↓ Skip to main content

Using in vivo oxidation status of one- and two-component redox relays to determine H2O2 levels linked to signaling and toxicity

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Biology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Using in vivo oxidation status of one- and two-component redox relays to determine H2O2 levels linked to signaling and toxicity
Published in
BMC Biology, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12915-018-0523-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alba Domènech, José Ayté, Fernando Antunes, Elena Hidalgo

Abstract

Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) is generated as a by-product of metabolic reactions during oxygen use by aerobic organisms, and can be toxic or participate in signaling processes. Cells, therefore, need to be able to sense and respond to H2O2 in an appropriate manner. This is often accomplished through thiol switches: Cysteine residues in proteins that can act as sensors, and which are both scarce and finely tuned. Bacteria and eukaryotes use different types of such sensors-either a one-component (OxyR) or two-component (Pap1-Tpx1) redox relay, respectively. However, the biological significance of these two different signaling modes is not fully understood, and the concentrations and peroxides driving those types of redox cascades have not been determined, nor the intracellular H2O2 levels linked to toxicity. Here we elucidate the characteristics, rates, and dynamic ranges of both systems. By comparing the activation of both systems in fission yeast, and applying mathematical equations to the experimental data, we estimate the toxic threshold of intracellular H2O2 able to halt aerobic growth, and the temporal gradients of extracellular to intracellular peroxides. By calculating both the oxidation rates of OxyR and Tpx1 by peroxides, and their reduction rates by the cellular redoxin systems, we propose that, while Tpx1 is a sensor and an efficient H2O2 scavenger because it displays fast oxidation and reduction rates, OxyR is strictly a H2O2 sensor, since its reduction kinetics are significantly slower than its oxidation by peroxides, and therefore, it remains oxidized long enough to execute its transcriptional role. We also show that these two paradigmatic H2O2-sensing models are biologically similar at pre-toxic peroxide levels, but display strikingly different activation behaviors at toxic doses. Both Tpx1 and OxyR contain thiol switches, with very high reactivity towards peroxides. Nevertheless, the fast reduction of Tpx1 defines it as a scavenger, and this efficient recycling dramatically changes the Tpx1-Pap1 response to H2O2 and connects H2O2 sensing to the redox state of the cell. In contrast, OxyR is a true H2O2 sensor but not a scavenger, being partially insulated from the cellular electron donor capacity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 11%
Chemistry 4 11%
Environmental Science 2 5%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 8 21%