Article

New insights into the detection of sulfur trioxide anion radical by spin trapping: radical trapping versus nucleophilic addition

Laboratory of Pharmacology, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
Free Radical Biology and Medicine (Impact Factor: 5.71). 05/2009; 47(2):128-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2009.04.006
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT It has recently been demonstrated that (bi)sulfite (hydrated sulfur dioxide) reacts with 5,5-dimethyl-1-pyrroline N-oxide (DMPO) via a nonradical, nucleophilic reaction, and further proposed that the radical adduct (DMPO/()SO(3)(-)) formation in biological systems is an artifact and not the result of spin trapping of sulfur trioxide anion radical (()SO(3)(-)). Here, the one-electron oxidation of (bi)sulfite catalyzed by horseradish peroxidase/H(2)O(2) has been reinvestigated by ESR spin trapping with DMPO and oxygen uptake studies to obtain further evidence for the radical reaction mechanism. In the case of ESR experiments, the signal of the DMPO/()SO(3)(-) radical adduct was detected, and the initial rate of its formation was calculated. Support for the radical pathway via ()SO(3)(-) was obtained from the stoichiometry between the amount of consumed molecular oxygen and the amount of (bi)sulfite oxidized to sulfate (SO(4)(2-)). When DMPO was incubated with (bi)sulfite, oxygen consumption was completely inhibited owing to the efficiency of DMPO trapping. In the absence of DMPO, the initial rate of oxygen and H(2)O(2) consumption was determined to be half of the initial rate of DMPO/()SO(3)(-) radical adduct formation as determined by ESR, demonstrating that DMPO forms the radical adduct by trapping the ()SO(3)(-) exclusively. We conclude that DMPO is not susceptible to artifacts arising from nonradical chemistry (nucleophilic addition) except when both (bi)sulfite and DMPO concentrations are at nonphysiological levels of at least 0.1 M and the incubations are for longer times.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Ronald P Mason, Aug 10, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
101 Views
  • Source
    • ") and HRP (1.8 ± 0.06 × 10 2 M −1 s −1 [30]). Although the calculated rates show that sulfite is a relatively poor myeloperoxidase substrate, it has been demonstrated that the sulfite radical chain chemistry via Eqns (4)-(6) can be initiated by only 1.4 × 10 −13 M • SO 3 − [31]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to determine the effect of (bi)sulfite (hydrated sulfur dioxide) on human neutrophils and the ability of these immune cells to produce reactive free radicals due to (bi)sulfite oxidation. Myeloperoxidase (MPO) is an abundant heme protein in neutrophils that catalyzes the formation of cytotoxic oxidants implicated in asthma and inflammatory disorders. In this study sulfite ((•)SO(3)(-)) and sulfate (SO(4)(•-)) anion radicals are characterized with the ESR spin-trapping technique using 5,5-dimethyl-1-pyrroline N-oxide (DMPO) in the reaction of (bi)sulfite oxidation by human MPO and human neutrophils via sulfite radical chain reaction chemistry. After treatment with (bi)sulfite, phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate-stimulated neutrophils produced DMPO-sulfite anion radical, -superoxide, and -hydroxyl radical adducts. The last adduct probably resulted, in part, from the conversion of DMPO-sulfate to DMPO-hydroxyl radical adduct via a nucleophilic substitution reaction of the radical adduct. This anion radical (SO(4)(•-)) is highly reactive and, presumably, can oxidize target proteins to protein radicals, thereby initiating protein oxidation. Therefore, we propose that the potential toxicity of (bi)sulfite during pulmonary inflammation or lung-associated diseases such as asthma may be related to free radical formation.
    Free Radical Biology and Medicine 02/2012; 52(8):1264-71. DOI:10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2012.01.016 · 5.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "•– / SO 4 2– = 2.43 V)—can attack target proteins (e.g., HSA in plasma) (Neta et al. 1988; Steele and Appelman 1982) (Figure 1). Previous work on the oxidation of (bi)sulfite by the HRP–H 2 O 2 system and ESR spin­ trapping experiments showed that there is a strong competition between the spin trap DMPO and oxygen for • SO 3 – (Ranguelova and Mason 2009). In fact, in the latter system, the formation of the oxygen­derived radicals – O 3 SOO • and SO 4 •– was almost prevented by high DMPO concentrations (100 mM) (Figure 3B), and a decrease of the spin­trap concentration to ≤ 3 mM was required to trap protein radicals formed by – O 3 SOO • and SO 4 •– (Mottley and Mason 1988). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sulfur dioxide, formed during the combustion of fossil fuels, is a major air pollutant near large cities. Its two ionized forms in aqueous solution, sulfite and (bi)sulfite, are widely used as preservatives and antioxidants to prevent food and beverage spoilage. (Bi)sulfite can be oxidized by peroxidases to form the very reactive sulfur trioxide anion radical (*SO(3)-). This free radical further reacts with oxygen to form the peroxymonosulfate anion radical (-O(3)SOO*) and sulfate anion radical (SO(4)*-). To explore the critical role of these radical intermediates in further oxidizing biomolecules, we examined the ability of copper,zinc-superoxide dismutase (Cu,Zn-SOD) to initiate this radical chain reaction, using human serum albumin (HSA) as a model target. We used electron paramagnetic resonance, optical spectroscopy, oxygen uptake, and immuno-spin trapping to study the protein oxidations driven by sulfite-derived radicals. We found that when Cu,Zn-SOD reacted with (bi)sulfite, *SO(3)- was produced, with the concomitant reduction of SOD-Cu(II) to SOD-Cu(I). Further, we demonstrated that sulfite oxidation mediated by Cu,Zn-SOD induced the formation of radical-derived 5,5-dimethyl-1-pyrroline N-oxide (DMPO) spin-trapped HSA radicals. The present study suggests that protein oxidative damage resulting from (bi)sulfite oxidation promoted by Cu,Zn-SOD could be involved in oxidative damage and tissue injury in (bi)sulfite-exacerbated allergic reactions.
    Environmental Health Perspectives 03/2010; 118(7):970-5. DOI:10.1289/ehp.0901533 · 7.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Eosinophil peroxidase (EPO) is an abundant heme protein in eosinophils that catalyzes the formation of cytotoxic oxidants implicated in asthma, allergic inflammatory disorders, and cancer. It is known that some proteins with peroxidase activity (horseradish peroxidase and prostaglandin hydroperoxidase) can catalyze oxidation of bisulfite (hydrated sulfur dioxide), leading to the formation of sulfur trioxide anion radical ((.)SO(3)(-)). This free radical further reacts with oxygen to form peroxymonosulfate anion radical ((-)O(3)SOO(.)) and the very reactive sulfate anion radical (SO(4)()), which is nearly as strong an oxidant as the hydroxyl radical. However, the ability of EPO to generate reactive sulfur radicals has not yet been reported. Here we demonstrate that eosinophil peroxidase/H(2)O(2) is able to oxidize bisulfite, ultimately forming the sulfate anion radical (SO(4)()), and that these reactive intermediates can oxidize target proteins to protein radicals, thereby initiating protein oxidation. We used immuno-spin trapping and confocal microscopy to study protein oxidation by EPO/H(2)O(2) in the presence of bisulfite in a pure enzymatic system and in human promyelocytic leukemia HL-60 clone 15 cells, maturated to eosinophils. Polyclonal antiserum raised against the spin trap 5,5-dimethyl-1-pyrroline N-oxide (DMPO) detected the presence of DMPO covalently attached to the proteins resulting from the DMPO trapping of protein free radicals. We found that sulfite oxidation mediated by EPO/H(2)O(2) induced the formation of radical-derived DMPO spin-trapped human serum albumin and, to a lesser extent, of DMPO-EPO. These studies suggest that EPO-dependent oxidative damage may play a role in tissue injury in bisulfite-exacerbated eosinophilic inflammatory disorders.
    Journal of Biological Chemistry 07/2010; 285(31):24195-205. DOI:10.1074/jbc.M109.069054 · 4.57 Impact Factor
Show more