4.7 Article

The periplasmic bacterial molecular chaperone SurA adapts its structure to bind peptides in different conformations to assert a sequence preference for aromatic residues

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
卷 373, 期 2, 页码 367-381

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2007.07.069

关键词

molecular chaperone; membrane protein folding; crystallography; phage display; isothermal titration calorimetry

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM039928-19, R01 GM039928-20, R01 GM039928-18, R01 GM039928, GM39928] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The periplasmic molecular chaperone protein SurA facilitates correct folding and maturation of outer membrane proteins in Gram-negative bacteria. It preferentially binds peptides that have a high fraction of aromatic amino acids. Phage display selections, isothermal titration calorimetry and crystallographic structure determination have been used to elucidate the basis of the binding specificity. The peptide recognition is imparted by the first peptidyl-prolyl isomerase (PPIase) domain of SurA. Crystal structures of complexes between peptides of sequence WEYIPNV and NFTLKFWDIFRK with the first PPlase domain of the Escherichia coli SurA protein at 1.3 angstrom resolution, and of a complex between the dodecapeptide and a SurA fragment lacking the second PPlase domain at 3.4 angstrom resolution, have been solved. SurA binds as a monomer to the heptapeptide in an extended conformation. It binds as a dimer to the dodecapeptide in an a-helical conformation, predicated on a substantial structural rearrangement of the SurA protein. In both cases, side-chains of aromatic residues of the peptides contribute a large fraction of the binding interactions. SurA therefore asserts a recognition preference for aromatic amino acids in a variety of sequence configurations by adopting alternative tertiary and quaternary structures to bind peptides in different conformations. (C) 2007 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