Structural Chemistry

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 139–151 | Cite as

The solution conformation of cyclic β-casomorphin-5 analogues

  • E. Kleinpeter
  • D. Ströhl
  • S. Peinze
  • W. Brandt
  • R. Schmidt
  • K. Neubert
Article
  • 27 Downloads

Abstract

The solution conformation of two cyclicβ-casomorphin-5 analogues H-Tyr-c(-d-Orn-Phe-Pro-Gly-)1 and H-Tyr-c(-Orn-Phe-Pro-Gly-)2 in DMSO-d6 was studied by NMR spectroscopy and accompanying force field calculations. By especially employing1H,13C, and15N chemical shifts, respectively, the temperature coefficient of the amide proton chemical shifts,3JNH,CαH andJCαH.CβH coupling constants, respectively, and nuclear Overhauser effects in the rotating frame (ROEs), in the case of1, only one preferred conformer could be identified. In the case of2, two or even more preferred conformers were found, readily interconverting on the NMR time scale. Empirical force field calculations using the SYBYL 6.0 software (TRIPOS) corroborate the experimental NMR results obtained. The conformational behavior of the compounds studied is discussed with respect to the receptor specificity of theβ-casomorphins studied.

Key words

Cyclicβ-casomorphins conformational analysis NMR spectroscopy cyclic pentapeptides force field calculations 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Brantl, V.; Teschemacher, H.; Henschen, A.; Lottspeich, F.Hoppe-Seyler's Z. Physiolog. Chem. 1979,360, 1211.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Henschen, A.; Lotterspecih, F.; Brantl, V.; Teschemacher, H.Hoppe-Seyler's Z. Physiolog. Chem. 1979,360, 1217.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brantl, V.; Pfeiffer, A.; Herz, A.; Henschen, A.; Lottspeich, F.Peptides 1992,3, 793.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Matthies, H.; Stark, H.; Hartrodt, B.; Rütrich, H.-L.; Spieler, H.-T.; Barth, A.; Neubert, K.Peptides 1994,5, 463.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liebmann, C.; Schnittler, M.; Neubert, K.; Hartrodt, B.; Born, I.; Barth, A.Pharmazie 1991,46, 345.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schmidt, R.; Neubert, K.; Barth, A.; Liebmann, C.; Schnittler, M.; Chung, N. N.; Schiller, P. W.Peptides 1991,2, 1779.Google Scholar
  7. 7. (a)
    Sanders, J. K. M.; Hunter, B. K.Modern NMR Spectroscopy—A Guide for Chemists; Oxford University Press: Oxford 1987.Google Scholar
  8. 7. (b)
    Wüthrich, K.NMR in Biological Research: Peptides and Proteins:; North-Holland: Amsterdam, 1976; p. 171.Google Scholar
  9. 8.
    Siemion, I. Z.; Wieland, T.; Pook, K. H.Angew. Chem. 1975,87, 712.Google Scholar
  10. 9.
    Giessner-Pettre, C.; Chung, M. T.; Marrand, M.Eur. J. Biochem. 1987,163, 79.Google Scholar
  11. 10.
    Kessler, H.Angew. Chem. 1982,94, 509;Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1982,21, 512.Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    von Philipsborn W.; Miller, R.,Angew. Chem. 1986,98, 381.Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    Oschkinat, H.Dissertation, Universität Frankfurt a. M. 1986.Google Scholar
  14. 13.
    Khaled, M. A.; Sugano, H.; Urry, D. W.J. Chem. Soc., Perkin 2 1979, 206.Google Scholar
  15. 14.
    Tripos Associates, Inc. 1699 S. Hanley Road, Suite 303, St. Louis, MO, 63144.Google Scholar
  16. 15.
    Clark, M.; Cramer III, R. D., Van Opdenbosch, N.J. Comput. Chem. 1989,10, 982.Google Scholar
  17. 16.
    Gasteiger, J., Marseli, M.Tetrahedron 1980, 3219.Google Scholar
  18. 17.
    Brandt, W.; Wahab. M.; Schinke, H.; Thondorf, I.; Barth.J. Mol. Graphics 1991, 122.Google Scholar
  19. 18.
    Schmidt, R.; Neubert, K.; Barth, A.; Liebmann, C.; Schnittler, M.; Chung, N. N.; Schiller, P. W.Peptides 1991,2, 1175.Google Scholar
  20. 19.
    Schmidt, R.; Vogel, D.; Mrestani-Klaus, C.; Brandt, W.; Neubert, K.; Chung, N. N.; Lemieux, C.; Schiller, P. W.;J. Med. Chem. 1994,37, 1136.Google Scholar
  21. 20.
    Brandt, W.; Barth, A.; Höltje, H. D.Drug Design Discovery 1993,10, 257.Google Scholar
  22. 21.
    Brandt, W.; Mrestani-Klaus, C.; Schinke, H.; Neubert, K.; Barth, A.; Schmidt, R.; Schiller, P. W.; Höltje, H.-D.Quant. Structure Activity Relat. 1995,14, 417.Google Scholar
  23. 22.
    Penkler, I. J.; van Rooyen, P. H.; Wessels, P. L.Int. J. Peptide Protein Res. 1993,41, 261.Google Scholar
  24. 23.
    Schmidt, R.; Neubert, K.Int. J. Peptide Protein Res. 1991,37, 502.Google Scholar
  25. 24.
    Bax, A.; Summers, M. F.J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1986,108, 2093.Google Scholar
  26. 25.
    Live, D.; Armitage, I. M.; Dalgamo, D. C.; Cowburn, D.J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1985,107, 1775.Google Scholar
  27. 26.
    Garbow, J. R.; Weitekamp, D. P.; Pines, A.Chem. Phys. Lett. 1982,93, 504.Google Scholar
  28. 27.
    Neuhaus, D.; Williamson, M. P.The Nuclear Overhauser Effect in Structural and Conformational Analysis, Verlag Chemie: New York, 1989.Google Scholar
  29. 28.
    Keeler, J.Chem. Soc. Rev. 1990,19, 381.Google Scholar
  30. 29.
    Kessler, H.; Gehrke, M.; Griesinger, C.Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1988,27, 490.Google Scholar
  31. 30.
    Davies, D. G.; Bax, A.J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1985,107, 2821.Google Scholar
  32. 31.
    States, D. J.; Haberkom, R. A.; Ruben, D. J.J. Magn. Reson. 1982,48, 286.Google Scholar
  33. 32.
    Castellano, S.; Bothner-By, A. A.J. Chem. Phys. 1964,41, 3863.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Kleinpeter
    • 1
  • D. Ströhl
    • 2
  • S. Peinze
    • 2
  • W. Brandt
    • 2
  • R. Schmidt
    • 2
  • K. Neubert
    • 2
  1. 1.Institut für Organische Chemie und StrukturanalytikUniversität PotsdamPotsdamGermany
  2. 2.Fachbereich Biochemie/BiotechnologieMartin-Luther-Universität Halle-WittenbergHalleGermany

Personalised recommendations