Literature DB >> 22648408

Product binding varies dramatically between processive and nonprocessive cellulase enzymes.

Lintao Bu1, Mark R Nimlos, Michael R Shirts, Jerry Ståhlberg, Michael E Himmel, Michael F Crowley, Gregg T Beckham.   

Abstract

Cellulases hydrolyze β-1,4 glycosidic linkages in cellulose, which are among the most prevalent and stable bonds in Nature. Cellulases comprise many glycoside hydrolase families and exist as processive or nonprocessive enzymes. Product inhibition negatively impacts cellulase action, but experimental measurements of product-binding constants vary significantly, and there is little consensus on the importance of this phenomenon. To provide molecular level insights into cellulase product inhibition, we examine the impact of product binding on processive and nonprocessive cellulases by calculating the binding free energy of cellobiose to the product sites of catalytic domains of processive and nonprocessive enzymes from glycoside hydrolase families 6 and 7. The results suggest that cellobiose binds to processive cellulases much more strongly than nonprocessive cellulases. We also predict that the presence of a cellodextrin bound in the reactant site of the catalytic domain, which is present during enzymatic catalysis, has no effect on product binding in nonprocessive cellulases, whereas it significantly increases product binding to processive cellulases. This difference in product binding correlates with hydrogen bonding between the substrate-side ligand and the cellobiose product in processive cellulase tunnels and the additional stabilization from the longer tunnel-forming loops. The hydrogen bonds between the substrate- and product-side ligands are disrupted by water in nonprocessive cellulase clefts, and the lack of long tunnel-forming loops results in lower affinity of the product ligand. These findings provide new insights into the large discrepancies reported for binding constants for cellulases and suggest that product inhibition will vary significantly based on the amount of productive binding for processive cellulases on cellulose.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22648408      PMCID: PMC3397907          DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M112.365510

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biol Chem        ISSN: 0021-9258            Impact factor:   5.157


  44 in total

1.  Computational investigation of glycosylation effects on a family 1 carbohydrate-binding module.

Authors:  Courtney B Taylor; M Faiz Talib; Clare McCabe; Lintao Bu; William S Adney; Michael E Himmel; Michael F Crowley; Gregg T Beckham
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 5.157

2.  Mechanism of initial rapid rate retardation in cellobiohydrolase catalyzed cellulose hydrolysis.

Authors:  Jürgen Jalak; Priit Väljamäe
Journal:  Biotechnol Bioeng       Date:  2010-08-15       Impact factor: 4.530

3.  CHARMM-GUI: a web-based graphical user interface for CHARMM.

Authors:  Sunhwan Jo; Taehoon Kim; Vidyashankara G Iyer; Wonpil Im
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 3.376

4.  Biomass recalcitrance: engineering plants and enzymes for biofuels production.

Authors:  Michael E Himmel; Shi-You Ding; David K Johnson; William S Adney; Mark R Nimlos; John W Brady; Thomas D Foust
Journal:  Science       Date:  2007-02-09       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 5.  CHARMM: the biomolecular simulation program.

Authors:  B R Brooks; C L Brooks; A D Mackerell; L Nilsson; R J Petrella; B Roux; Y Won; G Archontis; C Bartels; S Boresch; A Caflisch; L Caves; Q Cui; A R Dinner; M Feig; S Fischer; J Gao; M Hodoscek; W Im; K Kuczera; T Lazaridis; J Ma; V Ovchinnikov; E Paci; R W Pastor; C B Post; J Z Pu; M Schaefer; B Tidor; R M Venable; H L Woodcock; X Wu; W Yang; D M York; M Karplus
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2009-07-30       Impact factor: 3.376

6.  Kinetics of the enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose.

Authors:  S Wald; C R Wilke; H W Blanch
Journal:  Biotechnol Bioeng       Date:  1984-03       Impact factor: 4.530

7.  Determination of product inhibition of CBH1, CBH2, and EG1 using a novel cellulase activity assay.

Authors:  Faye Du; Erin Wolger; Louise Wallace; Amy Liu; Thijs Kaper; Brad Kelemen
Journal:  Appl Biochem Biotechnol       Date:  2009-10-16       Impact factor: 2.926

Review 8.  Deconstruction of lignocellulosic biomass to fuels and chemicals.

Authors:  Shishir P S Chundawat; Gregg T Beckham; Michael E Himmel; Bruce E Dale
Journal:  Annu Rev Chem Biomol Eng       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 11.059

9.  Fungal cellulase systems. Comparison of the specificities of the cellobiohydrolases isolated from Penicillium pinophilum and Trichoderma reesei.

Authors:  M Claeyssens; H Van Tilbeurgh; P Tomme; T M Wood; S I McRae
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  1989-08-01       Impact factor: 3.857

10.  Additive empirical force field for hexopyranose monosaccharides.

Authors:  Olgun Guvench; Shannon N Greene; Ganesh Kamath; John W Brady; Richard M Venable; Richard W Pastor; Alexander D Mackerell
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2008-11-30       Impact factor: 3.376

View more
  17 in total

1.  Binding and movement of individual Cel7A cellobiohydrolases on crystalline cellulose surfaces revealed by single-molecule fluorescence imaging.

Authors:  Jaemyeong Jung; Anurag Sethi; Tiziano Gaiotto; Jason J Han; Tina Jeoh; Sandrasegaram Gnanakaran; Peter M Goodwin
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2013-07-01       Impact factor: 5.157

2.  Systematic deletions in the cellobiohydrolase (CBH) Cel7A from the fungus Trichoderma reesei reveal flexible loops critical for CBH activity.

Authors:  Corinna Schiano-di-Cola; Nanna Røjel; Kenneth Jensen; Jeppe Kari; Trine Holst Sørensen; Kim Borch; Peter Westh
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2018-12-11       Impact factor: 5.157

3.  Computational investigation of the pH dependence of loop flexibility and catalytic function in glycoside hydrolases.

Authors:  Lintao Bu; Michael F Crowley; Michael E Himmel; Gregg T Beckham
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 5.157

4.  Initial recognition of a cellodextrin chain in the cellulose-binding tunnel may affect cellobiohydrolase directional specificity.

Authors:  Pavan K Ghattyvenkatakrishna; Emal M Alekozai; Gregg T Beckham; Roland Schulz; Michael F Crowley; Edward C Uberbacher; Xiaolin Cheng
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2013-02-19       Impact factor: 4.033

5.  Endo-exo synergism in cellulose hydrolysis revisited.

Authors:  Jürgen Jalak; Mihhail Kurašin; Hele Teugjas; Priit Väljamäe
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2012-06-25       Impact factor: 5.157

6.  The predominant molecular state of bound enzyme determines the strength and type of product inhibition in the hydrolysis of recalcitrant polysaccharides by processive enzymes.

Authors:  Silja Kuusk; Morten Sørlie; Priit Väljamäe
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 5.157

7.  Loop motions important to product expulsion in the Thermobifida fusca glycoside hydrolase family 6 cellobiohydrolase from structural and computational studies.

Authors:  Miao Wu; Lintao Bu; Thu V Vuong; David B Wilson; Michael F Crowley; Mats Sandgren; Jerry Ståhlberg; Gregg T Beckham; Henrik Hansson
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 5.157

8.  Structural, biochemical, and computational characterization of the glycoside hydrolase family 7 cellobiohydrolase of the tree-killing fungus Heterobasidion irregulare.

Authors:  Majid Haddad Momeni; Christina M Payne; Henrik Hansson; Nils Egil Mikkelsen; Jesper Svedberg; Åke Engström; Mats Sandgren; Gregg T Beckham; Jerry Ståhlberg
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2013-01-09       Impact factor: 5.157

9.  Cellobiohydrolase and endoglucanase respond differently to surfactants during the hydrolysis of cellulose.

Authors:  Chia-Wen C Hsieh; David Cannella; Henning Jørgensen; Claus Felby; Lisbeth G Thygesen
Journal:  Biotechnol Biofuels       Date:  2015-03-28       Impact factor: 6.040

10.  Reassembly and co-crystallization of a family 9 processive endoglucanase from its component parts: structural and functional significance of the intermodular linker.

Authors:  Svetlana Petkun; Inna Rozman Grinberg; Raphael Lamed; Sadanari Jindou; Tal Burstein; Oren Yaniv; Yuval Shoham; Linda J W Shimon; Edward A Bayer; Felix Frolow
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 2.984

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.