4.7 Article

Promiscuous antigen presentation by the nonclassical MHC lb Qa-2 is enabled by a shallow, hydrophobic groove and self-stabilized peptide conformation

期刊

STRUCTURE
卷 9, 期 12, 页码 1213-1224

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/S0969-2126(01)00689-X

关键词

MHC; nonclassical; X-ray crystallography; immune recognition; structure

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [P01 AI 37818, R01 AI 19624, R01 AI48540] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Qa-2 is a nonclassical MHC lb antigen, which has been implicated in both innate and adaptive immune responses, as well as embryonic development. Qa-2 has an unusual peptide binding specificity in that it requires two dominant C-terminal anchor residues and is capable of associating with a substantially more diverse array of peptide sequences than other nonclassical MHC. Results: We have determined the crystal structure, to 2.3 Angstrom, of the Q9 gene of murine Qa-2 complexed with a self-peptide derived from the L19 ribosomal protein, which is abundant in the pool of peptides eluted from the Q9 groove. The 9 amino acid peptide is bound high in a shallow, hydrophobic binding groove of Q9, which is missing a C pocket. The peptide makes few specific contacts and exhibits extremely poor shape complementarity to the MHC groove, which facilitates the presentation of a degenerate array of sequences. The L19 peptide is in a centrally bulged conformation that is stabilized by intramolecular interactions from the invariant P7 histidine anchor residue and by a hydrophobic core of preferred secondary anchor residues that have minimal interaction with the MHC. Conclusions: Unexpectedly, the preferred secondary peptide residues that exhibit tenuous contact with Q9 contribute significantly to the overall stability of the peptide-MHC complex. The structure of this complex implies a conformational selection by Q9 for peptide residues that optimally stabilize the large bulge rather than making intimate contact with the MHC pockets.

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