4.7 Article

Asymmetric Structure of Podophage GP4 Reveals a Novel Architecture of Three Types of Tail Fibers

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
卷 435, 期 20, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2023.168258

关键词

podophage; tail fiber; fiber-tail adaptor; symmetry-mismatch structure; cryo-EM

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study resolved the asymmetric structure of the podophage GP4 and identified a new topology of the tail components. The podophage GP4 has three types of tail fibers, which may provide evolutionary advantages in terms of host range and infection efficiency.
Bacteriophage tail fibers (or called tail spikes) play a critical role in the early stage of infection by binding to the bacterial surface. Podophages with known structures usually possess one or two types of fibers. Here, we resolved an asymmetric structure of the podophage GP4 to near-atomic resolution by cryo-EM. Our structure revealed a symmetry-mismatch relationship between the components of the GP4 tail with pre-viously unseen topologies. In detail, two dodecameric adaptors (adaptors I and II), a hexameric nozzle, and a tail needle form a conserved tail body connected to a dodecameric portal occupying a unique vertex of the icosahedral head. However, five chain-like extended fibers (fiber I) and five tulip-like short fibers (fiber II) are anchored to a 15-fold symmetric fiber-tail adaptor, encircling the adaptor I, and six bamboo-like trimeric fibers (fiber III) are connected to the nozzle. Five fibers I, each composed of five dimers of the protein gp80 linked by an elongated rope protein, are attached to the five edges of the tail vertex of the icosahedral head. In this study, we identified a new structure of the podophage with three types of tail fibers, and such phages with different types of fibers may have a broad host range and/or infect host cells with considerably high efficiency, providing evolutionary advantages in harsh environments.(c) 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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