4.2 Article

Homology modelling and site-directed mutagenesis studies of the epoxide hydrolase from Phanerochaete chrysosporium

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 149, Issue 6, Pages 673-684

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jb/mvr015

Keywords

docking; epoxide hydrolase; homology modelling; Phanerochaete chrysosporium; site-directed mutagenesis

Funding

  1. HiTech Research and Development Program of China [2006AA02Z221]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Three-dimensional structural model of epoxide hydrolase (PchEHA) from Phanerochaete chrysosporium was constructed based on X-ray structure of Agrobacterium radiobacter AD1 sEH using SWISS-MODEL server. Conserved residues constituting the active site cavity were identified, of which the functional roles of 14 residues were determined by site-directed mutagenesis. In catalytic triad, Asp105 and His308 play a leading role in alkylation and hydrolysis steps, respectively. Distance between Asp105 and epoxide ring of substrate may determine the regiospecificity in the substrate docking model. Asp277 located at the entrance of substrate tunnel is concerned with catalysis but not essential. D307E had the highest activity and lower enantioselectivity among 14 mutants, suggesting Asp307 may be involved in choice of substrate configuration. Y159F and Y241F almost exhibited no activity, indicating that they are essential to bind substrate and facilitate opening of epoxide ring. Besides, His35-Gly36-Asn37-Pro38, Trp106 and Trp309 surrounding Asp105, may coordinate the integration of active site cavity and influence substrate binding. Especially, W106I reversed the enantioselectivity, perhaps due to more deteriorative impact on the preferred (R)-styrene oxide. Gly65 and Gly67 occurring at beta-turns and Gly36 are vital in holding protein conformation. Conclusively, single conserved residue around the active sites has an important impact on catalytic properties.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available