|
|
|
|
 |
Contents |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Residue conservation analysis
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
DOI no:
|
EMBO J
23:1474-1482
(2004)
|
|
PubMed id:
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Structural inhibition of the colicin D tRNase by the tRNA-mimicking immunity protein.
|
|
M.Graille,
L.Mora,
R.H.Buckingham,
H.van Tilbeurgh,
M.de Zamaroczy.
|
|
|
|
| |
ABSTRACT
|
|
|
| |
|
Colicins are toxins secreted by Escherichia coli in order to kill their
competitors. Colicin D is a 75 kDa protein that consists of a translocation
domain, a receptor-binding domain and a cytotoxic domain, which specifically
cleaves the anticodon loop of all four tRNA(Arg) isoacceptors, thereby
inactivating protein synthesis and leading to cell death. Here we report the 2.0
A resolution crystal structure of the complex between the toxic domain and its
immunity protein ImmD. Neither component shows structural homology to known
RNases or their inhibitors. In contrast to other characterized colicin
nuclease-Imm complexes, the colicin D active site pocket is completely blocked
by ImmD, which, by bringing a negatively charged cluster in opposition to a
positively charged cluster on the surface of colicin D, appears to mimic the
tRNA substrate backbone. Site-directed mutations affecting either the catalytic
domain or the ImmD protein have led to the identification of the residues vital
for catalytic activity and for the tight colicin D/ImmD interaction that
inhibits colicin D toxicity and tRNase catalytic activity.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Selected figure(s)
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Figure 1.
Figure 1 Stereo views. (A) Ribbon representation of the complex
between colicin D (yellow) and ImmD (pink). The colicin D His611
and the ImmD Glu56 side chains at the interface are shown as
sticks. Residues whose mutation has no effect on the in vivo and
in vitro activities are highlighted in green. (B) Close-up of
the colicin D putative active site. The colicin D tRNase domain
is shown as a ribbon with the potential active site residues
represented as sticks. For clarity, residues are identified by
their one-letter code in all figures. (C) Close-up of main
colicin D (yellow) and ImmD (green) residues involved at the
dimer interface.
|
 |
Figure 2.
Figure 2 Molecular surface representation. (A, B) Secondary
structure assignments along the colicin D (A) and ImmD (B)
sequences. Residues involved in complex formation are
highlighted in bold. (C) The binary colicin D (yellow) -ImmD
(green) complex. The orientation is the same as in Figure 1A.
The red-coloured region corresponds to ImmD positions located
outside the interface, but whose mutation abolishes or reduces
the inhibitory capacity. (D) Surface mapping of the colicin D
catalytic active site residues. Unmutated positions are coloured
grey. Residues whose mutation does not alter tRNase activity are
shown in green, those whose substitution results in partially or
fully inactivated proteins are depicted in orange and red,
respectively. For clarity, only residues whose mutation results
in complete loss of activity are labelled. (E) ImmD
foot-printing (green) at the colicin D surface. The His611
residue is coloured yellow. The orientation is the same as in
(D). (F) Open leaflet representation of the complex illustrating
the electrostatic complementarity between colicin D and ImmD.
Regions of the surface with negative potential are coloured red
and those with positive potential are in blue. The colicin D
orientation is similar as in (D). The ImmD is rotated 180°
around the vertical axis. (G) Surface mapping of the ImmD
residues involved in the inhibitory effect. Colour coding is the
same as in (D). The orientations of the ImmD in the top and
bottom panels are related by a 180° rotation around the vertical
axis.
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
The above figures are
reprinted
from an Open Access publication published by Macmillan Publishers Ltd:
EMBO J
(2004,
23,
1474-1482)
copyright 2004.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Literature references that cite this PDB file's key reference
|
|
 |
| |
PubMed id
|
 |
Reference
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
W.Yang
(2011).
Nucleases: diversity of structure, function and mechanism.
|
| |
Q Rev Biophys,
44,
1.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
M.Shigematsu,
T.Ogawa,
A.Kido,
H.K.Kitamoto,
M.Hidaka,
and
H.Masaki
(2009).
Cellular and transcriptional responses of yeast to the cleavage of cytosolic tRNAs induced by colicin D.
|
| |
Yeast,
26,
663-673.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
N.Keppetipola,
R.Jain,
B.Meineke,
M.Diver,
and
S.Shuman
(2009).
Structure-activity relationships in Kluyveromyces lactis gamma-toxin, a eukaryal tRNA anticodon nuclease.
|
| |
RNA,
15,
1036-1044.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
N.Kowalsman,
and
M.Eisenstein
(2009).
Combining interface core and whole interface descriptors in postscan processing of protein-protein docking models.
|
| |
Proteins,
77,
297-318.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
J.Lu,
A.Esberg,
B.Huang,
and
A.S.Byström
(2008).
Kluyveromyces lactis gamma-toxin, a ribonuclease that recognizes the anticodon stem loop of tRNA.
|
| |
Nucleic Acids Res,
36,
1072-1080.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
J.Nandakumar,
B.Schwer,
R.Schaffrath,
and
S.Shuman
(2008).
RNA repair: an antidote to cytotoxic eukaryal RNA damage.
|
| |
Mol Cell,
31,
278-286.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
L.Mora,
M.Klepsch,
R.H.Buckingham,
V.Heurgué-Hamard,
S.Kervestin,
and
M.de Zamaroczy
(2008).
Dual roles of the central domain of colicin D tRNase in TonB-mediated import and in immunity.
|
| |
J Biol Chem,
283,
4993-5003.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
E.Cascales,
S.K.Buchanan,
D.Duché,
C.Kleanthous,
R.Lloubès,
K.Postle,
M.Riley,
S.Slatin,
and
D.Cavard
(2007).
Colicin biology.
|
| |
Microbiol Mol Biol Rev,
71,
158-229.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
N.Keppetipola,
J.Nandakumar,
and
S.Shuman
(2007).
Reprogramming the tRNA-splicing activity of a bacterial RNA repair enzyme.
|
| |
Nucleic Acids Res,
35,
3624-3630.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
N.Keppetipola,
and
S.Shuman
(2007).
Characterization of the 2',3' cyclic phosphodiesterase activities of Clostridium thermocellum polynucleotide kinase-phosphatase and bacteriophage lambda phosphatase.
|
| |
Nucleic Acids Res,
35,
7721-7732.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
N.London,
and
O.Schueler-Furman
(2007).
Assessing the energy landscape of CAPRI targets by FunHunt.
|
| |
Proteins,
69,
809-815.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
S.J.de Vries,
A.D.van Dijk,
M.Krzeminski,
M.van Dijk,
A.Thureau,
V.Hsu,
T.Wassenaar,
and
A.M.Bonvin
(2007).
HADDOCK versus HADDOCK: new features and performance of HADDOCK2.0 on the CAPRI targets.
|
| |
Proteins,
69,
726-733.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
J.J.Gray
(2006).
High-resolution protein-protein docking.
|
| |
Curr Opin Struct Biol,
16,
183-193.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
K.Mosbahi,
D.Walker,
R.James,
G.R.Moore,
and
C.Kleanthous
(2006).
Global structural rearrangement of the cell penetrating ribonuclease colicin E3 on interaction with phospholipid membranes.
|
| |
Protein Sci,
15,
620-627.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
S.Yajima,
S.Inoue,
T.Ogawa,
T.Nonaka,
K.Ohsawa,
and
H.Masaki
(2006).
Structural basis for sequence-dependent recognition of colicin E5 tRNase by mimicking the mRNA-tRNA interaction.
|
| |
Nucleic Acids Res,
34,
6074-6082.
|
 |
|
PDB codes:
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
A.D.van Dijk,
S.J.de Vries,
C.Dominguez,
H.Chen,
H.X.Zhou,
and
A.M.Bonvin
(2005).
Data-driven docking: HADDOCK's adventures in CAPRI.
|
| |
Proteins,
60,
232-238.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
C.Wang,
O.Schueler-Furman,
and
D.Baker
(2005).
Improved side-chain modeling for protein-protein docking.
|
| |
Protein Sci,
14,
1328-1339.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
D.N.Wilson,
and
K.H.Nierhaus
(2005).
RelBE or not to be.
|
| |
Nat Struct Mol Biol,
12,
282-284.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
E.Ben-Zeev,
N.Kowalsman,
A.Ben-Shimon,
D.Segal,
T.Atarot,
O.Noivirt,
T.Shay,
and
M.Eisenstein
(2005).
Docking to single-domain and multiple-domain proteins: old and new challenges.
|
| |
Proteins,
60,
195-201.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
G.Terashi,
M.Takeda-Shitaka,
D.Takaya,
K.Komatsu,
and
H.Umeyama
(2005).
Searching for protein-protein interaction sites and docking by the methods of molecular dynamics, grid scoring, and the pairwise interaction potential of amino acid residues.
|
| |
Proteins,
60,
289-295.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
H.Chen,
and
H.X.Zhou
(2005).
Prediction of interface residues in protein-protein complexes by a consensus neural network method: test against NMR data.
|
| |
Proteins,
61,
21-35.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
H.Takagi,
Y.Kakuta,
T.Okada,
M.Yao,
I.Tanaka,
and
M.Kimura
(2005).
Crystal structure of archaeal toxin-antitoxin RelE-RelB complex with implications for toxin activity and antitoxin effects.
|
| |
Nat Struct Mol Biol,
12,
327-331.
|
 |
|
PDB code:
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
J.Janin
(2005).
Assessing predictions of protein-protein interaction: the CAPRI experiment.
|
| |
Protein Sci,
14,
278-283.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
J.Janin
(2005).
The targets of CAPRI rounds 3-5.
|
| |
Proteins,
60,
170-175.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
L.Mora,
N.Diaz,
R.H.Buckingham,
and
M.de Zamaroczy
(2005).
Import of the transfer RNase colicin D requires site-specific interaction with the energy-transducing protein TonB.
|
| |
J Bacteriol,
187,
2693-2697.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
M.D.Daily,
D.Masica,
A.Sivasubramanian,
S.Somarouthu,
and
J.J.Gray
(2005).
CAPRI rounds 3-5 reveal promising successes and future challenges for RosettaDock.
|
| |
Proteins,
60,
181-186.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
O.Schueler-Furman,
C.Wang,
and
D.Baker
(2005).
Progress in protein-protein docking: atomic resolution predictions in the CAPRI experiment using RosettaDock with an improved treatment of side-chain flexibility.
|
| |
Proteins,
60,
187-194.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
O.Schueler-Furman,
C.Wang,
P.Bradley,
K.Misura,
and
D.Baker
(2005).
Progress in modeling of protein structures and interactions.
|
| |
Science,
310,
638-642.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
S.R.Comeau,
S.Vajda,
and
C.J.Camacho
(2005).
Performance of the first protein docking server ClusPro in CAPRI rounds 3-5.
|
| |
Proteins,
60,
239-244.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
X.H.Ma,
C.H.Li,
L.Z.Shen,
X.Q.Gong,
W.Z.Chen,
and
C.X.Wang
(2005).
Biologically enhanced sampling geometric docking and backbone flexibility treatment with multiconformational superposition.
|
| |
Proteins,
60,
319-323.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
A.Martins,
and
S.Shuman
(2004).
An RNA ligase from Deinococcus radiodurans.
|
| |
J Biol Chem,
279,
50654-50661.
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
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.
|
');
}
}
 |