Fig. 3. (A, B) Crystal structure of eicosanoic acid-bound OleT (PDB:4L40). (C, D) Proposed model of DAUDA bound OleT. (E, F) Proposed model of HCUDA
bound OleT. The substrates were shown in green. The hydrophobic residues along the substrate binding pocket and Arg245, His58 were shown in sticks. F-G
loop was highlighted in cyan. The heme was shown in red and the iron was in yellow sphere. The distance between carboxylate and Arg245 and His85 was
labled.
In summary, a series of novel fatty acid derivatives were designed and synthesized to probe the hydroxylation/decarboxylation
activity of P450 OleT. It demonstrated that most of the derivatives were well accepted as substrates of OleT, which extraordinarily
broadened the enzyme’s substrate scope. More importantly, diversified product profiles were observed based on the difference in end
groups, which indicated that the minor change in the remote site of substrates could regulate the hydroxylation/decarboxylation
reaction. Evidently the molecular docking study implies that the position shifts of the carboxylate group induced by the remote structure
contributes the bifurcative catalysis. This work sheds light on the understanding of the OleT catalysis and will benefit the application of
OleT enzymes in synthesis and biofuel industry [12].
Declaration of interests
☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that
could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
We wish to acknowledge the support from the State Scholarship Fund of the China Scholarship Council (No. 201806310084). We
also wish to thank Dr. Thomas M. Makris for providing the OleTSA plasmid, thank Olivia Manley, Suman Das for their help on protein
purification. We also acknowledge technical supports from the staffs at the Mass Spectrometry at the University of South Carolina.
References
[1] I.G. Denisov, T.M. Makris, S.G. Sligar, I. Schlichting, Chem Rev. 105 (2005) 2253–2277.
[2] F.P. Guengerich, FASEB J. 6 (1992) 745–748.
[3] P. Anzenbacher, E. Anzenbacherová, Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 58 (2001) 737–747.
[4] D.C. Lamb, M.R. Waterman, S.L. Kelly, F.P. Guengerich, Curr. Opin. Biotech. 18 (2007) 504–512.
[5] M.A. Rude, T.S. Baron, S. Brubaker, et al., Appl. Environ. Microb. 77 (2011) 1718–1727.
[6] J.L. Grant, C.H. Hsieh, T.M. Makris, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 137 (2015) 4940–4943.
[7] J. Belcher, K.J. McLean, S. Matthews, et al., J. Biol. Chem. 289 (2014) 6535–6550.
[8] A. Dennig, M. Kuhn, S. Tassoti, et al., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 54 (2015) 8819–8822.
[9] A. Greule, J.E. Stok, J.J. De Voss, M.J. Cryle, Nat. Prod. Rep. 35 (2018) 757–791.
[10] J.T. Groves, G.A. McClusky, R.E. White, M.J. Coon, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 81 (1978) 154–160.
[11] J.A. Amaya, C.D. Rutland, N. Leschinsky, T.M. Makris, Biochemistry 57 (2018) 344–353.
[12] L. Zhang, O.M. Manley, D. Ma, et al., Bioresour. Technol. 311 (2020) 123538.
[13] J. Wang, R. Lonsdale, M.T. Reetz. Chem. Commun. 52 (2016) 8131–8133.