16.11.2012 Views

10 A niversary of IIMCB

10 A niversary of IIMCB

10 A niversary of IIMCB

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

A B<br />

Fig. 2. Comparison <strong>of</strong> the DNA co-crystal structures <strong>of</strong> (A) BcnI and (B) MvaI. The figure was adapted from Sokolowska et al., Cell Mol Life Sci 2007, 64:<br />

2351-2357.<br />

Ecl18kI and PspGI, but cleave them with a different stagger.<br />

Nevertheless, MvaI and BcnI have evolved a very different<br />

strategy to deal with the asymmetries <strong>of</strong> their substrates:<br />

both enzymes bind their substrates as monomers. As<br />

there is only one active site per monomer, the implication<br />

is that MvaI and BcnI must cleave the two DNA strands one<br />

after another, with an intermittent DNA rebinding event to<br />

bring the uncleaved strand <strong>of</strong> the nicked intermediate into<br />

a position proximal to the active site. Support for a nicked<br />

intermediate in the DNA cleavage reactions by MvaI and<br />

BcnI is also provided by comparison <strong>of</strong> the MvaI and BcnI<br />

structures with all structures in the Protein Data Bank,<br />

because it turns out the MvaI and BcnI are more similar to<br />

the DNA nickase MutH, a component <strong>of</strong> the mismatch repair<br />

machinery, than to any other DNA restriction endonuclease<br />

<strong>of</strong> known structure (Fig. 2).<br />

The ββα-Me restriction endonuclease Hpy99I: This<br />

restriction endonuclease is specific for the sequence<br />

CGWCG/ and cuts DNA into fragments with highly unusual<br />

5 nucleotide long 3’-overhangs. Our recent crystal structure<br />

<strong>of</strong> this enzyme represents the first structure <strong>of</strong> a ββα-Me<br />

restriction endonuclease and allows detailed comparisons<br />

36 Annual Report 2008<br />

with previously determined structures <strong>of</strong> ββα-Me<br />

endonucleases that play no role in restriction biology, but are<br />

involved in unspecific DNA degradation (such as the Serratia<br />

nuclease), in homing (such as I-PpoI) or Holliday junction<br />

resolution (T4 endonuclease VII). Hpy99I distinguishes<br />

between W and S at the center <strong>of</strong> its target sequence by<br />

exclusive minor groove readout.<br />

Unlike major readout, minor groove readout is perfectly<br />

suitable to distinguish S and W. The presence <strong>of</strong> an amino<br />

group (<strong>of</strong> guanine) in the central minor groove position signals<br />

a G:C/C:G pair, its absence (which is verified by two Hpy99I<br />

arginines) confirms the presence <strong>of</strong> an A:T/T:A pair. Based on<br />

mutagenesis data alone, this mechanism has been suggested<br />

earlier for methyltransferases. To our knowledge, our Hpy99I-<br />

DNA co-crystal structure provides its first crystallographic<br />

demonstration.<br />

Peptidoglycan amidases<br />

Bacterial peptidoglycan amidases are a diverse group<br />

<strong>of</strong> enzymes. Some are metallopeptidases, others serine<br />

peptidases, and yet others cysteine peptidases. Only aspartic<br />

(and threonine) peptidases have so far not been found.<br />

In each catalytic group, different folds can be discerned,<br />

Fig. 3. (A) Hydrogen bonding patterns <strong>of</strong> T:A/A:T pairs (W) and G:C/C:G pairs (S). The figure highlights the similarity <strong>of</strong> T:A and G:C pairs on the major<br />

groove side, as well as the similarity <strong>of</strong> A:T and C:G pairs, which makes the distinction between W and S by major groove readout difficult. (B) Recognition<br />

<strong>of</strong> the symmetry violating A:T/T:A pair by Hpy99I. This enzyme “verifies” the absence <strong>of</strong> a guanine amino group in the central minor groove position,<br />

which could clash with the two arginine residues <strong>of</strong> the protein. The figure has been adapted from Szczepanowski et al., Nucleic Acids Res. 2008,<br />

36:6<strong>10</strong>9-17 and from Sokolowska et al., Nucleic Acid Research 2009, in press.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!