table 2
). The VM (Matthews 1968) was calculated to be 2.41 Å3Da1 and the solvent content was estimated to be 49%, with one molecule per asymmetric unit. The nsLTP1STE (C18) complex crystals belong to the space group C2 with cell dimensions of a = 75.94Å, b = 53.8Å, c = 49.08Å, and
= 96.36° (Table 2
). The VM (Matthews 1968) of the nsLTP1STE complex crystal was calculated to be 2.8 Å3Da1 with 56% solvent content and diffracted to 2.0Å. There are two molecules of the complex per asymmetric unit.
|
=
= 90°. Data between 8.0 to 4.0 Åand a Patterson radius of 20 Å were used to calculate the rotation and translation functions. Significant rotation and translation solutions were obtained for the nsLTP1MYR and nsLTP1PAL complexes. After rigid body refinement, the correlation coefficients and R-factors were 64.9% and 34.9% for the nsLTP1MYR complex and 30.7% and 49.1% for the nsLTP1PAL complex. In the nsLTP1STE complex, the same search model and similar procedure were applied for structure determination. Since there are two molecules per asymmetric unit in the nsLTP1STE complex, two solutions were obtained with a correlation coefficient of 44.5% and an R-factor of 37.1%.
Structural model building and refinement were carried out using the XTALVIEW (McRee 1999) and CNS (Brunger 1998) programs. Simulated annealing omit maps were used to reduce the model bias and to determine the lipid positions of these three complex crystals. A bulk solvent mask was calculated to improve the reflection data. The refined structural model of the nsLTP1MYR complex contains 616 non-hydrogen atoms, one myristic acid molecule and 92 water molecules, with an R-factor of 21.6% and an Rfree of 28.8% at 2.5 Å (Table 2
). The refined structural model of the nsLTP1PAL complex includes 616 nonhydrogen atoms, two palmitic acid molecules and 89 water molecules, with an R-factor of 22.4% and an Rfree of 26.5% at 2.1 Å (Table 2
). The refined structural model of the nsLTP1STE complex contained 1232 nonhydrogen atoms, two stearic acid molecules and 189 water molecules with an R-factor of 21.7% and an Rfree of 25.6% at 2.0 Å (Table 2
). The final structure refinement statistics for three complex crystals are summarized in Table 2
. The averaged B-factors were 20 Å2 for the MYR in the nsLTP1MYR complex, 22.8 Å2 and 33.6 Å2 for the PAL1 and PAL2 in the nsLTP1PAL complex, and 28.1 Å2 and 26.8 Å2 for the STE A and STE B in the nsLTP1STE complex.
Protein Data Bank accession numbers
The coordinates of the rice nsLTP1 complexes have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank, accession numbers 1uva, 1uvb and 1uvc for the rice nsLTP1MYR, nsLTP1PAL and nsLTP1STE complexes, respectively.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 USC section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Breu, V., Guerbette, F., Kader, J.C., Kannangara, C.G., Svensson, B., and Wettstein-Knowles, P. 1989. A 10 kDa barley basic protein transfers phosphatidylcholine from liposomes to mitochondria. Carlsberg Res. Commun. 54: 8184.
Brunger, A.T. 1998. Crystallography & NMR system: A new software suite for macromolecular structure determination. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol Crystallogr. 54: 905921.[CrossRef][Medline]
Charvolin, D., Douliez, J.-P., Marion, D., Cohen-Addad, C., and Pebay-Peyroula, E. 1999. The crystal structure of a wheat nonspecific lipid transfer protein (nsLTP1) complexed with two molecules of phospholipid at 2.1 Åresolution. Eur. J. Biochem. 264: 562568.[Medline]
De Wolf, F.A. and Brett, G.M. 2000. Ligand-binding proteins: Their potential for application in systems for controlled delivery and uptake of ligands. Pharmacol. Rev. 52: 207236.
Douliez, J.-P., Michon, T., Elmorjani, K., and Marion, D. 2000a. Structure, biological and technological functions of lipid transfer proteins and indolines, the major lipid-binding proteins from cereal kernels. J. Cereal Sci. 32: 120.
Douliez, J.-P., Michon, T., and Marion, D. 2000b. Steady-state tyrosine fluorescence to study the lipid-binding properties of a wheat non-specific lipid-transfer protein (ns-LTP1). Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1467: 6572.[CrossRef]
Ge, X., Chen, J., Sun, C., and Cao, K. 2003. Preliminary study on the structural basis of the antifungal activity of a rice lipid transfer protein. Protein Eng. 16: 387390.
Han, G.W., Lee, J.Y., Song, H.K., Chang, C., Min, K., Moon, J., Shin, D.H., Kopka, M.L., Sawaya, M.R., Yuan, H.S., et al. 2001. Structure basis of non-specific lipid binding in maize lipidtransfer protein complexes revealed by high-resolution x-ray crystallography. J. Mol. Biol. 308: 263278.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kader, J.-C. 1996. Lipid-transfer protein in plants. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 47: 627654.[CrossRef]
Kolattukudy, P.E. 1981. Structure, biosynthesis and biodegradation of cutin and suberin. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 32: 539568.
Lee, J.Y., Min, K., Cha, H., Shin, D.H., Hwang, K.Y., and Suh, S.W. 1998. Rice non-specific lipid transfer protein: The 1.6 Åcrystal structure in the unliganded state reveals a small hydrophobic cavity. J. Mol. Biol. 276: 437448.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lerche, M.H. and Poulsen, F.M. 1998. Solution structure of barley lipid transfer protein complexed with palmitate. Two different binding modes of palmitate in the homologous maize and barley nonspecific lipid transfer proteins. Protein Sci. 7: 24902498.[Abstract]
Lerche, M.H., Kragelund, B.B., Bech, L.M., and Poulsen, F.M. 1997. Barley lipidtransfer protein complexed with palmitoyl CoA: The structure reveals a hydrophobic binding site that can expand to fit both large and small lipid-like ligands. Structure 5: 291306.[Medline]
Liang, J., Edelsbrunner, H., and Woodward, C. 1998. Anatomy of protein pockets and cavities: Measurement of binding site geometry and implications for ligand design. Protein Sci. 7: 18841897.[Abstract]
Liu, Y.-J., Samuel, D., Liu, C.-H., and Lyu, P.-C. 2002. Purification and characterization of a novel 7-kDa non-specific lipid transfer protein-2 from rice. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 294: 535540.[CrossRef][Medline]
Maldonado, A.M., Dixon, P.A., Lamb, C.J., and Cameron, R.K. 2002. A putative lipid transfer protein involved in systemic resistance signalling in Arabidopsis. Nature 419: 399403.[CrossRef][Medline]
Matthews, B.W. 1968. Solvent content of protein crystals. J. Mol. Biol. 33: 491497.[Medline]
McRee, D.E. 1999. XtalView/Xfita versatile program for manipulating atomic coordinates and electron density. J. Struct. Biol. 125: 156165.[CrossRef][Medline]
Navaza, J. 1994. AMoRe: An automated package for molecular replacement. Acta Crystallogr. A 50: 157163.[CrossRef]
Otwinowski, Z. and Minor, W. 1997. Processing of x-ray diffraction data collected in oscillation mode. Meth. Enzymol. 276: 307326.
Pato, C., Borgne, M.L., Baut, G.L., Pape, P.L., Marion, D., and Douliez, J.-P. 2001. Potential application of plant lipid transfer proteins for drug delivery. Biochem. Pharmacol. 62: 555560.[CrossRef][Medline]
Poznanski, J., Sodano, P., Suh, S.W., Lee, J.Y., Ptak, M., and Vovelle, F. 1999. Solution structure of a lipid transfer protein extracted from rice seeds comparison with homologous proteins. Eur. J. Biochem. 259: 692708.[Medline]
Rueckert, D.G. and Schmidt, K. 1990. Lipid transfer proteins. Chem. Phys. Lipids 56: 120.[CrossRef][Medline]
Shin, D.H., Lee, J.Y., Hwang, K.Y., Kim, K.K., and Suh, S.W. 1995. High-resolution crystal structure of the non-specific lipid-transfer protein from maize seedlings. Structure 3: 189199.[Medline]
Sodano, P., Caille, A., Sy, D., de Person, G., Marion, D., and Ptak, M. 1997. 1H NMR and fluorescence studies of the complexation of DMPG by wheat non-specific lipid transfer protein. Global fold of the complex. FEBS Lett. 416: 130134.[CrossRef][Medline]
Trevino, M.B. and OConnell, M.A. 1998. Three drought-responsive members of the nonspecific lipid-transfer protein gene family in Lycopersicon pennellii show different developmental patterns of expression. Plant Physiol. 116: 14611468.
Tsuboi, S., Osafune, T., Nishimura, M., and Yamada, M. 1992. Nonspecific lipid transfer protein in castor bean cotyledon cells: Subcellular localization and a possible role in lipid metabolism. J. Biochem. (Tokyo) 111: 500508.
Wallace, A.C., Laskowski, R.A., and Thornton, J.M. 1995. LIGPLOT: A program to generate schematic diagrams of proteinligand interactions. Protein. Eng. 8: 127134.
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. Kielbowicz-Matuk, P. Rey, and T. Rorat The organ-dependent abundance of a Solanum lipid transfer protein is up-regulated upon osmotic constraints and associated with cold acclimation ability J. Exp. Bot., May 1, 2008; 59(8): 2191 - 2203. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Sawano, K.-i. Hatano, T. Miyakawa, H. Komagata, Y. Miyauchi, H. Yamazaki, and M. Tanokura Proteinase Inhibitor from Ginkgo Seeds Is a Member of the Plant Nonspecific Lipid Transfer Protein Gene Family Plant Physiology, April 1, 2008; 146(4): 1909 - 1919. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. H. Yeats and J. K.C. Rose The biochemistry and biology of extracellular plant lipid-transfer proteins (LTPs) Protein Sci., February 1, 2008; 17(2): 191 - 198. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |