 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Contents |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Residue conservation analysis
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
Gene Ontology (GO) functional annotation
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
Biological process
|
response to DNA damage stimulus
|
4 terms
|
 |
|
Biochemical function
|
nucleotide binding
|
9 terms
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
DOI no:
|
J Biol Chem
279:43879-43885
(2004)
|
|
PubMed id:
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
ATP increases the affinity between MutS ATPase domains. Implications for ATP hydrolysis and conformational changes.
|
|
M.H.Lamers,
D.Georgijevic,
J.H.Lebbink,
H.H.Winterwerp,
B.Agianian,
N.de Wind,
T.K.Sixma.
|
|
|
|
| |
ABSTRACT
|
|
|
| |
|
MutS is the key protein of the Escherichia coli DNA mismatch repair system. It
recognizes mispaired and unpaired bases and has intrinsic ATPase activity. ATP
binding after mismatch recognition by MutS serves as a switch that enables MutL
binding and the subsequent initiation of mismatch repair. However, the mechanism
of this switch is poorly understood. We have investigated the effects of ATP
binding on the MutS structure. Crystallographic studies of ATP-soaked crystals
of MutS show a trapped intermediate, with ATP in the nucleotide-binding site.
Local rearrangements of several residues around the nucleotide-binding site
suggest a movement of the two ATPase domains of the MutS dimer toward each
other. Analytical ultracentrifugation experiments confirm such a rearrangement,
showing increased affinity between the ATPase domains upon ATP binding and
decreased affinity in the presence of ADP. Mutations of specific residues in the
nucleotide-binding domain reduce the dimer affinity of the ATPase domains. In
addition, ATP-induced release of DNA is strongly reduced in these mutants,
suggesting that the two activities are coupled. Hence, it seems plausible that
modulation of the affinity between ATPase domains is the driving force for
conformational changes in the MutS dimer. These changes are driven by distinct
amino acids in the nucleotide-binding site and form the basis for long-range
interactions between the ATPase domains and DNA-binding domains and subsequent
binding of MutL and initiation of mismatch repair.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Selected figure(s)
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Figure 1.
FIG. 1. Structure of MutS in complex with DNA and ATP. A,
overview of the complex with ATPase domains of monomer A and B
colored green and blue, respectively. Electron density covering
the ATP molecules is colored dark blue. Signature loops are in
red, and missing residues are transparent. The rest of the
molecule is colored gray. DNA is dark red. B, enlarged view of A
showing the position of the nucleotides and signature loops. C,
overview of the ATPase dimer interface showing only the ATPase
domains. D and E, detailed view of the nucleotide-binding site
of monomer A binding ADP or ATP, respectively. Monomer A is
colored green, and the opposing monomer B is blue, with missing
residues transparent. Note the rotation of residues Asn616 and
His728 and the stabilization of Ser668 and the larger part of
the loop on which it resides. F, nucleotide-binding site of
monomer B binding ATP. Asn616, indicated as transparent, is
poorly defined in electron density.
|
 |
Figure 3.
FIG. 3. Modeling of conformational changes induced by ATP
binding. A, model of MutS after superposition of the MutS ATPase
domains on the ATPase domains of RAD50-ATP (see "Discussion").
In addition to an 5 Å translation, an
25° degrees rotation
of the two monomers toward one another is observed. B-D, model
for ATP-induced DNA release. In the absence of DNA (B), the
DNA-binding domains (clamp and mismatch, indicated by "C" and
"M") are flexible and opened up to allow the DNA to enter. When
a mismatch is bound (shown in yellow), the DNA is kinked and
surrounded by the two monomers (C). Subsequent ATP binding (D)
causes a further closing of the clamp. To avoid the clashing of
the mismatch binding domains, they are rotated away from the
DNA, leaving MutS as a sliding clamp on the DNA.
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
The above figures are
reprinted
by permission from the ASBMB:
J Biol Chem
(2004,
279,
43879-43885)
copyright 2004.
|
|
| |
Figures were
selected
by the author.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Literature references that cite this PDB file's key reference
|
|
 |
| |
PubMed id
|
 |
Reference
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
J.H.Lebbink,
A.Fish,
A.Reumer,
G.Natrajan,
H.H.Winterwerp,
and
T.K.Sixma
(2010).
Magnesium coordination controls the molecular switch function of DNA mismatch repair protein MutS.
|
| |
J Biol Chem, 285,
13131-13141.
|
 |
|
PDB codes:
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
I.Tessmer,
Y.Yang,
J.Zhai,
C.Du,
P.Hsieh,
M.M.Hingorani,
and
D.A.Erie
(2008).
Mechanism of MutS searching for DNA mismatches and signaling repair.
|
| |
J Biol Chem, 283,
36646-36654.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
P.Hsieh,
and
K.Yamane
(2008).
DNA mismatch repair: molecular mechanism, cancer, and ageing.
|
| |
Mech Ageing Dev, 129,
391-407.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
S.Acharya
(2008).
Mutations in the signature motif in MutS affect ATP-induced clamp formation and mismatch repair.
|
| |
Mol Microbiol, 69,
1544-1559.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
C.D.Putnam,
M.Hammel,
G.L.Hura,
and
J.A.Tainer
(2007).
X-ray solution scattering (SAXS) combined with crystallography and computation: defining accurate macromolecular structures, conformations and assemblies in solution.
|
| |
Q Rev Biophys, 40,
191-285.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
E.Jacobs-Palmer,
and
M.M.Hingorani
(2007).
The effects of nucleotides on MutS-DNA binding kinetics clarify the role of MutS ATPase activity in mismatch repair.
|
| |
J Mol Biol, 366,
1087-1098.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
S.S.Shell,
C.D.Putnam,
and
R.D.Kolodner
(2007).
Chimeric Saccharomyces cerevisiae Msh6 protein with an Msh3 mispair-binding domain combines properties of both proteins.
|
| |
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 104,
10956-10961.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
G.Plotz,
S.Zeuzem,
and
J.Raedle
(2006).
DNA mismatch repair and Lynch syndrome.
|
| |
J Mol Histol, 37,
271-283.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
J.H.Lebbink,
D.Georgijevic,
G.Natrajan,
A.Fish,
H.H.Winterwerp,
T.K.Sixma,
and
N.de Wind
(2006).
Dual role of MutS glutamate 38 in DNA mismatch discrimination and in the authorization of repair.
|
| |
EMBO J, 25,
409-419.
|
 |
|
PDB codes:
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
J.Jiricny
(2006).
The multifaceted mismatch-repair system.
|
| |
Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 7,
335-346.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
L.Manelyte,
C.Urbanke,
L.Giron-Monzon,
and
P.Friedhoff
(2006).
Structural and functional analysis of the MutS C-terminal tetramerization domain.
|
| |
Nucleic Acids Res, 34,
5270-5279.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
S.H.Jun,
T.G.Kim,
and
C.Ban
(2006).
DNA mismatch repair system. Classical and fresh roles.
|
| |
FEBS J, 273,
1609-1619.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
S.W.Matson,
and
A.B.Robertson
(2006).
The UvrD helicase and its modulation by the mismatch repair protein MutL.
|
| |
Nucleic Acids Res, 34,
4089-4097.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
S.Banerjee,
and
H.Flores-Rozas
(2005).
Cadmium inhibits mismatch repair by blocking the ATPase activity of the MSH2-MSH6 complex.
|
| |
Nucleic Acids Res, 33,
1410-1419.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
T.A.Kunkel,
and
D.A.Erie
(2005).
DNA mismatch repair.
|
| |
Annu Rev Biochem, 74,
681-710.
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
The most recent references are shown first.
Citation data come partly from CiteXplore and partly
from an automated harvesting procedure. Note that this is likely to be
only a partial list as not all journals are covered by
either method. However, we are continually building up the citation data
so more and more references will be included with time.
Where a reference describes a PDB structure, the PDB
codes are
shown on the right.
|
|