Substrate recognition by β-ketoacyl-ACP synthases

β-Ketoacyl-ACP synthase (KAS) enzymes catalyze Claisen condensation reactions in the fatty acid biosynthesis pathway. These reactions follow a ping-pong mechanism in which a donor substrate acylates the active site cysteine residue after which the acyl group is condensed with the malonyl-ACP acceptor substrate to form a β-ketoacyl-ACP. In the priming KASIII enzymes the donor substrate is an acyl-CoA while in the elongating KASI and KASII enzymes the donor is an acyl-ACP. Although the KASIII enzyme in Escherichia coli (ecFabH) is essential, the corresponding enzyme in Mycobacterium tuberculosis (mtFabH) is not, suggesting that the KASI or II enzyme in M. tuberculosis (KasA or KasB, respectively) must be able to accept a CoA donor substrate. Since KasA is essential, the substrate specificity of this KASI enzyme has been explored using substrates based on phosphopantetheine, CoA, ACP, and AcpM peptide mimics. This analysis has been extended to the KASI and KASII enzymes from E. coli (ecFabB and ecFabF) where we show that a 14-residue malonyl-phosphopantetheine peptide can efficiently replace malonyl-ecACP as the acceptor substrate in the ecFabF reaction. While ecFabF is able to catalyze the condensation reaction when CoA is the carrier for both substrates, the KASI enzymes ecFabB and KasA have an absolute requirement for an ACP substrate as the acyl donor. Provided that this requirement is met, variation in the acceptor carrier substrate has little impact on the k(cat)/K(m) for the KASI reaction. For the KASI enzymes we propose that the binding of ecACP (AcpM) results in a conformational change that leads to an open form of the enzyme to which the malonyl acceptor substrate binds. Finally, the substrate inhibition observed when palmitoyl-CoA is the donor substrate for the KasA reaction has implications for the importance of mtFabH in the mycobacterial FASII pathway.     

Do water molecules mediate protein-DNA recognition?

A comprehensive analysis of interfacial water molecules in the structures of 109 unique protein-DNA complexes is presented together with a new view on their role in protein-DNA recognition. Location of interfacial water molecules as reported in the crystal structures and as emerging from a series of molecular dynamics studies on protein-DNA complexes with explicit solvent and counterions, was analyzed based on their acceptor, donor hydrogen bond relationships with the atoms and residues of the macromolecules, electrostatic field calculations and packing density considerations. Water molecules for the purpose of this study have been categorized into four classes: viz. (I) those that contact both the protein and the DNA simultaneously and thus mediate recognition directly; (II) those that contact either the protein or the DNA exclusively via hydrogen bonds solvating each solute separately; (III) those that contact the hydrophobic groups in either the protein or the DNA; and, lastly (IV) those that contact another water molecule. Of the 17,963 crystallographic water molecules under examination, about 6% belong to class I and 76% belong to class II. About three-fourths of class I and class II water molecules are exclusively associated with hydrogen bond acceptor atoms of both protein and DNA. Noting that DNA is polyanionic, it is significant that a majority of the crystallographically observed water molecules as well as those from molecular dynamics simulations should be involved in facilitating binding by screening unfavorable electrostatics. Less than 2% of the reported water molecules occur between hydrogen bond donor atoms of protein and acceptor atoms of DNA. These represent cases where protein atoms cannot reach out to DNA to make favorable hydrogen bond interactions due to packing/structural restrictions and interfacial water molecules provide an extension to side-chains to accomplish hydrogen bonding.     

Hydration of protein–RNA recognition sites

We investigate the role of water molecules in 89 protein–RNA complexes taken from the Protein Data Bank. Those with tRNA and single-stranded RNA are less hydrated than with duplex or ribosomal proteins. Protein–RNA interfaces are hydrated less than protein–DNA interfaces, but more than protein–protein interfaces. Majority of the waters at protein–RNA interfaces makes multiple H-bonds; however, a fraction do not make any. Those making H-bonds have preferences for the polar groups of RNA than its partner protein. The spatial distribution of waters makes interfaces with ribosomal proteins and single-stranded RNA relatively ‘dry’ than interfaces with tRNA and duplex RNA. In contrast to protein–DNA interfaces, mainly due to the presence of the 2′OH, the ribose in protein–RNA interfaces is hydrated more than the phosphate or the bases. The minor groove in protein–RNA interfaces is hydrated more than the major groove, while in protein–DNA interfaces it is reverse. The strands make the highest number of water-mediated H-bonds per unit interface area followed by the helices and the non-regular structures. The preserved waters at protein–RNA interfaces make higher number of H-bonds than the other waters. Preserved waters contribute toward the affinity in protein–RNA recognition and should be carefully treated while engineering protein–RNA interfaces.     

RNA recognition motifs: boring? Not quite

The RNA recognition motif (RRM) is one of the most abundant protein domains in eukaryotes. While the structure of this domain is well characterized by the packing of two alpha-helices on a four-stranded beta-sheet, the mode of protein and RNA recognition by RRMs is not clear owing to the high variability of these interactions. Here we report recent structural data on RRM-RNA and RRM-protein interactions showing the ability of this domain to modulate its binding affinity and specificity using each of its constitutive elements (beta-strands, loops, alpha-helices). The extreme structural versatility of the RRM interactions explains why RRM-containing proteins have so diverse biological functions.     

Drug targeting by macromolecules without recognition unit?

his review will summarize available information on the ability of macromolecular conjugates containing no specific recognition motifs to deliver anthracyclines (daunomycin, adriamycin) or methotrexate to target cells such as tumour cells or macrophages. Conjugates with natural (proteins, DNA, carbohydrates) and synthetic macromolecules (linear and branched chain poly-alpha-amino acids, non-biodegradable DIVEMA, HPMA etc.) will be reviewed. Experimental data from several laboratories indicate that these conjugates are taken up by cells mainly by fluid-phase or adsorptive endocytosis. It is believed that these processes do not involve 'specific receptors'. Two examples of methotrexate and daunomycin conjugates will be discussed to show the effect of the chemical structure of branched chain polypeptides on the uptake and antitumour or antiparasitic (Leishmania donovani infection) efficacy of conjugates.     

New immunology—immunology of pattern recognition receptors

Pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) have been found on all cells of the body—cells of the innate and adaptive immune systems, epithelial and endothelial cells, keratinocytes, etc. PRRs can recognize specific molecular structures of microorganisms as well as allergens and other substances. The interaction with ligands of foreign microorganisms activates PRRs, after which host cells start to produce cytokines both to specifically activate innate immunity and to control adaptive immune reactions. On the othe hand, no immune response develops against microorganisms of the normal microflora. Practically, the development of all immune responses is controlled by PRRs. These responses start in epithelial cells, skin cells, and vascular epithelial cells, which meet alien first. The immune system uses these cells to control the composition of normal microflora. Accordingly, the definition of immune system functions should be complemented by the regulation of body’s microflora in addition to the protection from alien and altered self.     

Mismatch recognition function of Arabidopsis thaliana MutSγ

Genetic stability depends in part on an efficient DNA lesion recognition and correction by the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system. In eukaryotes, MMR is initiated by the binding of heterodimeric MutS homologue (MSH) complexes, MSH2–MSH6 and MSH2–MSH3, which recognize and bind mismatches and unpaired nucleotides. Plants encode another mismatch recognition protein, named MSH7. MSH7 forms a heterodimer with MSH2 and the protein complex is designated MutSγ. We here report the effect the expression of Arabidopsis MSH2 and MSH7 alone or in combination exert on the genomic stability of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. AtMSH2 and AtMutSγ proteins failed to complement the hypermutator phenotype of an msh2 deficient strain. However, overexpressing AtMutSγ in MMR proficient strains generated a 4-fold increase in CAN1 forward mutation rate, when compared to wild-type strains. Can^r mutation spectrum analysis of AtMutSγ overproducing strains revealed a substantial increase in the frequency of base substitution mutations, including an increased accumulation of base pair changes from G:C to A:T and T:A to C:G, G:C or A:T. Taken together, these results suggest that AtMutSγ affects yeast genomic stability by recognizing specific mismatches and preventing correction by yeast MutSα and MutSβ, with subsequent inability to interact with yeast downstream proteins needed to complete MMR.     

A critical note on ‘exclusive recognition’

Cenk Saracoglu conceptualizes the antipathy towards Kurdish migrants manifesting in certain cities of Turkey since the early 2000s as ‘exclusive recognition’ in his article ‘“Exclusive recognition”: the new dimensions of the question of ethnicity and nationalism in Turkey’ published in Ethnic and Racial Studies 32(4). According to the author, these recent developments represent ‘a historically specific ethnicization process’ and its sources cannot be found directly and only in historical discourses and policy of mainstream Turkish nationalism. In this note, I contradict the author's claims by asserting that the recent manifestations of anti-Kurdish sentiments are an extension of the ongoing policies of Turkish national identity based on Turkish nationalism.     

Parallel RNA-strand recognition by 2′-amino-β-l-LNA

A short synthetic route to the first β-l-ribo configured locked nucleic acid (LNA), that is, 2′-amino-β-l-LNA thymine phosphoramidite 6, has been developed from bicyclic nucleoside 1. Incorporation of 2′-amino-β-l-LNA thymine monomers into α-DNA strands results in probes forming stable duplexes with complementary RNA in parallel orientation.     

What are the baselines for protein fold recognition?

MOTIVATION: What constitutes a baseline level of success for protein fold recognition methods? As fold recognition benchmarks are often presented without any thought to the results that might be expected from a purely random set of predictions, an analysis of fold recognition baselines is long overdue. Given varying amounts of basic information about a protein-ranging from the length of the sequence to a knowledge of its secondary structure-to what extent can the fold be determined by intelligent guesswork? Can simple methods that make use of secondary structure information assign folds more accurately than purely random methods and could these methods be used to construct viable hierarchical classifications? EXPERIMENTS PERFORMED: A number of rapid automatic methods which score similarities between protein domains were devised and tested. These methods ranged from those that incorporated no secondary structure information, such as measuring absolute differences in sequence lengths, to more complex alignments of secondary structure elements. Each method was assessed for accuracy by comparison with the Class Architecture Topology Homology (CATH) classification. Methods were rated against both a random baseline fold assignment method as a lower control and FSSP as an upper control. Similarity trees were constructed in order to evaluate the accuracy of optimum methods at producing a classification of structure. RESULTS: Using a rigorous comparison of methods with CATH, the random fold assignment method set a lower baseline of 11% true positives allowing for 3% false positives and FSSP set an upper benchmark of 47% true positives at 3% false positives. The optimum secondary structure alignment method used here achieved 27% true positives at 3% false positives. Using a less rigorous Critical Assessment of Structure Prediction (CASP)-like sensitivity measurement the random assignment achieved 6%, FSSP-59% and the optimum secondary structure alignment method-32%. Similarity trees produced by the optimum method illustrate that these methods cannot be used alone to produce a viable protein structural classification system. CONCLUSIONS: Simple methods that use perfect secondary structure information to assign folds cannot produce an accurate protein taxonomy, however they do provide useful baselines for fold recognition. In terms of a typical CASP assessment our results suggest that approximately 6% of targets with folds in the databases could be assigned correctly by randomly guessing, and as many as 32% could be recognised by trivial secondary structure comparison methods, given knowledge of their correct secondary structures.     

3′-modified nucleotides: Substrate recognition by phosphohydrolases

Analogs of thymidine-5′-monophosphate, thymidine-5′-monophosphate-p-nitrophenylester, and adenosine-5′-monophosphate with an amino or azido group in the 3′-position have been synthesized by convenient methods. These compounds were tested as substrates for acid phosphatase from potatoes (EC 3.1.3.27), 5′-nucleotidase from snake venom (EC 3.1.3.5), alkaline phosphatase from calf intestine (EC 3.1.3.1), and phosphodiesterase from snake venom (EC 3.1.4.1). The influence of the modification was found to increase with the higher specificity of the enzymes (thus, e.g., 5′-nucleotidase does not accept the 3′-modified thymidine derivatives).     

Individual recognition through olfactory–auditory matching in lemurs

Individual recognition can be facilitated by creating representations of familiar individuals, whereby information from signals in multiple sensory modalities become linked. Many vertebrate species use auditory–visual matching to recognize familiar conspecifics and heterospecifics, but we currently do not know whether representations of familiar individuals incorporate information from other modalities. Ring-tailed lemurs (Lemur catta) are highly visual, but also communicate via scents and vocalizations. To investigate the role of olfactory signals in multisensory recognition, we tested whether lemurs can recognize familiar individuals through matching scents and vocalizations. We presented lemurs with female scents that were paired with the contact call either of the female whose scent was presented or of another familiar female from the same social group. When the scent and the vocalization came from the same individual versus from different individuals, females showed greater interest in the scents, and males showed greater interest in both the scents and the vocalizations, suggesting that lemurs can recognize familiar females via olfactory–auditory matching. Because identity signals in lemur scents and vocalizations are produced by different effectors and often encountered at different times (uncoupled in space and time), this matching suggests lemurs form multisensory representations through a newly recognized sensory integration underlying individual recognition.     

NKT TCR recognition of CD1d-α-C-galactosylceramide

NKT cells respond to a variety of CD1d-restricted glycolipid Ags that are structurally related to the prototypic Ag α-galactosylceramide (α-GalCer). A modified analog of α-GalCer with a carbon-based glycosidic linkage (α-C-GalCer) has generated great interest because of its apparent ability to promote prolonged, Th1-biased immune responses. In this study, we report the activation of spleen NKT cells to α-C-GalCer, and related C-glycoside ligands, is weaker than that of α-GalCer. Furthermore, the Vβ8.2 and Vβ7 NKT TCR affinity for CD1d-α-C-GalCer, and some related analogs, is ～10-fold lower than that for the NKT TCR-CD1d-α-GalCer interaction. Nevertheless, the crystal structure of the Vβ8.2 NKT TCR-CD1d-α-C-GalCer complex is similar to that of the corresponding NKT TCR-CD1d-α-GalCer complex, although subtle differences at the interface provide a basis for understanding the lower affinity of the NKT TCR-CD1d-α-C-GalCer interaction. Our findings support the concept that for CD1d-restricted NKT cells, altered glycolipid ligands can promote markedly different responses while adopting similar TCR-docking topologies.     

Is emotion recognition the only problem in ADHD? effects of pharmacotherapy on face and emotion recognition in children with ADHD

The objectives of this study were to evaluate both face and emotion recognition, to detect differences among attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) subgroups, to identify effects of the gender and to assess the effects of methylphenidate and atomoxetine treatment on both face and emotion recognition in patients with ADHD. The study sample consisted of 41 male, 29 female patients, 8–15 years of age, who were diagnosed as having combined type ADHD (N = 26), hyperactive/impulsive type ADHD (N = 21) or inattentive type ADHD (N = 23) but had not previously used any medication for ADHD and 35 male, 25 female healthy individuals. Long-acting methylphenidate (OROS-MPH) was prescribed to 38 patients, whereas atomoxetine was prescribed to 32 patients. The reading the mind in the eyes test (RMET) and Benton face recognition test (BFRT) were applied to all participants before and after treatment. The patients with ADHD had a significantly lower number of correct answers in child and adolescent RMET and in BFRT than the healthy controls. Among the ADHD subtypes, the hyperactive/impulsive subtype had a lower number of correct answers in the RMET than the inattentive subtypes, and the hyperactive/impulsive subtype had a lower number of correct answers in short and long form of BFRT than the combined and inattentive subtypes. Male and female patients with ADHD did not differ significantly with respect to the number of correct answers on the RMET and BFRT. The patients showed significant improvement in RMET and BFRT after treatment with OROS-MPH or atomoxetine. Patients with ADHD have difficulties in face recognition as well as emotion recognition. Both OROS-MPH and atomoxetine affect emotion recognition. However, further studies on the face and emotion recognition are needed in ADHD.     

Endotoxin recognition: in fish or not in fish?

The interaction between pathogens and their multicellular hosts is initiated by activation of pathogen recognition receptors (PRRs). These receptors, that include most notably members of the toll-like receptor (TLR) family, recognize specific pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs). TLR4 is a central part of the receptor complex that is involved in the activation of the immune system by lipopolysaccharide (LPS) through the specific recognition of its endotoxic moiety (Lipid A). This is a critical event that is essential for the immune response to Gram-negative bacteria as well as the etiology of endotoxic shock. Interestingly, compared to mammals, fish are resistant to endotoxic shock. This in vivo resistance concurs with in vitro studies demonstrating significantly lowered sensitivity of fish leukocytes to LPS activation. Further, our in vitro analyses demonstrate that in trout mononuclear phagocytes, LPS fails to induce antiviral genes, an event that occurs downstream of TLR4 and is required for the development of endotoxic shock. Finally, an in silico approach that includes mining of different piscine genomic and EST databases, reveals the presence in fish of all of the major TLR signaling elements except for the molecules specifically involved in TLR4-mediated endotoxin recognition and signaling in mammals. Collectively, our analysis questions the existence of TLR4-mediated cellular responses to LPS in fish. We further speculate that other receptors, in particular beta-2 integrins, may play a primary role in the activation of piscine leukocytes by LPS.     

Parent–offspring recognition in the Brown-headed Parrot Poicephalus cryptoxanthus

Recognition by vocal characteristics between parents and their offspring is thought to be ubiquitous in colonially nesting avian species. The Brown-headed Parrot Poicephalus cryptoxanthus nests in hollows in trees. However, when the chicks fledge they leave the nest and for the following three weeks spend their time in a tree where they are fed by their parents. As the fledglings are mobile and cryptic, returning parents must locate their own chicks. In this study a series of playback experiments was carried out, which showed that the chicks recognise their parents by voice. A simultaneous mirror experiment indicated that recognition was not reciprocated, although there may be alternative explanations for this behaviour. When the young began to forage with their parents, vocal stimuli did not induce any response from adult or chick. We suggest that vocal recognition becomes secondary to visual recognition as development proceeds.