4.5 Article

A novel amidotransferase required for lipoic acid cofactor assembly in Bacillus subtilis

期刊

MOLECULAR MICROBIOLOGY
卷 80, 期 2, 页码 350-363

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2011.07598.x

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of General Medical Sciences [5 T32 GM070421]
  2. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease [AI15650]
  3. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas (CONICET)
  4. Agencia Nacional de Promocion Cientifica y Tecnologica (FONCYT)
  5. Fundacion Josefina Prats

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>In the companion paper we reported that Bacillus subtilis requires three proteins for lipoic acid metabolism, all of which are members of the lipoate protein ligase family. Two of the proteins, LipM and LplJ, have been shown to be an octanoyltransferase and a lipoate : protein ligase respectively. The third protein, LipL, is essential for lipoic acid synthesis, but had no detectable octanoyltransferase or ligase activity either in vitro or in vivo. We report that LipM specifically modifies the glycine cleavage system protein, GcvH, and therefore another mechanism must exist for modification of other lipoic acid requiring enzymes (e.g. pyruvate dehydrogenase). We show that this function is provided by LipL, which catalyses the amidotransfer (transamidation) of the octanoyl moiety from octanoyl-GcvH to the E2 subunit of pyruvate dehydrogenase. LipL activity was demonstrated in vitro with purified components and proceeds via a thioester-linked acyl-enzyme intermediate. As predicted, Delta gcvH strains are lipoate auxotrophs. LipL represents a new enzyme activity. It is a GcvH:[lipoyl domain] amidotransferase that probably uses a Cys-Lys catalytic dyad. Although the active site cysteine residues of LipL and LipB are located in different positions within the polypeptide chains, alignment of their structures show these residues occupy similar positions. Thus, these two homologous enzymes have convergent architectures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据