Aaron A Koch, Douglas A Hansen, Vikram V Shende, Lawrence R Furan, K N Houk1, Gonzalo Jiménez-Osés2, David H Sherman. 1. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles , 607 Charles E. Young Drive East, Los Angeles, California 90095, United States. 2. Departamento de Química, Centro de Investigación en Síntesis Química, Universidad de La Rioja , 26006 Logroño, La Rioja, Spain.
Abstract
Macrolactonization of natural product analogs presents a significant challenge to both biosynthetic assembly and synthetic chemistry. In the preceding paper , we identified a thioesterase (TE) domain catalytic bottleneck processing unnatural substrates in the pikromycin (Pik) system, preventing the formation of epimerized macrolactones. Here, we perform molecular dynamics simulations showing the epimerized hexaketide was accommodated within the Pik TE active site; however, intrinsic conformational preferences of the substrate resulted in predominately unproductive conformations, in agreement with the observed hydrolysis. Accordingly, we engineered the stereoselective Pik TE to yield a variant (TES148C) with improved reaction kinetics and gain-of-function processing of an unnatural, epimerized hexaketide. Quantum mechanical comparison of model TES148C and TEWT reaction coordinate diagrams revealed a change in mechanism from a stepwise addition-elimination (TEWT) to a lower energy concerted acyl substitution (TES148C), accounting for the gain-of-function and improved reaction kinetics. Finally, we introduced the S148C mutation into a polyketide synthase module (PikAIII-TE) to impart increased substrate flexibility, enabling the production of diastereomeric macrolactones.
Macrolactonization of natural product analogs presents a significant challenge to both biosynthetic assembly and synthetic chemistry. In the preceding paper , we identified a thioesterase (TE) domain catalytic bottleneck processing unnatural substrates in the pikromycin (Pik) system, preventing the formation of epimerized macrolactones. Here, we perform molecular dynamics simulations showing the epimerized hexaketide was accommodated within the Pik TE active site; however, intrinsic conformational preferences of the substrate resulted in predominately unproductive conformations, in agreement with the observed hydrolysis. Accordingly, we engineered the stereoselective Pik TE to yield a variant (TES148C) with improved reaction kinetics and gain-of-function processing of an unnatural, epimerized hexaketide. Quantum mechanical comparison of model TES148C and TEWT reaction coordinate diagrams revealed a change in mechanism from a stepwise addition-elimination (TEWT) to a lower energy concerted acyl substitution (TES148C), accounting for the gain-of-function and improved reaction kinetics. Finally, we introduced the S148C mutation into a polyketide synthase module (PikAIII-TE) to impart increased substrate flexibility, enabling the production of diastereomeric macrolactones.
Macrocycles are a common
motif among natural product and natural
product derived therapeutics, with >100 marketed drugs possessing
a macrocyclic core.[1] The conformational
preorganization of these large rings enables precise display of functionality
to engage challenging targets such as protein–protein interactions,
and, in the case of macrolides, ribosomal machinery.[2−4]The macrolactone core of macrolide[5] natural
products is formed through two steps: first, the linear intermediate
is transferred from the upstream acyl carrier protein (ACP) to a catalytic
serine of the TE via a transesterification to form an acyl-enzyme
complex. Next, the acyl intermediate is offloaded via intermolecular
water hydrolysis or intramolecular nucleophilic attack to release
the product as a linear acid or macrolactone, respectively[6] (Figure ).
Figure 1
Macrolactonization or hydrolysis of an ACP-tethered polyketide
intermediate.
Macrolactonization or hydrolysis of an ACP-tethered polyketide
intermediate.Biochemical and structural
studies of the Pik TE and related DEBSTE (erythromycin pathway) have provided initial insights into the
mechanism of ring formation over hydrolysis.[7,8] While
it is generally accepted that modular type I TEs have high substrate
flexibility for the initial acylation step, the second, macrolactone
forming release step is far more stringent.[6] Since the formation of the macrocyclic core is essential for downstream
tailoring and biological activity of a natural product, aberrant hydrolysis
limits access to new macrocyclic analogs.In an preceding paper,[9] we employed a
series of synthetic Pik pentaketides to evaluate
the substrate tolerance of PikAIII-TE. Characterization of the in
vitro reaction products indicated a catalytic bottleneck localized
to the Pik TE domain, preventing macrolactonization to form C-10 and
C-11 epimers of 10-dml (1). Furthermore, this bottleneck
was confirmed directly by incubation of 5 with Pik TE
resulting exclusively in hydrolysis[9] (Figure ). Given the importance
of the TE domain in production of macrolactone analogs, we sought
to engineer the excised Pik TE domain to expand its substrate scope
and, potentially, improve reaction rates. In this study, we report
the identification of a single active site mutation (S148C) in Pik
TE that generates a more effective macrolactonization catalyst by
increasing both the substrate flexibility and efficiency of the enzyme.
Subsequent introduction of the engineered TE into PikAIII-TE results
in a polyketide synthase with increased substrate flexibility capable
of producing epimeric macrolactones.
Figure 2
Pik TE displays a high level of substrate stereoselectivity.
(a)
Pik hexaketides used in this study to probe Pik TE substrate flexibility. 3 is generated in situ by photolysis of the 2-nitrobenzyloxymethyl
ether (NBOM) protected native hexaketide.[10] (b) Incubation of C-11-epimerized Pik hexaketide 5 results exclusively
in hydrolysis.[9]
Pik TE displays a high level of substrate stereoselectivity.
(a)
Pik hexaketides used in this study to probe Pik TE substrate flexibility. 3 is generated in situ by photolysis of the 2-nitrobenzyloxymethyl
ether (NBOM) protected native hexaketide.[10] (b) Incubation of C-11-epimerized Pik hexaketide 5 results exclusively
in hydrolysis.[9]
Results
Molecular Dynamics
(MD) Simulations of Pik TE Macrolactonization
Intrigued by
the stark catalytic divergence from macrolactonization
to hydrolysis in Pik TE reactions containing hexaketide 5 bearing the epimerized C-11 hydroxyl group (Figure ), we envisioned that comparing MD simulations
of Pik TEWT acylated with hexaketides 4 and 5 (denoted Pik TE-4 and Pik TE-5, respectively, Figure ) could provide structural insight into these experimental findings.
Accordingly, we performed MD simulations of each catalytic system
modeled as acyl-enzyme intermediates bound to the C-3 methyl-protected
hexaketides (Figure ), using the conformation of the derivatized products[10] as the starting arrangement for the individual
substrates. MD simulations (see Computational Details in the Supporting Information) were initiated with the
hexaketide C-11 alcohol constrained in a reactive conformation by
imposing a maximum distance restraint of 2.3 Å between the hexaketide
nucleophilic hydroxylhydrogen and the Nε nitrogen of His268.
After 50 ns, the distance restraint was removed and the simulations
were allowed to continue for 500 ns.
Figure 3
Acyl-enzyme
starting structures for the MD simulations of 4 (Pik
TE-4) and C-11-epimerized 5 (Pik TE-5).
Acyl-enzyme
starting structures for the MD simulations of 4 (Pik
TE-4) and C-11-epimerized 5 (Pik TE-5).Simulations of Pik TE-4 revealed that
while the initial
catalytic restraint was in place, the native hexaketide readily adopts
two main conformations favorable toward macrolactonization (denoted
as I and II, Figure a). At the initial stages of the simulation,
conformation I predominates, accompanied by a high level
of shape complementarity with the TE active site. The main interactions
constituting conformation I are hydrophobic contacts
between the hexaketide and the side chains of residues lining the
active site. Additionally, a hydrogen bond between the hexaketideC-7 carbonyl and the side chain of Thr77 facilitates stabilization
of the cyclic, reactive conformation (Figure S13). After ∼30 ns the hexaketide evolves to conformation II through a substrate tail rotation that places the C-11
alcohol 0.2 and 0.7 Å closer to His268 and the C-1 carbonyl,
respectively. This orientation resembles the macrolactonization transition
state (vide infra) even closer than conformation I and is likely catalytically productive.
Figure 4
Comparison of the reactive
conformations for each acyl-enzyme intermediate
obtained from clustering analysis of MD simulations with Pik TEWT: (a) Pik TE-4 and (b) Pik TE-5. Pik TE-4 conformations I and II contain a hexaketide orientation most conducive to macrolactonization
with the C-11 OH in close proximity to both His268 and the C-1 carbonyl.
The corresponding conformation (cluster I′) in
the Pik TE-5 simulation likely represents a larger barrier
to macrolactonization as the distance between the C-11 OH and His268
has increased and the resulting geometry hinders deprotonation. The
Pik TE-5 hexaketide continues to evolve toward a linear
conformation until the final cluster III′ is reached
which places the C-11 OH distal to both His268 and the C-1 carbonyl
and in an orientation susceptible to hydrolysis. The catalytic triad
His268 and Asp176 residues are colored yellow. For each conformation
the distance in angstroms from the nucleophilic hydroxyl oxygen to
the Nε nitrogen of His268 and the ester C-1 carbonyl is displayed
above the dashed lines. Clusters containing catalytically productive
conformations contain red dashed lines. (c) The distance of the nucleophilic
hydroxyl oxygen and the ester C-1 carbonyl plotted for each frame
of the MD simulation with each data point colored according to the
corresponding clustered conformation. The vertical dashed line at
50 ns indicates when the distance constraints were released.
Comparison of the reactive
conformations for each acyl-enzyme intermediate
obtained from clustering analysis of MD simulations with Pik TEWT: (a) Pik TE-4 and (b) Pik TE-5. Pik TE-4 conformations I and II contain a hexaketide orientation most conducive to macrolactonization
with the C-11 OH in close proximity to both His268 and the C-1 carbonyl.
The corresponding conformation (cluster I′) in
the Pik TE-5 simulation likely represents a larger barrier
to macrolactonization as the distance between the C-11 OH and His268
has increased and the resulting geometry hinders deprotonation. The
Pik TE-5 hexaketide continues to evolve toward a linear
conformation until the final cluster III′ is reached
which places the C-11 OH distal to both His268 and the C-1 carbonyl
and in an orientation susceptible to hydrolysis. The catalytic triad
His268 and Asp176 residues are colored yellow. For each conformation
the distance in angstroms from the nucleophilic hydroxyloxygen to
the Nε nitrogen of His268 and the esterC-1 carbonyl is displayed
above the dashed lines. Clusters containing catalytically productive
conformations contain red dashed lines. (c) The distance of the nucleophilic
hydroxyloxygen and the esterC-1 carbonyl plotted for each frame
of the MD simulation with each data point colored according to the
corresponding clustered conformation. The vertical dashed line at
50 ns indicates when the distance constraints were released.Following formation of conformation II, the hexaketide
displays a large amount of conformational freedom within the TE active
site. In the most prevalent conformation (III, Figure a) hydrophobic packing
is largely reduced and nonproductive hydrogen bonds between the C-11
alcohol and Tyr25/Leu193 are formed (Figure S13). Loss of the key hydrophobic interactions is detrimental to macrolactonization
as it increases the conformational space accessible to the hexaketide,
which adopts a more linear, unreactive conformation. Although conformation III accounts for the majority of the Pik TE-4 simulation, conformation II developed again later in
the trajectory (406–443 ns, Figure c), suggesting that productive conformations
for macrocyclization are frequently sampled despite the high substrate
flexibility.The simulations of Pik TE-5 involving
the C-11-epimerized
hexaketide revealed a significantly different scenario. While the
initial distance restraint was in place, the hexaketide adopted a
cyclic conformation stabilized by hydrophobic packing with the TE
active site (I′, Figure b). However, in contrast with the native
hexaketide, the C-11 alcohol of the epimerized hexaketide is prone
to intramolecular hydrogen bonding with the C-1 carbonyl oxygen. Despite
maintaining the substrate in a cyclic conformation with the nucleophilic
hydroxyl in close proximity to the C-1 carbonyl, the resulting geometry
impedes macrolactonization. Furthermore, His268 remains 4.0 Å
away and positioned at an angle suboptimal for deprotonation, making
this conformation catalytically unproductive. After ∼80 ns,
unrestricted Pik TE-5 transitions to the second most
prevalent conformation that is primarily defined by interruption of
the intramolecular hydrogen-bond and rotation of the hexaketide tail
away from His268 resulting in poor shape complementarity with the
TE active site and a more linear conformation of the hexaketide (II′, Figure b). These two unproductive conformations are alternately sampled
for the majority of the simulation (∼470 ns). Afterwards, the
hexaketide chain evolves toward even more extended conformations (III′, Figure b) characterized by a gradual loss of hydrophobic interactions
with the protein, and formation of unproductive hydrogen bonds between
the C-11 alcohol and Glu85 (Figure S13).
This conformation impedes macrolactonization and increases the likelihood
competing hydrolysis of the acyl-enzyme intermediate will occur.We next compared the frequency of productive conformations sampled
in the MD simulations (Figure ) by calculating quantum mechanically (QM) optimized macrolactonization
transition structures (TS) for each hexaketide (vide infra). We used these models to describe the precise angle of nucleophilic
attack (O11–C1–O1) and distance (O11–C1) for
macrolactonization of each hexaketide. The resulting geometric values
were then compared to those extracted from each frame of the corresponding
MD simulations and the entire trajectories were plotted according
to their deviation from the ideal TS values (Figure ). Consistent with our clustering analysis
of the hexaketide conformations, comparison of the geometric deviations
from ideal within each simulation revealed that Pik TE-4 contained more frames with the hexaketide in a position favorable
to macrolactonization (Figure c). In contrast, Pik TE-5 presented a larger
distribution of geometries with very few catalytically productive
structures (Figure d). Taken together, the MD results on the covalent acyl-enzyme intermediates
indicate that hydrophobic interactions accompanying a high level of
substrate-TE shape complementarity are critical for maintaining each
hexaketide in a catalytically productive conformation. These contacts
are, to a lesser extent, maintained in simulations containing the
C-11-epimerized hexaketide 5, indicating that the Pik
TE active site has sufficient flexibility to accommodate both epimers.
The intrinsic conformational preferences of each hexaketide further
influence catalysis. The acyl intermediates must reach conformations
that are matched for deprotonation by His268 and subsequent nucleophilic
attack in order to achieve macrolactonization. When these structural
preferences are perturbed, as in the case with Pik TE-5, the energetic barrier to macrolactonization is increased above
that of competing hydrolysis.
Figure 5
Procatalytic sampling of Pik TE during MD simulations.
(a,b) Low-energy
QM optimized transition states for macrolactonization of Pik hexaketides
(a) Pik TE-4 and (b) Pik TE-5. Nonpolar
hydrogens have been removed for clarity. (c,d) Deviations of the key
catalytic distances (x axis) and angles (y axis) in the MD simulations of (c) Pik TE-4 and (d) Pik TE-5 from their respective optimized transition
structure (green square at the origin of coordinates). Each point
represents a single frame from the 550 ns simulation, while the shaded
rectangles represent frames from the MD that are likely in a catalytically
productive state.
Procatalytic sampling of Pik TE during MD simulations.
(a,b) Low-energy
QM optimized transition states for macrolactonization of Pik hexaketides
(a) Pik TE-4 and (b) Pik TE-5. Nonpolar
hydrogens have been removed for clarity. (c,d) Deviations of the key
catalytic distances (x axis) and angles (y axis) in the MD simulations of (c) Pik TE-4 and (d) Pik TE-5 from their respective optimized transition
structure (green square at the origin of coordinates). Each point
represents a single frame from the 550 ns simulation, while the shaded
rectangles represent frames from the MD that are likely in a catalytically
productive state.
Chemical Lactonizations
As the MD simulations containing
covalently bound hexaketides 4 and 5 revealed
that both substrates are accommodated by the Pik TE active site, we
next investigated if macrolactonization of the C-11-epimerized 5 suffered in bulk solution outside of enzymatic constraints.
Starting with conditions employed for similar seco-acids,[11,12] we screened contemporary lactonization methodologies capable of
cyclizing 8 to 6. Optimization of Yamaguchi
conditions originally reported from the total synthesis of spinosyn
analogs,[13] enabled direct comparison of
lactonization efficiency of 8 and 7. Employing
identical reaction conditions resulted in 73% and 6% conversions to
generate 6 and 9, respectively (Scheme ). This result confirmed
the intrinsically poor reactivity of 7 toward macrocyclization
compared to 8, corroborating the MD findings that the
lack of macrolactone formation with the C-11-epimerized hexaketide
is not due to steric clashes within the Pik TE active site.
Scheme 1
Yamaguchi Macrolactonization of Methyl-Protected Hexaketides
Conversion
of 8 to 6 and 7 to 9 was monitored
by HPLC, with data represented as the mean ± standard deviation,
where n = 3.
Yamaguchi Macrolactonization of Methyl-Protected Hexaketides
Conversion
of 8 to 6 and 7 to 9 was monitored
by HPLC, with data represented as the mean ± standard deviation,
where n = 3.
Pik TES148C Macrolactonization of epi-Hexaketide 5
As the strict substrate stereoselectivity of Pik
TEWT does not arise from inherent steric clashes within
the TE active site, we considered the excised Pik TE domain to be
a prime engineering target to generate a catalyst capable of cyclizing 5. We envisioned that altering substrate specificity would
likely require a protracted directed evolution campaign and, if successful,
would potentially yield a variant incapable of cyclizing the starting,
native substrate 3. Prior to library generation, we performed
preliminary site directed mutagenesis on select residues in the active
site, including a serine to cysteine mutation of the serine-histidine-aspartate
catalytic triad.[14,15] Remarkably, this variant was
able to efficiently cyclize 5 to 9 while
also displaying improved native functionality (Scheme ).
Scheme 2
Evaluation of Pik TES148C with Methyl-Protected Hexaketides 4 and 5
Enzymatic reaction conditions:
1 mM hexaketide, 8 mM 2-vinylpyridine, purified Pik TES148C (10 μM), 4 h, stationary, RT. Conversion of 4 to 6 and 5 to 9 was monitored
(HPLC), with data represented as the mean ± standard deviation,
where n = 3.
Evaluation of Pik TES148C with Methyl-Protected Hexaketides 4 and 5
Enzymatic reaction conditions:
1 mM hexaketide, 8 mM 2-vinylpyridine, purified Pik TES148C (10 μM), 4 h, stationary, RT. Conversion of 4 to 6 and 5 to 9 was monitored
(HPLC), with data represented as the mean ± standard deviation,
where n = 3.
Kinetic Analysis
of Pik TE WT and S148C
In addition
to the gain-of-function macrolactonization of 5, we also
examined the kinetic effect of the S148C mutation on cyclization (Table ). Steady-state kinetic
analysis of Pik TEWT and TES148C was performed
using both methyl-protected Pik hexaketides 4 and 5, as well as the previously reported NBOM-protected[10] native hexaketide 3, following
a procedure similar to one used previously.[16] Kinetic analysis revealed that the serine to cysteine substitution
afforded a superior cyclization catalyst for each substrate tested.
Pik TES148C displayed a 4.3- and 12-fold increase in the kcat/Km for macrolactonization
of both the native (3) and C-3 methoxy hexaketide 4 compared to Pik TEWT, respectively. In reactions
containing methyl-protected epimerized 5, not only did
Pik TES148C retain the ability to catalyze macrolactonization
of the linear substrate, but notably the kcat/Km was 5.5-fold higher than for Pik
TEWT-catalyzed hydrolysis. In addition to increased substrate
flexibility of Pik TES148C, the gain-of-function mutation
provided a 2.6-fold rate enhancement with the native hexaketide 3 over wild type. These kinetic parameters demonstrate that
the S148C mutation of Pik TE produces a catalyst with both expanded
substrate scope and increased catalytic efficiency.
Table 1
Steady-State Kinetic Values for Pik
TEWT and TES148C
substrate
TE
reaction
kcat (min–1)
Km (mM)
kcat/Km (mM–1 min–1)
3
WT
cyclization
101.7 ± 8.2
4.06 ± 0.68
25.1 ± 0.19
S148C
cyclization
261.7 ± 19.6
2.40 ± 0.46
109 ± 0.21
4
WT
cyclization
11.61 ± 0.24
4.46 ± 0.18
2.60 ± 0.05
S148C
cyclization
44.39 ± 2.01
1.42 ± 0.16
31.3 ± 0.12
5
WT
hydrolysis
8.58 ± 0.42
1.04 ± 0.16
8.25 ± 0.16
S148C
cyclization
3.37 ± 0.09
0.07 ± 0.01
50 ± 0.4
Full-Module Processing
We next investigated whether
the engineered Pik TES148C was able to improve substrate
flexibility in the context of full-module catalysis. To accomplish
this, we generated PikAIII-TES148C and incubated it with
an analogous series of epimeric Pik pentaketides. LC-HRMS analysis
of reaction products revealed two new peaks in the chromatograms not
observed in PikAIII-TEWT reactions (Figure S12), with masses and retention times corresponding
to 12-membered ring macrolactones. As no authentic standards for the
putative novel products were available, a 0.2 mmol scale reaction
of 10 with PikAIII-TES148C was performed and
the reaction products were purified and characterized via MS and NMR.
Structural determination of the reaction products confirmed that PikAIII-TES148C was indeed able to generate 11-epi-10-dml 11 from 10, as well as 3-keto-11-epi-10-dml 12, due to failed reduction of the β-keto intermediate by the
PikAIII KR domain prior to transfer to the terminal TE domain (Scheme ).
Scheme 3
Reaction of PikAIII-TES148C with C-9-Epimerized Pentaketide 10
Enzymatic reaction conditions:
1 mM Pik pentaketide, 20 mM (20 equiv) MM-NAC, 8 mM (8 equiv) 2-vinylpyridine,
0.5 mM (50 mol %) NADP+, 2.5 mM (2.5 equiv) glucose-6-phosphate,
glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (2 units/mL), 3 μM (0.3 mol
%) PikAIII-TES148C, 8 h, stationary, RT.
Reaction of PikAIII-TES148C with C-9-Epimerized Pentaketide 10
Enzymatic reaction conditions:
1 mM Pik pentaketide, 20 mM (20 equiv) MM-NAC, 8 mM (8 equiv) 2-vinylpyridine,
0.5 mM (50 mol %) NADP+, 2.5 mM (2.5 equiv) glucose-6-phosphate,
glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (2 units/mL), 3 μM (0.3 mol
%) PikAIII-TES148C, 8 h, stationary, RT.Diminished relative KR activity has been previously observed
in
vitro by the production of both the predicted reduced and 3-keto macrolactones
from reactions containing Ery5-TE with DEBS pentaketide.[17] Additionally, PikAIII-PikAIV chimeras[18] lacking a KR domain yielded exclusively 3-keto-10-dml
when incubated with Pik pentaketide in vivo, indicating that the WT
Pik TE domain is capable of cyclizing the C-3 keto intermediate. We
next investigated if the KR-TE domain competition observed in PikAIII-TES148C reactions with 10 also occurred with the
native Pik pentaketide. Accordingly, we performed analytical scale
reactions containing PikAIII-TES148C with its native substrate
and analyzed the product distribution using synthetic standards for
each product. HPLC quantification of the reaction products revealed
the conversion of native pentaketide to 3-keto-10-dml and 10-dml (1) to be 5.5% and 12.5%, respectively (see Supporting Information). Generation of both the reduced and
unreduced macrolactone products indicates competition for the linear
hexaketide intermediate between the KR and TE domains even in the
context of the native substrate. Isolation of 11 and 12 at 12% yields indicates that the identified thioesterase
bottleneck had been alleviated by a single amino acid change (S148C)
enabling substrate flux to generate novel epimerized macrolactones.
Quantum Mechanical (QM) Modeling of Pik TE Macrolactonization
Since MD simulations revealed the Pik TEWT active site
to be competent in binding the unnatural substrate 5,
we hypothesized the catalytic advantages imparted by the S148C mutation
were kinetic in nature as opposed to structural. To further our understanding
of the energetics of these processes and how Pik TES148C is able to overcome the barrier to macrolactone formation with 5, we turned to QM modeling of the catalytic steps comprising
macrolactonization (see Computational Details in the Supporting Information) after formation of the acyl-enzyme
intermediate. To accomplish this, we generated abbreviated active
site models (theozymes[19]) for Pik TEWT and Pik TES148C containing the
native C-3-unprotected hexaketide (Pik TEWT-13 and Pik TES148C-13) and the C-11-epi hexaketide
(Pik TEWT-14 and Pik TES148C-14). Analysis of the resulting free energy landscapes revealed
that macrolactonization of the linear hexaketide intermediates is
an exergonic process in all four systems after product release (Figure ). Cyclization of
the native hexaketide was more thermodynamically favorable compared
to C-11-epimerized hexaketide, particularly with the wild-type enzyme.
Moreover, the macrolactonization mechanism with each TE was calculated
to change from a stepwise addition–elimination with existence
of a tetrahedral intermediate in Pik TEWT to a concerted
acyl substitution[20] upon the S148C mutation.
This change in mechanism was evidenced by the flat potential energy
surface which precludes the formation of a tetrahedral intermediate.
Figure 6
Reaction
coordinate diagram representing the relative free energies
for Pik TE-catalyzed macrolactonization of hexaketides 13 and 14. Calculations were performed at the PCM/M06-2X/6-31+G(d,p)
level using reduced models that define the enzymatic active site (theozymes[19]). Relative free energies
are in kcal mol–1. Only the lowest energy conformers
are represented; see Supporting Information for details and all the calculated structures. *This intermediate
is higher in energy than its preceding TS due to conformational differences
between both stationary points.
Reaction
coordinate diagram representing the relative free energies
for Pik TE-catalyzed macrolactonization of hexaketides 13 and 14. Calculations were performed at the PCM/M06-2X/6-31+G(d,p)
level using reduced models that define the enzymatic active site (theozymes[19]). Relative free energies
are in kcal mol–1. Only the lowest energy conformers
are represented; see Supporting Information for details and all the calculated structures. *This intermediate
is higher in energy than its preceding TS due to conformational differences
between both stationary points.Figure shows
the
lowest energy transition structures and associated activation barriers
(ΔG⧧) for the macrolactonization
of the acyl intermediates of both the natural 13 and
C-11-epimerized 14 substrates with the Pik TEWT and TES148C protein models. The rate-limiting activation
barriers for the TES148C-catalyzed reactions are significantly
lower than those for the TEWT reactions, which correspond
to the final Ser148-acyl cleavage. Thus, Pik TES148C performs
the macrolactonization of the native and C-11-epimerized hexaketides
with ΔG⧧ values of 14.8 and
16.0 kcal mol–1, respectively, while Pik TEWT displays ΔG⧧ values
of 18.2 and 22.4 kcal mol–1 for the same substrates
(Figure ). These values
predict that the rate of reactions containing the native hexaketide
after the formation of the acyl-enzyme intermediate is faster in Pik
TES148C compared to TEWT.
Figure 7
Lowest energy rate-limiting
transition structures calculated with
PCM/M06-2X/6-31+G(d,p) for the abbreviated active
site models (theozymes[19]) of the Pik TEWT (left) and Pik TES148C (right)
catalyzed macrolactonization of native hexaketide 13 (top,
in blue) and C-11-epi hexaketide 14 (bottom, in red).
Activation free energies (ΔG⧧) calculated from the corresponding Pik TE hexaketides are given
in kcal mol–1 and distances in angstroms. Relevant
breaking/forming C–O and C–S bonds are shown in boldface.
Nonpolar hydrogens have been removed for clarity. See Supporting Information for all calculated structures
along the reaction pathway.
Lowest energy rate-limiting
transition structures calculated with
PCM/M06-2X/6-31+G(d,p) for the abbreviated active
site models (theozymes[19]) of the Pik TEWT (left) and Pik TES148C (right)
catalyzed macrolactonization of native hexaketide 13 (top,
in blue) and C-11-epi hexaketide 14 (bottom, in red).
Activation free energies (ΔG⧧) calculated from the corresponding Pik TEhexaketides are given
in kcal mol–1 and distances in angstroms. Relevant
breaking/forming C–O and C–S bonds are shown in boldface.
Nonpolar hydrogens have been removed for clarity. See Supporting Information for all calculated structures
along the reaction pathway.The calculated increase of 4.2 kcal mol–1 in
the activation barrier of the macrolactonization of Pik TEWT-13 vs Pik TEWT-14, agrees well
with the experimentally observed lack of epimerized macrolactone formation.
This higher macrolactonization energy barrier in the TEWT system increases the difficulty in proceeding from the acyl-enzyme
intermediate, which is vulnerable to water hydrolysis.[6] While we did not observe significant water hydrolysis in
reactions containing Pik TEWT and the native substrate,
incubation with epimerized methyl-protected 5 resulted
exclusively in hydrolyzed product, the result of an inability to form
the epimerized macrolactone 9. In contrast, the 6.4 kcal
mol–1 decrease in activation barrier for Pik TES148C-14 macrolactonization is consistent with
our experimentally observed product formation.
Discussion
TE Substrate
Tolerance
In vivo engineering of the DEBS
biosynthetic pathway has shown that DEBSTE possesses some tolerance
to modifications in both the length and the functionality of the linear
polyketide substrate. Modifications in the DEBS pathway have yielded
a large number of 6-dEB analogs from differential extender unit incorporation
and reductive processing[21−28] as well as macrolactones ranging in size from 6- to 16-membered
rings.[29−32] However, the titers of these unnatural products are greatly diminished
compared to wild type production levels,[6] and the inherent complexity of in vivo biosynthesis has prevented
identification of pathway bottlenecks, such as TE domains.Initial
in vitro biochemical characterization of the DEBSTE[33,34] provided further evidence for the relatively high substrate tolerance
of PKS TEs for acylation and hydrolysis, as terminally (omega) hydroxylated
fatty acids and substrates resembling simplified DEBS heptaketides
were all hydrolyzed by DEBSTE. However, the ability of PKS TEs to
cyclize substrates other than their native linear intermediates has
proved to be much more limited. In fact, TE mediated macrolactonization
has only been observed in a select few studies.[10,16,35−42]In addition to their native substrates, Pik TE has been shown
to
catalyze macrolactonization of C-3 methyl 4 and NBOM-protected
derivatives,[10] though not C-7 reduced analogs.[16,36] DEBSTE has been shown to catalyze macrolactonization of unnatural
mimics of the DEBS heptaketide.[39,42] However, there are
no reports of either the Pik or DEBSTEs catalyzing macrolactonization
of a substrate containing a nucleophilic hydroxyl group with an unnatural,
epimerized (S)-configuration. When probed for the
ability to form an epimeric heptaketide mimic of 6-dEB, the DEBSTE
displayed a high level of stereoselectivity for the natural (R)-configuration, and exclusively hydrolyzed the unnatural
(S)-stereoisomer,[42] adding
to the observations in this study for strict stereoselectivity in
TE-catalyzed macrolactonization.
PKS Catalysis with Engineered
TE Domains
In an preceding
article, we describe the identification of the TE domain as a catalytic
bottleneck in the processing of unnatural substrates. Accordingly,
we have engineered the TE domain for increased substrate flexibility
and introduced it into PikAIII-TE to yield the engineered variant
PikAIII-TES148C.Direct comparison of PikAIII-TEWT to PikAIII-TES148C with a panel of stereoisomer
Pik pentaketides demonstrated the success of this approach as a 0.2
mmol scale reaction with 10 resulted in the production
of two new macrolactone products, 11-epi-10-dml 11 and
3-keto-11-epi-10-dml 12. The 1:1 isolation of 11 and 12 from reactions of 10 with PikAIII-TES148C indicates that the TE was indeed responsible for the
failed catalysis using PikAIII-TEWT, as the KR domain
retained a sufficient level of activity toward the unnatural intermediate.
This demonstration of TE engineering offers a potential means for
increasing the substrate flexibility of biosynthetic pathways for
the production of natural product analogs.In a previous report we assayed a series of different thio- and
oxoester-protected hexaketides against the terminal Pik module (PikAIV)
as well as the excised TE domain.[10] We
found that thio- or oxoester choice determined the catalytic route
of the hexaketide in the presence of PikAIV in vitro, with thiophenol
and N-acetylcysteamine thioesters having a 10:1 preference
for either full-module processing or direct cyclization, respectively.
Moreover, previous studies have demonstrated that TE domains can function
as hydrolases with a large degree of substrate flexibility.[16,17] Thus, we reasoned that the low yields from the PikAIII-TES148C reactions with 10 are likely due to direct loading
of the TES148C domain and subsequent hydrolysis. Indeed,
control reactions (see Supporting Information) confirmed (i) the S148C mutation overrides the KS preference previously
enjoyed by thiophenol thioesters and (ii) enzymatic reactions performed
without extender unit or reductive cofactors showed a much higher
hydrolysis of Pik pentaketide with PikAIII-TES148C relative
to wild type.Recently, Schaffer et al. reported a TE domain
with a native cysteine
nucleophile critical to the cyclization of a strained β-lactone
ring in the obafluorin (Obi) nonribosomal peptide pathway.[43] Of note, an analogous cysteine to serine mutation
in the Obi TE resulted solely in the hydrolysis product, further implicating
the catalytic advantage of a cysteineTE in the cyclization of strained
ring systems. Examples of modular type I polyketideTE domains containing
cysteine active site nucleophiles are notably rare.[6] Further studies will focus on delineating the biosynthetic
parameters that select for cysteine or serine active site residues.
Computational Investigation of the TE Domain Catalysis
Our
investigation revealed mutual recognition, TE-substrate shape
complementarity, and intrinsic substrate structural preferences to
be critical for the hexaketide to reach a conformation productive
toward macrolactonization. MD simulations revealed hydrophobic interactions
between the substrate and TE residues lining the active site as being
vital for guiding the hexaketide to a catalytically competent pro-cyclic conformation. These findings are consistent with
mutational analysis of DEBSTE where exchange of potential hydrogen-bonding
residues did not substantively affect the specificity constant for
hydrolysis of four unnatural thioester substrates. In this case, Wang
and Boddy suggested that hydrophobic interactions between the active
site and substrate are the main driving force of substrate specificity.[37] Additionally, our results are in agreement with
the available crystal structures of Pik TE bound with phosphonate
substrate mimics, which displayed a lack of specific TE-substrate
polar contacts.[7,8]Recently, Chen et al.[44] reported theoretical investigations of the thioesterase
domain from the erythromycin biosynthetic pathway (DEBSTE) to describe
the mechanistic parameters that determine the catalytic partitioning
of substrates to either macrocyclic or linear hydrolysis products.
MD simulations coupled with QM calculations were performed on systems
of DEBSTE modeled with the native DEBS heptaketide and Pik hexaketide,
which both lead to macrolactonization, as well as two diastereomers
of a reduced C-7 hydroxyl analog of Pik hexaketide that result exclusively
in substrate hydrolysis. Analysis of the resulting MD simulations
provided findings consistent with those in this report, particularly
highlighting the importance of the formation of a substrate pre-reaction
state through induced-fit mutual recognition between the enzyme and
the substrate for macrolactonization to occur. Consistent with the
present study, the authors found a hydrogen bond between the lactonizing
hydroxyl group of the substrate and the catalytic histidine as well
as hydrophobic interactions to be critical for formation of a catalytically
competent pre-reaction state.To understand the energetic consequences
of the S148C mutation
during the macrolactonization process, we performed DFT analysis of
Pik TEWT and TES148C modeled as acyl-enzyme
intermediates with the native and C-11-epimerized hexaketides. The
results of our QM calculations revealed a significant kinetic advantage
in the reactions catalyzed by Pik TES148C. The S148C mutation
provides a mechanistic change during the macrolactonization step from
a two-step transesterification in the TEWT reaction (i.e.,
addition–elimination) to a lower energy single concerted step
in the TES148C pathway.Overall, our combined computational
method for investigating Pik
TE catalysis using MD simulations in concert with QM calculations
provides a plausible explanation for improved substrate flexibility
and catalytic efficiency of Pik TES148C. According to the
results from our MD simulations, epimerization of the hexaketide C-11
stereocenter generates a substrate with a reduced propensity for acquiring
a catalytically competent conformation within the TE active site.
However, the ability of the hexaketides to reach a conformation viable
for catalysis is not the only factor affecting macrocylicization,
especially if this step is not rate-limiting.[44] Hence, even if a substrate has a poor propensity to arrange in a
productive conformation and/or lactonization is structurally hindered
(as with the C-11-epimerized hexaketide) a significant acceleration
through a key single mutation can overcome these structural limitations,
boosting reactivity even with unnatural substrates.
Conclusion
Based on the TE catalytic stringency observed in the processing
of unnatural substrates,[9] we focused the
current study on investigating full-length substrate analogs as probes
for the Pik TE domain and describe the identification of a single
active site mutation that generates a more effective macrolactonization
catalyst. Remarkably, this single S148C mutation provided a Pik TE
variant with increases in both substrate scope and catalytic efficiency.
Notably, Pik TES148C was able to catalyze the cyclization
of a hexaketide with an epimerized nucleophilic hydroxyl to generate
a novel epimerized macrolactone, while TEWT catalyzed complete
hydrolysis of the same substrate due to inefficient macrocyclization.
Furthermore, application of the engineered TE through reactions containing
PikAIII-TES148C allowed for the full-module processing
of a C-9-epimerized Pik pentaketide 10 to the corresponding
epimeric macrolactones 11 and 12. Computational
investigation of both variants revealed that a single mutation greatly
lowers the activation barriers to macrolactonization; as a consequence,
the catalytic process occurs faster and the substrate specificity
previously dictated by shape complementarity is kinetically overcome,
in line with the observed increase in kcat.Notably, in the context of our system, the KR domain of PikAIII-TES148C displayed diminished relative activity for both the native
Pik pentaketide as well as 10 with an epimerized distal
hydroxyl stereocenter. The product distribution indicates competition
between the KR mediated β-keto reduction and TE cyclization
of the linear hexaketide intermediate. This competition is remarkable
since the KR domain is fully competent toward processing the native
substrate and no unreduced products are observed in reactions containing
PikAIII-TEWT, suggesting that the engineered TE
domain is able to outcompete the native catalytic sequence.[45,46] While this domain competition for the hexaketide
intermediate diminished the product yields for 11-epi-10-dml 11, it provides insight into the effects of engineered domains
on the sequence of catalytic events in PKS catalysis.While
additional biochemical studies of excised domains and full-modules
with full-length analogs of native substrates are necessary to support
and expand our understanding of PKS function, it is becoming apparent
that efficient production of specific, designer macrolide analogs
will require significant pathway engineering. However, production
of a desired natural product analog should be obtainable through the
following workflow: (i) a targeted domain is engineered to perform
an unnatural function; (ii) downstream modules are biochemically characterized
in vitro with the resulting unnatural polyketide in order to identify
bottlenecks; and (iii) catalytically inefficient domain(s) are engineered
with the goal of restoring effective processing to generate unnatural
products. Indeed, as noted in a recent review by Weissman,[47] it is perhaps more realistic to envision the
future application of PKS engineering as a synthetic biology tool
for producing specific, high-value natural product derivatives through
targeted reprogramming of modular type I polyketide pathways rather
than generation of natural product libraries.The results described
herein lay the groundwork for future engineering
of PKS TE domains in order to generate more flexible catalysts for
the production of novel natural product analogs.
Authors: Jonathan R Whicher; Somnath Dutta; Douglas A Hansen; Wendi A Hale; Joseph A Chemler; Annie M Dosey; Alison R H Narayan; Kristina Håkansson; David H Sherman; Janet L Smith; Georgios Skiniotis Journal: Nature Date: 2014-06-18 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Somnath Dutta; Jonathan R Whicher; Douglas A Hansen; Wendi A Hale; Joseph A Chemler; Grady R Congdon; Alison R H Narayan; Kristina Håkansson; David H Sherman; Janet L Smith; Georgios Skiniotis Journal: Nature Date: 2014-06-18 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Aaron A Koch; Jennifer J Schmidt; Andrew N Lowell; Douglas A Hansen; Katherine M Coburn; Joseph A Chemler; David H Sherman Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2020-06-05 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Edward Kalkreuter; Jared M CroweTipton; Andrew N Lowell; David H Sherman; Gavin J Williams Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2019-01-24 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Jennifer J Schmidt; Yogan Khatri; Scott I Brody; Catherine Zhu; Halina Pietraszkiewicz; Frederick A Valeriote; David H Sherman Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2020-02-03 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: De-Wei Gao; Cooper S Jamieson; Gaoqian Wang; Yan Yan; Jiahai Zhou; K N Houk; Yi Tang Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2020-12-22 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Dale F Kreitler; Erin M Gemmell; Jason E Schaffer; Timothy A Wencewicz; Andrew M Gulick Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2019-07-31 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Craig J Tainter; Nathan D Schley; Constance M Harris; Donald F Stec; Anna K Song; Andrzej Balinski; Jody C May; John A McLean; Kimberly S Reece; Thomas M Harris Journal: J Nat Prod Date: 2020-02-21 Impact factor: 4.803