This is the article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5611670/ I'm not a Chemist, so I can't understand the article very well.

The conclusion states that the molecules tested should not be called "piezolytes". Is this a nomenclature issue only? My only question is: does the presence of such molecules in deep sea organisms help in keeping proteins in their naturally folded state, resistant to denaturation due to high pressure or not?


From the abstract of the article in question:

The results suggest that the pressure stability of a protein in solution is not directly affected by the presence of these proposed piezolytes, and so they cannot be granted this distinction.

So the answer is "no", the supposed piezolytes do not appear to have the purported function. They do stabilize proteins against thermal denaturation, but not against pressure-induced destabilization.

| improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ I see. So there's likely no "holy grail" of deep-sea adaptation, such as those piezolytes, could one say that instead the biochemical elements of deep-sea creatures are all adapted to the pressure, for example using modified versions of land-animal proteins that count on high pressure to maintain their natural state and synthesis? $\endgroup$ – Davi Mar 2 at 15:20
  • $\begingroup$ Yes that's what I'd conclude in any case from the study. Similarly to hyperthermostable proteins. But perhaps the piezolytes don't act alone? $\endgroup$ – Buck Thorn Mar 2 at 15:40

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.