9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Water Stress, Osmolytes and Proteins

      American Zoologist
      Oxford University Press (OUP)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references57

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Living with water stress: evolution of osmolyte systems

          Striking convergent evolution is found in the properties of the organic osmotic solute (osmolyte) systems observed in bacteria, plants, and animals. Polyhydric alcohols, free amino acids and their derivatives, and combinations of urea and methylamines are the three types of osmolyte systems found in all water-stressed organisms except the halobacteria. The selective advantages of the organic osmolyte systems are, first, a compatibility with macromolecular structure and function at high or variable (or both) osmolyte concentrations, and, second, greatly reduced needs for modifying proteins to function in concentrated intracellular solutions. Osmolyte compatibility is proposed to result from the absence of osmolyte interactions with substrates and cofactors, and the nonperturbing or favorable effects of osmolytes on macromolecular-solvent interactions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Quaternary Ammonium and Tertiary Sulfonium Compounds in Higher Plants

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Hofmeister effect and the behaviour of water at interfaces.

              Starting from known properties of non-specific salt effects on the surface tension at an air-water interface, we propose the first general, detailed qualitative molecular mechanism for the origins of ion-specific (Hofmeister) effects on the surface potential difference at an air-water interface; this mechanism suggests a simple model for the behaviour of water at all interfaces (including water-solute interfaces), regardless of whether the non-aqueous component is neutral or charged, polar or non-polar. Specifically, water near an isolated interface is conceptually divided into three layers, each layer being I water-molecule thick. We propose that the solute determines the behaviour of the adjacent first interfacial water layer (I1); that the bulk solution determines the behaviour of the third interfacial water layer (I3), and that both I1 and I3 compete for hydrogen-bonding interactions with the intervening water layer (I2), which can be thought of as a transition layer. The model requires that a polar kosmotrope (polar water-structure maker) interact with I1 more strongly than would bulk water in its place; that a chaotrope (water-structure breaker) interact with I1 somewhat less strongly than would bulk water in its place; and that a non-polar kosmotrope (non-polar water-structure maker) interact with I1 much less strongly than would bulk water in its place. We introduce two simple new postulates to describe the behaviour of I1 water molecules in aqueous solution. The first, the 'relative competition' postulate, states that an I1 water molecule, in maximizing its free energy (--delta G), will favour those of its highly directional polar (hydrogen-bonding) interactions with its immediate neighbours for which the maximum pairwise enthalpy of interaction (--delta H) is greatest; that is, it will favour the strongest interactions. We describe such behaviour as 'compliant', since an I1 water molecule will continually adjust its position to maximize these strong interactions. Its behaviour towards its remaining immediate neighbours, with whom it interacts relatively weakly (but still favourably), we describe as 'recalcitrant', since it will be unable to adjust its position to maximize simultaneously these interactions.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                American Zoologist
                Am Zool
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                0003-1569
                August 01 2001
                August 2001
                August 01 2001
                August 2001
                : 41
                : 4
                : 699-709
                Article
                10.1093/icb/41.4.699
                4f622954-1075-43c6-a12e-1ea54e9a7f17
                © 2001
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article