Volume 6, Issue 1, Pages (January 1998)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Javed A. Khan, Ben M. Dunn, Liang Tong  Structure 
Advertisements

Volume 11, Issue 11, Pages (November 2003)
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages (January 2005)
Structure of the Molecular Chaperone Prefoldin
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages (January 2005)
Volume 13, Issue 4, Pages (February 2004)
Volume 105, Issue 4, Pages (May 2001)
A Non-Stem-Loop CRISPR RNA Is Processed by Dual Binding Cas6
Hierarchical Binding of Cofactors to the AAA ATPase p97
Crystal Structure of Activated HutP
Volume 14, Issue 9, Pages (September 2006)
Structure of the Papillomavirus DNA-Tethering Complex E2:Brd4 and a Peptide that Ablates HPV Chromosomal Association  Eric A. Abbate, Christian Voitenleitner,
Huifang Huang, Stephen C Harrison, Gregory L Verdine 
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages (January 1997)
Volume 13, Issue 12, Pages (December 2005)
X-Ray Crystal Structure and Functional Analysis of Vaccinia Virus K3L Reveals Molecular Determinants for PKR Subversion and Substrate Recognition  Arvin.
Chaperone-Assisted Crystallography with DARPins
Volume 34, Issue 4, Pages (May 2009)
Keqiong Ye, Dinshaw J. Patel  Structure 
Interaction with PCNA Is Essential for Yeast DNA Polymerase η Function
Crystal Structure of Tetrameric Arabidopsis MYC2 Reveals the Mechanism of Enhanced Interaction with DNA  Teng-fei Lian, Yong-ping Xu, Lan-fen Li, Xiao-Dong.
Volume 23, Issue 11, Pages (November 2015)
Einav Gross, David B Kastner, Chris A Kaiser, Deborah Fass  Cell 
Myosin VI Undergoes Cargo-Mediated Dimerization
Molecular Insights into Polyubiquitin Chain Assembly
Volume 139, Issue 6, Pages (December 2009)
Phospho-Pon Binding-Mediated Fine-Tuning of Plk1 Activity
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.
A Non-Stem-Loop CRISPR RNA Is Processed by Dual Binding Cas6
A Shared Surface of TBP Directs RNA Polymerase II and III Transcription via Association with Different TFIIB Family Members  Xuemei Zhao, Laura Schramm,
Volume 26, Issue 2, Pages e3 (February 2018)
Crystal Structures of RNase H Bound to an RNA/DNA Hybrid: Substrate Specificity and Metal-Dependent Catalysis  Marcin Nowotny, Sergei A. Gaidamakov, Robert.
Crystal Structure of a Y-Family DNA Polymerase in Action
Volume 1, Issue 2, Pages (January 1998)
Volume 28, Issue 6, Pages (December 2007)
Structure and function of mutationally generated monomers of dimeric phosphoribosylanthranilate isomerase from Thermotoga maritima  Ralf Thoma, Michael.
Structural Basis for Protein Recognition by B30.2/SPRY Domains
Crystal Structure of the RuvA-RuvB Complex
Crystal Structure of the TAO2 Kinase Domain
Zhenjian Cai, Nabil H. Chehab, Nikola P. Pavletich  Molecular Cell 
Elizabeth J. Little, Andrea C. Babic, Nancy C. Horton  Structure 
A Potential Protein-RNA Recognition Event along the RISC-Loading Pathway from the Structure of A. aeolicus Argonaute with Externally Bound siRNA  Yu-Ren.
Structure of the Catalytic Region of DNA Ligase IV in Complex with an Artemis Fragment Sheds Light on Double-Strand Break Repair  Takashi Ochi, Xiaolong.
Daniel Olal, Oliver Daumke  Cell Reports 
Volume 21, Issue 1, Pages (January 2013)
Crystal Structure of the DegS Stress Sensor
Volume 16, Issue 12, Pages (September 2016)
Volume 19, Issue 1, Pages (January 2011)
Volume 13, Issue 12, Pages (December 2005)
Volume 96, Issue 3, Pages (February 1999)
Structural and Functional Analyses of an Archaeal XPF/Rad1/Mus81 Nuclease: Asymmetric DNA Binding and Cleavage Mechanisms  Tatsuya Nishino, Kayoko Komori,
Volume 14, Issue 11, Pages (November 2006)
DNA-Induced Switch from Independent to Sequential dTTP Hydrolysis in the Bacteriophage T7 DNA Helicase  Donald J. Crampton, Sourav Mukherjee, Charles.
Volume 9, Issue 12, Pages (December 2001)
Volume 110, Issue 6, Pages (September 2002)
Volume 20, Issue 7, Pages (July 2012)
Crystal Structure of Eukaryotic DNA Ligase–Adenylate Illuminates the Mechanism of Nick Sensing and Strand Joining  Mark Odell, Verl Sriskanda, Stewart.
Crystal Structures of RNase H Bound to an RNA/DNA Hybrid: Substrate Specificity and Metal-Dependent Catalysis  Marcin Nowotny, Sergei A. Gaidamakov, Robert.
Jue Wang, Jia-Wei Wu, Zhi-Xin Wang  Structure 
Excision of the Drosophila Mariner Transposon Mos1
Structural and Mechanistic Analysis of the Slx1-Slx4 Endonuclease
Maria Spies, Stephen C. Kowalczykowski  Molecular Cell 
Structure of the RNA 3′-Phosphate Cyclase-Adenylate Intermediate Illuminates Nucleotide Specificity and Covalent Nucleotidyl Transfer  Naoko Tanaka, Paul.
Volume 9, Issue 3, Pages (March 2001)
Structure of Human Cytosolic Phenylalanyl-tRNA Synthetase: Evidence for Kingdom- Specific Design of the Active Sites and tRNA Binding Patterns  Igal Finarov,
Sabine Pokutta, William I. Weis  Molecular Cell 
AppA Is a Blue Light Photoreceptor that Antirepresses Photosynthesis Gene Expression in Rhodobacter sphaeroides  Shinji Masuda, Carl E. Bauer  Cell  Volume.
Structure of GABARAP in Two Conformations
The Structure of the MAP2K MEK6 Reveals an Autoinhibitory Dimer
Presentation transcript:

Volume 6, Issue 1, Pages 11-21 (January 1998) Functional analyses of the domain structure in the Holliday junction binding protein RuvA  Tatsuya Nishino, Mariko Ariyoshi, Hiroshi Iwasaki, Hideo Shinagawa, Kosuke Morikawa  Structure  Volume 6, Issue 1, Pages 11-21 (January 1998) DOI: 10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00003-3

Figure 1 A stereo view showing the RuvA tetramer. The molecule is viewed from the convex side along the fourfold axis of the molecule. Each subunit is represented by a different color. The flexible loops, which contain the disordered segments (not shown), are located between domains II and III of each subunit. Domain III makes no direct contact with domains I and II within the same subunit. Structure 1998 6, 11-21DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00003-3)

Figure 2 A ribbon representation showing the three domains of RuvA. The blue ribbon indicates the domains I and II, and the red ribbon indicates domain III of the adjacent subunit. Light blue sidechains show notable aromatic and hydrophobic residues (His29, His50, Val52, Leu59 and Tyr61) on the OB (oligonucleotide/oligosaccharide binding) fold of domain I. Residues involved in the contact between domain III and the adjacent subunit are indicated by the gray sidechains (Pro14, Met32, Phe35, Leu113, Pro114 and Leu203). Mutation sites, such as Tyr36, Leu110, Leu167, Leu170, Tyr172 and Leu199, are shown by yellow sidechains. Note that the invariant residue, Leu110, is located within the second helix–hairpin–helix (HhH) in domain II, and that Tyr36 lies on the surface of domain I. Structure 1998 6, 11-21DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00003-3)

Figure 3 The secondary structure and the internal mobility of RuvA. (a) Primary and secondary structure assignments of RuvA. The secondary structure elements (β strands and α helices) of domains I, II and III are shown in purple, light blue and red, respectively. The six mutation sites, which impair the activity to complement the DNA-repair activity of ruvA deletion phenotype, are indicated by orange letters, and the 34 mutation sites that have normal phenotype are shown by green letters. Proteolytic sites are shown by black arrowheads. (b) B-factor plots of RuvA. The B factors corresponding to the disordered segments (residues 141–157) are eliminated from the plots. Structure 1998 6, 11-21DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00003-3)

Figure 4 Partial proteolytic-fragment analysis. (a) Gel filtration of endoproteinase AspN treated RuvA. The sample was applied to a Superdex 75 PC3,2/30 column. The absorbance was measured at 280 nm and its units are arbitrary in this figure. (b) Interaction of the intact RuvA protein and the NH2 fragment with the synthetic Holliday junction. The immobile Holliday junction was prepared from four 24-mer DNA strands by annealing. For gel-shift assays, the protein and the DNA (at the indicated amounts) were mixed in a buffer containing 40 mM HEPES–NaOH (pH 8.0), 150 mM NaCl, 5% glycerol, and 2 mM DTT. Reaction mixtures were incubated for 30 min at 20°C. The samples were applied to a 6% polyacrylamide gel containing 40 mM HEPES–NaOH (pH 8.0), 5% glycerol and 2 mM DTT. Electrophoresis was carried out at 4°C for 2 h at 150 V, 20 mM HEPES–NaOH (pH 8.0). The bands containing DNA were visualized by staining with ethidium bromide and UV illumination. HJ indicates the position for the Holliday junction alone. Structure 1998 6, 11-21DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00003-3)

Figure 5 Electron micrographs of the wild-type and mutant RuvA proteins. The other three mutant proteins, Leu167→Ala, Leu172→Ala and Leu199→Ala, which are not shown here, yielded essentially the same images. Note that no morphological difference is evident between the wild-type and mutant proteins. Structure 1998 6, 11-21DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00003-3)

Figure 6 Assays to measure the ability of RuvA mutant proteins to bind to a synthetic Holliday junction and to migrate the junction point. The [32P]-labeled Holliday junction was made by annealing four 72-mer oligonucleotides and the reaction products were detected by a bioimage analyzer BAS 5000 (Fuji). Both electrophoreses were carried out at 25°C in TAE buffer. The protein and the DNA were mixed as indicated. For details, see the Materials and methods section. (a) RuvA–Holliday-junction binding. (b) Ability of mutant RuvA proteins to dissociate the synthetic Holliday junction. Wt represents wild type; one-letter codes are used for amino acid mutations. Structure 1998 6, 11-21DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00003-3)

Figure 7 Abilities of mutant RuvA proteins to form homo-oligomers and RuvA–RuvB complexes as studied by gel filtration. Absorbance was measured at 280 nm. (a) Gel filtration profiles (Superdex 200 PC3,2/30) of wild-type RuvA, RuvB, and the mixture of wild-type RuvA and RuvB. The peak positions of the NH2 fragment and the mutant RuvAs, in the presence or absence of RuvB, are indicated by arrowheads. Two mutant proteins, Leu110→Ala and Tyr36→Ala, shifted their elution positions in the presence of RuvB as did the wild-type RuvA, as shown by the respective arrowheads in the frame. The elution position of the other mutant proteins and the NH2 fragment, which did not shift, are indicated by the same arrowheads outside the frame. (b) The peak fractions of wild-type RuvA, RuvB, and the mixture of RuvA and RuvB were analyzed by SDS-PAGE. Structure 1998 6, 11-21DOI: (10.1016/S0969-2126(98)00003-3)