YoeB–YefM, the widespread type II toxin–antitoxin (TA) module, binds to its own promoter to autoregulate its transcription: repress or induce transcription under normal or stress conditions, respectively. It remains unclear how YoeB–YefM regulates its transcription depending on the YoeB to YefM TA ratio. We find that YoeB–YefM complex from S.aureus exists as two distinct oligomeric assemblies: heterotetramer (YoeB–YefM2–YoeB) and heterohexamer (YoeB–YefM2–YefM2–YoeB) with low and high DNA-binding affinities, respectively. Structures of the heterotetramer alone and heterohexamer bound to promoter DNA reveals that YefM C-terminal domain undergoes disorder to order transition upon YoeB binding, which allosterically affects the conformation of N-terminal DNA-binding domain. At TA ratio of 1:2, unsaturated binding of YoeB to the C-terminal regions of YefM dimer forms an optimal heterohexamer for DNA binding, and two YefM dimers with N-terminal domains dock into the adjacent major grooves of DNA to specifically recognize the 5′-TTGTACAN6AGTACAA-3′ palindromic sequence, resulting in transcriptional repression. In contrast, at TA ratio of 1:1, binding of two additional YoeB molecules onto the heterohexamer induces the completely ordered conformation of YefM and disassembles the heterohexamer into two heterotetramers, which are unable to bind the promoter DNA optimally due to steric clashes, hence derepresses TA operon transcription.
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are adult stem cells with a self-renewal and multipotent capability and express extensively in multitudinous tissues. We found that water channel aquaporin-5 (AQP5) is expressed in bone marrow-derived MSCs (BMMSCs) in the plasma membrane pattern. BMMSCs from AQP5 -/ -mice showed significantly lower plasma membrane water permeability than those from AQP5 + / + mice. In characterizing the cultured BMMSCs from AQP5-/ -and AQP5 + / + mice, we found no obvious differences in morphology and proliferation between the 2 genotypes. However, the multiple differentiation capacity was significantly higher in AQP5 -/ -than AQP5 + / + BMMSCs as revealed by representative staining by Oil Red O (adipogenesis); Alizarin Red S and alkaline phosphatase (ALP; osteogenesis); and type II collagen and Safranin O (chondrogenesis) after directional induction. Relative mRNA expression levels of 3 lineage differentiation markers, including PPARc2, C/EBPa, adipsin, collagen 1a, osteopontin, ALP, collagen 11a, collagen 2a, and aggrecan, were significantly higher in AQP5 -/ --differentiating BMMSCs, supporting an increased differentiation capacity of AQP5BMMSCs. Furthermore, a bone-healing process was accelerated in AQP5 -/ -mice in a drill-hole injury model. Mechanistic studies indicated a significantly lower apoptosis rate in AQP5 -/ -than AQP5 + / + BMMSCs. Apoptosis inhibitor Z-VAD-FMK increased the differentiation capacity to a greater extent in AQP5 + / + than AQP5 -/ -BMMSCs. We conclude that AQP5-mediated high plasma membrane water permeability enhances the apoptosis rate of differentiating BMMSCs, thus decreasing their differentiation capacity. These data implicate AQP5 as a novel determinant of differentiation of BMMSCs and therefore a new molecular target for regulating differentiation of BMMSCs during tissue repair and regeneration.
This part of work was done to explore the basic understanding of the adsorption chromatography by determining the interaction of selected model proteins (n = 5) to monolithic chromatographic materials, with varying densities of butyl and phenyl ligands. Surface energetics approach was applied to study the interaction behavior. The physicochemical properties of the proteins and monolithic chromatographic materials were explored by contact angle and zeta potential values. These values were used to study protein to monolith interaction under various operating conditions. Surface energetics approach allowed the calculation of interaction energy as a function of distance, i.e. energy minimum values. Calculations were performed at various conditions to analyze the effect of major operating parameters on the interaction strength. The interaction strength exposed the hydrophobic nature of the monoliths which increases with increasing ligand density. Further, interaction energy of proteins were higher with monolith with butyl ligand compared to monolith with phenyl ligand. For instance, lactoferrin interaction to monoliths with butyl represents more interaction, i.e. 24.38 kT as compared to monoliths with phenyl i.e. 23.28 kT, keeping lambda as 0.2 nm and salt concentration as 100 mM of ammonium sulphate. Hence, more energy and time will be consumed for elution of proteins immobilized to monoliths with butyl. Similarly, the effect of solid surface for proteins immobilization, effect of ligand density and effect of lambda showed some interesting insights on the interaction behavior. The knowledge generated from the present work will help in the basic understanding as well as development of an efficient, low cost downstream processing design and may mimic the real chromatographic experiments.
Ion exchange chromatography is one of the most widely used chromatographic technique for the separation and purification of important biological molecules. Due to its wide applicability in separation processes, a targeted approach is required to suggest the effective binding conditions during ion exchange chromatography. A surface energetics approach was used to study the interaction of proteins to different types of ion exchange chromatographic beads. The basic parameters used in this approach are derived from the contact angle, streaming potential, and zeta potential values.The interaction of few model proteins to different anionic and cationic exchanger, with different backbone chemistry, that is, agarose and methacrylate, was performed.Generally, under binding conditions, it was observed that proteins having negative surface charges showed strong to lose interaction (20 kT for Hannilase to 0.5 kT for IgG) with different anionic exchangers (having different positive surface charges). On the contrary, anionic exchangers showed almost no interaction (0-0.1 kT) with the positively charged proteins. An inverse behavior was observed for the interaction of proteins to cationic exchangers. The outcome from these theoretical calculations can predict the binding behavior of different proteins under real ion exchange chromatographic conditions. This will ultimately propose a better bioprocess design for protein separation.
Hydrophobic interaction chromatography, an important and effective purification strategy, is generally used for the purification of variety of biomolecules. A basic understanding of the protein interaction behavior is required to effectively separate these biomolecules. A colloidal type extended Derjaguin, Landau, Verwey, and Overbeek calculations were utilized to study the interactions behavior of model proteins to commercially available hydrophobic chromatographic materials that is, Toyopearl Phenyl 650C and Toyopearl Butyl 650C. Physicochemical properties of selected model proteins were achieved by contact angle and zeta potential measurements. The contact angle of chromatographic materials used was achieved through sessile drop method on disrupted beads and capillary penetration method (CPM) on intact beads. The surface properties were further used to calculate the interactions of the proteins to chromatographic supports. The calculated secondary energy minimum of the proteins with the chromatographic materials (from the contact angle values determined through both methods can be correlated with the retention volumes from the real chromatography. The secondary energy minimum values are higher for each protein to the chromatographic materials calculated from the inputs derived through sessile drop method compared to CPM. For instance, immunoglobulin G has secondary energy minimum value of 0.17 kT compared to 0.11 kT, obtained through sessile drop method and CPM, respectively. Average relative values of the energy minimum calculated for all proteins are as 1.51 kT and 1.29 kT for Toyopearl Butyl 650C and Toyopearl Phenyl 650C, respectively, as a conversion factor for estimation of secondary energy minimum for both methods.
Anthranilate phosphoribosyltransferase (AnPRT) catalyzes the transfer of the phosphoribosyl group of 5′-phosphoribosyl-1′-pyrophosphate (PRPP) to anthranilate to form phosphoribosyl-anthranilate. Crystal structures of AnPRTs from bacteria and archaea have previously been determined; however, the structure of Saccharomyces cerevisiae AnPRT (ScAnPRT) still remains unsolved. Here, crystal structures of ScAnPRT in the apo form as well as in complex with its substrate PRPP and the substrate analogue 4-fluoroanthranilate (4FA) are presented. These structures demonstrate that ScAnPRT exhibits the conserved structural fold of type III phosphoribosyltransferase enzymes and shares the similar mode of substrate binding found across the AnPRT protein family. In addition, crystal structures of ScAnPRT mutants (ScAnPRTSer121Ala and ScAnPRTGly141Asn) were also determined. These structures suggested that the conserved residue Ser121 is critical for binding PRPP, while Gly141 is dispensable for binding 4FA. In summary, these structures improved the preliminary understanding of the substrate-binding mode of ScAnPRT and laid foundations for future research.
This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.