Advertisement

Alternative strategies for the characterization of associations in multicomponent solutions via measurement of sedimentation equilibrium

  • A. P. Minton
Keynote Lectures
Part of the Progress in Colloid & Polymer Science book series (PROGCOLLOID, volume 107)

Abstract

Four strategies for the analysis of sedimentation equilibrium of solutions containing two solute components in the context of models for equilibrium association are described:
  1. (1)

    Direct modeling of the equilibrium gradients of a single experimentally measurable signal measured in each of several samples of differing composition;

     
  2. (2)

    Direct modeling of the equilibrium gradients of two (or more) signals measured in each of several samples of differing composition;

     
  3. (3)

    Calculation of the independent component concentration gradients in individual samples via analysis of the gradients of two or more signals in the sample, followed by modeling of the component concentration gradients from several samples of differing composition; and

     
  4. (4)

    Calculation of the signal-average buoyant molar mass as a function of solution composition, followed by modeling of the composition dependence of the signal-average buoyant molar mass in the context of an association model.

     

Examples of the application of each strategy are presented and compared, and conclusions are drawn regarding the relative utility of each method for different types of experiments and systems studied.

Key words

Self-association hetero-association 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hsu C, Minton AP (1991) J Mol Recognition 4:93–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Minton AP (1994) In: Schuster TM, Laue TM (eds) Modern Analytical Ultracentrifugation. Birkhäuser, Boston, pp 81–93Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Laue TM, Senear DF, Eaton S, Ross JBA (1993) Biochemistry 32:2469–2472PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rivas G, Ingham KC, Minton AP (1994) Biochemistry 33:2341–2348PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Press WH, Flannery BP, Teukolsky SA, Vertterling WT (1986) Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing, Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Henry ER, Hofrichter J (1992) Meth Enzymol 210:129–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lewis MS, Shrager RI, Kim S-J (1994) In: Schuster TM, Laue TM (eds) Modern Analytical Ultracentrifugation. Birkhäuser, Boston, pp 94–115Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bailey MF, Davidson BE, Minton AP, Sawyer WH, Howlett GJ (1996) J Mol Biol 263:671–684PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Minton AP (1989) Anal Biochem 176:209–216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Darawshe S, Minton AP (1994) Anal Biochem 220:1–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Laue TM (1992) Beckman Instruments Technical Information Bulletin DS-835Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nichol LW, Ogston AG (1965) J Phys Chem 69:4365–4367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lewis MS (1991) Biochem 30:11716–11719Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brooks I, Wetzel R, Chan W, Lee G, Watts DG, Soneson KK, Hensley P (1994) In: Schuster TM, Laue TM (eds) Modern Analytical Ultracentrifugation. Birkhäuser, Boston, p 351Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chatelier RC, Minton AP (1987) Biopolymers 26:1097–1113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr. Dietrich Steinkopff Verlag GmbH & Co. KG 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. P. Minton
    • 1
  1. 1.National Institute of HealthBethesdaUSA

Personalised recommendations