Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34235478›Full record

ArticleCurrent research in structural biology2020

Structure dictates the mechanism of ligand recognition in the histidine and maltose binding proteins.

Lakshmi P Jayanthi, Nahren Manuel Mascarenhas, Shachi Gosavi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current research in structural biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

3 authors.

Lakshmi P JayanthiSimons Centre for the Study of Living Machines, National Centre for Biological Sciences, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bangalore, 560065, India.
Nahren Manuel MascarenhasDepartment of Chemistry, Sacred Heart College (Autonomous), Tirupattur, 635601, India.
Shachi GosaviSimons Centre for the Study of Living Machines, National Centre for Biological Sciences, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bangalore, 560065, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two mechanisms, induced fit (IF) and conformational selection (CS), have been proposed to explain ligand recognition coupled conformational changes. The histidine binding protein (HisJ) adopts the CS mechanism, in which a pre-equilibrium is established between the open and the closed states with the ligand binding to the closed state. Despite being structurally similar to HisJ, the maltose binding protein (MBP) adopts the IF mechanism, in which the ligand binds the open state and induces a transition to the closed state. To understand the molecular determinants of this difference, we performed molecular dynamics (MD) simulations of coarse-grained dual structure based models. We find that intra-protein contacts unique to the closed state are sufficient to promote the conformational transition in HisJ, indicating a CS-like mechanism. In contrast, additional ligand-mimicking contacts are required to "induce" the conformational transition in MBP suggesting an IF-like mechanism. In agreement with experiments, destabilizing modifications to two structural features, the spine helix (SH) and the balancing interface (BI), present in MBP but absent in HisJ, reduce the need for ligand-mimicking contacts indicating that SH and BI act as structural restraints that keep MBP in the open state. We introduce an SH like element into HisJ and observe that this can impede the conformational transition increasing the importance of ligand-mimicking contacts. Similarly, simultaneous mutations to BI and SH in MBP reduce the barrier to conformational transitions significantly and promote a CS-like mechanism. Together, our results show that structural restraints present in the protein structure can determine the mechanism of conformational transitions and even simple models that correctly capture such structural features can predict their positions. MD simulations of such models can thus be used, in conjunction with mutational experiments, to regulate protein ligand interactions, and modulate ligand binding affinities.

Indexed as

BI, Balancing interfaceConformational selectionCS, conformational selectionCTD, C-terminal domaindSBM, dual structure-based modelDual structure based modelsFEP, free energy profileHisJ, histidine binding proteinIF, induced fitInduced fitMBP, maltose binding proteinMD, molecular dynamicsMD simulationsNTD, N-terminal domainPBP, periplasmic binding proteinPeriplasmic binding proteinsSH, spine helixsSBM, single structure-based modelStructural restraintsWT, wild-type

Identifiers

PMID34235478
PMCPMC8244415

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.