4.7 Article

Assembly of Ruminococcus flavefaciens cellulosome revealed by structures of two cohesin-dockerin complexes

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-00919-w

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (Lisbon, Portugal) [PTDC/BIA-MIC/5947/2014, RECI/BBB-BEP/0124/2012]
  2. European Community [283570, Biostruct-X_4399]
  3. [SFRH/BD/86821/2012]
  4. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [RECI/BBB-BEP/0124/2012, SFRH/BD/86821/2012, PTDC/BIA-MIC/5947/2014] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cellulosomes are sophisticated multi-enzymatic nanomachines produced by anaerobes to effectively deconstruct plant structural carbohydrates. Cellulosome assembly involves the binding of enzymeborne dockerins (Doc) to repeated cohesin (Coh) modules located in a non-catalytic scaffoldin. Docs appended to cellulosomal enzymes generally present two similar Coh-binding interfaces supporting a dual-binding mode, which may confer increased positional adjustment of the different complex components. Ruminococcus flavefaciens' cellulosome is assembled from a repertoire of 223 Doccontaining proteins classified into 6 groups. Recent studies revealed that Docs of groups 3 and 6 are recruited to the cellulosome via a single-binding mode mechanism with an adaptor scaffoldin. To investigate the extent to which the single-binding mode contributes to the assembly of R. flavefaciens cellulosome, the structures of two group 1 Docs bound to Cohs of primary (ScaA) and adaptor (ScaB) scaffoldins were solved. The data revealed that group 1 Docs display a conserved mechanism of Coh recognition involving a single-binding mode. Therefore, in contrast to all cellulosomes described to date, the assembly of R. flavefaciens cellulosome involves single but not dual-binding mode Docs. Thus, this work reveals a novel mechanism of cellulosome assembly and challenges the ubiquitous implication of the dual-binding mode in the acquisition of cellulosome flexibility.

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