217 - Short-Term Effect of Ammonium Chloride on Nitrogen Fixation by Azotobacter vinelandii and by Bacteroids of Rhizobium leguminosarum

The question here is how fixed nitrogen regulates nitrogenase in Azotobacter vinelandii. Adding ammonium above a certain concentration immediately shuts off nitrogen fixation, but the organism doesn't have the DRAT/DRAG enzyme system for ADP-ribosylation of the nitrogenase for posttranscriptional regulation that other organisms have.

This shut-off in A. vinelandii is not due solely to repression of nitrogenase synthesis, since that would not show an effect so quickly. To test alternative mechanisms, this paper took cells grown without fixed nitrogen, suspended them in buffer with a carbon source (sucrose or succinate) and oxygen, and measured acetylene reduction before and after adding ammonium. They also measured nucleotide phosphate levels and respiration.

As expected, adding ammonium greatly lowered nitrogen fixation. The ratio of ATP to ADP seemed mostly to increase though, so lack of ATP didn't seem to cause the inhibition. So what's left? Maybe lack of reducing equivalents used to reduce nitrogen.

Then they did a very confusing and poorly explained experiment (Fig 2) showing uptake of ammonium, which doesn't seem very surprising or informative. However, apparently adding a compound that dissipates membrane potential (valinomycin) caused the opposite effect (loss of ammonium), and another (nigericin) does the opposite (enhancing uptake), so that's somewhat interesting.

They measured proton motive force by a gradient of lipophilic cations, such as tetraphenylphosphonium, across the membrane. They also used a weak acid, 5,5-dimethyloxazolidine-2,4-dione to measure the pH gradient. The sum of these measurements was the proton motive force, in mV.

What they saw was that increasing amounts of ammonium chloride decreased the total proton motive force, but not the pH gradient part or the internal pH of the cells. So the electrical gradient was decreased. This could be because taking up a lot of ammonium, a cation, affects the charge of the membrane. I wonder if they could've tested this further using a different cation though.

Anyway, that's pretty interesting. Nitrogen fixation requires a fairly delicate redox balance, but this can be beneficial for the cells if they use imbalance to regulate their metabolism.

Reference:

Laane, C., Krone, W., Konings, W., Haaker, H. & Veeger, C. Short-Term Effect of Ammonium Chloride on Nitrogen Fixation by Azotobacter vinelandii and by Bacteroids of Rhizobium leguminosarum. Eur J Biochem 103, 39–46 (1980).

615 - ATP-dependent reduction of azide and HCN by N2-fixing enzymes of Azotobacter vinelandii and Clostridium pasteurianum

This study again looks at nitrogenase in Azotobacter vinelandii and also Clostridium pasteurianum and how it affects/is affected by stuff like azide and cyanide.

What They Saw
They were looking at cell extracts, protein activity in vitro. Nitrogenase can reduce azide to ammonia (and other stuff); carbon monoxide can inhibit this process completely, and nitrous oxide (N₂O) partially. More ammonia is formed from azide than from dinitrogen even. However, each azide molecule is reduced to one N₂ and one NH₃, so two thirds of the nitrogen becomes gas instead of being fixed. Presumably if left long enough, all the N₂ would become ammonia though.

In terms of amount of hydrogen produced with azide present, it varied from between 28 and 35% of what was produced with no substrate present, similar to dinitrogen.

With cyanide, the enzyme reduces it to methane, ammonia, and methylamine (CH₃NH₂). CO inhibits this reaction completely, and azide and nitrous oxide partially. When nitrogen gas and cyanide are present, less base is formed than when only nitrogen is present, so there is competition.

In terms of hydrogen again, with cyanide there was 17% as much hydrogen as with no substrate, but it also seemed like cyanide reduced the electron flux to the enzyme overall, to about 30% of when fixing nitrogen. If CO was added with cyanide, it restored hydrogen production up to 58% of what it was with neither. This is pretty consistent with previous results.

They also tried methylamine reduction directly, but it was a very poor substrate. The same was true of cyanate (NCO^-), and they didn't detect any reduction of CO to methane. (Though they maybe should've looked for ethylene, since the Mo nitrogenase produces mostly that and none of methane from CO).

What This Means
So nitrogenase can reduce a bunch of things pretty well: nitrogen, nitrous oxide, azide, cyanide, and acetylene. It's an interesting enzyme.

This study has a good summary table of different substrates for nitrogenase, products made from them, and their effects on hydrogen production/electron flux.

Reference:

Hardy, R. W. F. & Knight Jr., E. ATP-dependent reduction of azide and HCN by N₂-fixing enzymes of Azotobacter vinelandii and Clostridium pasteurianum. Biochim Biophys Acta 139, 69–90 (1967).

630 - Diastereomer-dependent substrate reduction properties of a dinitrogenase containing 1-fluorohomocitrate in the iron-molybdenum cofactor

The normal nitrogenase central cofactor contains homocitrate near the central metal atom; it is required for formation of the cofactor. This study looks at compounds similar to homocitrate (diastereomers of fluorohomocitrate) incorporated into the cofactor, and how they affect the enzyme's activity.

What They Saw
They purified enzyme from Klebsiella pneumoniae and Azotobacter vinelandii I think; it's hard to tell because this paper (and others they cite) are really badly written with regard to methods. (They seriously put in a footnote saying "The experimental details of the synthesis of 1-fluorohomocitrate may be obtained from [author initials]." How is that acceptable, especially in a PNAS paper?). Somehow they got FeMo-cofactor with different analogs of homocitrate, and tested their activity with different substrates.

With threo-fluorohomocitrate, there was hardly any nitrogen fixation, similar to with citrate, but with erythro-fluorohomocitrate, there was about 3.5x less than with plain homocitrate, so it was somewhat active. Both were about half as good at acetylene reduction (measured by ethylene), and just as good at cyanide reduction (measured by methane).

In terms of hydrogen production, if there was a difference between plain homocitrate and the fluoros, it wasn't very big; they produced almost as much as the normal one. The same was true of other analogs (homoisocitrate, isocitrate, etc), though some were impaired (such as citrate, producing only about half as much).

The addition of inhibitors, carbon monoxide (CO) or carbonyl sulfide (COS), affected these different enzymes differently. The amount of hydrogen from homocitrate increased (maybe significantly) but decreased some or none for analogs, depending on the analog, up to 63%. The inhibitors reduced acetylene reduction from 35-100% in all cases, and cyanide reduction a little or a lot too.

Cyanide itself affected hydrogen production. (Dang, this paper is so badly written, it's giving me a headache trying to figure it out.) With all tested analogs (and homocitrate), cyanide inhibited hydrogen production 85-95%. Adding CO with cyanide prevented this inhibition with homocitrate and partially with fluorohomocitrate, but not much the other analogs. CO also inhibits cyanide reduction, at least with some analogs (especially the more active ones).

What This Means
This study can tell a lot about the biochemistry of different substrates binding to the enzyme and the enzyme acting on them. I wonder if the results are skewed somewhat because they only measured some of the products, not all possible ones (i.e. might some analog-based cofactors produce ethane from acetylene in addition to ethylene?). In terms of application, even if some of these analogs have desirable properties, it seems like it would be difficult to get them incorporated in vivo.

Reference:

Madden, M. S., Kindon, N. D., Ludden, P. W. & Shah, V. K. Diastereomer-dependent substrate reduction properties of a dinitrogenase containing 1-fluorohomocitrate in the iron-molybdenum cofactor. PNAS 87, 6517–6521 (1990).

610 - A Nitrogen Pressure of 50 Atmospheres does not Prevent Evolution of Hydrogen by Nitrogenase

Nitrogenase always seems to produce at least one hydrogen molecule per nitrogen fixed when fixing nitrogen. This study looked at whether very high pressures of pure nitrogen could prevent this wasteful side reaction.

What They Saw
They purified nitrogenase from Azotobacter vinelandii and put it in a chamber with 50-51 atmospheres of pure nitrogen gas. The chamber was designed so they could start and stop the reaction by tipping the chamber to add reagents that would start or stop it, without changing the atmosphere. Then they measured pressure in the chamber and amount of hydrogen.

Even at the high pressure of nitrogen in this experiment, the amount of hydrogen produced was about one-to-one with the amount of nitrogen fixed. So it must be pretty essential to the reaction.

Reference:

Simpson, F. B. & Burris, R. H. A Nitrogen Pressure of 50 Atmospheres does not Prevent Evolution of Hydrogen by Nitrogenase. Science 224, 1095–1097 (1984).

598 - Nitrogenase-catalyzed reactions

This paper looks at a bunch of possible substrates and reactions that nitrogenase catalyzes.

What They Saw
They extracted nitrogenase from Azotobacter vinelandii. ATP was necessary for any activity, of course; 3 mM was the optimal amount in their in vitro reactions, possibly because of the amount of magnesium ions that were present (5 mM). They saw 1.6 hydrogens per nitrogen fixed, on average, a bit higher than the normal figure of 1; about 33% of the energy flux went to hydrogen (normal figure is 25%).

With azide added, 1 mole azide is made into 1 mole ammonia and 1 mole dinitrogen. Lower levels allowed production of hydrogen instead, but that wasn't investigated much. The same was true with acetylene; both seem better substrates than nitrogen.

Cyanide is reduced to methane and ammonia; optimal concentrations were 2-4 mM. At other concentrations, there are other products formed: ethylene, ethane, methylamine (CH₃NH₂). They don't discuss hydrogen.

However, their calculations of ATP per electron pair transferred were skewed because they didn't measure all the products (i.e. hydrogen gas).

Reference:

Hwang, J. C. & Burris, R. H. Nitrogenase-catalyzed reactions. Biochim Biophys Acta 283, 339–350 (1972).

558 - Isolation of a new vanadium-containing nitrogenase from Azotobacter vinelandii

This study is the first to fully purify the vanadium nitrogenase from Azotobacter vinelandii.

What They Saw
They used strain UW (aka CA) and a nifHDK knockout. It didn't seem like they scrubbed the medium for Mo, but they did test the purified product for metals and didn't see a detectable amount of Mo, only V and Fe (in a 1-to-13 ratio), so I guess it's good.

They did acetylene reduction assays on the V and Mo nitrogenases, and found that 90% of the electrons went to acetylene in the former, but only 12% in the latter. It seems like they only measured ethylene production though, so they might've underestimated the total activity by neglecting the ethane produced by the V nitrogenase.

Under argon, the Mo nitrogenase produced 1.6x more hydrogen than the V version. This was the same ratio as that of nitrogen fixed by each version. I'm not sure how much it's possible to compare these enzymes in vitro though. But it seems like the V nitrogenase is better at nitrogen and hydrogen than at acetylene.

As mentioned, ICP emission spectroscopy didn't detect any metals other than V or Fe: no Mo, Cr, Co, Ni, Cu, or W, so that's good.

What This Means
This shows how the Mo and V nitrogenases are similar in some ways and yet different in others. They work in similar ways and are sensitive to similar things, but the products of their reactions and such are different (though possible substrates seem largely the same). By comparing the two, we can learn more about the process of nitrogen fixation in general.

Reference:

Hales, B. J., Case, E. E., Morningstar, J. E., Dzeda, M. F. & Mauterer, L. A. Isolation of a new vanadium-containing nitrogenase from Azotobacter vinelandii. Biochemistry 25, 7251–7255 (1986).

555 - Differential Effects on N2 Binding and Reduction, HD Formation, and Azide Reduction with α-195His- and α-191Gln-Substituted MoFe Proteins of Azotobacter vinelandii Nitrogenase

Similar to 554, this study looked at mutated versions of the Mo nitrogenase in Azotobacter vinelandii, but different reactions this time: interactions with nitrogen gas (hooray), with dihydrogen and dideuterium, and with azide (N₃^-).

What They Saw
Adding nitrogen gas revealed that Asn 195 couldn't fix nitrogen; Gln 195 had a slight ability. However, replacing argon with pure nitrogen reduced hydrogen production by Asn 195 about 30%, though increasing the pressure with additional nitrogen didn't affect things further except maybe to increase the ATP required for each electron transfer, almost double what it is at 100% argon. Nitrogen didn't seem to affect hydrogen from Lys 191 at all.

Adding nitrogen also inhibited acetylene reduction in Asn 195, 28%; and again, did not inhibit Lys 191. For the former, nitrogen seems to inhibit the reaction competitively but reversibly; removing the nitrogen restored the rate almost to what it had been.

They tried adding hydrogen to acetylene reduction assays with Asn 195, enough to raise the pressure to two atmospheres. This didn't affect anything with argon; ethylene and ethane were both produced about the same amount. But when nitrogen was present, hydrogen restored most or all the activity that nitrogen would've inhibited.
They also saw that having 50% deuterium with the rest nitrogen doesn't really result in inhibition of hydrogen production by Asn 195.

When they tried adding sodium azide, this didn't really affect hydrogen production, but the activity reducing it to ammonia or hydrazine (N₂H₄) was much less for all the mutants than for the wild-type, at least 8x less. Adding carbon monoxide to Asn 195 assays abolished any azide reduction activity, but adding hydrogen had no effect. The azide might've reduced electron flux through Asn 195 a little (20%) but CO prevented this reduction too.

What This Means
Even some of the mutants that can't fix nitrogen seem to interact with it to some extent, as evidenced by its inhibiting other reactions. The other findings are pretty interesting too. It all relates to how the mutations affect the activity: in affinity, in substrate fit in the active site, and in electron flux through the whole complex.

Reference:

Fisher, K., Dilworth, M. J. & Newton, W. E. Differential Effects on N₂ Binding and Reduction, HD Formation, and Azide Reduction with α-195^His- and α-191^Gln-Substituted MoFe Proteins of Azotobacter vinelandii Nitrogenase. Biochemistry 39, 15570–15577 (2000).

554 - Azotobacter vinelandii Nitrogenases Containing Altered MoFe Proteins with Substitutions in the FeMo-Cofactor Environment: Effects on the Catalyzed Reduction of Acetylene and Ethylene

This is another study looking at mutating the Mo nitrogenase protein in Azotobacter vinelandii to see how it changes the enzyme's activity. Here's a picture they gave of the active center, with the FeMo cofactor in the middle and the protein surrounding it, with certain amino acids they were targeting:

What They Saw
They targeted conserved amino acids, common to homologs in many organisms, such as Gln 191 and His 195, with three mutations: Lys 191 (seen before in 536), Asn 195, and Gln 195. These proteins were extracted and purified.

Under argon, Gln 195 produced about as much hydrogen as the wild-type, while the others only about half as much (though apparently they only contained half as much FeMo cofactor). Under 10% acetylene, the wild-type put most electrons toward producing ethylene, while the others only devoted 55% at most, the others going to hydrogen (Gln 195) or hydrogen and ethane (others).

The mutations also affected how the protons were added to acetylene, whether in cis or in trans, as determined by using C₂D₂ instead of C₂H₂ and looking at where there was hydrogen or deuterium. The mutants had higher proportions of trans-C₂D₂H₂ compared to the wild-type, except Gln 195 which had lower. This seems related to their ability to reduce acetylene all the way to ethane or not.

Then they tested whether ethylene instead of acetylene, with or without CO or acetylene too, could be a substrate or inhibitor of activity. Having 50% ethylene with the rest argon led to ethane production from all versions, including the wild-type, except not Lys 191. It seemed to inhibit overall flux a little, though for most versions it didn't inhibit as much when CO was present (the exception was Lys 191, which had about 3x less flux with CO present compared to just argon, though in both cases it all went to hydrogen). Interestingly, adding 50% hydrogen with 50% ethylene increased the amount of ethane for all versions. Strangely, though it didn't reduce ethylene to ethane, adding 10% acetylene to the mix with Lys 191 showed some ethane production; so it doesn't reduce ethylene, only acetylene. Acetylene also increased the rate of ethane production with Asn 195.

What This Means
This helps understand the precise reaction that takes place in nitrogenase. It seems like the affinity of the enzyme for the substrate affects how far that substrate is reduced before being replaced by a fresh molecule. Still, it's hard to make real comparisons from in vitro assays, but I don't know that there's a good alternative.

Reference:

Fisher, K., Dilworth, M. J., Kim, C.-H. & Newton, W. E. Azotobacter vinelandii Nitrogenases Containing Altered MoFe Proteins with Substitutions in the FeMo-Cofactor Environment: Effects on the Catalyzed Reduction of Acetylene and Ethylene. Biochemistry 39, 2970–2979 (2000).

544 - Nitrogenase from vanadium-grown Azotobacter: Isolation, characteristics, and mechanistic implications

It was known that Mo seemed important for nitrogen fixation in Azotobacter vinelandii. This study looked at substituting V for Mo for nitrogen fixation. It wasn't discovered until about a decade later that there were two separate sets of genes for two versions of nitrogenase with different metals, so here they thought it was a substitution of metals in the same protein.

What They Saw
They grew A. vinelandii OP (aka CA) with Mo or V and extracted and purified its nitrogenase. They said it didn't grow without either Mo or V, which seems weird because it should be able to grow with just iron.

The V nitrogenase activity (measured as hydrogen production) was lower than that of the Mo nitrogenase, about 22% of it, though it's hard to compare in vitro assays. It also seemed less stable and more prone to heat inactivation.

They did detect traces of Mo in the V purification, so it's not clear exactly what's happening. There was about 20x more V than Mo. Both purifications could reduce acrylonitrile, propionitrile, and acetonitrile in addition to the more familiar substrates, and hydrogen was produced at the same time. Hydrogen inhibited nitrogen reduction and carbon monoxide inhibited everything except hydrogen production.

In terms of efficiency, they observed that the Mo nitrogenase allocated 70% of its electrons to nitrogen and only 30% to hydrogen (similar to the typical 75%/25% numbers), while electrons in the V nitrogenase only went to nitrogen 25% of the time, which works out to 6 electrons making 2 ammonia, and another 18 making 9 hydrogen. Other substrates gave different numbers, but the V nitrogenase always had higher flux to hydrogen.

It seemed like CO inhibition of the V version was competitive but it wasn't clear that the same was true of the Mo version. And acrylonitrile reduction was different between them: V nitrogenase produced about twice as much propane as opposed to propylene compared to the Mo version.

What This Means
It seems, from the results, pretty likely that they were studying the V nitrogenase (Vnf) in this study, despite slight contamination with Mo. The CO inhibition pattern, and other activity patterns, support this conclusion.

I didn't know that acrylonitrile and such could be substrates for nitrogenase, but perhaps the cyanide residue is reduced to make it a hydrocarbon, either propylene or propane. Not sure this seems more useful than other substrates.

Overall, it's interesting how much this study revealed that wasn't really known until later studies confirmed it.

Reference:

Burns, R. C., Fuchsman, W. H. & Hardy, R. W. F. Nitrogenase from vanadium-grown Azotobacter: Isolation, characteristics, and mechanistic implications. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 42, 353–358 (1971).

542 - Purification and Characterization of the vnf-encoded Apodinitrogenase from Azotobacter vinelandii

This study looks at the vanadium nitrogenase apoprotein and how it works with its own cofactors or those of the other versions.

What They Saw
Azotobacter vinelandii strains possessing or lacking genes for one or more of the nitrogenases were grown and their protein was extracted. They also extracted central cofactors for each type separately.

Without nifB, a strain can't produce any of the cofactors, so it's easier to get apoproteins. They took vanadium aponitrogenase (Vnf version) and activated it with FeVco. Not surprisingly, they only saw activity in strains containing vnf when vanadium was present and Mo or ammonium was not. Extracts of active strains lost activity when treated with heat or exposed to air for 45 minutes, though the holoenzyme seemed more stable to heat.

When they purified the enzyme as much as possible, the delta subunit (vnfG-encoded) seemed only loosely attached to the others, unlike in A. chroococcum where it purifies together with the others; though it's not clear that conditions were the same. It was necessary for active enzyme though, and seems to be involved in inserting the cofactor into the enzyme, but also something else.

They tried replacing FeVco with FeMoco in the V nitrogenase (or vice versa in the Mo version). With the V version and FeVco, carbon monoxide inhibited about 70% of the acetylene reduction activity but no hydrogen production activity. The Mo nitrogenase with FeVco had a fraction of the V version's acetylene activity but no nitrogen fixation; sadly they didn't test hydrogen production.

With the V nitrogenase and FeMoco, it had a bit (1/6th) of the acetylene reduction activity, which seemed insensitive to CO. Ethane production was proportionally higher (1:4 instead of 1:12). Hydrogen production was reduced about 40%. Nitrogen fixation was pretty much abolished.

With the correct cofactors, the V nitrogenase had about 31% the acetylene reduction activity, 34% of the hydrogen production activity, and 22% of the nitrogen fixation activity of the Mo nitrogenase, but it's not clear if these in vitro assays allow for accurate comparisons.

It didn't seem like FeFeco allowed any activity in the V aponitrogenase.

What This Means
It seems like nitrogen fixation requires a very specific environment, and messing with it in various ways (mutations, different cofactors) messes it up while allowing the enzymes to still do less strict activities.

Reference:

Chatterjee, R., Allen, R. M., Ludden, P. W. & Shah, V. K. Purification and Characterization of the vnf-encoded Apodinitrogenase from Azotobacter vinelandii. J. Biol. Chem. 271, 6819–6826 (1996).

541 - Diversity of Nitrogenase Systems in Diazotrophs

This review looks at different kinds of nitrogen-fixing enzymes, real and theoretical. Azotobacter vinelandii itself has three genetically distinct versions, with different central metals in their central cofactors: molybdenum, vanadium, and iron.

The molybdenum version is most common in nature, and used preferentially in organisms that possess it. It has also been studied the most. No known organism possesses either of the other two versions while lacking this one. Protein sequences of this enzyme in different organisms are remarkably similar to each other. It uses 2 ATP to transfer one electron from the dinitrogenase reductase protein to the dinitrogenase complex, and 6 such transfers reduce one dinitrogen to two ammonia (along with 2 electrons going to hydrogen).

The other versions were discovered when Mo or its enzyme were unavailable yet nitrogen fixation continued. They have an extra subunit of unknown function (perhaps cofactor insertion), but otherwise seem pretty similar in structure and function.

Other than those three, Streptomyces thermoautotrophicus has a novel system: it has Mo in the dinitrogenase and the dinitrogenase reductase equivalent is a manganese-superoxide oxidoreductase with no iron or sulfur. It doesn't do acetylene reduction, but far from being oxygen-sensitive, it depends on oxygen for its activity. The overall stoichiometry is similar to the Azotobacter Mo nitrogenase though, including the hydrogen production, but the minimum ATP requirement is only 4, instead of 16.

Then the authors go into some discussion of other nitrogenases, with the same apoenzymes as those in A. vinelandii but with different central cofactors that may or may not be found in nature. For example, a tungsten-iron cofactor, which has been studied before: it doesn't permit nitrogen fixation, but some proton reduction is possible. Then there were chromium- or manganese-iron cofactor proteins: when extracts were treated with o-phenanthroline and purified as apoproteins, activity could be partially restored with solutions including salts of Mn, V, Mo, Cr, or Re. W failed to give this effect, but the others permitted some acetylene and proton reduction activity. I don't have access to the citations for these claims though.

These in vitro proteins, even if they contain weird metals, also seem to contain Mo in equal proportions to the others. A. vinelandii UW3 lacks nif genes required for the primary nitrogenase, but can use alternatives, and some suggest that the V nitrogenase may use Re or Mn or Cr instead; or maybe the Mo nitrogenase proteins are expressed but use these metals. It doesn't seem very clear, but it's interesting.

Reference:

Zhao, Y., Bian, S.-M., Zhou, H.-N. & Huang, J.-F. Diversity of Nitrogenase Systems in Diazotrophs. J Integr Plant Biol 48, 745–755 (2006).

536 - Nitrogenase-catalyzed Ethane Production and CO-sensitive Hydrogen Evolution from MoFe Proteins Having Amino Acid Substitutions in an α-Subunit FeMo Cofactor-binding Domain

To figure out which parts of the nitrogenase protein are important, this study made very specific mutations to amino acids in the protein in Azotobacter vinelandii to see how they affected the catalysis.

What They Saw
They grew cells, wild-type and mutants, with molybdenum, then extracted and tested their nitrogenase. There was a nifEN knockout strain, a nifDK knockout, and others with specific changes in nifD, sometimes combined with nifN knockout.

None of these had nitrogen-fixing activity. All had just as much dinitrogenase reductase activity as the wild-type; some had more. But regarding acetylene reduction, all nifN knockouts had about zero, but the single-mutation strains all had some, though none nearly as much as the wild-type. They each had more ethane production than the wild-type though, so although total reduction and ethylene production were lower, ethane production was higher.

The temperature stability of mutants wasn't all the same either; some were more sensitive to heat. Lowering the temperature below 30ºC also led to a lower proportion of electron flux going to ethane instead of ethylene (in the mutants that produced ethane). No ethane was seen at any temperature in the wild-type. Though these measurements may not have been reliable, so the trend might not be real.

Then they tried adding carbon monoxide (CO) to inhibit the enzymes. The pattern was the same for each strain (they say), but the amount of total inhibition was different; some were less sensitive than the wild-type, some more, some equal to wild-type.

The FeMo cofactor didn't seem to be different in the mutants; extracting it and using it to restore activity to an apoprotein gave the same results from each strain.

After these results on crude extracts, they purified wild-type nitrogenase and the mutants' most stable enzyme (that replaced the glutamine in NifD position 191 with a lysine). Under acetylene, the wild-type enzyme had about the same electron flux with or without 0.2% CO, but more went to ethylene (vs hydrogen) when CO was absent. 3% CO completely inhibited nitrogen fixation (under nitrogen, obviously), but didn't inhibit hydrogen production: about as much was produced with nitrogen and CO as with argon and CO (or argon without CO). Incidentally, this study gave a NH₃ to H₂ ratio of 1.4 to 1 in 100% nitrogen, which is somewhat lower than the normal 2 to 1.

With the mutant, there was at least 4x less electron flux overall. With CO absent, most of it went to hydrogen when acetylene was present, but what did go to acetylene produced some ethane and more ethylene (as usual). With argon or nitrogen, it all went to hydrogen. When CO was present, the electron flux seemed even more reduced, but the patterns of product were similar.

What This Means
The 191 glutamine residue seems involved in the catalysis, positioned near the FeMo cofactor active center as it is. I am curious about several things, considering nitrogenase's already interesting catalytic abilities: what would similar studies of the other nitrogenases show? What kind of activity might result from other modifications? And, does this kind of modification allow for the reduction of new substrates, such as carbon monoxide itself? These would be interesting studies, if they haven't been done already. Apparently the vanadium nitrogenase is less sensitive to CO than the Mo version here, and it has already been shown to reduce CO to hydrocarbons, at least in vitro.

The difference in acetylene reduction could be due to different affinities: in the wild-type, a new acetylene replaces an old as soon as it is reduced to ethylene, whereas in a mutant, the ethylene remains long enough to be reduced further to ethane. It seems like this difference is due to a difference in the enzyme itself, rather than the cofactor; so the enzyme itself affects the catalysis (though I guess that's not surprising).

Reference:

Scott, D. J., Dean, D. R. & Newton, W. E. Nitrogenase-catalyzed Ethane Production and CO-sensitive Hydrogen Evolution from MoFe Proteins Having Amino Acid Substitutions in an α-Subunit FeMo Cofactor-binding Domain. J. Biol. Chem. 267, 20002–20010 (1992).

516 - Role of magnesium adenosine 5'-triphosphate in the hydrogen evolution reaction catalyzed by nitrogenase from Azotobacter vinelandii

Nitrogenase evolves hydrogen in a reaction that depends on ATP. The amount of ATP varies from 2 ATP per electron to over 20 (supposedly). The 4Fe-4S cluster in the dinitrogenase reductase donates one electron to the dinitrogenase, binding 2 ATP to do so. It seems like the ATP-powered flow of electrons can determine how many go toward hydrogen and how many toward nitrogen fixation. This study wanted to see if powering this flux was ATP's only role.

What They Saw
They purified enzyme from Azotobacter vinelandii and separated the two components, then mixed them with MgATP in in vitro assays. They observed that there was a burst of rapid ATP hydrolysis at first, which leveled off and remained fairly constant for the rest of the time. It seemed like the rate was the same as the rate of electron transfer between components. They confirmed the rate of about 2 ATP per electron; this makes sense with the dinitrogenase accepting two electrons at a time, one for each of its molybdenum atoms. The rate depended on the concentration of ATP, which makes sense and indicates that ATP is essential. This is also true when measuring the amount of hydrogen produced.

What This Means
They appeared to succeed in their goal of showing that ATP's only role in this reaction was powering the electron transfer, though some ATP can be used up to no purpose in some conditions.

Reference:

Hageman, R. V., Orme-Johnson, W. H. & Burris, R. H. Role of magnesium adenosine 5’-triphosphate in the hydrogen evolution reaction catalyzed by nitrogenase from Azotobacter vinelandii. Biochemistry 19, 2333–2342 (1980).

453 - Direct mass-spectrometric determination of the relationship between respiration, hydrogenase and nitrogenase activities in Azotobacter chroococcum

This study looked at hydrogen and its relationship to different enzymatic processes in Azotobacter chroococcum.

What They Saw
The organism was grown in continuous culture with limited oxygen, 5% glucose. Samples were removed and sparged with different mixtures of argon, oxygen, and deuterium. Gases are measured by mass spectrometer.

Their figure is pretty confusing, poorly designed, and poorly described, but as far as I can tell, when they added either 80% argon with 20% oxygen or 70% argon, 20% oxygen, and 10% deuterium, the oxygen goes down to near zero within about 5 minutes either way, at which point hydrogen production starts increasing and deuterium uptake slows down or stops. So it seems like oxygen is required for hydrogenase to work.

They tried again with the addition of some carbon monoxide and acetylene to inhibit hydrogenase. This didn't really change the oxygen consumption, but deuterium consumption was a lot lower. Hydrogen evolution was the same.

What This Means
The deuterium consumption is by hydrogenase, of course, and it seems like oxygen is a necessary electron acceptor for it to function (in the absence of something else). But it seems like the increase in hydrogen evolution is not because hydrogenase stopped working, but rather because nitrogenase started, as oxygen stopped interfering. This is something we've seen before.

Oxygen is important for many things: it provides energy by accepting electrons, powering the nitrogenase and allowing more hydrogen production. It accepts electrons from hydrogenase, enabling hydrogen oxidation. It inhibits nitrogenase, reducing hydrogen production. Pretty confusing.

Reference:

Lespinat, P.-A., Gerster, R. & Berlier, Y. Direct mass-spectrometric determination of the relationship between respiration, hydrogenase and nitrogenase activities in Azotobacter chroococcum. Biochimie 60, 339–341 (1978).

448 - Hydrogen-deuterium exchange reactions catalysed by nitrogenase

Previous reports suggested that nitrogenase could convert dideuterium (D₂) to hydrogen-deuterium (HD) by swapping one hydrogen from water with one deuterium atom. This only happened in the presence of nitrogen. This was tested in various organisms with D₂ or D₂O as a source of deuterium.

Azotobacter species didn't make HD unless ATP and electrons were present. They actually made less hydrogen and HD with nitrogen than with argon, contradicting earlier findings. 10% CO did inhibit HD formation but not hydrogen formation. Acetylene and methyl isocyanide inhibited HD completely. Cyanide partially or fully inhibited.

There was more exchange with D₂O than with D₂ for some reason, but this was inhibited more by nitrogen or cyanide.

This seems to have implications for nitrogenase's functions relating to hydrogen.

Reference:

Kelly, M. Hydrogen-deuterium exchange reactions catalysed by nitrogenase. Biochem J 109, 322–324 (1968).

365 - Mechanism of biological nitrogen fixation VII. Molecular H2 and the pN2 function of Azotobacter

They looked at the amount of nitrogen fixed with different concentrations in the atmosphere, in Azotobacter vinelandii and chroococcum cells. They were looking for K_N2: the concentration of nitrogen at which the amount of nitrogen fixed is half the maximum.

With inert gases (argon, helium) or with a partial vacuum, the concentration of nitrogen had to get down below 0.15 atm before the fixation decreased much. It gets to 50% around 0.01 atm. But when there was hydrogen, the rate decreased more quickly; the more, the faster. So hydrogen seems to inhibit the nitrogenase, but only at very high concentrations (over 20% of the atmosphere). This inhibition is competitive and reversible.

Reference:

Wyss, O., Lind, C. J., Wilson, J. B. & Wilson, P. W. Mechanism of biological nitrogen fixation VII. Molecular H₂ and the pN₂ function of Azotobacter. Biochem J 35, 845–854 (1941).

358 - Molecular H2 and the pN2 function of Azotobacter

There was a question at this time of whether hydrogen in the air could inhibit nitrogen fixation in Azotobacter vinelandii, and in what conditions this might happen. There were various complicating factors though. This study attempted to do a more controlled investigation using purified enzyme.

What They Saw

They observed that the higher the concentration of nitrogen in the atmosphere, the more nitrogen was fixed in a given time (thus the higher the specific activity was). From this they could calculate the K_N2, by plotting the inverse of the specific activity over the inverse of the concentration and taking the slope of the line. This is an indication of the enzyme's affinity for nitrogen, I think. This is higher than seen from intact cells (0.01).

Then they got to the hydrogen inhibition experiments. As they increased the amount of hydrogen, the nitrogen-fixing activity did seem to decrease, indicating competitive inhibition.

One issue that they didn't control for was the production of hydrogen by nitrogenase itself; this could've influenced the numbers. It could also influence the K_N2 numbers, come to think of it. It's also unclear whether the extracts had any hydrogenase activity, which could influence things in the opposite direction.

Reference:

Strandberg, G. W. & Wilson, P. W. Molecular H₂ and the pN₂ function of Azotobacter. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 58, 1404–1409 (1967).

190 - Characterization of a Tungsten-Substituted Nitrogenase Isolated from Rhodobacter capsulatus

The three normal nitrogenases have molybdenum and iron, vanadium and iron, or just iron in their central cofactors. This study looked at whether it's possible to have a version that only has tungsten in it though, and if it has any activity, in Rhodobacter capsulatus.

What They Saw
This strain only has Mo and Fe nitrogenases, and they knocked out the latter. So when they removed all Mo from the medium and added W, the only thing it would produce would be Mo nitrogenase with W in it, theoretically.

Adding tungsten almost completely stopped acetylene reduction activity in the wild-type, unless 10x more Mo was added. So tungsten doesn't allow that kind of activity.

Mo also induces production of the Mo nitrogenase (which makes sense), but W also seems to have that effect, though not to the same extent.

Then they purified nitrogenase that had been produced when only W was present (in significant amounts) in the mutant. Purification was the same with this as with Mo in the wild-type, though of course the yield was lower. But the protein had 1 atom of W and none of Mo pretty much, as hoped. Still, it seems like there's only one FeW cofactor, not two, but at least there aren't any FeMos.

This protein still wasn't very active in acetylene reduction, and it didn't seem to be able to fix nitrogen at all. What it could do, though, was produce hydrogen when under an argon atmosphere, so electron flux wasn't totally abolished. And this activity wasn't inhibited by acetylene, unlike in the Mo version. Still, the amount of hydrogen it produced was only 1/4th the amount the normal enzyme could produce in the same conditions.

Finally they wanted to see if rhenium (Re) could take the place of Mo as a FeReco and be functional, since Re is not far from Mo and W (one more proton than W), so they tried growing cells with perrhenate (KReO₄), but it didn't seem to help at all. The cells didn't even appear to be able to assimilate it, so it wasn't possible to test whether the nitrogenase could use it.

What This Means
It's difficult to do this kind of study, because Mo and other metals are almost impossible to eliminate completely from the medium. But they seem to have succeeded as much as possible, and still the nitrogenase only had one FeW cofactor rather than two. But surprisingly it showed some proton reduction activity, though not an exceptional amount. It seems like W in the protein is much more difficult to reduce, an essential step in the catalysis. Maybe the amount of reduction that's possible is only enough for some proton reduction activity.

One interesting speculation is based on an observation that Methanococcus thermolithotrophicus can fix nitrogen in the presence of tungstate at 60ºC, a pretty high temperature, so they wonder whether the nitrogenase with FeWco in R. capsulatus might also have more activity at higher temperature, but they didn't actually test this. Maybe another study.

Reference:

Siemann, S., Schneider, K., Oley, M. & Müller, A. Characterization of a Tungsten-Substituted Nitrogenase Isolated from Rhodobacter capsulatus. Biochemistry 42, 3846–3857 (2003).

162 - Hydrogen evolution: A major factor affecting the efficiency of nitrogen fixation in nodulated symbionts

In the nitrogen fixation process, hydrogen gas is produced. This consumes extra ATP, about 4 per molecule of hydrogen (for reference, a molecule of glucose can be fully oxidized to produce about 30 ATP). This paper looks at this process in legume nodules and its effects on yield.

What They Saw
They got nodules from different kinds of plants, infected with either wild bacteria or commercial strains, and measured hydrogen production in air or argon, and acetylene reduction.

In an in vitro nitrogenase system, activity depended on the presence of ATP, reducing equivalents, and the enzyme. The ratio of hydrogen in argon to hydrogen in air here was about 3.

There was a pretty wide variety of values they saw, but most seemed to cluster around a measure of 50% of the hydrogen produced in argon was produced in air; so the presence of nitrogen reduced the hydrogen production by half. It's not clear how uptake hydrogenases might have affected these numbers though. They got similar results with whole plants. This means that each nitrogen gets 6 electrons to become 2 ammonia, and another 6 electrons go to hydrogen; that seems like a lot.

They also noticed that adding enough acetylene stopped the hydrogen production, so it seemed like hydrogen is not a necessary byproduct of that reaction.

What This Means
Correlation between amounts of acetylene reduced and nitrogen fixed are not necessarily accurate, because of the hydrogen produced as a byproduct. But the hydrogen production seems to be a big waste of efficiency; reducing this could help increase yield, maybe by choosing good nodulating bacteria. They wonder whether the hydrogen could be captured from plants somehow and used for energy.

Reference:

Schubert, K. R. & Evans, H. J. Hydrogen evolution: A major factor affecting the efficiency of nitrogen fixation in nodulated symbionts. Proc Natl Acad Sci 73, 1207–1211 (1976).

054 - Nitrogen fixation by Azotobacter vinelandii in tungsten-containing medium

This study investigates how the alternative (vanadium) nitrogenase interacts with tungsten.

What They Saw
They grew Azotobacter vinelandii UW (aka CA) or a tungsten-tolerant mutant with tungsten and Mo or V, then extracted the nitrogenase.

This mutant was derived by growing UW with W and ammonium over several passages to try to remove all the Mo the cells might be storing, and then plating the cells on plates without ammonium, so they would have to fix nitrogen in the presence of W and absence of Mo to survive. Stuff that grew was tungsten-tolerant: strain LM2.

Then to get nitrogenase, they grew LM2 with tungsten and UW with tungsten and ammonium (not sure why it would produce nitrogenase in that condition, though I guess it might when it ran out of fixed nitrogen).

Both UW and LM2 could grow on medium with Mo, though LM2 was sometimes slower. With W, LM2 grew faster or slower depending on amount of W, while UW did not grow.

They used something called rocket immunoelectrophoresis to measure how much MoFe nitrogenase components each strain produced with W. Each produced about the same amount of dinitrogenase reductase in all conditions, but UW with 1mM W produced about 56% the amount of dinitrogenase as it produced with Mo, and LM2 with 10mM W produced about 7% of the amount that UW produced with Mo. I wonder how accurate this technique is. But they also note that the specific acetylene reduction activity of crude extracts was about 6-8% for each strain grown in W compared to UW in Mo. Does this include alternative nitrogenase activity? They say no. But overall, it seems that both strains produce less Mo nitrogenase with W, LM2 less than UW, but LM2's is relatively more active.

I think what happened next was that they couldn't isolate nitrogenase well from LM2, so they studied it from UW. They had two kinds: typical Mo nitrogenase, and Mo/W nitrogenase that had one FeW-cofactor and one FeMo-cofactor. This latter showed less activity in every way: hydrogen under argon, nitrogen, or acetylene atmospheres, nitrogen reduction, and acetylene reduction. This fits with at least one previous study (045). There is still activity though, even with nitrogen reduction, so it's not clear why the cells can't grow in W; maybe its interaction with other important proteins?

What This Means
It's possible that instead of each molecule of Mo/W protein containing one W and one Mo, half the protein could have all Mo and the other half all W; this would give the same results, but seems a less likely explanation. Of course, both possibilities are pretty weird and confusing.

According to some chemistry stuff they did, it seems like the enzyme can't reduce FeW-cofactors, which could reduce the possible electron flux by half, I think. There are a lot of mysteries here.

Reference:

Hales, B. J. & Case, E. E. Nitrogen fixation by Azotobacter vinelandii in tungsten-containing medium. J. Biol. Chem. 262, 16205–16211 (1987).