4.7 Article

The crystal structure of the bacteriophage PSA endolysin reveals a unique fold responsible for specific recognition of Listeria cell walls

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
卷 364, 期 4, 页码 678-689

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2006.08.069

关键词

phosphorylase/hydrolase-like alpha/beta-proteins; zinc protease; peptidoglycan; gene duplication; domain swapping

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bacteriophage murein hydrolases exhibit high specificity towards the cell walls of their host bacteria. This specificity is mostly provided by a structurally well defined cell wall-binding domain that attaches the enzyme to its solid substrate. To gain deeper insight into this mechanism we have crystallized the complete 314 amino acid endolysin from the temperate Listeria monocytogenes phage PSA. The crystal structure of PlyPSA was determined by single wavelength anomalous dispersion methods and refined to 1.8 angstrom resolution. The two functional domains of the polypeptide, providing cell wall-binding and enzymatic activities, can be clearly distinguished and are connected via a linker segment of six amino acid residues. The core of the N-acetylmuramoyl-L-alanine amidase moiety is formed by a twisted, six-stranded beta-sheet flanked by six helices. Although the catalytic domain is unique among the known Listeria phage endolysins, its structure is highly similar to known phosphorylase/hydrolase-like alpha/beta-proteins, including an autolysin amidase from Paenibacillus polymyxa. In contrast, the C-terminal domain of PlyPSA features a novel fold, comprising two copies of a beta-barrel-like motif, which are held together by means of swapped beta-strands. The architecture of the enzyme with its two separate domains explains its unique substrate recognition properties and also provides insight into the lytic mechanisms of related Listeria phage endolysins, a class of enzymes that bear biotechnological potential. (c) 2006 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