4.4 Article

Crystal Structure of Acyl-CoA Oxidase 3 from Yarrowia lipolytica with Specificity for Short-Chain Acyl-CoA

期刊

JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
卷 28, 期 4, 页码 597-605

出版社

KOREAN SOC MICROBIOLOGY & BIOTECHNOLOGY
DOI: 10.4014/jmb.1711.11032

关键词

Yarrowia lipolytica; acyl-CoA oxidase 3; fatty acid; beta-oxidation

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korean Government (MSIP) [2014M1A2A2033626, NRF-2013R1A1A2059325, NRF-2017R1A6A3A11031554]
  2. New & Renewable Energy Core Technology Program of the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) - Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy, Republic of Korea [20153030091360]
  3. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [20153030091360] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Acyl-CoA oxidases (ACOXs) play important roles in lipid metabolism, including peroxisomal fatty acid beta-oxidation by the conversion of acyl-CoAs to 2-trans-enoyl-CoAs. The yeast Yarrowia lipolytica can utilize fatty acids as a carbon source and thus has extensive biotechnological applications. The crystal structure of ACOX3 from Y. lipolytica (YlACOX3) was determined at a resolution of 2.5 angstrom. It contained two molecules per asymmetric unit, and the monomeric structure was folded into four domains; N alpha, N beta, C alpha 1, and C alpha 2 domains. The cofactor flavin adenine dinucleotide was bound in the dimer interface. The substrate-binding pocket was located near the cofactor, and formed at the interface between the Na, N beta, and C alpha 1 domains. Comparisons with other ACOX structures provided structural insights into how YlACOX has a substrate preference for short-chain acyl-CoA. In addition, the structure of YlACOX3 was compared with those of medium- and long-chain ACOXs, and the structural basis for their differences in substrate specificity was discussed.

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

4.4
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