| Literature DB >> 24635441 |
David P Martin1, Patrick G Blachly, Amy R Marts, Tessa M Woodruff, César A F de Oliveira, J Andrew McCammon, David L Tierney, Seth M Cohen.
Abstract
The binding of three closely related chelators: 5-hydroxy-2-methyl-4H-pyran-4-thione (Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24635441 PMCID: PMC4104174 DOI: 10.1021/ja500616m
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Am Chem Soc ISSN: 0002-7863 Impact factor: 15.419
Figure 1Structures of ATM, TM, TPMA, and several previously reported hCAII inhibitors: acetazolamide, based on the arylsulfonamide MBG, 1,2-HOPTO, 2-mercaptophenol (2-MP) and its methylated analog thioguaiacol (TG).
K Values (mM) of Compounds Against hCAII
| compound | compound | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| ATM | 0.65 ± 0.06 | ATM-OMe | 6.9 ± 1.0 |
| THM | 1.4 ± 0.2 | THM-OMe | >50 |
| TPMA | 1.1 ± 0.2 |
Figure 2For ATM, TM, and TPMA, ϕ is defined as the Zn2+–S–O-C dihedral angle (A, shown labeled on ATM with red arrows). This parameter defines the angle between the planes formed by the Zn–S–O and S–O–C atoms, representing the tilt of the MBG. MBGs assume different binding modes in TpPh,MeZn (B, ϕModel) and hCAII (C, ϕProtein) complexes. |ϕModel| ranges from 166 to 174°, while |ϕProtein| ranges from 90 to 143° depending on the MBG.
Figure 3Crystal structure of ATM bound in the active site of hCAII. The |Fobs| electron density map (gray) is shown contoured at 1.5σ for protein residues, while the omit |Fobs – Fcalc| map (red) is shown contoured at 3.0σ for ATM. A schematic representation of the interactions between ATM and hCAII can be found in Figure S12.
Figure 4Crystal structure of TM bound in the active site of hCAII. The ligand has two conformations, shown in green and cyan. Omit maps (|Fobs|, gray; |Fobs – Fcalc|, red) are shown contoured at 1.5σ. A diagram of the interactions between THM and hCAII can be found in Figure S12.
Figure 5Fourier transforms (A) of the k3-weighted EXAFS (B) of hCAII with ATM, TM, and TPMA. In each case, the data for the resting enzyme are shown as a thin line overlay.
Figure 6Calculated O–Zn distances (top) and relative binding energies (bottom) as a function of ϕ from linear transit computations.
Figure 7Overlay of the crystal structures of ATM and 1,2-HOPTO (PDB ID 3M1K, shown in yellow) bound to hCAII. Although the donor atoms are positioned similarly (left), a view along the plane of the ligands (right) reveals that ATM is ∼10° closer to ideal “head-on” binding.
Figure 8Overlay of the crystal structure of TM and inhibitors that show similar binding modes. Left: The conformation with the hydroxyl group of TM facing the hydrophobic pocket occupies a space similar to that of 2-mercaptophenol (PDB 2OSM, shown in green). Right: When the hydroxyl group of TM is oriented toward the hydrophilic side of the active site, the ring nearly overlays with that of 2-mercaptophenol.