In conclusion, we have demonstrated that the S. coelicolor RedH
enzyme catalyses condensation of MBC 3 and 2-undecylpyrrole 4
in the biosynthesis of undecylprodigine 1. We have also shown that
RedH can catalyse condensation of a variety of synthetic MBC
analogues 7a–d with 2-undecylpyrrole 4 to form several undecyl-
prodiginine analogues 14a–d, albeit with varying efficiences.18 The
results of these experiments indicate that the nitrogen atom in the
A-ring of MBC is not required for catalysis, but that a heteroatom
capable of donating a lone-pair to the aromatic ring is important.
They also indicate that RedH does not impose a strong steric
constraint on the A-ring of MBC. While we suspect that the
nitrogen atom in the B-ring of MBC may play an important role
in the catalytic mechanism of RedH, the data obtained here do not
allow us to conclusively confirm or deny this hypothesis. Finally
these experiments demonstrate the feasibility of preparing prodigi-
nine analogues via a mutasynthesis approach. It will be particularly
interesting to see whether this mutasynthesis approach can be
extended to the preparation of analogues of streptorubin B 2,
which unlike analogues of undecylprodiginine 1 and prodigiosin
are not readily accessible by total synthesis strategies.
This research was supported by grants from the UK BBSRC
(grant ref. BBSSK200310147), the US National Institutes of Health
(GM077147) and the European Union (Contract No. 005224), as
well as a Warwick Postgraduate Research Fellowship (to PKS).
Scheme 2 Structures of roseophilin 8 and the undecylprodiginine–
roseophilin hybrid 9, and synthesis of MBC analogue 13.
Notes and references
resolution MS data to characterise these undecylprodiginine
analogues, which do not unambiguously confirm their struc-
tures, authentic standards of 14a–d were prepared by acid-
catalysed condensation of 7a–d with 2-undecylpyrrole17 and
shown to be identical by LC-MS/MS analyses to the undecyl-
prodiginine analogues produced in the feeding experiments. In
critically important control experiments designed to discrimi-
nate between enzymatic and non-enzymatic condensation
reactions, 7a–d were fed to the S. coelicolor W33 (redH::
aac(3)IV) mutant. LC-MS/MS analyses indicated that
14a–d were produced in all of these experiments, probably as
a result of the isolation procedure.w While the quantity of 14a
produced relative to the accumulated 2-undecylpyrrole 4 was
modestly greater when 7a was fed to the W33
(redH::aac(3)IV) mutant than when 7a was fed to the W39
(redM::aac(3)IV) mutant, the quantities of 14b–d produced
by the W39 mutant were very much higher than the quantities
produced by the W33 mutant (relative to accumulated 4),
indicating unequivocally that 7b–d are substrates of RedH.w In
contrast, feeding of MBC analogue 13 to the S. coelicolor W39
mutant did not result in production of roseophilin–undecyl-
prodiginine hybrid 9. This may be because 13 is not a substrate
of RedH or because it cannot enter S. coelicolor cells.
1 A. Mortellaro, S. Songia, P. Gnocchi, M. Ferrari, C. Fornasiero,
R. D’Alessio, A. Isetta, F. Colotta and J. Golay, J. Immunol., 1999,
162, 7102–7109.
2 N. N. Gerber, J. Antibiot., 1975, 28, 194–199; M. Isaka, A.
Jaturapat, J. Kramyu, M. Tanticharoen and Y. Thebtaranonth,
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., 2002, 46, 1112–1113.
3 B. Montaner and R. Perez-Tomas, Curr. Cancer Drug Targets,
2003, 3, 57–65.
4 A. Furtsner, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2003, 42, 3582–3603.
¨
5 G. C. Shore, J. Bajorath, F. L. Stahura and M. S. R. Murthy,
International patent application WO 2003015788, 2003.
6 M. Nguyen, R. C. Marcellus, A. Roulston, M. Watson, L. Serfass,
S. R. M. Madiraju, D. Goulet, J. Viallet, L. Belec, X. Billot, S.
Acoca, E. Purisima, A. Wiegmans, L. Cluse, R. W. Johnstone, P.
Beauparlant and G. C. Shore, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2007,
104, 19512–19517.
7 S. W. Tsao, B. A. Rudd, X. G. He, C. J. Chang and H. G. Floss, J.
Antibiot., 1985, 38, 128–131.
8 S. J. Mo, P. K. Sydor, C. Corre, M. M. Alhamadsheh, A. E.
Stanley, S. W. Haynes, L. Song, K. A. Reynolds and G. L. Challis,
Chem. Biol., 2008, 15, 137–148.
9 A. M. Cerdeno, M. J. Bibb and G. L. Challis, Chem. Biol., 2001, 8,
211–224.
10 A. E. Stanley, L. J. Walton, M. Kourdi-Zerikly, C. Corre and G.
L. Challis, Chem. Commun., 2006, 3981–3983.
11 M. G. Thomas, M. D. Burkart and C. T. Walsh, Chem. Biol., 2002,
9, 171–184.
12 S. Garneau-Tsodikova, P. C. Dorrestein, N. L. Kelleher and C. T.
Walsh, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2006, 128, 12600–12601.
13 N. R. Williamson, H. T. Simonsen, R. A. A. Ahmed, G. Goldet, H.
Slater, L. Woodley, F. J. Leeper and G. P. C. Salmond, Mol.
Microbiol., 2005, 56, 971–989.
14 B. Gust, G. L. Challis, K. Fowler, T. Kieser and K. F. Chater,
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2003, 100, 1541–1546.
´
15 K. Dairi, S. Tripathy, G. Attardo and J.-F. Lavallee, Tetrahedron
Lett., 2006, 47, 2605–2606.
16 Y. Kayakawa, K. Kawakami, H. Seto and K. Furihata, Tetrahe-
dron Lett., 1992, 33, 2701–2704.
17 H. H. Wasserman, G. C. Rodgers and D. D. Keith, Tetrahedron,
1976, 32, 1851–1854.
Scheme 3 Structures of undecylprodiginine analogues produced
by feeding the corresponding synthetic MBC analogues to the
S. coelicolor W39 mutant.
18 These results were first presented on 20 June 2007 at the Chemistry
and Biology of Natural Products Biosynthesis III, University of
Bristol, UK.
ꢀc
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2008
Chem. Commun., 2008, 1865–1867 | 1867