Cited by 59

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The number of amphipathic alpha-helical segments of apolipoproteins A-I, E, and A-IV determines the size and functional properties of their reconstituted lipoprotein particles.

Jonas, A., Steinmetz, A., Churgay, L.·1993·Journal of Biological Chemistry

Abstract

The objective of this work was to determine the role of the amphipathic alpha-helical structural units of human apolipoproteins A-I, E, and A-IV in defining the sizes and reactivities with lecithin:cholesterol acyltransferase (LCAT) of their reconstituted lipoprotein particles. We prepared reconstituted high density lipoprotein (rHDL) particles with each of the three apolipoproteins in two weight ratios with lipid: 2.7/0.07/1 and 1.35/0.04/1, palmitoyloleoylphosphatidylcholine/cholesterol/apolipoprotein, by the sodium cholate dialysis procedure; and examined the rHDL product sizes and distributions by nondenaturing gradient gel electrophoresis. The rHDL particles were also incubated with low density lipoprotein (LDL), and with LDL plus LCAT, to observe any structural modifications due to phospholipid transfers to LDL and to cholesterol esterification by LCAT. In addition, we examined the average structural properties of the original rHDL by several fluorescence methods and circular dichroism spectroscopy, and determined their reaction kinetics with LCAT. The results indicate that the diameters of the largest rHDL particles, containing two apolipoproteins per particle, correlate with the maximum number of putative amphipathic alpha-helical segments in their sequences, and that smaller particles of this class may arise from the removal of one or more alpha-helical segments from contact with lipid. Furthermore, the larger particles may be converted into the smaller ones upon los…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0021-9258(18)53895-3

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • ApoE formed using the sodium cholate dialysis method forms particles ranging from 8 to 15 nm.

    “ApoE formed using the sodium cholate dialysis method forms particles ranging from 8 to 15 nm [17, 56].”
  • Generation of discoidal ApoE using recombinant protein and lipidation with lipids such as POPC and DMPC result in the formation of discoidal lipoprotein similar in diameter and conformation to astrocyte secreted human LpE.

    “Generation of discoidal ApoE using recombinant protein and lipidation with lipids such as 1-palmitoyl-2-oleoyl-glycero-3-phosphocholine (POPC) and dimyristoylphosphatidylcholine (DMPC) result in the formation of discoidal lipoprotein similar in diameter and conformation to astrocyte secreted human LpE [20, 56].”
  • Another study incubating discoidal ApoE containing two ApoE protein per particle from 8.7 to 10.8 nm in diameter with LCAT found that they formed spherical particles ~ 10.4 nm in diameter with a predicted 3 ApoE molecules per particle based on the diameter measured by electron microscopy.

    “Another study incubating discoidal ApoE containing two ApoE protein per particle from 8.7 to 10.8 nm in diameter with LCAT found that they formed spherical particles ~ 10.4 nm in diameter with a predicted 3 ApoE molecules per particle based on the diameter measured by electron microscopy [56].”
  • Larger particles can contain a higher stoichiometric ratio of ApoE to lipid, which may influence receptor binding and interaction with enzymes like LCAT.

    “Larger particles are also able to contain a higher stoichiometric ratio of ApoE to lipid which may also influence receptor binding and interaction with enzymes like LCAT [56, 118].”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. Jonas, 1989, J. Biol. Chem., 264, 4818, 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)83664-X · DOI
  2. Castro, 1988, Biochemistry, 27, 25, 10.1021/bi00401a005 · DOI
  3. Jonas, 1986, Methods Enzymol., 128, 553, 10.1016/0076-6879(86)28092-1 · DOI
  4. Wald, 1990, J. Biol. Chem., 265, 20037, 10.1016/S0021-9258(17)45479-2 · DOI
  5. Jonas, 1990, J. Biol. Chem., 265, 22123, 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)45679-7 · DOI
  6. Zorich, 1987, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 919, 181, 10.1016/0005-2760(87)90206-2 · DOI
  7. Nichols, 1983, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 750, 353, 10.1016/0005-2760(83)90040-1 · DOI
  8. Nichols, 1984, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 793, 325, 10.1016/0005-2760(84)90246-7 · DOI
  9. Cheung, 1987, J. Lipid Res., 28, 913, 10.1016/S0022-2275(20)38631-4 · DOI
  10. Boguski, 1986, J. Lipid Res., 27, 1011, 10.1016/S0022-2275(20)38761-7 · DOI
  11. Li, 1988, J. Lipid Res., 29, 245, 10.1016/S0022-2275(20)38532-1 · DOI
  12. Brasseur, 1990, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1043, 245, 10.1016/0005-2760(90)90023-Q · DOI
  13. Marcel, 1991, J. Biol. Chem., 266, 3644, 10.1016/S0021-9258(19)67843-9 · DOI
  14. Luo, 1986, J. Mol. Biol., 187, 325, 10.1016/0022-2836(86)90436-5 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Karathanasis, 1986, Biochemistry, 25, 3962, 10.1021/bi00361a034 · DOI
  16. Yokoyama, 1985, J. Biol. Chem., 260, 16375, 10.1016/S0021-9258(17)36247-6 · DOI
  17. Rifici, 1985, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 834, 205, 10.1016/0005-2760(85)90157-2 · DOI
  18. Zorich, 1985, J. Biol. Chem., 260, 8831, 10.1016/S0021-9258(17)39427-9 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Steinmetz, 1985, J. Biol. Chem., 260, 2258, 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)89547-3 · DOI
  20. Edelstein, 1972, J. Biol. Chem., 247, 5842, 10.1016/S0021-9258(19)44834-5 · DOI
  21. Utermann, 1975, Hoppe-Seyler Z. Physiol. Chem., 356, 1113, 10.1515/bchm2.1975.356.2.1113 · DOI
  22. Steinmetz, 1989, J. Chromatogr., 487, 154, 10.1016/S0378-4347(00)83018-2 · DOI
  23. Pownall, 1986, Methods Enzymol., 128, 515, 10.1016/0076-6879(86)28089-1 · DOI
  24. Beaven, 1952, Adv. Protein Chem., 7, 319, 10.1016/S0065-3233(08)60022-4 · DOI
  25. Staros, 1982, Biochemistry, 21, 3950, 10.1021/bi00260a008 · DOI
  26. Chen, 1972, Biochemistry, 11, 4120, 10.1021/bi00772a015 · DOI
  27. Matz, 1982, J. Biol. Chem., 257, 4541, 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)34757-4 · DOI
  28. Jonas, 1988, J. Lipid Res., 29, 1349, 10.1016/S0022-2275(20)38436-4 · DOI
  29. Jonas, 1991, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1085, 71, 10.1016/0005-2760(91)90233-8 · DOI
  30. Ritter, 1977, J. Biol. Chem., 252, 1208, 10.1016/S0021-9258(17)40642-9 · DOI
  31. Weinberg, 1985, J. Biol. Chem., 260, 14279, 10.1016/S0021-9258(17)38714-8 · DOI
  32. Weinberg, 1990, J. Biol. Chem., 265, 8081, 10.1016/S0021-9258(19)39041-6 · DOI
  33. Wetterau, 1988, J. Biol. Chem., 263, 6240, 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)68778-2 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Weinberg, 1985, J. Biol. Chem., 260, 4914, 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)89159-1 · DOI
  35. Gong, 1989, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1006, 317, 10.1016/0005-2760(89)90019-2 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Dvorin, 1985, J. Lipid Res., 26, 38, 10.1016/S0022-2275(20)34402-3 · DOI
  37. Weinberg, 1990, J. Biol. Chem., 265, 18372, 10.1016/S0021-9258(17)44762-4 · DOI
  38. Jonas, 1991, J. Lipid Res., 32, 97, 10.1016/S0022-2275(20)42248-5 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Jonas, A., Steinmetz, A., & Churgay, L.
Venue
Journal of Biological Chemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1993-01
Volume
268
Issue
3
Pages
1596-1602
ISSN
0021-9258
Cited by
59
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review