their derivatives (1b–10b and 1c–10c) as sialidase substrates are
shown in Fig. 1.
cleavage (Fig. 1E). As shown before,12,13 a2–3-linked Neu5Gc-
containing sialoside was a better substrate than the corres-
ponding Neu5Ac-containing counterpart for the a2–3-sialidase
activity of PmST1. Nevertheless, C9-modifications on Neu5Gc
in Siaa2–3GalbpNP decreased the a2–3-sialidase activity of
PmST1. In general, Siaa2–3GalbpNP containing Neu5Gc or
its C9-derivatives were not good substrates for S. pneumoniae
sialidase (Fig. 1D) although some of the structures including
Neu5Gca2–3GalbpNP (6b), Neu5Gc9OMea2–3GalbpNP (8b),
and Neu5Gc9N3a2–3GalbpNP (10b) were weak substrates for
S. typhimurium sialidase (Fig. 1C).
In consistence with our previous reports,12,13 C. perfringens
sialidase (Fig. 1A), V. cholerae sialidase (Fig. 1B), and human
sialidase NEU2 (Fig. 1F) were able to cleave both a2–3- and
a2–6-linked sialosides, while S. typhimurium sialidase
(Fig. 1C), S. pneumoniae sialidase (Fig. 1D), and PmST1
(Fig. 1E) could only cleave a2–3-linked sialosides efficiently.
Among three sialidases that could cleave both a2–3- and
a2–6-linked sialosides including C. perfringens sialidase
(Fig. 1A), V. cholerae sialidase (Fig. 1B), and human NEU2
(Fig. 1F), V. cholerae sialidase (Fig. 1B) had the highest
substrate promiscuity. It could use all 20 compounds
(1b–10b and 1c–10c) as substrates and only the 9-O-methyl
modification on either Neu5Ac or Neu5Gc decreased its
activity significantly. 9-F and 9-deoxy modification on
Neu5Gc decreased its activity moderately and 9-N3 modification
on Neu5Gc or 9-F, 9-deoxy, and 9-N3 modifications on Neu5Ac
only affected its activity weakly. In comparison, although
C9-modifications on Neu5Ac were well tolerated by C. perfringens
sialidase (Fig. 1A), sialosides containing Neu5Gc or its
C9-derivatives were not good substrates for this enzyme. Quite
interestingly, although human do not synthesize Neu5Gc-
containing structures but present substantial amount of Neu5Ac
on oligosaccharides and glycoconjugates, human cytosolic sialidase
NEU2 (Fig. 1F) cleaved Neu5Gc- and Neu5Gc9N3-containing
sialosides more efficiently than Neu5Ac-containing sialosides.
Sialosides containing C9-modified Neu5Ac derivatives and
9-F, 9-methoxy, and 9-deoxy derivatives of Neu5Gc were
not suitable substrates for human NEU2. This indicated that
while NEU2 was able to tolerate some modifications at C5 as
shown previously,14 it was more restricted to C9-modifications. It
is unclear why the sialosides with C9-azido Neu5Gc (10b and 10c)
were tolerable substrates for NEU2 but other modifications
on Neu5Gc protected it from being cleaved by NEU2. Future
studies are needed to test whether C9-azido modification on
the Neu5Gc in sialosides changes the conformation of NEU2.
All three sialidases that were specific for a2–3-linked sialosides
including S. typhimurium sialidase (Fig. 1C), S. pneumoniae
sialidase (Fig. 1D), and PmST1 (Fig. 1E) had good tolerance
towards C9-modifications on Neu5Ac in sialoside substrates. No
significant changes were seen for S. typhimurium sialidase
(Fig. 1C) and S. pneumoniae sialidase (Fig. 1D) when a2–3-linked
sialosides containing Neu5Ac or its C9-derivatives were used
as the substrates. Quite interestingly, 9-F, 9-deoxy, and 9-N3
modifications on Neu5Ac in Siaa2–3GalbpNP (2b, 4b and 5b,
respectively) provided better substrates than non-modified
Neu5Aca2–3GalbpNP (1b) for the a2–3-sialidase activity
of PmST1 with about 2-fold activity increase in sialic acid
In conclusion, a library of thirty pNP-tagged sialosides
containing Neu5Ac, Neu5Gc, and Kdn derivatives, in which
the C9–OH on the sialic acid moiety was systematically
substituted with F, OMe, H, and N3, was chemoenzymatically
synthesized using an efficient one-pot three-enzyme approach.
These synthetic sialosides were applied in a 384-well plate-
based colorimetric high-throughput screening platform as
important probes for elucidating the importance of sialic
acid C9-modifications and identifying substrate specificity of
various sialidases.
This work was supported by NIH grant R01HD065122,
NSF grant CHE-1012511, and Beckman Young Investigator
Award. X. Chen is a Camille Dreyfus Teacher-Scholar and a
UC-Davis Chancellor’s Fellow.
Notes and references
1 S. Muthana, H. Cao and X. Chen, Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol., 2009,
13, 573–581.
2 R. M. Schmaltz, S. R. Hanson and C. H. Wong, Chem. Rev., 2011,
111, 4259–4307.
3 R. Schauer, Glycoconjugate J., 2000, 17, 485–499.
4 T. Angata and A. Varki, Chem. Rev., 2002, 102, 439–469.
5 X. Chen and A. Varki, ACS Chem. Biol., 2010, 5, 163–176.
6 S. J. Williams and S. G. Withers, Carbohydr. Res., 2000, 327,
27–46.
7 H. Yu, H. A. Chokhawala, S. Huang and X. Chen, Nat. Protoc.,
2006, 1, 2485–2492.
8 Y. Li, H. Yu, H. Cao, K. Lau, S. Muthana, V. K. Tiwari, B. Son
and X. Chen, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 2008, 79, 963–970.
9 H. Yu, H. Yu, R. Karpel and X. Chen, Bioorg. Med. Chem., 2004,
12, 6427–6435.
10 H. Yu, H. Chokhawala, R. Karpel, H. Yu, B. Wu, J. Zhang,
Y. Zhang, Q. Jia and X. Chen, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2005, 127,
17618–17619.
11 H. Yu, S. Huang, H. Chokhawala, M. Sun, H. Zheng and X. Chen,
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2006, 45, 3938–3944.
12 H. A. Chokhawala, H. Yu and X. Chen, ChemBioChem, 2007, 8,
194–201.
13 H. Cao, Y. Li, K. Lau, S. Muthana, H. Yu, J. Cheng,
H. A. Chokhawala, G. Sugiarto, L. Zhang and X. Chen, Org.
Biomol. Chem., 2009, 7, 5137–5145.
14 Y. Li, H. Cao, H. Yu, Y. Chen, K. Lau, J. Qu, V. Thon,
G. Sugiarto and X. Chen, Mol. BioSyst., 2011, 7, 1060–1072.
c
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
Chem. Commun., 2012, 48, 3357–3359 3359