ArticleBiochimica et biophysica acta2015
Differential repositioning of the second transmembrane helices from E. coli Tar and EnvZ upon moving the flanking aromatic residues.
Article in Biochimica et biophysica acta, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structural and Functional Analysis of the Escherichia coli Acid-Sensing Histidine Kinase EvgS.Journal of bacteriology · 2017Article
- Employing aromatic tuning to modulate output from two-component signaling circuits.Journal of biological engineering · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Aromatic tuning, i.e. repositioning aromatic residues found at the cytoplasmic end of transmembrane (TM) domains within bacterial receptors, has been previously shown to modulate signal output from the aspartate chemoreceptor (Tar) and the major osmosensor EnvZ of Escherichia coli. In the case of Tar, changes in signal output consistent with the vertical position of the native Trp-Tyr aromatic tandem within TM2 were observed. In contrast, within EnvZ, where a Trp-Leu-Phe aromatic triplet was repositioned, the surface that the triplet resided upon was the major determinant governing signal output. However, these studies failed to determine whether moving the aromatic residues was sufficient to physically reposition the TM helix within a membrane. Recent coarse-grained molecular dynamics (CG-MD) simulations predicted displacement of Tar TM2 upon moving the aromatic residues at the cytoplasmic end of the helix. Here, we demonstrate that repositioning the Trp-Tyr tandem within Tar TM2 displaces the C-terminal boundary of the helix relative to the membrane. In a similar analysis of EnvZ, an abrupt initial displacement of TM2 was observed but no subsequent movement was seen, suggesting that the vertical position of TM2 is not governed by the location of the Trp-Leu-Phe triplet. Our results also provide another set of experimental data, i.e. the resistance of EnvZ TM2 to being displaced upon aromatic tuning, which could be useful for subsequent refinement of the initial CG-MD simulations. Finally, we discuss the limitations of these methodologies, how moving flanking aromatic residues might impact steady-state signal output and the potential to employ aromatic tuning in other bacterial membrane-spanning receptors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.