the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Determining large hyperfine interactions of a model flavoprotein in the semiquinone state by pulse-EPR techniques
Abstract. Flavoproteins are a versatile class of proteins involved in numerous biological processes, including redox reactions, electron transfer, and signal transduction, often relying on their ability to stabilize different oxidation states of their flavin cofactor. A critical feature of flavin cofactors is their capacity to achieve, within particular protein environments, a semiquinone state that plays a pivotal role in mediating single-electron transfer events and is key to understanding flavoprotein reactivity.
Hyperfine interactions between the unpaired electron in the semiquinone state and magnetic nuclei in the isoalloxazine ring provide valuable insights into the electronic structure of this intermediate and its mechanistic roles. This study investigates the hyperfine interactions of isotopically labeled flavodoxin (Fld) with 13C and 15N at specific positions of the flavin mononucleotide (FMN) ring using advanced electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) techniques. The combination of Continuous wave (CW) EPR at X-band and ELDOR-detected NMR and HYSCORE at Q-band revealed a strong and anisotropic hyperfine interaction with the nucleus 13C at 4a and yielded principal tensor values of 40, -13.5 and -9 MHz, the first of which is associated to the axis perpendicular to the flavin plane. On the other hand, as predicted, the hyperfine interaction with the 13C nucleus at position 2 was minimal. Additionally, HYSCORE experiments on 15N-FMN labeled Fld provided precisely axial hyperfine parameters, (74, 5.6, 5.6) MHz for 15N(5) and (38, 3.2, 3.2) MHz for 15N(10). These were used to refine quadrupole tensor values for 14N nuclei via isotope-dependent scaling. These results showcase the potential of combining CW-EPR, ELDOR-detected NMR, and HYSCORE with isotopic labelling to probe electronic and nuclear interactions in flavoproteins. The new data complete and refine the existing experimental map for the electronic structure of the flavin cofactor and expose systematic divergences between the calculated and experimental values of hyperfine couplings of the atoms most contributing to the SOMO. This could indicate a slight but significant shift of the unpaired electron density from position 4a towards the central nitrogens of the pyrazine ring as compared to the calculations. These results highlight the importance of integrating computational and experimental approaches to refine our understanding of flavin cofactor reactivity.
- Preprint
(1690 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(549 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (extended)
-
RC1: 'Comment on mr-2024-24', Anonymous Referee #1, 30 Jan 2025
reply
Summary:
The manuscript presents an experimental study on hyperfine couplings in flavin mononucleotide (FMN) within isotopically labeled flavodoxin using a combination of X-band CW EPR, Q-band HYSCORE, and EDNMR. The detection of hyperfine interactions for C4a and two nitrogen nuclei (N5 and N10) expands the experimental database of FMN hyperfine couplings and provides an interesting comparison to previously calculated values, particularly for C4a. These results are of relevance to the magnetic resonance (MR) community, making this manuscript a valuable contribution.
However, the manuscript requires revisions before it can be accepted for publication. The, experimental procedures and data analysis need improvement to enhance clarity and consistency. Additionally, a more structured discussion would strengthen the manuscript’s argumentation. Below are specific and technical comments that should be addressed.
Experimental parameters:
- different experimental temperatures were used for the experiments according to the experimental section (50 K and 90 K, line 161 and 172) yet Fig. 5 (line 362) describes 80 K experiments.
- HYSCORE was performed successfully with multiple tau values to determine the N coupling parameters (Figs. 5 and 6) yet only a single tau value was used for the C coupling detection. That is hard to understand, especially because the features the authors use to argue in Fig.4 c are clearly affected by tau blindspots.
- What was the power of the EDNMR HTA pulse, and why were the parameters chosen?
- The experimental section discusses FID-detected EPR spectra at Q band, presumably to set up the EDNMR experiments. Fig 3 discusses Echo detected spectra (line 284). What was done?
Orientation Selection and Simulations:
- The origin of the orientation selection calculations in the figures is not described and, therefore, is hard to comprehend. Was a simulation of the EPR spectrum the basis for this? If so, why are they not shown?
- Comments about the orientation selection in X band spectra do not necessarily hold true at Q band and should, therefore, not be made. (e.g. Fig 3)
- The “complete nuclear system” (line 196) is not described.
- Was orientation-selection considered in the HYSCORE simulations using saffron ? (Figure S1)
Experimental Hyperfine Spectra:
- Highlight the features in EDNMR and HYSCORE, that are described in the text, in the figures.
Error of measurement parameters:
- Line 245: The 0.3 mT error of /Delta{B}_out can be understood but the resulting error of 0.4 mT for the difference is unclear. The sum of the two errors should then be 0.6 mT.
- The errors of the experimental hyperfine values are not explained at all, and the quadrupole coupling values are given without error. Do the errors result from performing multiple simulations? How were they judged?
Discussion
- the discussion should be more concise, particularly regarding the agreement and discrepancies between experimental and calculated hyperfine parameters. This description extends over a full page and lacks a structured progression of points.
Figure 1:
- The figure should appear way earlier to make the introduction argument more understandable.
- Illustrating the spin density would improve the paper’s argumentation and the author’s choice of investigated nuclei.
- Highlight the investigated nuclei in the structure
- The orientation of the g-Tensor should be shown in the illustration.
- Something in the rendering of the chemical structure has gone wrong, causing the misalignment of atoms and chemical bonds.
Spin Hamiltonian: Clarify the confusing indexing of SH parameters
- Line 202: “n different nuclear spins (I_i)” – i should be used to avoid confusion with mu_n
- Equation 1 then uses l and i as subscript. Only one is necessary to differentiate the nuclei.
- g_n is also nucleus specific and should, therefore have the subscript i
- the subscripts x,y,z ; 1,2,3 and parallel, perpendicular are used very interchangeably throughout the text, which causes considerable confusion
Further comments:
- The authors make no comment about the data and code availability.
- Line 36-40: Make it clear which reference belongs to which given example. Consider splitting the sentence to make it more readable.
- Line 46: “the isoalloxazine ring”
- Line 46-48: What is meant by this sentence, it is very confusing
- Line 49-40: “ the ability to exchange …”
- Line 69: How can protons be within the ring?
- Line 73-75: Explain the quadrupole coupling aspect here, “is also helpful” is not an explanation
- Line 75: I(15N)=1/2
- Line 75: Which nitrogen nuclei? How do these studies relate to this new work?
- Line 99: through?
- Line 151: \mu M, not mM
- Line 206 and 386: Authors cite Fuchs et al. 2002, the paper does not appear in the reference list.
- Line 212: “use to be sensibly large” – what is meant by this?
- Line 230-231: Calling the broad shoulders in the CW EPR spectra hyperfine splittings is a bit much.
- Line 260-264: Rephrase the description of the EDNMR experiment. The HTA pulse is frequency-swept, not the detection sequence.
- Line 270 and 280: Those are clearly not CW spectra but the echo detected spectra at Q band.
- Figure 3. Subtraction, not Substraction
- Line 273: “recorded at the center of the EPR spectrum”
- Line 289: 2x \nu_L(13C) = 26 MHz, not 13. , “strong coupling regime”, In the strong coupling regime, signals in EDNMR are centered at A/2 and split by 2 \nu_L. The fact that the spectrum is asymmetric with regard to the central blindspot is also an important factor. The conclusion drawn here is right but the argument must be made better and with the correct values.
- Line 320: the spectrum of 2C is in panel a) on the left, not the right.
- Line 323 – 325: “ribbon shaped” and “streamer” are arbitrary words. Use indicators in the figure.
- Line 338: The “proper simulations” of the intensities do not agree with the intensities detected experimentally. They are also not discussed further. What is the point then?
- Line 432: ”Q band EDNMR and HYSCORE“
- Line 440: Cryptochromes were not mentioned in the introduction of this paper. “… values should be …”
- Line 444: “or if they vary”
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/mr-2024-24-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on mr-2024-24', Anonymous Referee #2, 15 Feb 2025
reply
Thanks to a combination of advanced EPR techniques, isotope labelling and a multifrequency approach the authors perform a detailed characterisation of the electron spin delocalisation over the isoalloxazine ring of a flavin semiquinone radical, with a special focus on positions characterised by the highest spin density, for which only limited data is currently available.
The Introduction paragraph provides the required background to understand the specific research question addressed by this work. Experimental data and the related analysis are presented in a clear way; in the Discussions section, these are interpreted in light of previous experimental and computational studies on similar systems.
Specific comments as well as technical corrections are highlighted in the attached document.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
127 | 14 | 5 | 146 | 16 | 3 | 2 |
- HTML: 127
- PDF: 14
- XML: 5
- Total: 146
- Supplement: 16
- BibTeX: 3
- EndNote: 2
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1