ArticlePloS one2024
Computational investigation of cis-1,4-polyisoprene binding to the latex-clearing protein LcpK30.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Combined proteomics and metabolomics analyses revealed molecular signatures associated with proliferative diabetic retinopathy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Identification and validation of biomarkers associated with lactic acid metabolism in diabetic nephropathy.PeerJ · 2026Article
- Identification and validation of microglia-associated genes in ischemic stroke using single-cell and bulk RNA-seq.Molecular brain · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Latex clearing proteins (Lcps) catalyze the oxidative cleavage of the C = C bonds in cis-1,4-polyisoprene (natural rubber), producing oligomeric compounds that can be repurposed to other materials. The active catalytic site of Lcps is buried inside the protein structure, thus raising the question of how the large hydrophobic rubber chains can access the catalytic center. To improve our understanding of hydrophobic polymeric substrate binding to Lcps and subsequent catalysis, we investigated the interaction of a substrate model containing ten carbon-carbon double bonds with the structurally characterized LcpK30, using multiple computational tools. Prediction of the putative tunnels and cavities in the LcpK30 structure, using CAVER-Pymol plugin 3.0.3, fpocket and Molecular Dynamic (MD) simulations provided valuable insights on how substrate enters from the surface to the buried active site. Two dominant tunnels were discovered that provided feasible routes for substrate binding, and the presence of two hydrophobic pockets was predicted near the heme cofactor. The larger of these pockets is likely to accommodate the substrate and to determine the size distribution of the oligomers. Protein-ligand docking was carried out using GOLD software to predict the conformations and interactions of the substrate within the protein active site. Deeper insight into the protein-substrate interactions, including close-contacts, binding energies and potential cleavage sites in the cis-1,4-polyisoprene, were obtained from MD simulations. Our findings provide further justification that the protein-substrate complexation in LcpK30 is mainly driven by the hydrophobic interactions accompanied by mutual conformational changes of both molecules. Two potential binding modes were identified, with the substrate in either extended or folded conformations. Whilst binding in the extended conformation was most favorable, the folded conformation suggested a preference for cleavage of a central double bond, leading to a preference for oligomers with 5 to 6 C = C bonds. The results provide insight into further enzyme engineering studies to improve catalytic activity and diversify the substrate and product scope of Lcps.
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.