Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1976 Jun 1;155(3):607-13.
doi: 10.1042/bj1550607.

Purification of phosphodiesterase II from rat and guinea-pig intestinal mucosa

Purification of phosphodiesterase II from rat and guinea-pig intestinal mucosa

P R Flanagan et al. Biochem J. .

Abstract

Phosphodiesterase II from extracts of intestinal mucosa of rat and guinea pig was purified by chromatography on DEAE-cellulose, CM-cellulose and agarose. The rat enzyme was purified 350-550-fold, with recoveries ranging up to 46%. The best purification of the guinea-pig enzyme was 15-fold, and the recovery was only 2.6%, the large loss occurring during chromatography on DEAE-cellulose and agarose. The poor results with the guinea-pig enzyme reflect the difficulty in obtaining a truly soluble material. Repeated sonication of the crude guinea-pig preparations yielded material that was initially soluble but tended to re-aggregate quickly. Purification of the rat phosphodiesterase II increased its thermostability, the temperature of half-inactivation being increased from 54degrees to 60degreesC. Both enzymes had a Km value of 4 X 10(-5) M with thymidine 3'-(2,4-dinitrophenyl) phosphate as substrate and showed similar pH optima for activity. Both enzymes were inhibited slightly in 0.1 M-MgC12 or 2M-urea and much more strongly in 2M-(NH4)2SO4 or 6M-NaC1. The guinea-pig enzyme was usually inhibited more than the rat enzyme. The Arrhenius plots of the two enzymes differed slightly in slope, but both were biphasic, showing breaks between 30degrees and 40degreesC. It was concluded that the two enzymes were markedly similar in behaviour and that the differences found were related to the different degrees of purification attained by the procedures described.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

References

    1. J Biol Chem. 1961 Apr;236:1144-9 - PubMed
    1. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1962 Aug 27;62:445-9 - PubMed
    1. J Biol Chem. 1963 Aug;238:2780-8 - PubMed
    1. J Biol Chem. 1960 Jul;235:2117-21 - PubMed
    1. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1960 Jul;104:385-8 - PubMed