Yizhou Liu, Richard A. Kahn, James H. Prestegard  Structure 

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Structure of TAR RNA Complexed with a Tat-TAR Interaction Nanomolar Inhibitor that Was Identified by Computational Screening  Zhihua Du, Kenneth E Lind,
Advertisements

Volume 21, Issue 3, Pages (March 2013)
Conformational Heterogeneity in the Activation Mechanism of Bax
Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages (March 2006)
The LxVP and PxIxIT NFAT Motifs Bind Jointly to Overlapping Epitopes on Calcineurin’s Catalytic Domain Distant to the Regulatory Domain  Maayan Gal, Shuai.
Volume 24, Issue 7, Pages (July 2016)
Volume 31, Issue 1, Pages (July 2008)
Volume 19, Issue 8, Pages (August 2011)
Volume 23, Issue 10, Pages (October 2015)
Volume 23, Issue 11, Pages (November 2015)
Volume 24, Issue 3, Pages (March 2016)
Solution Structure of the U11-48K CHHC Zinc-Finger Domain that Specifically Binds the 5′ Splice Site of U12-Type Introns  Henning Tidow, Antonina Andreeva,
Volume 22, Issue 10, Pages (October 2014)
Volume 21, Issue 9, Pages (September 2013)
Volume 13, Issue 12, Pages (December 2005)
Volume 18, Issue 6, Pages (June 2005)
Volume 9, Issue 11, Pages (November 2001)
Interactions of Pleckstrin Homology Domains with Membranes: Adding Back the Bilayer via High-Throughput Molecular Dynamics  Eiji Yamamoto, Antreas C.
Volume 23, Issue 12, Pages (December 2015)
Volume 31, Issue 6, Pages (September 2008)
Volume 17, Issue 10, Pages (October 2009)
Volume 108, Issue 6, Pages (March 2015)
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages (February 2013)
Volume 19, Issue 7, Pages (July 2011)
Volume 24, Issue 4, Pages (April 2016)
James J Chou, Honglin Li, Guy S Salvesen, Junying Yuan, Gerhard Wagner 
Structures of Minimal Catalytic Fragments of Topoisomerase V Reveals Conformational Changes Relevant for DNA Binding  Rakhi Rajan, Bhupesh Taneja, Alfonso.
Solution and Crystal Structures of a Sugar Binding Site Mutant of Cyanovirin-N: No Evidence of Domain Swapping  Elena Matei, William Furey, Angela M.
Elif Eren, Megan Murphy, Jon Goguen, Bert van den Berg  Structure 
Leonardus M.I. Koharudin, Angela M. Gronenborn  Structure 
Volume 21, Issue 10, Pages (October 2013)
Volume 24, Issue 7, Pages (July 2016)
Volume 21, Issue 6, Pages (March 2006)
Nicholas J Skelton, Cliff Quan, Dorothea Reilly, Henry Lowman 
Volume 22, Issue 12, Pages (March 2018)
Zhaoyong Xi, Matthew J. Whitley, Angela M. Gronenborn  Structure 
Volume 20, Issue 12, Pages (December 2012)
Supertertiary Structure of the MAGUK Core from PSD-95
Volume 23, Issue 5, Pages (May 2015)
The Structure of the Tiam1 PDZ Domain/ Phospho-Syndecan1 Complex Reveals a Ligand Conformation that Modulates Protein Dynamics  Xu Liu, Tyson R. Shepherd,
Volume 17, Issue 10, Pages (October 2009)
A Functional Proline Switch in Cytochrome P450cam
Volume 13, Issue 2, Pages (February 2005)
Structural Diversity in Integrin/Talin Interactions
Volume 23, Issue 10, Pages (October 2015)
Volume 23, Issue 6, Pages (June 2015)
Volume 19, Issue 1, Pages (January 2011)
Volume 13, Issue 12, Pages (December 2005)
Volume 16, Issue 6, Pages (June 2008)
Conformational Heterogeneity in the Activation Mechanism of Bax
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages (February 2013)
Structural Basis for Recognition of Diubiquitins by NEMO
Volume 19, Issue 7, Pages (July 2011)
Volume 24, Issue 9, Pages (September 2016)
Volume 110, Issue 9, Pages (May 2016)
Volume 22, Issue 10, Pages (October 2014)
Hafumi Nishi, Kosuke Hashimoto, Anna R. Panchenko  Structure 
NMR Polypeptide Backbone Conformation of the E
Volume 18, Issue 9, Pages (September 2010)
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages (January 2012)
Characterization of Structure, Dynamics, and Detergent Interactions of the Anti-HIV Chemokine Variant 5P12-RANTES  Maciej Wiktor, Oliver Hartley, Stephan.
Volume 20, Issue 4, Pages (April 2012)
Volume 25, Issue 9, Pages e3 (September 2017)
Volume 44, Issue 6, Pages (December 2011)
A Plug Release Mechanism for Membrane Permeation by MLKL
Volume 14, Issue 12, Pages (December 2006)
Volume 19, Issue 4, Pages (April 2011)
Volume 15, Issue 9, Pages (September 2007)
Volume 17, Issue 2, Pages (February 2009)
Volume 21, Issue 12, Pages (December 2013)
Presentation transcript:

Interaction of Fapp1 with Arf1 and PI4P at a Membrane Surface: An Example of Coincidence Detection  Yizhou Liu, Richard A. Kahn, James H. Prestegard  Structure  Volume 22, Issue 3, Pages 421-430 (March 2014) DOI: 10.1016/j.str.2013.12.011 Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Structure 2014 22, 421-430DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2013.12.011) Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Fapp1-PH Interacts with PI4P (A) Superimposed TROSY spectra of Fapp1-PH in the presence of 10% DMPC/DHPC (q = 0.25) bicelle (red) and bicelle doped with 8 mM PI4P (blue). Assignments are indicated for residues that undergo combined chemical shift changes >0.15 ppm. (B) 31P spectra from serial titration of Fapp1-PH (0–3.5 mM) into 10% DMPC/DHPC (q = 0.25) bicelle doped with 2 mM PI4P, highlighting the migration and broadening/renarrowing of the PI4P phosphate monoester signal. Structure 2014 22, 421-430DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2013.12.011) Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 The PI4P Binding Interface of Fapp1-PH Identified through Chemical Shift Perturbations (A) A surface view of Fapp1-PH colored in red for residues of strong chemical shift perturbations (>0.4 ppm) upon adding PI4P and in yellow for those of weak perturbations (<0.4 ppm and >0.2 ppm). (B) The electrostatic surface of Fapp1-PH orientated in the same perspective as in (A), highlighting the positively charged pocket for PI4P binding. Positive potentials are shown in blue. Structure 2014 22, 421-430DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2013.12.011) Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 The Arf1 Binding Interface of Fapp1-PH Identified through Chemical Shift Perturbations (A) Residue-specific chemical shift perturbations in TROSY spectra of Fapp1-PH in the presence of myr-yArf1⋅GTPγS in 10% DMPC/DHPC (q = 0.25), 0.5% PI4P bicelles. Resonances that disappear have been set to 0.05 ppm. (B) The Arf1 binding surface of Fapp1-PH colored in red for residues showing strong chemical shift perturbations upon adding Arf1 and in yellow for those showing weak perturbations. Fapp1-PH is rotated ∼180° relative to the depiction in Figure 2. Residue numbers are indicated for those discussed in the text. Structure 2014 22, 421-430DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2013.12.011) Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 The Fapp1-PH Binding Interface of yArf1⋅GTPγS Identified through Chemical Shift Perturbations (A) Residue-specific chemical shift perturbations in TROSY spectra of myr-yArf1⋅GTPγS in 10% DMPC/DHPC (q = 0.25), 0.5% PI4P bicelles in the presence of 1.5 mM Fapp1-PH. The bars marked with asterisks (∗) are histidine residues whose shifts responded to small differences in pH (truncated to 0.05). (B) The Fapp1-PH binding surface of Arf1 colored in red for residues of strong chemical shift perturbation and in orange for those of weak perturbations. Residue numbers are indicated for those discussed in the text. Structure 2014 22, 421-430DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2013.12.011) Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 The Arf1 Binding Interface of Fapp1-PH Identified through Paramagnetic Relaxation Enhancements (A) Superimposed fast HSQC spectra of 0.3 mM 2D-15N Fapp1-PH mixed with 0.9 mM unlabeled oxidized yArf1.GTPγS -T55C-MTSSL (blue) and reduced yArf1.GDP-T55C-MTSSL (red). (B) The binding surface of Fapp1-PH colored in red for residues undergoing strong PRE effects and in orange for those undergoing weaker PRE effects. PRE effects reflect spatial proximity to the spin-labeled site (T55) of Arf1. Residue numbers are indicated for those discussed in the text. Structure 2014 22, 421-430DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2013.12.011) Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 6 The Fapp1-PH/yArf1 Complex Modeled by HADDOCK Using Chemical Shift Perturbation and PRE Data as the Experimental Constraints Fapp1-PH is colored in cyan with residues of strong and weak chemical shift perturbations upon adding yArf1.GTPγS and used in the calculations shown in purple and magenta respectively; residues strongly affected by PREs and used in the calculations are shown in blue. yArf1⋅GTPγS is colored in green with residues of strong and weak chemical shift perturbations upon adding Fapp1-PH shown in red and orange, respectively. Structure 2014 22, 421-430DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2013.12.011) Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 7 The Fapp1-PH/PI4P Complex Modeled by HADDOCK Using Chemical Shift Perturbation Data as the Experimental Constraints Residues of significant chemical shift perturbations upon adding PI4P and used in the calculation are shown in magenta. Residue numbers are indicated for those discussed in the text. Structure 2014 22, 421-430DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2013.12.011) Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 8 A Model of Fapp1-PH/PI4P/Arf1 Ternary Complex on a Small Bicelle Surface The HADDOCK models for the Fapp1-PH/yArf1 complex and the Fapp1-PH/PI4P complex are superimposed through the common partner Fapp1-PH, to obtain a model for the ternary complex. This complex is further superimposed through Arf1 structures with our previously published Arf1/bicelle model, to obtain the Fapp1-PH/PI4P/Arf1 ternary complex on the small bicelle surface. Structure 2014 22, 421-430DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2013.12.011) Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions