| Literature DB >> 34076590 |
Leona Švecová1, Lars Henrik Østergaard2, Tereza Skálová1, Kirk Matthew Schnorr2, Tomáš Koval'1, Petr Kolenko1, Jan Stránský1, David Sedlák3, Jarmila Dušková1, Mária Trundová1, Jindřich Hašek1, Jan Dohnálek1.
Abstract
The FAD-dependent oxidoreduEntities:
Keywords: Chaetomium thermophilum; FAD-dependent oxidoreductases; GMC oxidoreductases; crystallographic fragment screening
Year: 2021 PMID: 34076590 PMCID: PMC8171062 DOI: 10.1107/S2059798321003533
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Crystallogr D Struct Biol ISSN: 2059-7983 Impact factor: 7.652
Data-collection and processing statistics
Values in parentheses are for the outer shell. The resolution cutoff was chosen so that CC1/2 was greater than 0.5 and the mean I/σ(I) in the outer shell was around 1.5.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method of complex preparation | — | Soaking | Soaking | Soaking | Soaking | Co-crystallization | Co-crystallization |
| PDB code |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Diffraction source | P13, PETRA III | 14.2, BESSY II | 14.1, BESSY II | P13, PETRA III | 14.2, BESSY II | 14.1, BESSY II | P13, PETRA III |
| Wavelength (Å) | 1.0332 | 0.9184 | 0.9184 | 0.9763 | 0.9184 | 0.9184 | 0.9763 |
| Temperature (K) | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Detector | PILATUS 6M | PILATUS 2M | PILATUS 6M | PILATUS 6M | PILATUS 2M | PILATUS 6M | PILATUS 6M |
| Crystal-to-detector distance (mm) | 141.74 | 222.69 | 266.58 | 343.72 | 159.95 | 293.45 | 243.41 |
| Rotation range per image (°) | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.05 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.05 |
| Total No. of images | 1699 | 1996 | 1498 | 3579 | 2000 | 1400 | 2000 |
| Exposure time per image (s) | 0.04 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.04 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.04 |
| Space group |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 46.7, 116.8, 109.0 | 109.7, 115.6, 46.6 | 93.6, 109.9, 116.1 | 47.0, 117.0, 109.9 | 93.6, 109.6, 116.1 | 92.6, 109.7, 115.6 | 93.6, 109.8, 116.0 |
| α, β, γ (°) | 90.0, 90.8, 90.0 | 90.0, 90.0, 90.0 | 90.0, 90.0, 90.0 | 90.0, 90.7, 90.0 | 90.0, 90.0, 90.0 | 90.0, 90.0, 90.0 | 90.0, 90.0, 90.0 |
| Mosaicity (°) | 0.06 | 0.38 | 0.19 | 0.18 | 0.11 | 0.08 | 0.09 |
| Resolution range (Å) | 46.69–1.31 (1.33–1.31) | 43.26–2.22 (2.29–2.22) | 49.38–1.60 (1.63–1.60) | 43.40–1.82 (1.85–1.82) | 29.06–1.26 (1.28–1.26) | 47.23–1.50 (1.53–1.50) | 49.34–1.40 (1.42–1.40) |
| Total No. of reflections | 856212 (38307) | 218724 (20580) | 811144 (43706) | 358504 (18223) | 2316159 (81149) | 976283 (48771) | 825189 (43026) |
| No. of unique reflections | 268173 (13444) | 30083 (2690) | 147085 (7605) | 105562 (5247) | 314691 (14281) | 186872 (9171) | 223121 (11468) |
| Completeness (%) | 95.4 (96.8) | 99.9 (100.0) | 93.5 (98.5) | 99.4 (99.7) | 98.3 (91.0) | 99.5 (99.2) | 95.5 (99.8) |
| Multiplicity | 3.2 (2.8) | 7.3 (7.7) | 5.5 (5.7) | 3.4 (3.5) | 7.4 (5.7) | 5.2 (5.3) | 3.7 (3.8) |
| 〈 | 11.2 (2.0) | 8.3 (1.8) | 8.7 (1.6) | 9.6 (1.7) | 16.5 (1.7) | 10.6 (1.7) | 9.2 (1.4) |
| Solvent content (%) | 48.1 | 47.5 | 48.0 | 48.6 | 47.9 | 47.1 | 47.9 |
| Matthews coefficient (Å3 Da−1) | 2.37 | 2.34 | 2.36 | 2.39 | 2.36 | 2.32 | 2.36 |
|
| 0.045 (0.489) | 0.167 (1.147) | 0.088 (1.009) | 0.079 (0.752) | 0.060 (0.978) | 0.086 (0.908) | 0.058 (0.925) |
|
| 0.053 (0.599) | 0.182 (1.236) | 0.097 (1.108) | 0.094 (0.888) | 0.065 (1.076) | 0.096 (1.008) | 0.067 (1.079) |
|
| 0.029 (0.340) | 0.066 (0.441) | 0.039 (0.441) | 0.051 (0.469) | 0.024 (0.439) | 0.042 (0.429) | 0.033 (0.542) |
| CC1/2 | 0.999 (0.795) | 0.996 (0.646) | 0.998 (0.659) | 0.997 (0.673) | 1.000 (0.660) | 0.997 (0.668) | 0.999 (0.589) |
| Overall | 12.7 | 33.5 | 16.8 | 22.0 | 10.0 | 11.1 | 16.2 |
Structure solution and refinement
AU, asymmetric unit; GlcNAc, N-acetyl-D-glucosamine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PDB entry |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| PDB ligand ID | — | 8G2 | 479 | 4AQ | 4NC | NPO | EBS |
| Molecular-replacement program |
|
|
| — |
|
| Phaser |
| Refinement program |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.106 | 0.178 | 0.169 | 0.167 | 0.113 | 0.155 | 0.128 |
|
| 0.137 | 0.255 | 0.203 | 0.202 | 0.147 | 0.182 | 0.172 |
| Reflections used for | 2.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 4.8 | 2.0 | 5.1 | 5.0 |
| Average | 17.4 | 41.3 | 19.6 | 26.5 | 14.3 | 16.0 | 19.1 |
| R.m.s. deviations from ideal | |||||||
| Bond lengths (Å) | 0.013 | 0.010 | 0.010 | 0.011 | 0.014 | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Angles (°) | 1.825 | 1.738 | 1.658 | 1.127 | 1.839 | 1.776 | 1.751 |
| Ramachandran plot | |||||||
| Favoured (%) | 96.1 | 94.0 | 95.7 | 95.6 | 96.2 | 96.1 | 96.2 |
| Outliers (%) | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 |
| No. of outliers | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| No. of protein subunits per AU | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Localized ligands in AU (occupancy) | — | 1 MAMB (1.0) | 2 PESB (0.9) | 3 IPEA (1.0) | 4 4NC (0.7-0.8) | 3 4NP (0.8) | 2 ABTS (0.6–0.9) |
| No. of localized water molecules | 1664 | 310 | 1611 | 1272 | 1884 | 1489 | 1653 |
| No. of other localized moieties | |||||||
| FAD | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| GlcNAc | 11 | 6 | 12 | 10 | 13 | 10 | 13 |
| Mannose | — | — | 1 | — | — | — | — |
| Formic acid | 2 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 2 |
| Mg2+ | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Na+ | — | 1 | 2 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| Cl− | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Tetraethylene glycol/triethylene glycol | — | — | — | — | — | 2/2 | — |
| Acetate ion | — | — | — | — | — | 2 | — |
As calculated by MolProbity.
Figure 1Crystal structure of CtFDOdegl. The cofactor and the N-acetyl-d-glucosamine units (occupied in at least one of the structures) are shown as sticks with magenta and cyan C atoms, respectively. (a) The yellow and blue secondary-structure elements represent the substrate-binding and the FAD-binding domains, respectively. (b) Side view of CtFDOdegl shown as a Cα trace. The active-site pocket, as calculated with HOLLOW (Ho & Gruswitz, 2008 ▸), is displayed as a green surface. The black arrow marks the entrance to the pocket. The molecular graphics were created with PyMOL (Schrödinger).
Figure 2The catalytic site of CtFDO:free (chain A). The cofactor, modelled in reduced form (magenta C atoms), is surrounded by the His564–Ser607 pair and additionally by Asn562, Ala563 and Tyr476 on its re face and by Ala133 on its si face. The orientation of the His564 imidazole ring is stabilized by a hydrogen bond to Gln351 (His564 Nδ1–Gln351 Oɛ1, blue dotted line). Asn562 and Ser607 have two alternative conformations. The ‘in’ (nearest standard rotamer χ1 = −65°) and ‘out’ (χ1 = 64°) conformations of Ser607 are labelled. The active-site water molecules (WAS and WDAS) binding in the catalytic site (black dashed and dotted lines, respectively) are labelled. WAS binds between His564 Nɛ2, Ser607 Oγ, Asn562 Nδ2, FAD O4 and FAD N3 in the putative binding site of the catalytically modified group of the substrate. (a) A simulated-annealing 2mF o − DF c composite OMIT map (calculated in Phenix; Terwilliger, Grosse-Kunstleve, Afonine, Moriarty, Adams et al., 2008 ▸) shown for the cofactor contoured at the 1σ level. (b) Labelled distances (differing values for chain B are given in parentheses) for WAS, which is at a distance of 3.7 Å (3.9 Å in chain B) from FAD N5 and makes an angle of 97.5° (98.6° in chain B) with the FAD N10–FAD N5 atoms, i.e. it occupies the site of oxidative attack in CtFDO. (c) The isoalloxazine bend of 20.0° (21.4° in chain B) around the FAD N5 and FAD N10 axis (dashed line). The angle between the C4, N5 and C6 atoms is labelled (the value for chain B is given in parentheses). The molecular graphics were created with PyMOL (Schrödinger).
Figure 3The active-site pocket of CtFDO. The black arrows show the entrance to the pocket. (a) The view from two sides of the pocket in surface representation with a highlighted catalytic site (CS; green) and five subsites S1 (cyan), S2 (hot pink), S3 (orange), S4 (yellow) and the hypothetical S5 (grey). Selected surrounding residues are shown as sticks with C atoms in colours corresponding to the subsites. The residues shown with C atoms in black (Ala133, Tyr476, Asn562, His564 and Ser607) form the catalytic site. The FAD cofactor is shown with C atoms in white. The tunnel calculation was performed with HOLLOW (Ho & Gruswitz, 2008 ▸). The molecular graphics were created using PyMOL (Schrödinger). (b, c) Electrostatic potential distribution represented on the solvent-accessible surface of the active-site pocket of CtFDO at neutral pH 7 (b) and pH 5.5, corresponding to the crystallization condition (c). The catalytic site and subsites in (b) are marked by circles in colours corresponding to (a). The flavin has yellow C atoms. The electrostatic potential distribution was calculated using the Adaptive Poisson–Boltzman Solver (APBS; Baker et al., 2001 ▸) and visualized using the APBS plugin in PyMOL (Schrödinger).
Figure 4The active-site pockets of the CtFDO:MAMB, CtFDO:PESB and CtFDO:IPEA complexes (chains A). The PDB code for each structure is shown in the bottom left corner. Residues involved in ligand interaction and the FAD cofactor are shown as sticks (C atoms in light grey and magenta, respectively). Water molecules mediating ligand–CtFDO contacts are shown as red spheres. The active-site water molecule is labelled WAS. Selected interactions are shown as black dashed or full lines. The blue dotted line indicates the hydrogen bond His564 Nδ1–Gln351 Oɛ1 stabilizing the position of the His564 indole ring. The green, cyan, hot pink, orange and yellow curves represent the catalytic site (CS) and subsites S1, S2, S3 and S4, respectively. (a) Interactions of MAMB (hot pink C atoms) and formic acid (FMT; pale green C atoms) in the CtFDO:MAMB complex. (b) Interactions of PESB (green C atoms) and FMT (pale green C atoms) in the CtFDO:PESB complex. (c) Interactions of the FMT (pale green C atoms) and IPEA (yellow C atoms) molecules binding in the active-site pocket of chain A in the CtFDO:IPEA complex and the additional binding variant second IPEA molecule (red C atoms) at the interface of the symmetry-related chain A (symA, pink C atoms) with chain A. The figures were created with PyMOL (Schrödinger).
Figure 5The active-site pockets of the CtFDO:4NC, CtFDO:4NP and CtFDO:ABTS complexes (chains A) displayed in the same style as in Fig. 4 ▸. The figures were created in PyMOL (Schrödinger). (a, b) Interactions of two molecules of 4NC (cyan C atoms) and formic acid (FMT; pale green C atoms) in the CtFDO:4NC complex, respectively. (c, d) Interactions of two molecules of 4NP (orange C atoms) and FMT (pale green C atoms) in the CtFDO:4NP complex, respectively. (e) Interactions of ABTS (black C atoms) in the CtFDO:ABTS complex. Asp621 and Arg628 belong to symmetry-related chain B (symB, pink C atoms). Residue Trp97 was modelled in two alternative conformations: alt A (light grey C atoms) and alt B (grey C atoms).
Figure 6Structure-based sequence alignment and comparison of structural elements of CtFDO with the most similar structures of GMC oxidoreductases. (a) Structure-based sequence alignment of CtFDO (PDB entry 6ze2, chain A) with MtAAO (PDB entry 6o9n), AfGDH (PDB entry 4ynt), AnGOX (PDB entry 1cf3), PaGOX (PDB entry 1gpe, chain A) and PeAAO (PDB entry 3fim) according to PDBeFold (Krissinel & Henrick, 2005 ▸). Black and blue backgrounds show invariant residues of these six enzymes and the conserved motifs (Gly-X-Gly-X-X-Gly sequence motif and the conserved histidine residue) indicative of GMC oxidoreductases, respectively. The second residue of the His–His/His–Ser pair is shown in white letters on a magenta background. A pink background denotes other residues present in the active site. The parts of the sequence shown on a light brown background correspond to the main secondary-structure differences between the compared enzymes and CtFDO. The extra secondary-structure elements of CtFDO are coloured red and blue. The yellow, red and orange colours mark the secondary-structure elements of the wide-open access to the active site in CtFDO. The confirmed N-glycosylation sites in CtFDO and structurally confirmed N-glycosylation sites in MtAAO, AfGDH and AnGOX are marked by cyan boxes. The vicinal disulfide in CtFDO is marked by red stars. The graphics were created in ESPript (Robert & Gouet, 2014 ▸). (b) Secondary-structure representation of CtFDO:free with highlighted structural motifs as marked in the structure-based sequence alignment. The active-site pocket is shown in surface representation (green; calculated by HOLLOW; Ho & Gruswitz, 2008 ▸). The FAD cofactor is represented in sticks with C atoms coloured magenta. Molecular graphics were created with PyMOL (Schrödinger).
Figure 7Three-dimensional superposition of the active sites of the CtFDO complexes. FAD and formic acid (FMT) molecules and selected residues at distances of up to 3.8 Å from the ligands are shown with C atoms coloured magenta, pale green and light grey, respectively. The insets show the binding of the moieties of the ligands with regard to individual subsites. (a) Alignment of CtFDO:MAMB (PDB entry 6ze3), CtFDO:PESB (PDB entry 6ze4) and CtFDO:IPEA (PDB entry 6ze5). The ligands MAMB, PESB and IPEA are shown with C atoms coloured hot pink, green and yellow, respectively. (b) Superposition of CtFDO:4NC (PDB entry 6ze6), CtFDO:4NP (PDB entry 6ze7) and CtFDO:ABTS (PDB entry 7aa2). The ligands 4NC, 4NP and ABTS are shown with C atoms coloured cyan, orange and black, respectively. (c) Schematic pattern of ligand composition. Of all of the compounds used for CtFDO–ligand complex preparation, only those containing an aromatic group (except for formic acid) were found binding in the internal pocket. Hexagons, red lines and black circles with a minus sign on a yellow background represent the binding of aromatic rings, aliphatic moieties and negatively charged moieties in the active-site pocket, respectively. The pattern indicates a polyaromatic composition of the putative substrate. Molecular graphics were created with PyMOL (Schrödinger).