Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28859178›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Directed evolution provides insight into conformational substrate sampling by SrtA.

Muna Suliman, Vishaka Santosh, Tom C M Seegar, Annamarie C Dalton, Kathryn M Schultz, Candice S Klug, William A Barton

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Engineered Sortases in Peptide and Protein Chemistry.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2021
    Review
  3. An In Vitro Study of the Effect ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  4. Enhancing Robustness of Sortase A by Loop Engineering and Backbone Cyclization.Chemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2020
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Engineered control of enzyme structural dynamics and function.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Muna SulimanDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, United States of America.
Vishaka SantoshDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, United States of America.
Tom C M SeegarDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, United States of America.
Annamarie C DaltonDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, United States of America.
Kathryn M SchultzDepartment of Biophysics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States of America.
Candice S KlugDepartment of Biophysics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States of America.
William A BartonDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0457-0572
Virginia Commonwealth University · USMedical College of Wisconsin · US

Funding

TR&D Project 3P41EB001980 · NIBIB · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI KLUG, CANDICE S · 2003 to 2017
$16.3M
Acquisition of a Bruker E580 Pulse EPR SpectrometerS10RR022422 · NCRR · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI KLUG, CANDICE S · 2007 to 2007
$500k
Acquisition of Q-band Pulsed EPR CapabilityS10OD011937 · OD · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI KLUG, CANDICE S · 2012 to 2012
$381k
Structural and biophysical characterization of Tie receptor/integrin interactionsF31CA165673 · NCI · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI DALTON, ANNAMARIE C · 2012 to 2014
$92k
NCI NIH HHS F31 CA165673NCRR NIH HHS S10 RR022422NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB001980NIH HHS S10 OD011937
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Sortase family of transpeptidases are found in numerous gram-positive bacteria and involved in divergent physiological processes including anchoring of surface proteins to the cell wall as well as pili assembly. As essential proteins, sortase enzymes have been the focus of considerable interest for the development of novel anti-microbials, however, more recently their function as unique transpeptidases has been exploited for the synthesis of novel bio-conjugates. Yet, for synthetic purposes, SrtA-mediated conjugation suffers from the enzyme's inherently poor catalytic efficiency. Therefore, to identify SrtA variants with improved catalytic efficiency, we used directed evolution to select a catalytically enhanced SrtA enzyme. An analysis of improved SrtA variants in the context of sequence conservation, NMR and x-ray crystal structures, and kinetic data suggests a novel mechanism for catalysis involving large conformational changes that delivers substrate to the active site pocket. Indeed, using DEER-EPR spectroscopy, we reveal that upon substrate binding, SrtA undergoes a large scissors-like conformational change that simultaneously translates the sort-tag substrate to the active site in addition to repositioning key catalytic residues for esterification. A better understanding of Sortase dynamics will significantly enhance future engineering and drug discovery efforts.

Indexed as

Directed Molecular EvolutionAminoacyltransferasesBacterial ProteinsCatalysisCatalytic DomainCrystallography, X-RayCysteine EndopeptidasesElectron Spin Resonance SpectroscopyKineticsProtein ConformationStaphylococcus aureusSubstrate SpecificityAminoacyltransferasesBacterial ProteinsCysteine Endopeptidasessortase A

Identifiers

PMID28859178
PMCPMC5578623
OpenAlexW2753737444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.