10 A niversary of IIMCB
10 A niversary of IIMCB
10 A niversary of IIMCB
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.