The effect of serum vitamin D-binding protein on polymerization and depolymerization of actin is similar to the effect of profilin on actin

The mechanism of the interaction between two genetically determined serum vitamin D-binding protein forms and the muscle skeletal actin was investigated. Vitamin D-binding protein was isolated in a good yield from human serum, using immunoaffinity chromatography. 16 mg of pure vitamin D-binding protein were obtained from 100 ml of serum. The interaction between purified vitamin D-binding protein and skeletal muscle actin was studied by viscosity, delta A (232 nm) measurements and by electron microscopy. The effect of vitamin D-binding protein on actin polymerization is characterized by the decrease of the nucleation and elongation rates and by the decrease of the final concentration of polymerized actin in the steady state. The depolymerizing effect is not the result of direct action on vitamin D-binding protein on F-actin but rather of an increased concentration of the complex of the former protein with G-actin. The characteristics of the vitamin D-binding protein and profilin interactions with actin are similar. Both proteins seem to react only with G-actin.     

ION SERIES AND THE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF PROTEINS. II

1. Our results show clearly that the Hofmeister series is not the correct expression of the relative effect of ions on the swelling of gelatin, and that it is not true that chlorides, bromides, and nitrates have "hydrating," and acetates, tartrates, citrates, and phosphates "dehydrating," effects. If the pH of the gelatin is taken into considertion, it is found that for the same pH the effect on swelling is the same for gelatin chloride, nitrate, trichloracetate, tartrate, succinate, oxalate, citrate, and phosphate, while the swelling is considerably less for gelatin sulfate. This is exactly what we should expect on the basis of the combining ratios of the corresponding acids with gelatin since the weak dibasic and tribasic acids combine with gelatin in molecular proportions while the strong dibasic acid H₂SO₄ combines with gelatin in equivalent proportions. In the case of the weak dibasic acids he anion in combination with gelatin is therefore monovalent and in the case of the strong H₂SO₄ it is bivalent. Hence it is only the valency and not the nature of the ion in combination with gelatin which affects the degree of swelling. 2. This is corroborated in the experiments with alkalies which show that LiOH, NaOH, KOH, and NH₄OH cause the same degree of swelling at the same pH of the gelatin solution and that this swelling is considerably higher than that caused by Ca(OH)₂ and Ba(OH)₂ for the same pH. This agrees with the results of the titration experiments which prove that Ca(OH)₂ and Ba(OH)₂ combine with gelatin in equivalent proportions and that hence the cation in combination with the gelatin salt with these two latter bases is bivalent. 3. The fact that proteins combine with acids and alkalies on the basis of the forces of primary valency is therefore not only in full agreement with the influence of ions on the physical properties of proteins but allows us to predict this influence qualitatively and quantitatively. 4. What has been stated in regard to the influence of ions on the swelling of the different gelatin salts is also true in regard to the influence of ions on the relative solubility of gelatin in alcohol-water mixtures. 5. Conductivity measurements of solutions of gelatin salts do not support the theory that the drop in the curves for swelling, osmotic pressure, or viscosity, which occurs at a pH 3.3 or a little less, is due to a drop in the concentration of ionized protein in the solution; nor do they suggest that the difference between the physical properties of gelatin sulfate and gelatin chloride is due to differences in the degree of ionization of these two salts.