MICROFIBRILLAR PROTEIN FROM ELASTIC TISSUE: A CRITICAL EVALUATION

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Many workers have claimed to have isolated proteins which have been derived from the microfibrillar components of elastic tissue. Virtually all of these preparations have been derived from extracts made with strong solutions of guanidinium chloride (GuHCl) under reducing conditions following Ross and Bornstein (1969). The products have ranged from heterogeneous mixtures of proteins to discrete glycoproteins. In no case has identity between an individual protein and the elastin-associated microfibrils been confirmed by immunoelectron microscopy. We have undertaken a detailed re-examination of the extractability of elastin-associated microfibrils and of the composition of the extracts from foetal bovine nuchal ligament. Finely homogenized samples were subjected to a series of extractions (including cyclical treatments with GuHCl and purified bacterial Collagenase) in the presence of inhibitors of protease activity. Under these conditions it has been shown that—(i) microfibrils were removed progressively by GuHCl, throughout the extraction schedule, without the need for reduction; (ii) all remaining microfibrils were removed by reductive GuHCl extraction; (iii) the product from this reductive extraction consisted of a heterogeneous mixture of proteins including several glycoproteins; (iv) a major antigenic constituent of the mixture of proteins localized to elastin-associated microfibrils, as shown by immunoelectron microscopy. It is concluded that, while reductive GuHCl extracts do contain components with antigenic activity that is localized on elastin-associated microfibrils, they have many non-microfibrillar components. We stress that claims that a macromolecule is microfibrillar must be substantiated by immunoelectron microscopy.