Varnavas D Mouchlis1, Yuan Chen1, J Andrew McCammon1, Edward A Dennis1. 1. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry and Department of Pharmacology, School of Medicine , University of California , San Diego, La Jolla , California 92093-0601 , United States.
Abstract
We demonstrate that lipidomics coupled with molecular dynamics reveal unique phospholipase A2 specificity toward membrane phospholipid substrates. We discovered unexpected headgroup and acyl-chain specificity for three major human phospholipases A2. The differences between each enzyme's specificity, coupled with molecular dynamics-based structural and binding studies, revealed unique binding sites and interfacial surface binding moieties for each enzyme that explain the observed specificity at a hitherto inaccessible structural level. Surprisingly, we discovered that a unique hydrophobic binding site for the cleaved fatty acid dominates each enzyme's specificity rather than its catalytic residues and polar headgroup binding site. Molecular dynamics simulations revealed the optimal phospholipid binding mode leading to a detailed understanding of the preference of cytosolic phospholipase A2 for cleavage of proinflammatory arachidonic acid, calcium-independent phospholipase A2, which is involved in membrane remodeling for cleavage of linoleic acid and for antibacterial secreted phospholipase A2 favoring linoleic acid, saturated fatty acids, and phosphatidylglycerol.
We demonstrate that lipidomics coupled with molecular dynamics reveal unique phospholipase A2 specificity toward membrane phospholipid substrates. We discovered unexpected headgroup and acyl-chain specificity for three major human phospholipases A2. The differences between each enzyme's specificity, coupled with molecular dynamics-based structural and binding studies, revealed unique binding sites and interfacial surface binding moieties for each enzyme that explain the observed specificity at a hitherto inaccessible structural level. Surprisingly, we discovered that a unique hydrophobic binding site for the cleaved fatty acid dominates each enzyme's specificity rather than its catalytic residues and polar headgroup binding site. Molecular dynamics simulations revealed the optimal phospholipid binding mode leading to a detailed understanding of the preference of cytosolic phospholipase A2 for cleavage of proinflammatory arachidonic acid, calcium-independent phospholipase A2, which is involved in membrane remodeling for cleavage of linoleic acid and for antibacterial secreted phospholipase A2 favoring linoleic acid, saturated fatty acids, and phosphatidylglycerol.
Phospholipase
A2 (PLA2) constitutes a structurally
and functionally diverse superfamily of enzymes, and distinct types
can exhibit unique degradative, biosynthetic, and/or signaling functions
and are implicated in a wide variety of diseases. During the last
two decades, considerable effort has been devoted to cloning and purifying
different types of PLA2s and defining their implications
in signaling pathways as well as in various diseases.[1,2] However, questions related to the specificity of these enzymes toward
the huge range of naturally occurring phospholipid substrates have
not been thoroughly addressed. Using a novel lipidomic-based assay
described herein, we revealed significant specificity differences
toward natural and synthetic phospholipids not previously feasible
using traditional assays. We compared three major humanPLA2s including the Group IVA cytosolic (cPLA2), Group VIA
calcium-independent (iPLA2), and Group V secreted (sPLA2). The structural details and dynamics of each enzyme’s
association with the membrane or mixed micelle interface, and the
binding of specific phospholipids were elucidated using molecular
dynamics (MD) guided by hydrogen/deuterium (H/D) exchange.[3] This work constitutes the first detailed study
elucidating the specificity of PLA2s toward membrane phospholipids
and correlating it with the structural interactions of specific phospholipids
bound to each enzyme’s active site, extending earlier studies
on substrate and inhibitor binding.[4−11]The PLA2 superfamily constitutes a diverse set
of enzymes
that have a unique structure and specific cellular and tissue localization
as well as biological function.[1] Each of
these enzymes evolved to hydrolyze specific membrane phospholipids
based on its cellular/tissue/subcellular localization and distinct
biological function. Most PLA2s are water-soluble enzymes,
accessing their water-insoluble substrates by first associating with
the lipid–water interface and then extracting a single phospholipid
molecule into the active site. Structure and dynamics of PLA2 enzymes are significant factors in defining their association with
cellular membranes and their specificity toward membrane phospholipids.
Consequently, each PLA2 has a unique structure that contains
two very important regions: the interfacial surface through which
it associates and binds to the membrane and the active site where
catalysis occurs.[4] Assaying the activity
of PLA2 enzymes has posed significant challenges because
their natural phospholipid substrates aggregate in aqueous solution
to form micelles, vesicles, or liposomes.[12,13] To overcome these challenges, we have employed lipidomics to develop
a novel mass spectrometric-based high-throughput assay toward both
natural and synthetic membrane phospholipids in mixed micelles with
a nonionic surfactant. This assay was used to determine the substrate
specificity of three humanPLA2s toward the major phospholipid
molecular species.
Methods
A detailed description of the experimental and computational methods
used in this study is provided in the Supporting Information. Briefly, a lipidomics-based LC/MS assay was used
to define the specificity of cPLA2, iPLA2, and
sPLA2 toward a variety of phospholipids. Molecular dynamics-based
binding computations were employed to determine the structural features
of each enzyme that contribute to its specificity.
Results and Discussion
Lipidomics High-Throughput
PLA2 Assay
A lipidomics-based HPLC/MS assay was
developed using
a HILIC column and multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) for targeted
quantification of the assay components including the surfactant (octaethylene
glycol monododecyl ether, C12E8), a free fatty acid (arachidonic acid,
AA), a phospholipid (1-palmitoyl-2-arachidonoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, PAPC), a lysophospholipid (1-palmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, 16:0 LPC), and an internal
standard (1-heptadecanoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine,
17:0 LPC). Details are provided in the Supporting Information. Figure S1A shows the
peaks of all five analytes. The products of PLA2 activity
are a free fatty acid and a lysophospholipid. The lysophospholipid
was employed to measure PLA2 activity in positive ion mode
because it allowed monitoring of a variety of lysophospholipids including
16:0 and 18:0 LPA, 16:0 and 18:0 LPC, 16:0 and 18:0 LPE, 16:0 and
18:0 LPG, and 16:0 and 18:0 LPS with high sensitivity (Figure S1B). An internal standard (17:0 LPC)
was used for normalizing variations related to sample handling, ionization
efficiency, and signal intensity fluctuations. Standard curves were
generated using the ratio of each analyte peak area to the internal
standard peak area as a function of the analyte concentration (Figure S2).For the substrate, 100 μM
phospholipid was mixed with surfactant (C12E8) in buffer. The optimum
concentration of surfactant was determined by testing the activity
of each enzyme as a function of surfactant concentration (Figure S3). cPLA2 and iPLA2 demonstrate optimum activity at 400 μM C12E8, whereas sPLA2 has 60% of its optimum activity at the same concentration.
A surfactant concentration of 400 μM was chosen to have a uniform
micelle composition for all three enzymes. Additives required for
each enzyme were included (3 μM PIP2 and 90 μM calcium
in 100 mM HEPES pH 7.5 buffer for cPLA2, 2 mM ATP in 100
mM HEPES pH 7.5 buffer for iPLA2, and 5 mM calcium in 50
mM Tris-HCl pH 8 buffer for sPLA2). For each enzyme, product
formation was linear with the amount of enzyme (Figure S4A–C) and the reaction time (Figure S4D–F). A protein concentration in the middle
of the linear range and an assay time of 30 min at 40 °C was
employed with a total LC/MS analysis time of 1.6 min per sample.
Headgroup and Acyl-Chain Specificity
PLA2 enzymatic activity toward a variety of phospholipid
species was determined with the goal of defining headgroup and acyl-chain
specificity for all three human enzymes. Headgroup specificity was
defined by keeping constant the sn-1 and sn-2 fatty acyl-chains while varying the headgroup of the
phospholipid species. Positional (sn-1 or
sn-2) acyl-chain specificity was defined by keeping constant
the headgroup and sn-1 acyl-chain position of the
phospholipid species while varying the sn-2 fatty
acyl-chain.Five species of 1-palmitoyl-2-arachidonoyl-sn-glycero-3-X were employed where X was phosphatidic acid
(PA), phosphocholine (PC), phosphoethanolamine (PE), phosphoglycerol
(PG), or phosphoserine (PS). The sn-1 acyl chain
was kept constant with the saturatedpalmitic acid because it is the
most abundant de novo biosynthetic fatty acid in human plasma and
tissue.[14,15] Arachidonic acid was chosen for the sn-2 position because it has been successfully used in the
past for traditional radioactive assays based on the importance of
PLA2 in releasing arachidonic acid for eicosanoid production.[2,13] The enzymatic activity of each enzyme toward 100 μM of each
of the five phospholipid species is shown in Figure A–C. Based on these results, cPLA2 shows a preference for zwitterionic phospholipids such as
PAPC and PAPE rather than negatively charged PAPA, PAPG, and PAPS.
iPLA2 has a preference for negatively charged phospholipids
and especially for PAPG and PAPS. sPLA2 is the only enzyme
that exhibits remarkable specificity toward PAPG, indicating a distinct
preference for that headgroup. However, to differentiate true catalytic
preferences from interfacial surface association effects, the enzymatic
activity of each enzyme was also determined in an equimolar mixture
of all five phospholipid species (Figure D–F). Total lipid concentration was
kept at 100 μM by employing 20 μM of each phospholipid
species. cPLA2 and iPLA2 exhibit similar activity
toward all five headgroups with a mild preference (factor of 2) of
iPLA2 for PAPE. Interestingly, sPLA2 still shows
specificity (factor of 3) toward PAPG over PAPC and PAPE and less
activity toward PAPA and PAPS, indicating that this enzyme favors
that headgroup in its active site.
Figure 1
Enzymatic activity toward 100 μM
of PAPA, PAPC, PAPE, PAPG,
and PAPS for (A) cPLA2, (B) iPLA2, and (C) sPLA2 and toward 100 μM of a mixture of PAPA, PAPC, PAPE,
PAPG, and PAPS at 20 μM each for (D) cPLA2, (E) iPLA2, and (F) sPLA2.
Enzymatic activity toward 100 μM
of PAPA, PAPC, PAPE, PAPG,
and PAPS for (A) cPLA2, (B) iPLA2, and (C) sPLA2 and toward 100 μM of a mixture of PAPA, PAPC, PAPE,
PAPG, and PAPS at 20 μM each for (D) cPLA2, (E) iPLA2, and (F) sPLA2.Acyl-chain specificity for each enzyme was determined by
keeping
the phospholipid headgroup constant as phosphocholine because it is
the major headgroup in membrane phospholipids.[14,16] Palmitic and stearic acid were utilized at the sn-1 position because they are synthesized de novo and constitute the
major fatty acids at the sn-1 position of membrane
phospholipids.[14,15] For the sn-2
position, a variety of important fatty acids were compared including
myristic acid (MA, 14:0), palmitic acid (PA, 16:0), stearic acid (SA,
18:0), oleic acid (OA, 18:1), linoleic acid (LA, 18:2), arachidonic
acid (AA, 22:4), and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, 22:6). cPLA2 exhibits a distinct specificity toward AA at the sn-2 position with significantly less activity toward OA and LA (Figure A, D). iPLA2 shows specificity toward LA and MA with slight preference for LA
(Figure B, E). sPLA2 exhibits significant activity toward MA, PA, SA, OA, and
LA with a preference for MA and LA (Figure C, F). Although iPLA2 and sPLA2 show measurable activity toward AA, it is not the optimal
fatty acid at the sn-2 position for these two enzymes.
It is also remarkable that cPLA2 does not show activity
toward DHA, whereas iPLA2 and sPLA2 exhibit
measurable activity with sPLA2, the most active one. Previous
studies also suggested that sPLA2 shows significant activity
toward DHA, whereas cPLA2 prefers AA.[17,18] Even though DHA is the most abundant and significant fatty acid
in mammalian brain, little is known about the regulation of its metabolism
compared to AA.[19] It was reported that
the reduced metabolism of DHA in iPLA2 deficient mice increased
their vulnerability to neuroinflammation because DHA is a precursor
of anti-inflammatory neuroprotectins and resolvins.[20,21]
Figure 2
Enzymatic
activity toward 100 μM of PXPC for (A) cPLA2, (B)
iPLA2, and (C) sPLA2 and toward
100 μM of SXPC for (D) cPLA2, (E) iPLA2, and (F) sPLA2.
Enzymatic
activity toward 100 μM of PXPC for (A) cPLA2, (B)
iPLA2, and (C) sPLA2 and toward
100 μM of SXPC for (D) cPLA2, (E) iPLA2, and (F) sPLA2.For all three enzymes, no significant differences in specificity
toward the sn-2 position were observed between palmitic
acid (Figure A–C)
and stearic acid (Figure D–F) at the sn-1 position. cPLA2 (Figure A,
D) and sPLA2 (Figure C, F) activities are slightly better toward phospholipids
containing steric acid (18:0) at the sn-1 position,
whereas iPLA2 (Figure B, E) activity is somewhat better toward phospholipids
containing palmitic acid (16:0) at the sn-1 position.
Previously published studies suggested that, although both cPLA2 and iPLA2 contribute to LPC accumulation during
stimulation of macrophages, 18:0 LPC appears to be produced primarily
by cPLA2 whereas 16:0 LPC appears to be produced primarily
by iPLA2.[22,23]
PLA2 Activity on Natural Phospholipids
The activity of
each enzyme was also measured toward 100 μM
of phospholipid extracts from chicken egg or porcine brain (Figure A–C). Fatty
acid distribution for these products is reported in Table S1 indicating that a variety of fatty acids can be esterified
at the sn-1 or sn-2 position. These
extracts are complex because both headgroups and fatty acyl-chains
vary, and PLA2 activity is dually dependent. According
to Figure , cPLA2 shows preference for zwitterionic phospholipids and especially
for PC. iPLA2 exhibits higher activity toward negatively
charged phospholipids including PA and PG. sPLA2 displays
higher activity toward PG. However, in an equimolar mixture of all
five extracts (Figure D–F), cPLA2 and iPLA2 have similar activities
toward all five groups with slight variations, whereas sPLA2 has higher activity toward PG. Thus, this lipidomics-based assay
can effectively be used to assay natural membrane phospholipids, and
the activity will reflect the heterogeneity of the fatty acid substituents
at each position and the variety of molecular species present.
Figure 3
Enzymatic activity
toward 100 μM of egg PA, egg PC, egg PE,
egg PG, and brain PS for (A) cPLA2, (B) iPLA2, and (C) sPLA2 and toward 100 μM of a mixture of
egg PA, egg PC, egg PE, egg PG, and brain PS at 20 μM each for
(D) cPLA2, (E) iPLA2, and (F) sPLA2.
Enzymatic activity
toward 100 μM of egg PA, egg PC, egg PE,
egg PG, and brain PS for (A) cPLA2, (B) iPLA2, and (C) sPLA2 and toward 100 μM of a mixture of
egg PA, egg PC, egg PE, egg PG, and brain PS at 20 μM each for
(D) cPLA2, (E) iPLA2, and (F) sPLA2.
Headgroup
and Acyl-Chain Binding Sites
Atomistic molecular dynamics
at a microsecond time scale revealed
the structural characteristics contributing to the specificity of
each enzyme toward each phospholipid. Simulations were carried out
on four complexes of each enzyme (cPLA2, iPLA2, and sPLA2) with their optimal phospholipid substrates
in the presence of a membrane patch. The sn-1 position
of each phospholipid was chosen to contain an esterified palmitic
acid (16:0) because the fatty acid at this position does not significantly
affect the specificity of these enzymes. Arachidonic (20:4), linoleic
(18:2), and myristic (14:0) acid were chosen to be esterified at the sn-2 position because cPLA2 exhibits optimum
activity toward the first while iPLA2 and sPLA2 showed optimum activity toward the second and third ones. Four major
headgroups were selected for the sn-3 position including
phosphoethanolamine (PE), phosphoserine (PS), phosphoglycerol (PG),
and phosphocholine (PC).A phospholipid headgroup consists of
a phosphate group that is connected to an alcohol like ethanolamine,
serine, glycerol, inositol, or choline through a phosphoester bond.
All three enzymes were evolved to have a positively charged residue,
an arginine, or a lysine that stabilizes the phosphate group in the
active site through hydrogen bonds (H-bonds) as well as electrostatic
interactions (Figure and Figure S5). The phosphate group in
the active site of sPLA2 interacts with the calcium ion
as well. The simulations showed that the binding site of the alcohol
at the phospholipid headgroup in cPLA2 and iPLA2 contains residues such as aspartic or glutamic acids as well as
lysines that interact through H-bonding or electrostatic interactions
with PE, PS, and PC (Figure S5A, B, D, and E, Movies 1–8). At the same binding site, sPLA2 has a glutamic
acid and an arginine that interact with PE (Figure S5C, Movie 9), whereas PG showed
a different interaction pattern that involved an arginine and a tryptophan
(Figure S5F, Movie 10). It is worth mentioning that sPLA2 is the only
enzyme that showed significant preference toward PG (Figure C and F), and the simulations
also showed a distinctive interaction pattern in comparison with PE
and PC (Movies 9–12).
Figure 4
Binding of PAPE in the active site of (A) cPLA2 (Movie 1), (B) iPLA2 (Movie 5), and (C) sPLA2 (Movie 9). Binding of PAPS in the active site of (D) cPLA2 (Movie 2), (E) iPLA2 (Movie 6), and (F) binding of PAPG in the active
site of sPLA2 (Movie 10).
Binding of PAPE in the active site of (A) cPLA2 (Movie 1), (B) iPLA2 (Movie 5), and (C) sPLA2 (Movie 9). Binding of PAPS in the active site of (D) cPLA2 (Movie 2), (E) iPLA2 (Movie 6), and (F) binding of PAPG in the active
site of sPLA2 (Movie 10).A phospholipid contains fatty
acid tails at the sn-1 and sn-2
position. The sn-1
position usually contains saturated fatty acids like palmitic (16:0)
or stearic (18:0), which do not significantly affect the activity
of PLA2 enzymes (Figure ). Because PLA2s catalyze the hydrolysis
of the sn-2 ester bond, we hypothesized that their
hydrophobic binding sites were structurally evolved to distinguish
between different fatty acid tails at the sn-2 position.
The hydrophobic binding site of cPLA2 is rich with aromatic
residues that interact with the double bonds of arachidonic acid (20:4)
through π stacking (Figure A and D, Movies 1 and 2) because the enzyme is specific for this fatty
acid (Figure A and
D). PLPC and PMPC are not good substrates for cPLA2, and
thus, they diffuse in the membrane during the simulations (Figure A and D, Movies 3 and 4). As
indicated in Figure B and E, iPLA2 exhibited optimum activity for phospholipids
containing linoleic (18:2) and myristic (14:0) acid at the sn-2 position. The MD simulations showed that iPLA2 has two hydrophobic binding pockets: the first one contains aromatic
and aliphatic residues and accommodates the linoleic acid tail (Figure B, Movie 7) and the second one contains exclusively aliphatic
residues and accommodates the myristic acid tail (Figure E, Movie 8). The arachidonic acid tail in PAPE and PAPS (Figure B and E, Movies 5 and 6) was accommodated
in a combined pocket and it was more unstable compared to PLPC and
PMPC. In an analogous manner, sPLA2 showed optimum activity
toward PLPC and PMPC (Figure C and F). The simulations also revealed two hydrophobic pockets:
an aromatic and an aliphatic, that bind the linoleic and myristic
acid tails, respectively (Figure C and F, Movies 11 and 12). The arachidonic acid in PAPE and PAPG (Figure C and F, Movies 9 and 10)
was also accommodated in a combined pocket, and it was more unstable
than PLPC and PMPC, analogous to iPLA2.
Figure 5
Binding of PLPC in the
active site of (A) cPLA2 (Movie 3), (B) iPLA2 (Movie 7), and
(C) sPLA2 (Movie 11). Binding of PMPC in the active site of (D) cPLA2 (Movie 4), (E) iPLA2 (Movie 8), and (F) sPLA2 (Movie 12).
Binding of PLPC in the
active site of (A) cPLA2 (Movie 3), (B) iPLA2 (Movie 7), and
(C) sPLA2 (Movie 11). Binding of PMPC in the active site of (D) cPLA2 (Movie 4), (E) iPLA2 (Movie 8), and (F) sPLA2 (Movie 12).
Active Site Properties
Each of the
three enzymes contains a unique active site exhibiting specific properties.
These properties define the specificity of each enzyme toward distinct
types of phospholipids. The active site of each enzyme consists of
a hydrophilic region where the headgroup of the phospholipid binds
and a hydrophobic region where the two acyl-chains bind. The experimental
and structural data showed that all three enzymes achieve substrate
specificity by recruiting a specific phospholipid molecule containing
the optimal fatty acid at the sn-2 position to its
distinctive hydrophobic binding subsite.cPLA2 has
a deep and rigid channel-like active site that accommodates a phospholipid
molecule in its entirety (Movies 1 and 2), and thus, the enzyme exhibits strict specificity
for arachidonic acid at the sn-2 position. The simulations
showed a well-maintained active site “pocket” volume
for cPLA2 with minor changes over the time course of the
simulations in the presence of PAPE, PAPS, PLPC, and PMPC (Figure S6A). The RMSD of the protein backbone
atoms was stabilized below 2.0 Å for the simulations with PAPE
and PAPS because these two phospholipids remained bound to the enzyme
during the entire simulation, and it was stabilized above 2.0 Å
for the simulations with PLPC and PMPC because they lost binding during
the simulation (Figure S7A). This indicates
that cPLA2 exists in two conformations on the surface of
the membrane: “bound” and “unbound”. The
flexibility profile of regions that are located within 4 Å of
the phospholipid molecule showed that these regions are more flexible
during the simulations in the presence of PLPC and PMPC because these
two phospholipids diffuse into the membrane during the simulations
(Figure S8 and Movies 3 and 4).iPLA2 contains a more flexible and versatile active
site, and thus, this enzyme exhibits a more permissive specificity
for the fatty acid at the sn-2 position. The volume
of the active site changes according to the size of the bound phospholipid,
indicating its high flexibility that allows binding of diverse types
of phospholipids (Figure S6B). The RMSD
of the protein backbone atoms for the simulations in the presence
of PAPE, PAPS, and PLPC was stabilized at ∼2.0 Å because
the size of these three phospholipids is comparable, whereas in the
case of PMPC, it was stabilized at ∼3.0 Å because PMPC
is smaller (Figure S7B). A close examination
of the regions located 4.0 Å around the bound phospholipid showed
that iPLA2 can recruit a diverse set of residues to achieve
binding of several types of fatty acids at the sn-2 position (Figure S9). Residues like
Leu491, Ile494, Ile523, Leu524, Leu564, Met537, and Leu560, which
interact with myristic acid in the simulation with PMPC, showed lower
RMSF values indicating lower flexibility (Figure S9, Movie 8). A similar pattern occurred during the simulations
in the presence of PAPE, PAPS, and PLPC for residues like Tyr541,
Tyr544, and Phe644, which interact with the arachidonic or linoleic
acid (Figure S9, Movies 5, 6, 7).Phospholipase
A2 exists in at least three conformations:
the “closed” conformation in water (E),
which associates with membranes (M) to form the “open”
membrane-associated “unbound” conformation (E·M). A phospholipid molecule is then extracted into the active site,
and the enzyme adopts a “bound” conformation (ES·M). Catalytic formation and release of the products
(EP·M) returns the enzyme to the “open”
membrane-associated “unbound” conformation (E·M) (modified from ref (3)).The sPLA2 active site
is a very shallow cavity that
accommodates only the sn-2fatty acid (Movies 9–12). The active site volume has similar values during the simulations
in the presence of PAPE, PAPG, and PLPC, whereas it has a smaller
value in the case of PMPC because it is significantly smaller than
the other three (Figure S6C). In all four
simulations, the RMSD of the protein backbone atoms was stabilized
at ∼2.0 Å, indicating that the conformation of sPLA2 was not affected by the bound phospholipid (Figure S7C). sPLA2 is a small enzyme (14 kDa, 138
aa) that contains 6 disulfide bonds, making its structure very rigid.[1] The hydrophobic pocket recruitment in sPLA2 was similar to iPLA2, which is consistent with
the similarity of the fatty acid specificity of these two enzymes
(Figure ). Several
aliphatic residues including Val12, Leu102, Leu98, and Lue94 showed
lower flexibility during the simulation with PMPC because they are
part of the hydrophobic pocket to which the myristic acid is bound
(Figure S10). During the simulations with
PAPE, PAPG, and PLPC, aromatic residues like Tyr21, Tyr24, and Tyr105
exhibited lower flexibility because they interact with the double
bonds of arachidonic and linoleic acid.
Connecting
Structure with Cellular Function
Molecular structure and
enzymatic activity of PLA2s
are tightly connected to their cellular function. cPLA2 is the main arachidonic acid provider in the eicosanoid pathway,[2] and thus, it exhibits distinctive specificity
for this fatty acid at the sn-2 position of a phospholipid
(Figure A and D).
The active site of cPLA2 is enriched with aromatic residues
that interact with the double bonds of the arachidonic acid, making
the enzyme specific for this fatty acid. iPLA2 was found
to be a vital enzyme for important metabolic functions within the
cells, including membrane remodeling and homeostasis,[24] and thus is more permissive for the fatty acid at the sn-2 position of a phospholipid (Figure B and E). The active site of iPLA2 is structurally more versatile separately using aliphatic and aromatic
residues to bind several types of fatty acids. sPLA2 also
exhibited a more permissive specificity profile like iPLA2 for the fatty acid at the sn-2 position (Figure C and F) and a distinctive
preference for PG over the other headgroups (Figure C and F). It is well-documented that some
sPLA2s have antibacterial action toward Gram-positive or
-negative bacteria.[1] Bacterial membrane
phospholipids contain high concentrations of PG, which is consistent
with the preference of sPLA2s for PG.[25,26] PG (Movie 10) showed a different interaction
pattern with the active site of sPLA2 compared with those
of PE and PC (Movies 9, 11, and 12). The sPLA2 active site contains aliphatic and aromatic residues that the enzyme
recruits to bind several types of fatty acids like iPLA2 (Figure ).
Conclusions
In previous studies, we introduced the
novel idea that membranes
serve as an allosteric ligand that enables phospholipase A2 to extract, bind, and catalyze the hydrolysis of a phospholipid
molecule.[3,4] We observed that these enzymes exist in
a “closed” form in water and in an “open”
form on the membrane surface (Figure ). In the present study, sophisticated molecular dynamics
simulations guided by experimental data indicated that, on the membrane,
a PLA2 enzyme can exist in a “bound” or “unbound”
form (Figure ) with
different pocket volumes. Our unique lipidomic-based enzymatic assay
combined with structural studies allowed us to connect molecular structure
with enzymatic activity. Our data strongly support our hypothesis
that PLA2 enzymes achieve substrate specificity by recruiting
the optimal fatty acid at the sn-2 position of a
phospholipid molecule to its unique hydrophobic binding subsite by
molecular recognition for catalysis.
Figure 6
Phospholipase
A2 exists in at least three conformations:
the “closed” conformation in water (E),
which associates with membranes (M) to form the “open”
membrane-associated “unbound” conformation (E·M). A phospholipid molecule is then extracted into the active site,
and the enzyme adopts a “bound” conformation (ES·M). Catalytic formation and release of the products
(EP·M) returns the enzyme to the “open”
membrane-associated “unbound” conformation (E·M) (modified from ref (3)).
Authors: Oswald Quehenberger; Aaron M Armando; Alex H Brown; Stephen B Milne; David S Myers; Alfred H Merrill; Sibali Bandyopadhyay; Kristin N Jones; Samuel Kelly; Rebecca L Shaner; Cameron M Sullards; Elaine Wang; Robert C Murphy; Robert M Barkley; Thomas J Leiker; Christian R H Raetz; Ziqiang Guan; Gregory M Laird; David A Six; David W Russell; Jeffrey G McDonald; Shankar Subramaniam; Eoin Fahy; Edward A Dennis Journal: J Lipid Res Date: 2010-07-29 Impact factor: 5.922
Authors: Varnavas D Mouchlis; Dimitris Limnios; Maroula G Kokotou; Efrosini Barbayianni; George Kokotos; J Andrew McCammon; Edward A Dennis Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2016-04-28 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Varnavas D Mouchlis; Denis Bucher; J Andrew McCammon; Edward A Dennis Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-01-26 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Luis Gil-de-Gómez; Alma M Astudillo; Carlos Guijas; Victoria Magrioti; George Kokotos; María A Balboa; Jesús Balsinde Journal: J Immunol Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: Yewon Cheon; Hyung-Wook Kim; Miki Igarashi; Hiren R Modi; Lisa Chang; Kaizong Ma; Deanna Greenstein; Mary Wohltmann; John Turk; Stanley I Rapoport; Ameer Y Taha Journal: Biochim Biophys Acta Date: 2012-02-10
Authors: Christina Dedaki; Maroula G Kokotou; Varnavas D Mouchlis; Dimitris Limnios; Xiaoyong Lei; Carol T Mu; Sasanka Ramanadham; Victoria Magrioti; Edward A Dennis; George Kokotos Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2019-03-12 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: William D Hancock; Xiaoyong Lei; Gregory A Clines; Ying G Tusing; Susan E Nozell; Sasanka Ramanadham Journal: Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat Date: 2021-12-16 Impact factor: 3.072
Authors: Loren M DeVito; Edward A Dennis; Barbara B Kahn; Gerald I Shulman; Joseph L Witztum; Sudeshna Sadhu; Joseph Nickels; Matthew Spite; Susan Smyth; Sarah Spiegel Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2022-02-25 Impact factor: 6.499
Authors: Alexander J Nelson; Daniel J Stephenson; Christopher L Cardona; Xiaoyong Lei; Abdulaziz Almutairi; Tayleur D White; Ying G Tusing; Margaret A Park; Suzanne E Barbour; Charles E Chalfant; Sasanka Ramanadham Journal: J Lipid Res Date: 2019-12-09 Impact factor: 5.922