Teaching a new dog old tricks?

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Model of DNA strand cleavage by topoisomerase I
Advertisements

Volume 2, Issue 9, Pages (September 1994)
R.Ian Menz, John E. Walker, Andrew G.W. Leslie  Cell 
Zhiyu Li, Alfonso Mondragón, Russell J DiGate  Molecular Cell 
Crystal Structure of the Tandem Phosphatase Domains of RPTP LAR
Crystal Structure of a Flp Recombinase–Holliday Junction Complex
Crystal Structure of T7 Gene 4 Ring Helicase Indicates a Mechanism for Sequential Hydrolysis of Nucleotides  Martin R Singleton, Michael R Sawaya, Tom.
Recombination: Pieces of the site-specific recombination puzzle
Ubiquitination Accomplished: E1 and E2 Enzymes Were Not Necessary
Volume 19, Issue 4, Pages (August 2005)
RNA Ligase Structures Reveal the Basis for RNA Specificity and Conformational Changes that Drive Ligation Forward  Jayakrishnan Nandakumar, Stewart Shuman,
Adrian T. Keatinge-Clay  Chemistry & Biology 
How do kinases transfer phosphoryl groups?
DNA transposition: Assembly of a jumping gene machine
Volume 3, Issue 12, Pages (December 1995)
Volume 8, Issue 9, Pages (September 2000)
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages (February 2000)
Yu Luo, Su-Chen Li, Min-Yuan Chou, Yu-Teh Li, Ming Luo  Structure 
Volume 9, Issue 5, Pages (May 2001)
Chapter 15 Homologous and Site-Specific Recombination
Structures of Mismatch Replication Errors Observed in a DNA Polymerase
Volume 8, Issue 7, Pages (July 2000)
Takuo Osawa, Hideko Inanaga, Chikara Sato, Tomoyuki Numata 
Unexpected Structural Diversity in DNA Recombination
Volume 5, Issue 7, Pages (July 1997)
Protein folding via binding and vice versa
Crawling and Wiggling on DNA
UG Wagner, M Hasslacher, H Griengl, H Schwab, C Kratky  Structure 
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages (February 2000)
Bernard Hallet, Lidia K Arciszewska, David J Sherratt  Molecular Cell 
Volume 2, Issue 6, Pages (June 1994)
Xiao Tao, Zhiru Yang, Liang Tong  Structure 
Structure of the Tetrahymena Ribozyme
Catalytic Center Assembly of HPPK as Revealed by the Crystal Structure of a Ternary Complex at 1.25 Å Resolution  Jaroslaw Blaszczyk, Genbin Shi, Honggao.
Crawling and Wiggling on DNA
Crystal Structure of ARF1•Sec7 Complexed with Brefeldin A and Its Implications for the Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Mechanism  Elena Mossessova, Richard.
Structures of Minimal Catalytic Fragments of Topoisomerase V Reveals Conformational Changes Relevant for DNA Binding  Rakhi Rajan, Bhupesh Taneja, Alfonso.
Kevin G. Hoff, José L. Avalos, Kristin Sens, Cynthia Wolberger 
Crystal Structure of PMM/PGM
Volume 15, Issue 10, Pages (October 2008)
Polynucleotide Ligase Activity of Eukaryotic Topoisomerase I
Site-specific recombination in plane view
Crystal Structure of a Y-Family DNA Polymerase in Action
Volume 10, Issue 4, Pages (October 2002)
Peter Trickey, Mary Ann Wagner, Marilyn Schuman Jorns, F Scott Mathews 
Regulation of protein phosphatase-1
Qian Steven Xu, Rebecca B. Kucera, Richard J. Roberts, Hwai-Chen Guo 
Emerging Roles for Plant Topoisomerase VI
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages (February 2007)
Glutamate mutase from Clostridium cochlearium: the structure of a coenzyme B12- dependent enzyme provides new mechanistic insights  R Reitzer, K Gruber,
Simone E. Nunes-Düby, Marco A. Azaro, Arthur Landy  Current Biology 
An open and closed case for all polymerases
Structural Analysis of DNA Replication Fork Reversal by RecG
Crystal Structure of Saccharopine Reductase from Magnaporthe grisea, an Enzyme of the α-Aminoadipate Pathway of Lysine Biosynthesis  Eva Johansson, James.
Structural Basis for Specificity in the Poxvirus Topoisomerase
Silvia Onesti, Andrew D Miller, Peter Brick  Structure 
Mathias Baedeker, Georg E Schulz  Structure 
The Structure of the Mammalian 20S Proteasome at 2.75 Å Resolution
X-Ray Crystallography Reveals a Large Conformational Change during Guanyl Transfer by mRNA Capping Enzymes  Kjell Håkansson, Aidan J. Doherty, Stewart.
Emerging Roles for Plant Topoisomerase VI
Volume 8, Issue 6, Pages (June 2000)
Hammerhead ribozyme structure: U-turn for RNA structural biology
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages (July 2003)
Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages (April 1995)
Volume 13, Issue 5, Pages (May 2005)
Restriction Enzyme BsoBI–DNA Complex
Catalytic Mechanism of DNA Topoisomerase IB
DNA transposition: Assembly of a jumping gene machine
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages (February 2000)
Volume 21, Issue 6, Pages (June 2013)
Presentation transcript:

Teaching a new dog old tricks? Dale B Wigley  Structure  Volume 6, Issue 5, Pages 543-548 (May 1998) DOI: 10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00056-2

Figure 1 Reactions catalysed by type IB topoisomerases and site-specific recombinases. (a) In type IB topoisomerases the enzyme (represented by a blue circle) cleaves a single strand of the duplex and forms a covalent linkage with the DNA (denoted by a dot). The DNA is then relaxed before the DNA is rejoined. (b) In site-specific recombinases the reaction involves two pairs of enzyme molecules and two separate duplexes. One enzyme molecule in each pair cleaves the DNA and forms a covalent linkage (again denoted by a dot). The free 5′-end at each cleavage site is then swapped with its equivalent in the partner duplex, before rejoining of the DNA takes place. This crossshaped DNA product is known as a Holliday junction. The final two steps of the reaction are equivalent to the first two except that it is the other enzyme molecule in each pair that performs the cleavage and religation. Structure 1998 6, 543-548DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00056-2)

Figure 2 The proposed ‘controlled rotation’ mechanism for topoisomerase IB. The reaction is initiated by cleavage of a single strand of the duplex DNA as it resides within the central cavity of the enzyme (a–c). The duplex is then allowed to rotate within this central cavity (d) before rejoining of the cleaved strand (e,f) and release of the relaxed DNA (g). Each rotation of the DNA duplex at (d) results in the relaxation of one supercoil. (The figure was reproduced from [5] with permission.) Structure 1998 6, 543-548DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00056-2)

Figure 3 Stereoview superposition of the crystal structures of human topoisomerase IB (red and green) and HP1 recombinase (grey) in the region of the active sites. The folds of the catalytic domains of the two enzymes are remarkably similar. (The figure was reproduced from [4] with permission.) Structure 1998 6, 543-548DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00056-2)

Figure 4 The chemical mechanism of type IB topoisomerases and lambda family site-specific recombinases. The reaction can be considered in four stages (a–d) with two pentavalent phosphorous transition states (b and d). The reaction begins with the initial protein–DNA complex (a) and proceeds via the transition state (b) to the stable 3′-phosphotyrosine DNA–enzyme intermediate (c). The reaction is completed by the attack of a 5′-hydroxyl from the same duplex (in the case of topoisomerases) or from a different duplex (recombinases), via a similar transition state (d) to give the products (a). DNA strand swapping (recombinases) or ‘controlled rotation’ (topoisomerases) occurs after formation of the phosphotyrosine adduct. The base shown in the scheme is always a histidine in recombinases, but the equivalent residue is a lysine in topoisomerases. In addition, the histidine residue shown is exceptionally a tryptophan in Cre recombinase. This means that although proton transfers are shown to be taking place at certain stages in the reaction pathway, these transfers may not be complete but might be more akin to hydrogen bonds between the enzyme and the substrates that would serve either to stabilise or activate intermediates of the catalytic pathway. Structure 1998 6, 543-548DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00056-2)

Figure 5 Activation in recombinases. Ribbon representations of the catalytic domains of three recombinases (a) XerD, (b) HP1 and (c) Cre. The figure illustrates the difference in conformation at the C terminus of the proteins (coloured blue in each case) that is proposed to constitute the activation of enzyme activity. A fourth recombinase structure (lambda integrase [14]) has not been included in this comparison as it is unclear whether the enzyme utilises a cis or trans cleavage mechanism – which may confuse the interpretation of the conformational differences that are observed. Structure 1998 6, 543-548DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00056-2)