Site specific interaction of the polyphenol EGCG with the SEVI amyloid precursor peptide PAP(248-286).

Abstract

Recently, a 39 amino acid peptide fragment from prostatic acid phosphatase has been isolated from seminal fluid that can enhance infectivity of the HIV virus by up to 4-5 orders of magnitude. PAP(248-286) is effective in enhancing HIV infectivity only when it is aggregated into amyloid fibers termed SEVI. The polyphenol EGCG (epigallocatechin-3-gallate) has been shown to disrupt both SEVI formation and HIV promotion by SEVI, but the mechanism by which it accomplishes this task is unknown. Here, we show that EGCG interacts specifically with the side chains of monomeric PAP(248-286) in two regions (K251-R257 and N269-I277) of primarily charged residues, particularly lysine. The specificity of interaction to these two sites is contrary to previous studies on the interaction of EGCG with other amyloidogenic proteins, which showed the nonspecific interaction of EGCG with exposed backbone sites of unfolded amyloidogenic proteins. This interaction is specific to EGCG as the related gallocatechin (GC) molecule, which shows greatly decreased antiamyloid activity, exhibits minimal interaction with monomeric PAP(248-286). The EGCG binding was shown to occur in two steps, with the initial formation of a weakly bound complex followed by a pH dependent formation of a tightly bound complex. Experiments in which the lysine residues of PAP(248-286) have been chemically modified suggest the tightly bound complex is created by Schiff-base formation with lysine residues. The results of this study could aid in the development of small molecule inhibitors of SEVI and other amyloid proteins.

Full text

Page 1

Site Specific Interaction of the Polyphenol EGCG with the SEVI
Amyloid Precursor Peptide PAP(248–286)
Nataliya Popovych1,2, Jeffrey R. Brender1, Ronald Soong1,2, Subramanian
Vivekanandan1,2, Kevin Hartman1, Venkatesha Basrur3, Peter M. Macdonald4, and
Ayyalusamy Ramamoorthy1,2,*
1Department of Chemistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1055, USA.
2Department of Biophysics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1055, USA.
3Proteomics Resource Facility, Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, USA.
4Department of Chemical & Physical Sciences, University of Toronto at Mississauga,
Mississauga, Canada.
Abstract
Recently, a 39 amino acid peptide fragment from prostatic acid phosphatase has been isolated
from seminal fluid that can enhance infectivity of the HIV virus by up to four to five orders of
magnitude. PAP(248–286) is effective in enhancing HIV infectivity only when it is aggregated
into amyloid fibers termed SEVI. The polyphenol EGCG (epigallocatechin-3-gallate) has been
shown to disrupt both SEVI formation and HIV promotion by SEVI, but the mechanism by which
it accomplishes this task is unknown. Here we show that EGCG interacts specifically with the
side-chains of monomeric PAP(248–286) in two regions (K251-R257 and N269-I277) of
primarily charged residues, particularly lysine. The specificity of interaction to these two sites is
contrary to previous studies on the interaction of EGCG with other amyloidogenic proteins, which
showed the nonspecific interaction of EGCG with exposed backbone sites of unfolded
amyloidogenic proteins. This interaction is specific to EGCG as the related gallocatechin (GC)
molecule, which shows greatly decreased anti-amyloid activity, exhibits minimal interaction with
monomeric PAP(248–286). The EGCG binding was shown to occur in two steps, with the initial
formation of a weakly bound complex followed by a pH dependent formation of a tightly bound
complex. Experiments in which the lysine residues of PAP(248–286) have been chemically
modified suggest the tightly bound complex is created by Schiff-base formation with lysine
residues. The results of this study could aid in the development of small molecule inhibitors of
SEVI and other amyloid proteins.
Keywords
Catechol; NMR; Schiff-base; ESI-MS; lysine
*Corresponding Author: Ayyalusamy Ramamoorthy, Phone: 734-647-6572, Fax: 734-764-3323. ramamoor@umich.edu.
Supporting Information Available
Complete reference 2, kinetics of amyloid formation of PAP248–286 at pH 6 and 7.3 by ThT fluorescence (Fig. S1), TEM images of
PAP248–286 incubated with GC (Fig. S2), ESI-MS of PAP248–286 at pH 6 and 7.3 with EGCG (Fig. S3) and ESI-MS of lysine-
blocked PAP248–286 (Fig. S4). This information is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org
NIH Public Access
Author Manuscript
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
Published in final edited form as:
J Phys Chem B. 2012 March 22; 116(11): 3650–3658. doi:10.1021/jp2121577.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 2

INTRODUCTION
The HIV virus responsible for AIDS is the source of a global pandemic with over 33 million
people worldwide currently infected with the virus. The scope of AIDS pandemic sparks the
question: why is HIV so prevalent in the population and transmitted so readily in vivo, while
the virus itself has a very poor infection rate in vitro? One possibility is the presence of in
vivo cofactors that facilitate entry of the virus, causing infection to occur at a higher rate.1,2
Recently, a cofactor has been found in human seminal fluid that could prove to be a key
component in HIV transmission.3 A peptide fragment of prostatic acid phosphatase
(PAP248–286, sequence GIHKQKEKSRLQGGVLVNEILNHMKRATQIPSYKKLIMY) was
discovered to increase the infection rate of HIV3–7 and other enveloped viruses7,8 by several
orders of magnitude when aggregated into amyloid fibrils termed SEVI.
The degree to which PAP248–286 promotes HIV infection is dependent on the conformation
and aggregation state of the peptide, with the monomeric peptide being ineffective at
promoting HIV infection.3,9 Since PAP248–286 is only effective in enhancing HIV infection
in the aggregated SEVI form, molecules that suppress fibrillization of PAP248–286 into the
active amyloid form can decrease the effective infectiousness of the HIV virus.10,11 Given
the potentially high impact SEVI amyloid formation may have on the sexual transmission of
HIV, a low cost SEVI inhibitor incorporated into an antiretroviral microbicide may have a
substantial effect on the HIV transmission rates.6,11,12
A polyphenolic compound found in green tea (epigallocatechin-3-gallate or EGCG) inhibits
the formation of SEVI fibers, disaggregates existing SEVI fibers, and blocks the SEVI
mediated attachment of HIV virion to target cells and SEVI promotion of HIV infectivity.12
Polyphenolic compounds are among the most effective anti-aggregative agents discovered to
date, effectively inhibiting aggregation of a broad-spectrum of amyloidogenic proteins.13
The exact mechanism by which polyphenols disrupt amyloid formation is unclear, but they
appear to act at multiple points along the aggregation pathway to inhibit the elongation of
existing fibers and to disrupt the formation of nuclei for further amyloid formation.14–17
EGCG has been proposed to bind to backbone sites exposed in the disordered conformation
of the monomeric species of many amyloid proteins, redirecting the aggregation pathway to
amorphous aggregates that are non-toxic and do not share many of the common features of
amyloid-based structures.14,16 The general mechanism by which polyphenolic compounds
block amyloid formation is of considerable importance, as amyloid formation is a common
feature of many degenerative diseases including Alzheimer’s, type II diabetes, Parkinson’s,
Creutzfield-Jacob’s, Huntington’s and others.18 Small molecules that disrupt aggregated
forms of these proteins could have considerable clinical application, making a determination
of the mechanism by which polyphenols disrupt aggregated conformations essential for
structure-activity assays. EGCG itself has been shown to suppress both amyloid formation
and associated toxicity for many of these proteins.14,16,19–21
To determine the mechanism by which EGCG disrupts SEVI amyloid formation from its
precursor PAP248–286, we analyzed binding of EGCG and the related catechin GC (chemical
structures shown in Fig. 1) to monomeric and small oligomeric forms of PAP248–286 by
NMR and other biophysical methods. We show that, contrary to the proposed general
mechanism,14 EGCG interacts specifically with the side-chains of PAP248–286. Binding
occurs by a two-step mechanism in which a weakly bound complex is initially formed from
monomeric PAP248–286 that is transformed in a pH dependent manner into a covalently
cross-linked complex over time following the oxidation of the Met residue. The mechanism
proposed in this study suggests the binding of polyphenols to amyloidogenic proteins is
more complex than previously proposed and multiple interactions must be considered.
Popovych et al.Page 2
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 3

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sample preparation
PAP248–286 obtained from Biomatik (Toronto, Ontario) was first disaggregated using a TFA
(trifluoroacetic acid)/HFIP (hexafluoroisopropanol) mixture and lyophilized as described in
ref. 33 for all experiments. EGCG ((−)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate) and GC ((−)-
gallocatechin) were purchased from Sigma. Stock solutions of EGCG and GC (50 mM and
30 mM respectively) were prepared in water and used immediately.
Thioflavin T fluorescence
The kinetics of PAP248–286 amyloid formation in the absence of EGCG or GC was measured
by monitoring the increase in fluorescence intensity upon binding of the amyloid fiber to the
amyloid specific dye Thioflavin T (ThT). Before the start of the experiment, PAP248–286
was solubilized in buffers containing 50 mM KPi and 25 µM ThT at two different pH values
(pH 7.3 and 6.0) to achieve a final peptide concentration of 439 µM (2 mg/mL). All buffers
were filtered and degassed before usage. Experiments were performed in sealed Corning 96
well clear bottom half area, nonbinding surface plates. Time traces were recorded with
Biotek Synergy 2 plate reader using a 440 nm excitation filter and a 485 nm emission filter
at a constant temperature of 37 °C with shaking.
Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM)
For inhibition experiments using monomeric PAP248–286 solutions at pH 6.0 or 7.3 as a
starting point, PAP248–286 and EGCG or GC were coincubated for 7 days at 37 °C with
linear agitation of the sample at 1500 rpm, using a PAP248–286 concentration of 439 µM and
a 1:5 molar ratio of EGCG or GC. After incubation, 10 µL aliquots were loaded onto
Formvar-coated copper grids (Ernest F. Fullam, Inc., Latham, NY) for 2 min., washed twice
with 10 µL of deionized water, and then negatively stained for 90 s with 2% uranyl acetate.
Samples were imaged with Philips CM10 Transmission Electron Microscope at 8400×,
11000×, and 15000× magnification.
For disaggregation experiments, 439 µM PAP248–286 was incubated alone for 4 days at 37
°C at pH 6 or 7.3 as described above. After 4 days (pH 7.3) or 8 days (pH 6.1), EGCG or
GC was added to the sample in a 1:5 molar ratio and coincubated with the resulting SEVI
amyloid fibers for 4 hours. The resulting solution was then stained and imaged as described
above. A comparison to control grids in the absence of EGCG or GC confirmed the presence
of amyloid fibers.
NMR spectroscopy
NMR samples were prepared by dissolving 0.5 mg of lyophilized peptide in 50 mM
phosphate buffer at either pH 6.0 or 7.3 containing 10% D2O. The peptide concentration was
determined from the absorbance at 276 nm and was in the range of 0.3–0.4 mM for each
sample.
NMR spectra were recorded at 42 °C on a 900 MHz Bruker Avance NMR spectrometer
equipped with a triple-resonance z-gradient cryogenic probe optimized for 1H-detection. All
spectra were processed using TopSpin 2.1 software (Bruker) and analyzed using
SPARKY.22 Binding experiments were performed by titration of the sample from a
concentrated EGCG or GC stock solution to a 1:1 molar ratio. Backbone and side-chain
assignments were performed using 2D 1H−1H TOCSY (total correlation spectroscopy) and
2D 1H−1H NOESY (nuclear Overhauser enhancement spectroscopy) recorded at two
different mixing times 70 or 80 and 300 ms, respectively. Complex data points were
acquired for quadrature detection in both frequency dimensions in 2D experiments and all
Popovych et al.Page 3
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 4

the spectra were zero-filled in both dimensions to yield matrices of 2048 × 2048 points.
Resonance assignments have been deposited in the Biological Magnetic Resonance Bank
(BMRB) database (accession number is 18287).
Proton diffusion NMR measurements were carried out at 499.78 MHz using the stimulated
echo (STE) pulsed field gradient (PFG) pulse sequence with squared gradient pulses of
constant duration (5 ms) and a variable gradient amplitude along the longitudinal axis.23 To
assay possible time-dependant aggregation behavior, the PFG-NMR experiment was
repeated every 2 hours on each sample for a total of 12 hours. Other parameters used in
NMR experiments were as follows: a 90° pulse width of 23 µs, a spin-echo delay of 10 ms, a
stimulated-echo delay of 150 ms, a recycle delay of 5 s, a spectral width of 10 kHz and 4048
data points. A saturation pulse centered at the water 1H resonance frequency was used for
solvent suppression. Radio frequency pulses were phase cycled to remove unwanted echoes.
All spectra were processed with a 5 Hz exponential line broadening prior to Fourier
transformation and were referenced relative to tetramethylsilane (TMS at 0 ppm). The
gradient strength was calibrated (G = 3.28 T m−1) from the known diffusion coefficient of
HDO in D2O at 25 °C (D0 = 1.9 × 10 −9 m2 s−1).24 The diffusion coefficients were
determined from a the slope of a log plot of the intensity as a function of gradient strength
using the Stejskal-Tanner equation.25 The hydrodynamic radius was then calculated from
the diffusion coefficient using the Einstein-Stokes relation.
SDS-PAGE and NBT (nitroblue tetrazolium) staining
PAP248–286 peptide alone and complexes of PAP248–286 with EGCG and GC in a 1:5 molar
ratio were incubated at the times, temperatures, and solutions indicated in the text and then
analyzed by SDS-PAGE on 17% acrylamide gels using Comassie blue staining. A 360 µM
concentration of PAP248–286 was used. The same samples were also analyzed by NBT
staining to detect protein-bound EGCG quinines.26 For NBT staining, proteins were first
separated by SDS-PAGE gel and electroblotted onto nitrocellulose membrane. The
membrane was then stained with glycinate/NBT solution (0.24 mM nitroblue tetrazolium in
2M potassium glycinate pH 10.0) for 1 hour in the dark. This resulted in a purple stain of
quinone-bound protein bands. The membrane was washed and stored in 0.1 M sodium
borate (pH 10.0).
Blocking ε-NH2 of Lysine in PAP248–286 using acetic anhydride
PAP248–286 peptide was first dissolved in 50 mM borate buffer (pH 8.0) and then an
equimolar amount of acetic anhydride was added to the peptide solution.27 The sample was
then mixed with EGCG in a 1:5 molar ratio and preincubated at room temperature for 2–3
hours before the NBT assay.
Mass spectrometry analysis
Samples of PAP248–286 for mass spectrometry analysis were first incubated at a
concentration of 50 µM with EGCG at a 1:5 molar ratio for 3 days at room temperature in
ammonium acetate buffer (10 mM, pH 6 or 7.3) before analysis. PAP248–286 by itself was
used as a control. Mass spectra were obtained using an Orbitrap XL (ThermoFisher)
electrospray-ionization (ESI) mass spectrometer. All samples were directly injected into the
ESI source in positive ion mode using a flow rate of 3µl/min. The source temperature was
set to 250 °C and the electrospray voltage to 4.5 kV. Before starting the experiment, the
instrument was calibrated with standard compounds (per instrument manufacturer’s
specification). Mass spectra were acquired continuously for 1 min and peaks between 400–
2000 m/z were processed by BioworksBrowser (3.3.1 SP1, ThermoFisher) software.
Popovych et al.Page 4
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 5

RESULTS
EGCG but not GC inhibits SEVI formation at neutral and acidic pH
Hauber et al. showed that an excess of EGCG inhibits SEVI amyloid formation from
PAP248–286 and slowly disaggregates existing SEVI fibers.12 These experiments were
performed at pH 7.3, however, a likely microbicide containing an anti-SEVI inhibitor would
have to be effective in the vaginal environment where the pH is significantly acidic, with a
pH closer to 6 than 7.3.28 PAP248–286 has two histidine residues that are likely to have pKa
values in this range, which may in turn effect fiber formation and/or EGCG binding. It has
previously been shown that a strongly acidic environment (2% acetic acid) maintains the
peptide in a monomeric state but the effect of a moderately acidic environment on SEVI
fiber formation and EGCG binding is not known.29 We therefore first tested to see if EGCG
would be effective at inhibiting the peptide PAP248–286 aggregation in an acidic
environment (pH 6) as it is in a neutral environment (pH 7.3).
To test the aggregation kinetics, we first used the commonly used amyloid specific dye
Thioflavin T. Thioflavin T (ThT) is a benzothiazole salt whose fluorescence is enhanced
when it binds to grooves in the amyloid fiber running parallel to the fiber axis. As measured
by ThT fluorescence, PAP248–286 fibrillizes within 53–62 hours at pH 7.3 in the absence of
EGCG. PAP248–286 aggregated more slowly in the absence of EGCG at pH 6 than at pH 7.3
(Fig. S1A in the Supplementary information), although faster than in 2% acetic acid,29 most
likely due to the greater electrostatic repulsion between peptides at pH 6 from the additional
charge on the two histidine residues. Addition of either EGCG or GC at a 5:1 molar ratio
abolishes the increase in Thioflavin T fluorescence (Fig.S1A), suggesting both compounds
apparently inhibit fiber formation. Addition of EGCG and GC to preformed fibers gives an
apparent dissolution half-life of 12 hours (Fig. S1B), similar to previously reported values.12
However, Thioflavin T fluorescence is known to give false positives for inhibition of fiber
formation for compounds that competitively bind to the Thioflavin T binding site on the
amyloid fiber without causing disaggregation of the fiber.30–32 To confirm the Thioflavin T
results, transmission electron micrographs (TEM) were taken of PAP248–286 after a 96 hour
incubation period. In the absence of either EGCG or GC, PAP248–286 fibrillizes to form a
dense network of amyloid fibers (Fig. 2A). Coincubation of the PAP248–286 monomer with
EGCG prevents the formation of this fiber network at both pH 6 and pH 7.3, confirming
EGCG actually inhibits fiber formation. Examination of TEM images of preformed
PAP248–286 fibers incubated with EGCG yields a similar result, confirming EGCG can also
dissolve preformed PAP248–286 amyloid fibers.
Comparison of the ThT and TEM results for PAP248–286 incubated with GC yields a
markedly different result. While the ThT signal decreases significantly in the presence of
GC, TEM images clearly show GC neither prevents fibers from forming nor dissolves
preformed fibers of PAP248–286 (Figs. S2 and 2C respectively). In this case, the decrease in
ThT fluorescence is a false positive for inhibition of fiber formation by GC. In summary,
EGCG inhibited aggregation of PAP248–286 and disaggregated existing SEVI fibers at both
pH 6 and 7.3. By contrast, the addition of the related catechin GC in a 1:5 PAP248–286 to GC
molar ratio did neither (Fig. 2C and Fig. S2), in agreement with a previous report showing
the absence of amyloid degradation when GC was incubated with SEVI and the lack of an
inhibitory action on viral infectivity in the presence of GC.12
EGCG oligomerizes PAP248–286 immediately at pH 7.3 but not pH 6
Previous reports of the interaction of EGCG with other amyloidogenic proteins have shown
the formation of off-pathway oligomers is an important mechanism for the inhibition of
amyloid formation by EGCG.33 To determine if EGCG binding similarly catalyzes the
Popovych et al. Page 5
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 6

oligomerization of PAP248–286, we examined the hydrodynamic radii of the PAP248–286 /
EGCG complex (1:1 molar ratio) at pH 6 and 7.3 using PFG-NMR.34–36 At pH 6, the
hydrodynamic radius of the PAP248–286 /EGCG complex is similar to that of PAP248–286
alone (~1.6 nm) (Fig. 3A), indicating EGCG does not cause the immediate oligomerization
of PAP248–286 at pH 6. The high degree of correspondence between the hydrodynamic radii
of PAP248–286 and the PAP248–286 /EGCG complex is also an indication that the size of the
PAP248–286/EGCG complex is either similar to that of the PAP248–286 monomer or that
EGCG does not bind the monomeric form of PAP248–286 with a high affinity at pH 6.
While the addition of EGCG had little discernible effect on the hydrodynamic radius of
PAP248–286 at pH 6, at pH 7.3 a white precipitate immediately formed upon the addition of
EGCG. However, a detectable signal from the PAP248–286/EGCG complex could be
determined from the supernatant solution. The hydrodynamic radius of the complex formed
at pH 7.3 (~3.6 nm) is substantially larger than that of PAP248–286 alone (~1.6 nm, Fig. 3B),
suggesting EGCG catalyzes the fast formation of small oligomeric complexes of PAP248–286
at pH 7.3 but not at 6.
EGCG binds near the 251–257 and 269–277 regions of monomeric PAP248–286
To investigate possible binding of EGCG to the monomeric form of PAP248–286 and to
identify target sites on the PAP248–286 molecule, we carried out binding studies using NMR
experiments. It has previously been reported that EGCG binds randomly to exposed sites on
the backbone of α-synuclein and calcitonin, 14,36 which was conjectured to be a mode of
binding for most amyloid proteins.14
The addition of EGCG at 1:1 molar ratio at pH 6 caused significant broadening of
resonances and substantial chemical shift perturbations for many of the residues in the
2D 1H-1H TOCSY spectrum of PAP248–286 (Fig. 4B). This finding confirms that EGCG can
bind to PAP248–286 in the monomeric state and that the interaction involves considerable
involvement of the side chain atoms of PAP248–286. The distribution of changes is not
uniform and shows larger effects for particular amino acid types and regions of the peptide.
Both the backbone and side-chain 1H resonances for residues near the central region of the
peptide, such as N269, H270, M271, K272, R273 and I277, displayed a considerable shift
after binding EGCG. The N-terminal region, particularly K251, Q252, K253, K255, is
similarly affected. The hydrophobic center of the peptide, proposed to be a spot of amyloid
initiation, 37,38 was relatively unaffected. The distribution of amino acid type is similarly
non-uniform, with positively charged residues (lysines, arginine, and histidine) along with
methionine showing the strongest interaction. The interaction of the positively charged side-
chains with EGCG may reflect the formation of a salt bridge between EGCG and
PAP248–286 (two of the phenolic groups of EGCG have pKa values near 7)39, however, we
have no direct evidence of such an interaction.
By contrast, GC, which is not an effective SEVI inhibitor,12 did not show substantial
changes in the 1H-1H TOCSY spectrum (Fig. 4C). In contrast to the substantial changes seen
in the 1H-1H TOCSY spectrum of EGCG/ PAP248–286, the side-chain resonances of
PAP248–286 are almost unaltered by the addition of GC, indicating that GC does not have a
significant interaction with the side-chains of PAP248–286.
Initial attempts at obtaining a 2D 1H−1H TOCSY spectrum of a 1:1 EGCG/PAP248–286
complex at pH 7.3 resulted in the rapid formation of a white precipitate followed by the
formation of a brown solid. EGCG alone has a high propensity to oxidize at pH 7.3 and
forms a brownish solution in the absence of PAP248–286. This is likely the result of auto-
oxidation and aggregation of EGCG, which increases with the basicity of the solution
between pH 4–8.40
Popovych et al. Page 6
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 7

EGCG forms a tightly bound PAP248–286-EGCG quinone complex after prolonged
incubation
The NMR results show that the residues affected by EGCG binding were not randomly
distributed but primarily concentrated among Lys, His, Arg, and Met residues. Both EGCG
and GC are known to react with the nucleophilic sidechains of proteins by Schiff-base or
Michelson addition.27 The formation of a precipitate when EGCG was added to PAP248–286
at high concentrations suggests the formation of covalently cross-linked products may occur,
as has previously been directly detected for other flavonoids in the presence of α-synuclein
and with EGCG in the presence of non-amyloidogenic proteins and peptides.27,41,42
We first tested this possibility by a NBT staining assay, which allows the detection of SDS
stable, covalently or tightly bound PAP248–286 /EGCG complexes.26 In the NBT assay, the
protein is first electrophoresed by SDS-PAGE than electroblotted into a membrane
submerged in a solution containing NBT and glycine. EGCG reacts with glycine, generating
a superoxide ion which reduces NBT to formazon generating a purple spot on the
membrane.26 If EGCG is weakly bound in a conformation that is not SDS-stable, EGCG is
not retained on the membrane and the formazon diffuses away during the washing step. A
purple band migrating at ~ 4.5 kDa was detected when PAP248–286 was incubated with
EGCG at pH 7.3 for 2 days at RT, indicating a strong SDS-resistant association with EGCG
(Fig. 5A, lane 4). A corresponding band was not detected in the absence of EGCG (Fig. 5A,
lane 3) or, interestingly, when PAP248–286 was incubated with EGCG at pH 6 under these
conditions (Fig. 5A, lane 2). Since these conditions roughly mirror those employed in the
NMR experiment, the absence of a positive NBT-staining test at pH 6 indicates that the
initial EGCG / PAP248–286 complex observed by NMR is not likely to be formed by
covalent attachment of ECGC to PAP248–286. However, purple bands indicating the
formation of a SDS-stable EGCG-PAP248–286 complex at pH 6 became evident after a
longer incubation time (2 weeks at 4° C, Fig. 5B, lane 3) but were not detected for GC (Fig.
5B, lane 4).
To confirm the existence of a covalently bound complex, PAP248–286 was incubated with
EGCG or GC for 3 days at room temperature and then analyzed by ESI-MS. A five-fold
molar excess of EGCG and GC was used to improve sensitivity. In the absence of EGCG or
GC, the mass chromatogram of PAP248–286 showed a major peak at m/z= 4550.6 and a
minor peak (~10% of the total) at 4566.6 that most likely corresponds to the oxidation of
M271 (Fig. S3A and B). In the presence of EGCG, the mass chromatogram showed an
additional peak at m/z = 5009.6 that could be assigned to the peptide-EGCG complex (Fig.
S3C and D). The intensity of the peak for the EGCG-peptide complex comprised about 35%
of the total and was not affected by the pH of incubation, suggesting an equilibrium for the
formation of the PAP248–286 : EGCG complex was reached after 3 days for both pH values
when incubated with a five-fold excess of EGCG. The intensity of the peak for the GC-
peptide complex (m/z=4857) is significantly weaker than that of EGCG (~10% compared to
35% for EGCG), indicating complex formation is more strongly favored for EGCG than GC
(Fig. S3E and F). In summary, the NBT staining and ESI-MS experiments suggest the
binding of EGCG to PAP248–286 is a multi-step process with covalent attachment of EGCG
occurring over a period of days.
Lysines residues are critical for the interaction of PAP248–286 and EGCG
2D 1H-1H TOCSY and NOESY solution NMR experiments revealed the effect of EGCG on
PAP248–286 is not random but is instead heavily concentrated on the six lysines present. To
examine the role of lysine in EGCG binding in more detail, we acetylated the lysine sites of
PAP248–286 by reaction with excess acetic anhydride (ESI-MS result is shown in Fig. S4). In
the absence of EGCG, lysine-blocked PAP248–286 formed a sparse network of thin short
Popovych et al.Page 7
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 8

fibers (Fig. 6A) after incubating for one week at pH 8. In the presence of 5 molar
equivalents of EGCG, a similar network of thin short fibers can be seen in the lysine-
blocked PAP248–286 sample (Fig. 6B). From these results, it is apparent that acetylation of
the lysine of PAP248–286 largely blocks the inhibiting effect of EGCG on PAP248–286
amyloid formation. To see if lysine residues are also essential for the formation of the
PAP248–286 covalent complex, lysine-blocked PAP248–286 was incubated with EGCG for
two days at pH 8.0 and the NBT assay performed. Bands corresponding to a tightly-bound
PAP248–286-EGCG complex were not observed for the lysine-blocked samples but were
observed for corresponding non-lysine blocked control samples (Fig. 7B, lane 6), suggesting
lysine’s involvement in cross-linking with EGCG as well.
The absence of perturbations in the NMR spectra of PAP248–286 upon the addition of EGCG
after it has been bound to SDS provided additional evidence for the importance of lysines in
the interaction of PAP248–286 with EGCG. In SDS micelles, PAP248–286 adopts a disordered
structure on the surface of the micelle.38 While most of the backbone sites are exposed to
solvent and available for binding in SDS, the lysine sidechains are buried within the micelle
and shielded from interaction with EGCG.38 No changes in either the side-chain or amide
backbone resonances were apparent in the 1H-1H TOCSY spectrum of PAP248–286 in 400
mM SDS at pH 6 upon the addition of EGCG (Fig. 7A). The absence of significant changes
in the 1H-1H TOCSY spectrum and the absence of NBT-positive bands when the lysine
sidechains are blocked are both strong indications that lysine residues are indeed essential
for the formation of a tightly bound complex between PAP248–286 and EGCG.
DISCUSSION
Besides PAP248–286, EGCG both inhibits amyloid fiber formation and destabilizes existing
amyloid fibers formed from a variety of other amyloid proteins including α-synuclein,
Aβ1–42 and Aβ1–40, IAPP, transthyretin, human and yeast prions, lysozyme, human
calcitonin, κ-casein and tau.19,20,36,43–46 The molecular mechanism by which this is
accomplished is not yet clear. Initially, it was proposed that EGCG diverts the normal
aggregation pathway of amyloidogenic proteins into the formation of spherical unstructured
aggregates, which form a non-toxic, off-pathway state that does not progress further to the
amyloid form.14,16,46 On a molecular-level, EGCG has been proposed to bind to the exposed
backbone of the unfolded regions of proteins, presumably blocking the association of these
aggregation prone regions.14
The evidence for this mechanism primarily comes from studies of α-synuclein and Aβ1–42.14
NBT staining showed a strong, SDS stable, association of EGCG with both of these peptides
and with denatured BSA but not with control proteins that were natively folded.14 Further,
NMR studies of α-synuclein showed changes in the HSQC spectrum induced by EGCG
were concentrated in the flexible C-terminus of the peptide, and not in the more ordered N-
terminus.14 The changes were not concentrated on a particular type of residue, suggesting
non-specific binding to peptide backbone rather than specific binding to the elements of the
side-chains. 14
Based on the apparent generality of amyloid inhibition by EGCG, the formation of off-
pathway aggregates by non-specific binding of EGCG to exposed backbone sites was
proposed as a generic mechanism for amyloid inhibition by EGCG.14 However, more recent
data suggests this mechanism is not entirely general. The crystal structure of EGCG bound
to the tetrameric form of transthyretin reveals EGCG binds at specific sites in transthyretin,
interacting with the folded transthyretin tetramer by a combination of specific hydrophobic
and hydrophilic contacts with sidechains and interactions with exposed amide backbones.47
EGCG has also been shown to interact with the helical native structure of the human prion
Popovych et al. Page 8
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 9

protein and with nonflexible regions of κ-casein,44 suggesting unfolded conformations are
not a strict necessity for EGCG binding, in agreement with reports of EGCG binding to
multiple natively folded non-amyloidogenic proteins.48 Similarly, NMR studies have
suggested EGCG primarily stabilizes the monomeric structure of human calcitonin rather
than redirecting the aggregation to amorphous aggregates.36
In striking contrast to the apparently random distribution of residues affected by EGCG in α-
synuclein and Aβ1–42,14 EGCG primarily interacts with PAP248–286 through the side-chains
of a specific set of residues. Chemical shift perturbations are concentrated at two clusters of
residues, the first near the N-terminus and the second closer to the center of the peptide (Fig.
4B). Pronounced changes in particular were detected for the positively charged side-chains
of lysines, suggesting a specific interaction of EGCG with this residue. The strong
association of EGCG with lysine was confirmed by the absence of a strong interaction with
PAP248–286 when the lysine residues of PAP248–286 were chemically blocked (Fig. 7B, lane
6). Further evidence for the importance of lysine in EGCG binding was provided by the
NMR spectra of EGCG titrated to PAP248–286 bound to SDS micelles. In the SDS micelle,
the positively charged lysine side-chains of PAP248–286 are strongly bound to the negatively
charged headgroups of SDS and are therefore not available for EGCG binding, while the
remainder of the protein is disordered and exposed to solvent.38 Virtually no change in the
spectrum was observed for PAP248–286 bound to SDS when EGCG was added, indicating
association of EGCG with lysine is essential for binding (Fig. 7A).
The changes in chemical shift of the initial PAP248–286/ECGC at pH 6 are reflective of a
relatively weak interaction with EGCG, with exchange occurring on a fast timescale, similar
to what has been observed for the initial complexes of EGCG with the amyloidogenic
proteins α-synuclein and MSP2.14,43 The formation of an initially weak complex is
consistent with the absence of a color reaction with NBT when PAP248–286 is incubated for
2 days at pH 6 (Fig. 5A, lane 2), indicating complex formation is initially reversible and
weak enough to be removed by SDS. By contrast, NBT reacts immediately with the
complex of PAP248–286 and ECGC formed at pH 7.3 (Fig 5B, lane 4). PFG NMR shows that
while the hydrodynamic radius of the PAP248–286/ECGC complex formed at pH 6 is similar
to that of PAP248–286 alone, the hydrodynamic radius of the complex formed at pH 7.4 is
substantially larger, reflecting the oligomerization of the peptide induced by EGCG (Fig. 3).
Oxidized EGCG is known to form covalently cross-linked complexes with proteins, a
process influenced by a number of factors including pH, temperature, oxygen and transition
metal concentrations, and the concentration of EGCG.42,49,50 Methionine residues in
particular are easily oxidized by EGCG, generating hydrogen peroxide and a reactive
quinone product.27 Once oxidized to the reactive quinone form, EGCG is subject to attack
by the nucleophilic sidechains of lysine, histidine, and arginine residues as well as the N-
terminus of the peptide to yield an acid-labile Schiff base.27,42,51,52 It should be noted,
however, that the formation of a covalent EGCG-PAP248–286 complex is apparently not an
absolute prerequisite for efficient inhibition of amyloid formation, as amyloid formation was
inhibited by EGCG at acidic pH where formation of the covalent complex is disfavored and
occurs slowly, in contrast to the relatively rapid disaggregation of amyloid fibrils observed
by TEM. The eventual formation of a covalent complex is apparently also not sufficient to
inhibit amyloid fiber formation, as the related compound GC does not have a strong
inhibitory effect on amyloid formation even though it does slowly form a covalent or a non-
covalent tightly bound complex (albeit less efficiently than EGCG) (see Fig. S3). Instead,
the greater ability of EGCG to inhibit amyloid formation compared to GC is most likely due
to a stronger initial association, as reflected in the stronger chemical shift perturbations
observed in the NMR spectra of the EGCG-PAP248–286 complex (Fig.4).
Popovych et al.Page 9
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 10

Conclusion
Our results show that EGCG inhibits SEVI fibril formation at both neutral and acidic pH in
good agreement with biophysical, biochemical and genetic data for other amyloidogenic
proteins. However, the binding mechanism of EGCG to PAP248–286 deviates substantially
from the proposed general model for polyphenols binding to amyloid proteins. Instead of
driving the formation of large amorphous off-pathway aggregates, EGCG binds to
PAP248–286 in the monomeric form, disaggregating fibrils completely to small EGCG/
PAP248–286 complexes. In addition, binding appears to be driven by interactions with the
sidechains of PAP248–286 with EGCG, rather than interactions with exposed backbone sites
as previously proposed. These differences may be due to the unusually high charge and low
overall hydrophobicity of the PAP248–286 protein when compared to most other amyloid
proteins.
While the precise mechanism by which EGCG inhibits SEVI amyloid formation is
uncertain, the delay between the time in which perturbations in the NMR spectra are
detected and time in which NBT staining indicates the formation of a tightly bound complex
suggests the binding of EGCG to PAP248–286 is a multistep process.41 In the first step, a
weakly bound, non-covalent complex is formed, most likely by hydrogen bonding and
hydrophobic interactions.53,54 In the next step, a covalent complex is formed by Schiff base
addition after the generation of a reactive quinone complex by autoxidation of EGCG.
Further studies aimed at characterizing the interaction of EGCG with the SEVI fibrillar form
of PAP248–286 are in progress.
Supplementary Material
Refer to Web version on PubMed Central for supplementary material.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by research funds from NIH (DK078885 to A. R.).
References
1. Doncel GF, Joseph T, Thurman AR. Am. J. Reprod. Immunol. 2011; 65:292–301. [PubMed:
21087339]
2. Easterhoff D, DiMaio JTM, Doran TM, Dewhurst S, Nilsson BL. Biophys. J. 2011; 100:1325–1334.
[PubMed: 21354406]
3. Munch J, et al. Cell. 2007; 131:1059–1071. [PubMed: 18083097]
4. Roan NR, Munch J, Arhel N, Mothes W, Neidleman J, Kobayashi A, Smith-McCune K, Kirchhoff
F, Greene WC. J. Virol. 2009; 83:73–80. [PubMed: 18945786]
5. Kim KA, Yolamanova M, Zirafi O, Roan NR, Staendker L, Forssmann WG, Burgener A, Dejucq-
Rainsford N, Hahn BH, Shaw GM, Greene WC, Kirchhoff F, Munch J. Retrovirology. 2010; 7:55–
67. [PubMed: 20573198]
6. Roan NR, Sowinski S, Munch J, Kirchhoff F, Greene WC. J. Biol. Chem. 2010; 285:1861–1869.
[PubMed: 19897482]
7. Wurm M, Schambach A, Lindemann D, Hanenberg H, Standker L, Forssmann WG, Blasczyk R,
Horn PA. J. Gene Med. 2010; 12:137–146. [PubMed: 20052742]
8. Hong SH, Klein EA, Das Gupta J, Hanke K, Weight CJ, Nguyen C, Gaughan C, Kim KA, Bannert
N, Kirchhoff F, Munch J, Silverman RH. J. Virol. 2009; 83:6995–7003. [PubMed: 19403677]
9. Brender JR, Hartman K, Gottler LM, Cavitt ME, Youngstrom DW, Ramamoorthy A. Biophys. J.
2009; 97:2474–2483. [PubMed: 19883590]
10. Capule CC, Brown C, Olsen JS, Dewhurst S, Yang J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134:905–908. [PubMed:
22239120]
Popovych et al.Page 10
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 11

11. Olsen JS, Brown C, Capule CC, Rubinshtein M, Doran TM, Srivastava RK, Feng C, Nilsson BL,
Yang J, Dewhurst S. J. Biol. Chem. 2010; 285:35488–35496. [PubMed: 20833717]
12. Hauber I, Hohenberg H, Holstermann B, Hunstein W, Hauber J. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
2009; 106:9033–9038. [PubMed: 19451623]
13. Porat Y, Abramowitz A, Gazit E. Chem. Biol. Drug. Des. 2006; 67:27–37. [PubMed: 16492146]
14. Ehrnhoefer DE, Bieschke J, Boeddrich A, Herbst M, Masino L, Lurz R, Engemann S, Pastore A,
Wanker EE. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2008; 15:558–566. [PubMed: 18511942]
15. Ladiwala ARA, Lin JC, Bale SS, Marcelino-Cruz AM, Bhattacharya M, Dordick JS, Tessier PM. J.
Biol. Chem. 2010; 285:24228–24237. [PubMed: 20511235]
16. Bieschke J, Russ J, Friedrich RP, Ehrnhoefer DE, Wobst H, Neugebauer K, Wanker EE. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2010; 107:7710–7715. [PubMed: 20385841]
17. Ladiwala AR, Dordick JS, Tessier PM. J. Biol. Chem. 2010; 286:3209–3218. [PubMed: 21098486]
18. Stefani M. FEBS J. 2010; 277:4602–4613. [PubMed: 20977664]
19. Meng FL, Abedini A, Plesner A, Verchere CB, Raleigh DP. Biochemistry. 2010; 49:8127–8133.
[PubMed: 20707388]
20. Ferreira N, Cardoso I, Domingues MR, Vitorino R, Bastos M, Bai GY, Saraiva MJ, Almeida MR.
FEBS Lett. 2009; 583:3569–3576. [PubMed: 19861125]
21. Mandel SA, Amit T, Weinreb O, Reznichenko L, Youdim MBH. CNS Neurosci. Ther. 2008;
14:352–365. [PubMed: 19040558]
22. Goddard, TD.; Kneller, DG. SPARKY 3. San Francisco: University of California; 1999.
23. Tanner JE. J. Chem. Phys. 1970; 52:2523–2526.
24. Mills R. J. Phys. Chem. 1973; 77:685–688.
25. Stejskal EO, Tanner JE. J. Chem. Phys. 1965; 42:288–292.
26. Paz MA, Fluckiger R, Boak A, Kagan HM, Gallop PM. J. Biol. Chem. 1991; 266:689–692.
[PubMed: 1702437]
27. Cao D, Zhang YJ, Zhang HH, Zhong LW, Qian XH. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 2009;
23:1147–1157. [PubMed: 19280611]
28. TeviBenissan C, Belec L, Levy M, SchneiderFauveau V, Mohamed AS, Hallouin MC, Matta M,
Gresenguet G. Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol. 1997; 4:367–374. [PubMed: 9144379]
29. Ye ZQ, French KC, Popova LA, Lednev IK, Lopez MM, Makhatadze GI. Biochemistry. 2009;
48:11582–11591. [PubMed: 19902966]
30. Hudson SA, Ecroyd H, Kee TW, Carver JA. FEBS J. 2009; 276:5960–5972. [PubMed: 19754881]
31. Chandrashekaran IR, Adda CG, MacRaild CA, Anders RF, Norton RS. Arch. Biochem. Biophys.
2011; 513:153–157. [PubMed: 21784057]
32. Liu KN, Wang HY, Chen CY, Wang SSS. Amino Acids. 2010; 39:821–829. [PubMed: 20204431]
33. Ladiwala ARA, Dordick JS, Tessier PM. J. Biol. Chem. 2011; 286:3209–3218. [PubMed:
21098486]
34. Brender JR, Nanga RPR, Popovych N, Soong R, Macdonald PM, Ramamoorthy A. Biochim.
Biophys. Acta. 2011; 1808:1161–1169. [PubMed: 21262195]
35. Soong R, Brender JR, Macdonald PM, Ramamoorthy A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009; 131:7079–7085.
[PubMed: 19405534]
36. Huang R, Vivekanandan S, Brender JR, Abe Y, Naito A, Ramamoorthy A. J. Mol. Biol. 416:108–
120. [PubMed: 22200484]
37. Sievers SA, Karanicolas J, Chang HW, Zhao A, Jiang L, Zirafi O, Stevens JT, Munch J, Baker D,
Eisenberg D. Nature. 2011; 475:96–100. [PubMed: 21677644]
38. Nanga RPR, Brender JR, Vivekanandan S, Popovych N, Ramamoorthy A. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2009; 131:17972–17979. [PubMed: 19995078]
39. Kumamoto M, Sonda T, Nagayama K, Tabata M. Biosci. Biotech. Biochem. 2001; 65:126–132.
40. Zhu QY, Zhang AQ, Tsang D, Huang Y, Chen ZY. J. Agric. Food. Chem. 1997; 45:4624–4628.
41. Meng XY, Munishkina LA, Fink AL, Uversky VN. Biochemistry. 2009; 48:8206–8224. [PubMed:
19634918]
Popovych et al.Page 11
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 12

42. Ishii T, Ichikawa T, Minoda K, Kusaka K, Ito S, Suzuki Y, Akagawa M, Mochizuki K, Goda T,
Nakayama T. Biosci. Biotech. Biochem. 2011; 75:100–106.
43. Chandrashekaran IR, Adda CG, MacRaild CA, Anders RF, Norton RS. Biochemistry. 2010;
49:5899–5908. [PubMed: 20545323]
44. Hudson SA, Ecroyd H, Dehle FC, Musgrave IF, Carver JA. J. Mol. Biol. 2009; 392:689–700.
[PubMed: 19616561]
45. Roberts BE, Duennwald ML, Wang H, Chung C, Lopreiato NP, Sweeny EA, Knight MN, Shorter
J. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2009; 5:936–946. [PubMed: 19915541]
46. He J, Xing YF, Huang B, Zhang YZ, Zeng CM. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2009; 57:11391–11396.
[PubMed: 19904937]
47. Miyata M, Sato T, Kugimiya M, Sho M, Nakamura T, Ikemizu S, Chirifu M, Mizuguchi M,
Nabeshima Y, Suwa Y, Morioka H, Arimori T, Suico MA, Shuto T, Sako Y, Momohara M, Koga
T, Morino-Koga S, Yamagata Y, Kai H. Biochemistry. 2010; 49:6104–6114. [PubMed: 20565072]
48. Maiti TK, Ghosh KS, Dasgupta S. Proteins-Structure Function and Bioinformatics. 2006; 64:355–
362.
49. Wang R, Zhou WB, Jiang XH. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2008; 56:2694–2701. [PubMed: 18361498]
50. Sang SM, Lee MJ, Hou Z, Ho CT, Yang CS. J. Agric. Food. Chem. 2005; 53:9478–9484.
[PubMed: 16302765]
51. Fluckiger R, Woodtli T, Gallop PM. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1988; 153:353–358.
[PubMed: 3132165]
52. Grelle G, Otto A, Lorenz M, Frank RF, Wanker EE, Bieschke J. Biochemistry. 2011; 50:10624–
10636. [PubMed: 22054421]
53. Wang SH, Liu FF, Dong XY, Sun Y. J. Phys. Chem. B. 2010; 114:11576–11583. [PubMed:
20718413]
54. Jobstl E, Howse JR, Fairclough JPA, Williamson MP. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006; 54:4077–4081.
[PubMed: 16756328]
Popovych et al.Page 12
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 13

Figure 1. Chemical structures of EGCG (A) and GC (B)
Popovych et al.Page 13
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 14

Figure 2. EGCG inhibits SEVI formation from PAP248–286 and disaggregates existing fibers
while the related catechin GC has a diminished effect
(A) TEM image of PAP248–286 incubated alone for 4 days (left) and coincubated for 4 days
with EGCG at a 1:5 molar ratio (right) at pH 7.3. (B) As above but for 7 days incubation at
pH 6. (C) TEM images of existing SEVI amyloid fibers (left), SEVI amyloid fibers
coincubated with EGCG for 5 hours (1:5 molar ratio)(center), and coincubated with GC for
5 hours (1:5 molar ratio)(right).
Popovych et al.Page 14
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Page 15

Figure 3. EGCG catalyzes the formation of small oligomeric species of PAP248–286 at pH 7.3 but
not pH 6
Normalized stimulated-echo intensity decays from STE (stimulated-echo) PFG 1H NMR
spectra of 215 µM PAP248–286 with and without 215 µM EGCG at 37 °C in 50 mM
potassium phosphate buffer at pH 6 (A) and pH 7.4 (B).
Popovych et al.Page 15
J Phys Chem B. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 22.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript