Please do not adjust margins
ChemComm
DOI: 10.1039/C6CC04649E
COMMUNICATION
Journal Name
2
0, 25, 84, 85). (a) Overlay of family representatives with adjacent catalytic
498; d) J. Larsbrink, A. J. Thompson, M. Lundqvist, J.
G. Gardner, G. J. Davies and H. Brumer, Mol. Microbiol.,
2014, 94, 418; e) G. R. Hemsworth, G. Dejean, G. J.
Davies and H. Brumer, Biochem. Soc. Trans., 2016, 44,
1
8
residues: GH20 Paenibacillus sp. β-HexNAcase (purple, PDB: 3SUR), and
GH84 Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron O-GlcNAcase (light green, PDB: 2CHN),
11
which contain adjacent. (b) Overlay of family representatives with non-
9
4.
adjacent catalytic residues: GH18 Serratia marcescens chitinase A (grey,
19
5
6
7
N. A. Pudlo, K. Urs, S. S. Kumar, J. B. German, D. A.
Mills and E. C. Martens, mBio, 2015, 6.
T. Sumida, K. Fujimoto and M. Ito, J. Biol. Chem., 2011,
PDB: 2WK2), GH25 Aspergillus fumigatus lysozyme (steel blue, PDB:
2
0
21
2
X8R), and GH85 Streptococcus pneumoniae endo-D (plum, PDB: 2W92).
2
86, 14065.
A comparison of the active sites of GH families that are
I. Noach, B. Pluvinage, C. Laurie, K. T. Abe, M. G.
Alteen, D. J. Vocadlo and A. B. Boraston, J. Mol. Biol.,
2016.
D. J. Vocadlo and G. J. Davies, Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol.,
2
known to utilise a substrateꢀassisted retaining mechanism,
which includes GH18, 20, 25, 84 and 85, reveal a remarkable
spatial conservation of the catalytic residues located on the
8
9
1
008, 12, 539.
fourth βꢀstrand of the respective (β/α) ꢀbarrel (Figure 4).
8
S. J. Williams, B. Mark, D. J. Vocadlo, M. N. James and
S. G. Withers, J. Biol. Chem., 2002, 277, 40055.
a) M. S. Macauley, G. E. Whitworth, A. W. Debowski, D.
Chin and D. J. Vocadlo, J. Biol. Chem., 2005, 280, 25313;
b) G. E. Whitworth, M. S. Macauley, K. A. Stubbs, R.
J. Dennis, E. J. Taylor, G. J. Davies, I. R. Greig and D. J.
Vocadlo, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2007, 129, 635.
R. J. Dennis, E. J. Taylor, M. S. Macauley, K. A. Stubbs,
J. P. Turkenburg, S. J. Hart, G. N. Black, D. J. Vocadlo
and G. J. Davies, Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol., 2006, 13, 365.
M. Robb, C. S. Robb, M. A. Higgins, J. K. Hobbs, J. C.
Paton and A. B. Boraston, J. Biol. Chem., 2015, 290,
30888.
a) E. C. Lai and S. G. Withers, Biochemistry, 1994, 33,
14743; b)S. Drouillard, S. Armand, G. J. Davies, C. E.
Vorgias and B. Henrissat, Biochem J, 1997, 328, 945; c)
B. L. Mark, D. J. Vocadlo, S. Knapp, B. L. TriggsꢀRaine,
S. G. Withers and M. N. G. James, J. Biol. Chem., 2001,
276, 10330.
Families GH20 and 84, like GH123, have the catalytic
acid/base and stabilizer adjacent in their protein chains, and
have essentially identical arrangements of these groups and the
linking peptide backbone. Families GH18, 25 and 85 have a
one residue insertion between the catalytic residues, yet still
adopt a remarkably similar spatial arrangement. Likewise the
active site closure motion now observed for two GH123
enzymes is also seen for a GH20 hexoaminidase and a GH84
0
1
1
1
1
2
3
7
,12,22
OꢀGlcNAcase.
These hexosaminidase families have little
or no sequence conservation yet display similar folds and
arrangement of catalytic residues and use a neighbouring group
participation mechanism, suggesting a common solution to the
2
3
chemical problem of hydrolysis of Nꢀacetylꢀβꢀhexosaminides.
This work was supported by the Australian Research
Council (FT130100103), and the BBSRC (BB/K003836/1), and
the Ramaciotti Foundation and VESKI with additional support
from the Australian Cancer Research Foundation and Victorian 14
S. Knapp and D. S. Myers, J. Org. Chem., 2002, 67, 2995.
F. Bäckhed, R. E. Ley, J. L. Sonnenburg, D. A. Peterson
and J. I. Gordon, Science, 2005, 307, 1915.
E. Krissinel, Nucleic Acids Res., 2015, 43, W314.
Y. He, M. S. Macauley, K. A. Stubbs, D. J. Vocadlo and
G. J. Davies, J Am Chem Soc, 2010, 132, 1807.
T. Sumida, K. A. Stubbs, M. Ito and S. Yokoyama, Org.
Biomol. Chem., 2012, 10, 2607.
1
5
State Government Operational Infrastructure Support, NHMRC
IRIISS grant 9000220. We thank the Diamond Light Source for
access to beamlines I02, I03 and I04 (proposal number mxꢀ
1
1
6
7
9948) that contributed to the results presented here. We also
thank Dr. Andrew Leech at the Bioscience Technology Facility 18
in the Department of Biology in York for his help with the
1
9
J. M. Macdonald, C. A. Tarling, E. J. Taylor, R. J. Dennis,
D. S. Myers, S. Knapp, G. J. Davies and S. G. Withers,
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2010, 49, 2599.
J. E. Korczynska, S. Danielsen, U. Schagerlof, J. P.
Turkenburg, G. J. Davies, K. S. Wilson and E. J. Taylor,
Acta Crystallogr. Sect. F Struct. Biol. Cryst. Commun., 66,
SECꢀMALLS experiments. We are grateful to Dr. Johan
Turkenburg and Sam Hart for assistance during data collection
and Wendy Offen for help with the crystallisation.
2
0
Notes and references
9
73.
2
2
1
2
D. W. Abbott, M. S. Macauley, D. J. Vocadlo and A. B.
Boraston, J. Biol. Chem., 2009, 284, 11676.
J. F. Darby, J. Landstrom, C. Roth, Y. He, G. J. Davies
Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available: SI Figures,
cloning, expression, biochemistry, and crystallography methods. See
DOI: xxxxxxxxxx
and R. E. Hubbard, Angew Chem Int Ed Engl, 2014, 53,
1
3419.
1
2
3
4
P. G. Falk, L. V. Hooper, T. Midtvedt and J. I. Gordon,
Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev., 1998, 62, 1157.
D. P. Bojanova and S. R. Bordenstein, PLoS Biol., 2016,
2
3
R. R. Copley and P. Bork, J. Mol. Biol., 2000, 303, 627; )
A. D. Goldman, J. T. Beatty and L. F. Landweber, J.
Mol. Evolution, 2016, 82, 17.
14, e1002503.
J. G. H. Ruselerꢀvan Embden, R. van der Helm and L. M.
C. van Lieshout, FEMS Microbiol. Lett., 1989, 58, 37.
a) B. A. White, R. Lamed, E. A. Bayer and H. J. Flint,
Annu. Rev. Microbiol., 2014, 68, 279; b) N. Terrapon, V.
Lombard, H. J. Gilbert and B. Henrissat, Bioinformatics,
2015, 31, 647; c) J. Larsbrink, T. E. Rogers, G. R.
Hemsworth, L. S. McKee, A. S. Tauzin, O. Spadiut, S.
Klinter, N. A. Pudlo, K. Urs, N. M. Koropatkin, A. L.
Creagh, C. A. Haynes, A. G. Kelly, S. N. Cederholm, G. J.
Davies, E. C. Martens and H. Brumer, Nature, 2014, 506,
4
| Chem. Commun., 2016, 00, 1-3
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2016
Please do not adjust margins