4.6 Article

Cyclomaltodextrinase, neopullulanase, and maltogenic amylase are nearly indistinguishable from each other

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 277, 期 24, 页码 21891-21897

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M201623200

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Over 20 enzymes denoted as cyclomaltodextrinase, maltogenic amylase, or neopullulanase that share 40-86% sequence identity with each other are found in public data bases. These enzymes are distinguished from typical alpha-amylases by containing a novel N-terminal domain and exhibiting preferential substrate specificities for cyclomaltodextrins (CDs) over starch. In this research field, a great deal of confusion exists regarding the features distinguishing the three groups of enzymes from one another. Although a different enzyme code has been assigned to each of the three different enzyme names, even a single differentiating enzymatic property has not been documented in the literature. On the other hand, an outstanding question related to this issue concerns the structural basis for the preference of these enzymes for CDs. To clarify the confusion and to address this question, we have determined the structures of two enzymes, one from alkalophilic Bacillus sp. 1-5 and named cyclomaltodextrinase and the other from a Thermus species and named maltogenic amylase. The structure of the Bacillus enzyme reveals a dodecameric assembly composed of six copies of the dimer, which is the structural and functional unit of the Thermus enzyme and an enzyme named neopullulanase. The structure of the Thermus enzyme in complex with beta-CD led to the conclusion that Trp(47), a well conserved N-terminal domain residue, contributes greatly to the preference for beta-CD. The common dimer formation through the novel N-terminal domain, which contributes to the preference for CDs by lining the active-site cavity, convincingly indicates that the three groups of enzymes are not different enough to preserve the different names and enzyme codes.

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

4.6
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