 |
PDBsum entry 2k3m
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Membrane protein
|
PDB id
|
|
|
|
2k3m
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
DOI no:
|
Protein Sci
18:134-146
(2009)
|
|
PubMed id:
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Backbone structure of a small helical integral membrane protein: A unique structural characterization.
|
|
R.C.Page,
S.Lee,
J.D.Moore,
S.J.Opella,
T.A.Cross.
|
|
|
|
| |
ABSTRACT
|
|
|
| |
|
The structural characterization of small integral membrane proteins pose a
significant challenge for structural biology because of the multitude of
molecular interactions between the protein and its heterogeneous environment.
Here, the three-dimensional backbone structure of Rv1761c from Mycobacterium
tuberculosis has been characterized using solution NMR spectroscopy and
dodecylphosphocholine (DPC) micelles as a membrane mimetic environment. This 127
residue single transmembrane helix protein has a significant (10 kDa) C-terminal
extramembranous domain. Five hundred and ninety distance, backbone dihedral, and
orientational restraints were employed resulting in a 1.16 A rmsd backbone
structure with a transmembrane domain defined at 0.40 A. The structure
determination approach utilized residual dipolar coupling orientation data from
partially aligned samples, long-range paramagnetic relaxation enhancement
derived distances, and dihedral restraints from chemical shift indices to
determine the global fold. This structural model of Rv1761c displays some
influences by the membrane mimetic illustrating that the structure of these
membrane proteins is dictated by a combination of the amino acid sequence and
the protein's environment. These results demonstrate both the efficacy of the
structural approach and the necessity to consider the biophysical properties of
membrane mimetics when interpreting structural data of integral membrane
proteins and, in particular, small integral membrane proteins.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Selected figure(s)
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Figure 3.
The 30 lowest energy backbone structures (A) are shown in a
wide-eyed stereo diagram along with a ribbon diagram of the
lowest energy structure (B). The ribbon representation clearly
shows the kink of the TM helix and helical propensity of the EM
domain. Both diagrams are colored from blue (amino terminus) to
red (carboxyl terminus). Structures are aligned to the average
backbone structure using all N[H], C[[alpha]], and C[prime prime
or minute] atoms.
|
 |
Figure 5.
The EM domain of Rv1761c is characterized by a set of four
helices (A, B). These four helices are organized such that H4
and H5 are co-planar and both H3 and H6 are behind the H4/H5
plane (A, B). The helical domain is shown as a ribbon model (A)
and a backbone trace for the 30 lowest energy structures (B)
colored in a rainbow (as in Fig. 3A Figure 3- ,
B). The 30 superimposed backbone structures (B) are aligned to
the average backbone structure using N[H], C[[alpha]], and
C[prime prime or minute] atoms from helices H3, H4, H5, and H6
(Residues 59 --67, 73 --86, 90 --103, and 110 --120). The
U-shaped H4/H5 helical pair forms a hydrophobic surface (C) with
the amphipathic Helix H6 situated just below the H4/H5 plane and
the hydrophilic Helix H3 located well below the H4/H5 plane (D).
For C, D positively charged residues are colored red (Arg, His,
Lys), negatively charged residues are colored blue (Asp, Glu),
nonpolar residues are colored grey (Ala, Gly, Ile, Leu, Met,
Pro, Phe, Ser, Thr, Val) and polar uncharged residues are
colored green (Asn, Cys, Gln, Trp, Tyr). Throughout this figure,
the flexible carboxyl terminal region (residues 122 --127) and
the flexible linker region between the TM and H3 are not shown.
Arrows and axes indicate the approximate rotations used to
transform between the orientations depicted in A, C, and D.
Figure generated using PyMOL.44.
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
The above figures are
reprinted
from an Open Access publication published by the Protein Society:
Protein Sci
(2009,
18,
134-146)
copyright 2009.
|
|
| |
Figures were
selected
by an automated process.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Literature references that cite this PDB file's key reference
|
|
 |
| |
PubMed id
|
 |
Reference
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
C.Wang,
S.Li,
L.Xi,
H.Liu,
and
X.Yao
(2011).
Accurate prediction of the burial status of transmembrane residues of α-helix membrane protein by incorporating the structural and physicochemical features.
|
| |
Amino Acids,
40,
991.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
D.T.Murray,
Y.Lu,
T.A.Cross,
and
J.R.Quine
(2011).
Geometry of kinked protein helices from NMR data.
|
| |
J Magn Reson,
210,
82-89.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
P.H.Keizers,
and
M.Ubbink
(2011).
Paramagnetic tagging for protein structure and dynamics analysis.
|
| |
Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc,
58,
88-96.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
K.J.Yeo,
H.Y.Kim,
Y.P.Kim,
E.Hwang,
M.H.Kim,
C.Cheong,
S.Choe,
and
Y.H.Jeon
(2010).
Rapid exploration of the folding topology of helical membrane proteins using paramagnetic perturbation.
|
| |
Protein Sci,
19,
2409-2417.
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
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.
|
');
}
}
 |