ArticlePloS one2017
Evolution-guided adaptation of an adenylation domain substrate specificity to an unusual amino acid.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structural basis of the nonribosomal codes for nonproteinogenic amino acid selective adenylation enzymes in the biosynthesis of natural products.Journal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology · 2019Review
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adenylation domains CcbC and LmbC control the specific incorporation of amino acid precursors in the biosynthesis of lincosamide antibiotics celesticetin and lincomycin. Both proteins originate from a common L-proline-specific ancestor, but LmbC was evolutionary adapted to use an unusual substrate, (2S,4R)-4-propyl-proline (PPL). Using site-directed mutagenesis of the LmbC substrate binding pocket and an ATP-[32P]PPi exchange assay, three residues, G308, A207 and L246, were identified as crucial for the PPL activation, presumably forming together a channel of a proper size, shape and hydrophobicity to accommodate the propyl side chain of PPL. Subsequently, we experimentally simulated the molecular evolution leading from L-proline-specific substrate binding pocket to the PPL-specific LmbC. The mere change of three amino acid residues in originally strictly L-proline-specific CcbC switched its substrate specificity to prefer PPL and even synthetic alkyl-L-proline derivatives with prolonged side chain. This is the first time that such a comparative study provided an evidence of the evolutionary relevant adaptation of the adenylation domain substrate binding pocket to a new sterically different substrate by a few point mutations. The herein experimentally simulated rearrangement of the substrate binding pocket seems to be the general principle of the de novo genesis of adenylation domains' unusual substrate specificities. However, to keep the overall natural catalytic efficiency of the enzyme, a more comprehensive rearrangement of the whole protein would probably be employed within natural evolution process.
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.