一个肽平面的翻转,怎么把两步催化分开
下划线 = 中文容易“变味”或丢信息的词句:红线带编号 = 14 条注释卡(悬停看、点击跳转)。这一页讲的事:亮氨酰-tRNA 合成酶要在同一个口袋里干两件先后不能乱的事,它靠一个氨基酸主链的“翻面”当计时器。全文开放获取,本页译的是全文。英文原文附于文末
作者:Luping Pang、Vladimir Zanki、Sergei V. Strelkov、Arthur Van Aerschot、Ita Gruic-Sovulj、Stephen D. Weeks
出处:Communications Biology 2022;5:883
DOI:10.1038/s42003-022-03825-8 PMID:36038645
结构坐标:PDB 7NU4–7NUC(15 个结构,见文末方法)
译自英文原题:Partitioning of the initial catalytic steps of leucyl-tRNA synthetase is driven by an active site peptide-plane flip(亮氨酰-tRNA 合成酶起始催化步骤的分割,由活性位点的一个肽平面翻转驱动)
摘要(全译)
为了让 tRNALeu 被正确地氨酰化,亮氨酰-tRNA 合成酶(leucyl-tRNA synthetase,LeuRS)催化三步反应:由 ATP 活化亮氨酸,生成亮氨酰-腺苷酸(leucyl-adenylate,Leu-AMP);把这个氨基酸转移到 tRNALeu 上;以及对任何被误充的产物进行转移后校读。尽管 LeuRS 在生化上已经被研究得很清楚,但目前只有催化后两个阶段的详细结构信息。我们解出了淋病奈瑟菌(Neisseria gonorrhoeae)LeuRS 在 Leu-AMP 形成过程中所有酶学状态的晶体结构。这些结构显示出一个涉及多个结构域的剧烈构象变化循环,并与前过渡态结构活性位点中观察到的一个能量上不利的肽平面翻转相关联。结合生化分析与突变体结构研究,我们证明这个主链扭曲充当了一个触发器,在时间上把前两步催化分割开来。这些结果揭示了这一微小的结构改变,对酶的整体动力学与活性有着多么惊人的影响。
摘要只有一段,但信息密度很高。你把它拆成四句就清楚了:① 这个酶要干三件事,前两件都在同一个口袋里;② 前人只看到了后两件的结构,第一件一直缺;③ 我们把第一件的每个状态都拍下来了,发现一个很小的主链翻转;④ 用突变体证明这个翻转不是装饰,是开关。整篇文章的骨架就是这四句,后面三十页都在给这四句补证据。
引言:腺苷酸形成酶的两步反应
腺苷酸形成酶(adenylate-forming enzymes)是一个超家族,成员结构多样,存在于生命三界之中,参与多种必需的细胞生物学过程,包括氨基酸与核苷/核苷酸的生物合成、脂肪酸代谢、转录后修饰,以及蛋白质生物合成所必需的 tRNA 氨酰化。按催化核心的结构差异,这些酶可以被归为若干类别。尽管在结构与功能上彼此不同,它们一般都催化一个两步反应:含羧基的底物先与 ATP 缩合,形成一个高反应性、紧密结合的酰基-腺苷酸中间体(acyl-adenylate,Acyl-AMP),同时释放无机焦磷酸(PPi);第二步,这个 Acyl-AMP 被一个亲核体攻击,生成酰胺、酯或硫酯产物,并释放 AMP。对大多数腺苷酸形成酶来说,这两个不同的步骤发生在同一个活性位点里。因此,为了高效地顺序催化,这个超家族的成员必须区分不同的底物,并根据中间产物的形成来协调它们的进入。这件事在原子层面是怎么实现的,此前并不知道。
与其它腺苷酸形成酶在机制上相似,class Ia 的氨酰-tRNA 合成酶(aaRS)LeuRS 负责给 tRNALeu 同工受体充氨,而这是蛋白质翻译必需的一步。LeuRS 识别亮氨酸(Leu)与 ATP,形成一个亮氨酰-腺苷酸中间体,该反应经由一个五价过渡态进行。Leu-AMP 形成之后,tRNALeu 的接受臂进入合成位点,亮氨酰基被转移到这个 tRNA 的 3′ 末端核糖的 2′-OH 上,生成最终产物亮氨酰-tRNALeu(Leu-tRNALeu),并释放 AMP。这些步骤全部在氨酰化结构域内催化。这个结构域在其它 class I aaRS 中普遍存在,属于 HUP 结构域超家族,拓扑上类似一个 Rossmann 折叠。除了给 tRNALeu 充氨,LeuRS 还有能力水解被错误酰化的 tRNALeu 物种——这些错误来自非蛋白原氨基酸的误活化与随后的氨酰转移。这种转移后校读发生在一个独立的校读结构域里,该结构域插在 LeuRS 一个被称为连接多肽 1(connective polypeptide 1,CP1)的区域内,在一级序列上把氨酰化结构域切成两半。细菌 LeuRS 分别结合 tRNALeu 处于氨酰化构象与校读构象的晶体结构,已经给出了氨酰转移与转移后校读这两个阶段的详细分子图像。相比之下,对应于第一步氨基酸活化的结构细节,以及它们与氨酰转移时酶构象之间的关系,一直悬而未决。
为什么这个“悬而未决”值得单独写一篇文章?因为一个酶要在同一个口袋里干两件事:先把 Leu 和 ATP 拼起来,再把 Leu 搬到 tRNA 上。第二件事需要 tRNA 的 3′ 端伸进口袋——可那个位子在第一件事进行时正是 ATP 的磷酸基占着。所以口袋里必然有一个“什么时候让谁进来”的机制,问题是它靠什么实现。
作者押的注很小:一个氨基酸的主链翻了个面。这个想法听起来不像能撑起一篇 Communications Biology——但你看完结果 2 和结果 3 就会发现,撑得住,因为它不只解释了“什么时候让 tRNA 进来”,还顺手解释了为什么这个酶在第一步做完之后必须换个姿势。这就是结构生物学里最漂亮的一类结论:用一个原子级的细节,解释一个动力学上的分期。
这篇文章能做成,靠的不是某个新技术,而是“把所有状态都抓住”这个笨办法:晶体里的酶有活性,泡不同的底物、泡不同的时间,就能把反应路径上的不同瞬间冻下来——作者一共解出十五个坐标。在单一状态里,你根本看不出主链翻了面。
结果 1:LeuRS 各酶学状态的晶体结构
为了抓住 LeuRS 第一个催化步骤的不同酶学状态,作者把淋病奈瑟菌(Ng)脱辅基酶(apo)的晶体分别浸泡于 Leu、ATP、ATP 加 L-亮氨醇(L-leucinol)、以及 ATP 加 Leu 之中。每个复合物都收集了高分辨率衍射数据,并用此前工作报道的、NgLeuRS 与一个中间体类似物形成的复合物结构做分子置换解相。每一个结构里,相应配体的电子密度都明确无误。
尽管所有晶体都来自同一批初始晶体,只有在 NgLeuRS·ATP·亮氨醇三元复合物里才能把完整的蛋白序列搭建出来。这个结构显示:氨酰化结构域(含两个在所有 class I aaRS 中都高度保守的特征序列基序——HIGH 与 KMSKS)与六个辅助结构域相连:CP1 发夹、校读结构域、CP2 结构域、亮氨酸特异性(LS)结构域、反密码子结合结构域(ACBD)与 C 端结构域(CTD)。在其它已解结构中,LS 与 CTD 通常是无序的——尽管它们空间群相同、不对称单位里也都只有一个分子。
“只有三元复合物里才看得全”这句话,是结构生物学里最常被忽略的一类信息。它意味着:蛋白的某些部分本来就松,只有配体把它按住了才看得见。反过来说,你在别的结构里看不到某段序列,不等于它不存在,只等于它没被固定住。这一条以后会反复用到(讨论里 CTD 的“高度动态、在 tRNA 结合前有序性很差”就是这个意思)。
1.1 Leu 怎么被认出来
如前人所认识到的,NgLeuRS 的活性位点很大(脱辅基状态下约 758 ų),这是容纳各种底物所必需的。在所有浸泡过的结构里,都能观察到构成这个位点的残基发生了大幅重排。Leu 处在一个由各物种间保守残基围成的疏水腔里。与脱辅基结构相比,Leu 的结合诱导 Y43 的侧链旋转 103.5°,转向 Leu 结合口袋,与 Leu 底物的 N-Cα-C 平面形成堆叠相互作用。Y43 是一个在所有 LeuRS 中都保守的残基。Leu 的 α-氨基与 D80 侧链的 Oδ2、以及 F41 的主链羰基氧形成氢键。
此外,作者观察到一段多肽环区 544GIEHA548 的重排——他们把它命名为“启始环”(priming loop)。与脱辅基状态相比,这段区域的主链最大位移 2.8 Å,把环上残基的侧链带进了活性位点;这个位移来自 H547 的 Nε1 与 Leu 羧基之间形成的氢键。这个相互作用很可能对选择正确的氨基酸手性是重要的。
1.2 ATP 怎么被认出来(以及一个意外)
ATP 结合的 NgLeuRS 结构通过浸泡与共结晶两种方式获得。两个结构里,腺苷部分都能被明确地搭建,而且几乎完全一致。核苷的结合导致 634KMSKS638 环向内移动 3.5 Å,起因是 M635 的主链与碱基 N6 之间的一次主链介导的相互作用。碱基部分的位置还由与 V583 主链原子的氢键、以及 M582 侧链向内旋转产生的硫-π 堆叠进一步稳定。核糖的 2′-OH 与 3′-OH 都与 G544 的主链氮形成氢键——这驱动了与 Leu 结合状态相似的启始环位移。这两个羟基还分别与 Q580 侧链的 Nε2、N55 侧链的 Oδ1 相互作用。Q580 在跨三界的 LeuRS 同源物中高度保守,它专一识别核糖的 2′-OH,很可能正是用来区分核糖与脱氧核糖类似物底物的。
接下来是一个意外。虽然浸泡与共结晶得到的两个结构在整体蛋白骨架上几乎一致(全体原子 RMSD 0.137 Å)、腺苷位置也几乎相同,但ATP 的三磷酸基团在这两个结构里处在不同位置;而且,这两种 ATP 结合状态都不是产生活性的构象。此外,尽管结晶条件里有 Mg2+,却没有观察到这个离子的密度——而在 class I aaRS 中,Mg2+ 与 ATP 三磷酸的八面体配位被证明对促进腺苷化反应是重要的。
这两件事合起来说明:ATP 单独结合是不够的。在你把 Leu 也放进去之前,这个酶并不知道该怎么摆 ATP。这也解释了作者下一步为什么必须去做那个“三元复合物”。
1.3 前过渡态:用亮氨醇把反应“卡”在半路
为了抓住前过渡态,作者把 Leu 与 ATP 一起泡进 NgLeuRS 晶体——结果活性位点里只看到中间体 Leu-AMP。这本身是个好消息:说明酶在这种晶型里是有活性的,晶体不是“死”的。但也意味着你没法用真底物停在半路。
于是作者换了 L-亮氨醇:它是 Leu 的还原类似物,羧基被换成了羟甲基,因此能被认出来、能结合,却不能被 ATP 活化。把亮氨醇与 ATP 一起泡进同样的晶体,得到了 NgLeuRS·ATP·亮氨醇结构。LeuRS 与 IleRS、ValRS、MetRS 同属 class Ia aaRS,所以据作者所知,这个三元结构首次给出了这个 aaRS 亚类前过渡态的结构信息。
在这个复合物里,亮氨醇与 ATP 的腺苷部分被识别的方式,与单独结合 Leu 或 ATP 时看到的一样。不同在于三磷酸:它完全有序,配位一个 Mg2+,并与 class I 特征 HIGH 基序(在 NgLeuRS 里的序列是 49HMGH52)、KMSKS 环以及 CP1 发夹形成大量相互作用。这导致 KMSKS 环更剧烈地移入氨酰化位点,与脱辅基结构相比最大距离达 8.6 Å。
具体到每个磷酸:α-磷酸与 H52 侧链 Nε2、K637 的 Nζ、以及 Y43 主链氮形成氢键;β-磷酸由 H49 侧链 Nε2、K634 与 K637 的 Nζ、以及 K637 主链稳定;γ-磷酸与 CP1 发夹上的 R178 形成盐桥,并与 S638 侧链 Oγ 和主链氮形成氢键。此外,ATP 的 α、β、γ-磷酸与三个额外的有序水分子一起配位一个 Mg2+,形成理想的八面体几何,Mg2+ 与配位原子之间的平均距离约 2 Å。
把 Leu 结合的结构叠到前过渡态模型上,可以看到:与 Leu 底物 α-氨基呈 syn 构象的那个羧基氧原子,正好处在能够亲核攻击 ATP α-磷酸的位置上,O-P 距离 2.9 Å。这与理论计算模型的结论一致——在 class I aaRS 中,syn 构象的氧原子是首选的攻击原子。Leu 底物的另一个羧基氧(相当于亮氨醇的羟基)与 α-磷酸氧直接与三个结构水之一相互作用,进一步帮助稳定围绕 Mg2+ 的水壳,提示在有 Mg2+ 存在时,ATP 与 Leu 是协同结合的。
还有一个漂亮的旁证。把 Geobacillus stearothermophilus 的 TrpRS·ATP·色氨酰胺结构与本文三元结构按 ATP 腺苷部分叠合(全部 ATP 原子 RMSD 0.09 Å),两个结构里 ATP 的三磷酸都采取非常相似的伸展构象,也都等价地配位一个 Mg2+。但是,NgLeuRS 结构里围绕 Mg2+ 的那三个结构水,在 TrpRS 复合物里没有被观察到——这提示 NgLeuRS·ATP·亮氨醇结构可能是其他 class I aaRS 前过渡态的更好模型。
1.4 中间体:PPi 走了,门就松了
与上面的结构相比,在 Leu-AMP 结合的复合物里,亮氨酰与 AMP 部分形成的相互作用与单独结合底物时相同。相对于前过渡态,PPi 副产物的释放导致与 KMSKS 环和 CP1 发夹上 R178 的相应相互作用丢失。结果,KMSKS 环回到了与 ATP 结合结构中相同的半开构象。
把视角拉远看整体变化:不同酶结合状态之间的转换,导致相当程度的结构域重排。把 NgLeuRS 脱辅基结构与三元复合物比较,可以看到 CP1 发夹(残基 147–194)连同与之结构相关的 α 螺旋(残基 84–93)向活性位点旋转 31°,同时把校读结构域(残基 225–427)从同一区域推开 29°;LS 结构域连同 KMSKS 环(残基 586–638)同时向内旋转 38°,形成一个更紧凑的活性位点。这个特征带来了与 ATP 三磷酸部分的保守相互作用,并使 Leu 的羧基能够靠近到足以与 ATP α-磷酸反应的距离。
把 1.1–1.4 的数字串起来读:Y43 转 103.5°、启始环挪 2.8 Å、KMSKS 内移 3.5 到 8.6 Å、CP1 转 31°、校读结构域让开 29°、LS 转 38°——就是口袋从开着的 758 ų 关到“活性位点体积减少 60% 以上”的具体步骤。组会上能把这一句讲清楚,比背十张图有用。
结果 2:活性位点的肽平面翻转
真正的好东西在这里。作者把不同状态的 X 射线结构逐一细看,发现 NgLeuRS·ATP·亮氨醇复合物里存在一个L550 与 H551 之间的肽平面翻转,而这个翻转在脱辅基结构与中间体结合结构里都不存在。这两个残基位于一段结构保守的 α 螺旋(残基 549–564)的 N 端,这段螺旋衬在底物结合口袋的一侧;肽平面翻转破坏了这几个“螺旋封端”残基的二级结构。
这个转变在拉氏图(Ramachandran plot)上看得非常清楚:前过渡态复合物形成时,L550 从右手 α 螺旋区(αR)跑到了 β 折叠区,H551 则从 αR 区跑进了一个不利区域。
先把“肽平面翻转”这个词讲清楚,不然后面全是空的。蛋白质主链上,相邻两个氨基酸由肽键相连,肽键由于部分双键性质,六个原子(Cα-C-O-N-Cα)基本共平面,这个平面的二面角叫 ω,正常情况下约 180°(反式)。所谓肽平面翻转,就是这个平面整个翻了个面,ω 从约 180° 变成约 0°(顺式)。这件事在自由溶液中很贵:顺式肽键在非脯氨酸残基上出现的概率极低,放在一段 α 螺旋的 N 端更是雪上加霜——螺旋的氢键网络会被打断。
所以这个观察本身就是一个“不该出现的东西出现了”。作者没有停在“看到了”,而是接着问:它是被什么逼出来的?结构给出的答案是:CP1 发夹的关闭。CP1 发夹关上时,E169 的侧链会与 L550 的侧链发生位阻冲突;为了避免撞上,L550 的主链只好翻面。换句话说,这个翻转不是主动设计的动作,而是被挤出来的结果——但它一旦发生,就改变了整个局面的稳定性。
为什么一个“被挤出来”的不利构象能稳住?因为它被三处相互作用补偿了。与单独底物结合的状态相比,前过渡态里这个能量上不利的翻转与 CP1 发夹的关闭构象,由以下相互作用稳定:CP1 发夹上 R178 与 ATP γ-磷酸之间的盐桥;CP1 发夹上 E169 的侧链与 L550 所在螺旋上 Y554 的侧链、以及 CP2 结构域 C 端 W223 的侧链之间的极性相互作用。此外,底物结合诱导的启始环 544GIEHA548 位移,也进一步容纳了这个翻转。
到这里,逻辑链是这样的:底物结合 → CP1 关闭 → 撞上 L550 → 肽平面翻转 → 换来一堆新的稳定相互作用 → 口袋进入“闭合且高互补”的状态。注意这条链的因果方向,它决定了后面突变体实验怎么设计:要证明翻转有用,最干净的办法不是“让它翻”,而是“让它不用翻”——把 L550 换成侧链更小的氨基酸,E169 就撞不到它了。
结果 3:突变体证明翻转是“触发开关”
为了理解这个肽平面翻转对整体构象变化与酶催化的作用,作者把 L550 突变成丙氨酸或甘氨酸,并分别做了结晶。两个突变体通过晶种接种(seeding)得到了与野生型相同的晶型。L550A 的衍射质量与野生型相当;L550G 稍差,在 2.7–3.3 Å 之间。与野生型一样,把晶体浸泡在 ATP 与 Leu 中会导致 Leu-AMP 形成——说明两个突变体都保留了完成氨酰化第一步的能力。
3.1 突变体的结构:该动的都动了,就是没翻
把两个突变体的脱辅基态与前过渡态放在一起比,看到的整体结构域运动与野生型完全一样,包括 CP1 发夹与结构相关的 α 螺旋(M84-N93)关闭活性位点、以及底物诱导的启始环位移。但是——两个突变体的前过渡态结构里,都没有肽平面翻转。原因不难猜:E169 的侧链与 A550/G550 之间不再有冲突,而 E169 的侧链仍保持着与野生型前过渡态相同的相互作用。
接着是最关键的一组对比。两个突变体的脱辅基态与前过渡态全局上都与野生型相似;但看它们的Leu-AMP 结合结构——CP1 发夹与相关螺旋(M84-N93)仍然处在闭合构象里。这些结构与两个突变体各自的前过渡态可以叠合;而野生型对应的 Leu-AMP 结构里,CP1 发夹是打开的、像脱辅基态。
这句话翻译成人话:在野生型晶体里泡 ATP 与 Leu,CP1 发夹会在 Leu 活化过程中关上,等这个反应做完了再挪开;而在两个突变体里,CP1 关上之后就再也打不开了。作者指出,CP1 打不开这件事,与肽平面翻转的缺失相关。
还有一个结构上的旁证:把这种“关着的状态”与已有的大肠杆菌 LeuRS·tRNALeu 结构(模拟氨酰化状态,PDB ID:4AQ7)比较,这个闭合状态与同源 tRNALeu 接受臂的进入是不相容的。也就是说,CP1 不打开,第二步的底物就进不来;这为“翻转影响整个氨酰化反应”提供了结构解释。
3.2 动力学:三步实验,把缺陷定位到第二步
结构只能说明“可能”,速率才能说明“有多重要”。作者用了三套动力学实验,每一套测的是反应里不同的一段。
第一套,总氨酰化(稳态、多轮)。NgLeuRS-L550G 的氨酰化速率常数下降了 25 倍(5.8 s−1 对 0.26 s−1)。但这只是“整个反应变慢了”,不能告诉你慢在哪一步——因为总反应包含活化和转移两段。
第二套,氨基酸活化(ATP-PPi 交换)。这个实验只测第一步:酶把 Leu 与 ATP 拼成 Leu-AMP,同时释放的 PPi 会与溶液中带放射性的 PPi 交换。结果:L550G 相对野生型,活化步骤的 kcat/KM 只下降了 约 2 倍(6.3 对 3.54)。也就是说,翻转不存在,几乎不影响活化。这一条非常重要,因为它排除了“翻转是第一步必需的”这个可能。
第三套,氨酰转移(单轮,single-turnover)。把 LeuRS 与 Leu-AMP 预先在原地形成,再与带标记的 tRNALeu 快速混合、快速淬灭,只走一轮,测转移这一步的速率常数 ktrans。结果:L550G 的单轮速率常数比野生型下降了 31 倍(1.7 s−1 对 52 s−1)。
| 酶 | 活化 kcat/KM(s−1µM−1) | 转移 ktrans(s−1) | 总氨酰化 kobs(s−1) | 相对野生型 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NgLeuRS 野生型 | 6.3 | 52 ± 4 | 5.8 ± 0.4 | 1× |
| NgLeuRS-L550G | 3.54 | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 0.26 ± 0.02 | 转移约 1/31;总反应约 1/22 |
| NgLeuRS-E169G | 0.28 | 78 ± 7 | 1.35 ± 0.08 | 活化约 1/24;总反应约 1/4 |
| EcLeuRS 野生型 | 2.12 | 58 ± 5 | 4.9 ± 0.2 | 1× |
| EcLeuRS-M536G | 0.65 | 15.0 ± 0.8 | 1.41 ± 0.03 | 转移约 1/4;总反应约 1/3 |
数据合起来只允许一种解释:肽平面翻转对第一步(活化)几乎不重要,对第二步(氨酰转移)是必需的。作者据此提出它的作用——Leu-AMP 形成后重新打开合成位点,为 tRNALeu 3′ 端的有效定位创造条件。
3.3 这个机制是不是只有淋球菌才有?
多基因组分析显示,细菌 LeuRS 在序列与预测二级结构上高度相似,无论是含 L550 的那段 α 螺旋,还是周围的活性位点残基。有意思的是,L550 在所有 LeuRS 中并不完全保守——在某些酶里它被甲硫氨酸取代(例如大肠杆菌 LeuRS)。EcLeuRS 已经被研究得很清楚,NgLeuRS 与 EcLeuRS 的全长序列一致性与相似性分别是 57% 与 71%。
为了检验 EcLeuRS 里的 M536 是否扮演与 NgLeuRS 的 L550 相同的角色,作者构建了 EcLeuRS-M536G 并做了同样的动力学测试。结果与 NgLeuRS 平行:活化步骤 kcat/KM 出现 3 倍缺陷,转移步骤速率下降 4 倍,总(两步)氨酰化下降 3 倍。总体而言,EcLeuRS 的 M536G 效应与 NgLeuRS 的 L550G 类似,但破坏性更小,提示“用肽平面翻转来催化”这件事可能在其他细菌 LeuRS 中是共有的。
3.4 反向突变体 E169G:把“开”锁死,只坏第一步
既然翻转是 E169 撞出来的,那反过来想:如果去掉 E169,会怎样?作者构建了 NgLeuRS-E169G,解出了它的脱辅基态、ATP·亮氨醇态与 Leu-AMP 态三个高分辨率结构。
这三个结构彼此之间、以及与野生型脱辅基结构之间都能很好地叠合,全体原子 RMSD 为 0.186 Å——说明在脱辅基、前过渡态与中间体之间,没有明显的构象变化,这与野生型的表现形成强烈反差。反映在结构上就是:在所有状态里,CP1 发夹都保持开放构象。在 E169G·ATP·亮氨醇复合物中,这导致 R178 侧链与 ATP γ-磷酸之间那个关键盐桥丢失;ATP 的三磷酸因此处在一个灵活的、非生产性的构象里——它的B 因子比对应的野生型复合物高,就是这个意思。具体到距离:Leu 的羧基氧无法与 ATP 的 α-磷酸反应,两者的距离是 3.7 Å。
但是(这里很重要):当晶体用 Leu 与 ATP 浸泡时,中间体仍然形成了,电子密度图能看得到。作者的解释是:尽管三磷酸高度活动,突变体酶仍能在两小时的浸泡中(底物浓度远高于各自的 KM)达到生产性构象并完成反应。
动力学上,E169G 的表现与 L550G 正好互补:活化步骤里 KM(Leu)升高最多 5 倍、kcat 下降 4 倍,整体效率相对野生型低 24 倍(0.28 对 6.3);而单轮转移速率 ktrans 是 78 s−1,比野生型的 52 s−1 还略高。
两个突变体像照镜子:L550G 把“闭合”锁死,坏在转移;E169G 把“开放”锁死,坏在活化。作者的原话是:“与捕获‘闭合构象’、在氨酰转移步骤表现出缺陷的 L550G 突变体相反,在 CP1 发夹上稳定‘开放构象’的突变,只影响活化步骤。”这句话是整篇文章最漂亮的一处对称,也是你能在组会上直接引用的一句结论。
注意表里的对比:野生型活化 6.3、L550G 3.54,只差 1.8 倍;转移却差 31 倍。只做总氨酰化(25 倍)永远不知道缺陷在哪一步——三套实验的价值就是把“变慢了”拆成“哪一步变慢了”。
讨论:一个骨架扭曲如何分割两步催化
这篇工作一共解出了代表 Leu 活化各酶学状态的五个 NgLeuRS 结构。此外,已经有大肠杆菌 LeuRS(PDB ID:4AQ7)与 Pyrococcus horikoshii LeuRS(PDB ID:1WZ2)的、模拟氨酰化状态(tRNALeu 3′ 端在合成位点)的结构;也有代表转移后校读构象(3′ 端在校读位点)的大肠杆菌与 Thermus thermophilus LeuRS 结构。由于 NgLeuRS 与后两者的序列、结构高度相似,那些 tRNA 结合结构提供了互补的机制信息,使作者能够提出一个完整的 NgLeuRS 催化循环的结构描述。
4.1 一个循环,三个“锁”
脱辅基状态下,NgLeuRS 的合成位点完全开放,所有底物都能进。在氨基酸活化步骤,Leu 与 ATP 的结合通过在前过渡态结构三个不同侧面诱导蛋白重排,使这个位点剧烈收紧:一是 CP1 发夹与相关 α 螺旋(M84-N93),靠近被 Y43 封住的 Leu 结合位点;二是保守的 KMSKS 环与 LS 结构域,靠近腺嘌呤结合位点;三是启始环,它毗邻核糖。合起来,这些变化使活性位点体积减少 60% 以上,从而保护并稳定前过渡态,同时排除 tRNALeu 接受茎的进入。
在这个高互补性的状态下,Leu 的羧基氧被摆到能对 ATP α-磷酸发起亲核攻击的位置。关键在于:最初由底物诱导的宏观重排,导致了 L550 的肽平面翻转——因为 E169(它位于进来的 CP1 发夹的锌指结构上)挡住了 L550 的侧链。而作者的生化的数据显示:在没有位阻约束的情况下,肽平面翻转对氨基酸活化不是必需的;反过来,中间体一旦形成,翻转回到它偏好的位置,就通过促进 CP1 发夹的重新定位促成了氨酰转移步骤。此外,中间体的形成使 KMSKS 环松弛,得到一个半开放的活性位点。这一组合的“重新打开”,允许 PPi 副产物释放,并允许同源 tRNALeu 的接受臂进入。
4.2 tRNA 进来之后
在 Leu 活化过程中,晶体结构显示校读结构域与 CP1 发夹之间有一种反向平行的运动:前者必须让开,才能容纳后者由底物诱导的关闭。基于 EcLeuRS·tRNALeu 的氨酰化状态结构(4AQ7),作者提出:中间体形成之后,CP1 发夹因 L550 肽平面翻转而重新定位,校读结构域随后可以朝活性位点移动,把 tRNALeu 的 3′ 端带进来。原本堆叠在 Leu-AMP 亮氨酰部分上的 Y43 侧链,转成开放构象,为 tRNALeu 3′ 末端腺苷的结合与反应腾出空间;KMSKS 环与相连的 LS 结构域再次完全关闭,以稳定 tRNALeu 的位置。
还有两处稳定化细节:校读结构域上一段环区(NgLeuRS 的 G297-M307)与 tRNALeu 接受臂的 CCA 尾堆叠;这段环区里一个保守谷氨酸(EcLeuRS 的 E292,对应 NgLeuRS 的 E301)与校读结构域 C 端一个不变的 Arg(EcLeuRS 的 R416,NgLeuRS 的 R428)形成关键盐桥,进一步把 tRNALeu 的 3′ 端稳定在合成位点内。这个复合物形成之后,亲核反应被认为由 Mg2+ 辅因子、Leu 的 α-氨基、以及两个保守残基(EcLeuRS 的 D80 与 E532,对应 NgLeuRS 的 D80 与 E546)协助完成。这一步里,上述关键盐桥把 tRNALeu 的 3′ 端约束在合成位点内,从而把氨酰化与转移后校读两个过程分开。
4.3 校读:tRNA 是怎么被“搬走”的
为保证 Leu-tRNALeu 生成之后的忠实性,被充氨的 tRNALeu 3′ 端会被转运到校读结构域,在那里,被误充的产物(例如 正缬氨酸,norvaline,Nva)被水解。此前有人提出,tRNALeu 进入校读构象是由 CP1 发夹的重新关闭与 KMSKS 相关 LS 结构域的运动促成的。但是,本文这些关于氨酰化起始步骤的结构显示,CP1 发夹的运动高度依赖于 Leu 与 ATP 的结合。因此作者提出一个不同的模型:带电荷的 tRNALeu 向校读位点的转运,可能是启始环与 KMSKS 环运动的结果。
具体机制:亮氨酰基转移到 tRNALeu 之后,合成位点与氨酰基的相互作用丢失、AMP 释放,导致启始环回到脱辅基构象。把 NgLeuRS 脱辅基结构与结合 tRNALeu 的同源大肠杆菌酶(4AQ7)叠合,提示启始环的复位会与 tRNALeu 的 3′ 端发生位阻冲突,把这个大底物的接受臂挤出合成位点。此外,底物与 KMSKS 环相互作用的丢失会导致该区域重新定位,连同与之结构相关的 tRNALeu 结合 LS 结构域一起移动。这些变化合起来,把 tRNALeu 的接受臂从合成位点赶出去,使它能够朝校读结构域的校读位点移动。
4.4 产物释放:真正的限速步
在 class I aaRS 中,带电荷 tRNA 产物的释放被证明限制着两步氨酰化的整体速率。本文 NgLeuRS 的动力学数据进一步支持这一点。有意思的是,NgLeuRS 的突变体与野生型一样,都是产物释放限速;因此突变体氨酰化速率的下降(例如 E169G 的 1.35 s−1 对野生型 5.8 s−1)也提示这些突变同时拖慢了产物释放。这反过来说明:受 L550 与 E169 影响的 CP1 发夹活动性,对最终产物的解离也是重要的。
对同一亚类的 IleRS 的详细研究显示:Ile 与 ATP 的再结合、或催化循环中间体 Ile-AMP 的形成,会先发生并促进 Ile-tRNAIle 的释放。类似地,作者假设 LeuRS 也可能通过启动下一轮 Leu 活化、导致 CP1 发夹关闭,来促进 Leu-tRNALeu 的解离。“用下一步的开始,推动上一步的结束”——这是这类酶常见的一种节奏。
4.5 把翻转放回文献里看
把话说到底:底物诱导的 L550 肽平面翻转,驱动 CP1 发夹重新打开,并促成随后的氨酰化反应。因此这个翻转起到一个时间标记的作用,在“ Leu 活化所需的活性位点构象”与“随后氨酰转移所需的构象”之间触发切换。此外,被触发的 CP1 发夹运动不仅在氨酰化中必不可少,对最终产物释放也很重要。于是,这个细微的主链改变,以及它所引发的、与之相关的大尺度结构域运动,共同调节着 NgLeuRS 的多步催化。
作者还做了一件我很欣赏的事:去查了“肽平面翻转”在结构数据库里的分布。系统考察显示,已观察到的大多数肽平面翻转位于活动的环区,而且通常发生在甘氨酸残基上。相比之下,NgLeuRS 前过渡态结构里 L550 的这个翻转相当特殊——它高度能量不利,因为它扭曲了该残基所在的那段结构保守的 α 螺旋二级结构。肽平面翻转在蛋白折叠中已知有重要作用,但被观察到能调节酶活性的例子极少。泛素里的一个肽平面翻转,会通过变构影响整个蛋白的“膨胀-收缩”切换,从而调节它与一个泛素特异性蛋白酶的结合(尽管它并不直接参与该界面);黄素氧还蛋白里也观察到一个肽平面翻转,存在于氧化态与还原态之间,对稳定半醌、调节氧化还原电位很重要。这两个例子涉及的残基对里,都有一个甘氨酸。用这种柔性残基,与 NgLeuRS 里 L550-H551 的大侧链形成鲜明对比——后者必须承受向拉氏图不利区域的转变。但正是这个转变,定义了这个活性位点开关的性质。
结论:这项研究给出了 class Ia aaRS 氨基酸活化机制的高分辨率结构框架,说明 LeuRS 用 ATP 活化 Leu 的过程涉及一个多结构域参与的剧烈构象变化循环,其运动与转移后校读期间看到的运动相平行。据作者所知,这是腺苷酸形成酶超家族中“分割机制”的第一个例子。它说明:在分子层面,一个酶如何把同一个合成位点用于不同的催化阶段,并且以受控的方式在这些阶段之间切换。
这篇文章最值得学的,不是“发现了一个翻转”,而是“发现之后怎么办”。作者做了四件事:换一个更小的侧链让翻转消失(L550G)、换掉撞人的那个残基让翻转不可能发生(E169G)、用三套动力学把缺陷定位到具体一步、再去数据库里查同类现象有多罕见。四步做完,“一个主链翻面”才从一个观察变成一个有分量的机制。你以后做出一个有意思的观察,可以按这四步自查。
材料与方法(择要)
构建与纯化。全长 NgLeuRS 的编码序列用一步 PCR 从基因组 DNA 扩增(Q5 高保真聚合酶),正向引物 5′-gcgaacagattggtggtggtATGCAAGAACATTACCAGCCCG-3′,反向引物 5′-ttgagcagaagcttaTTAGACGACGATGTTCACCAGT-3′。小写碱基是与质粒克隆位点互补的接头序列,大写碱基是退火序列;起始密码子前插入了一个非天然的甘氨酸残基(便于 SUMO 标签切割)。PCR 产物经胶回收后与线性化的 pETRUK 载体(N 端带增强型 SUMO 标签)做 in-fusion 连接;L550A、L550G、E169G 三个突变体用定点突变构建,测序确认只含目标单点突变。
表达用 E. coli Rosetta 2 (DE3) pLysS,先在 2 mL LB(100 µg/mL 氨苄青霉素、30 µg/mL 氯霉素)中 37 °C、250 rpm 培养 8 h,再转接到 2 L ZYP-5052 自动诱导培养基(补 1 mM ZnSO4 与 1 mL 消泡剂 SE-15),24 °C 过夜;OD600 到 4.0 后降到 18 °C 再长 24 h,7500×g、4 °C 收菌,菌体悬于 CEXA(25 mM HEPES-NaOH pH 8、200 mM NaCl、5 mM β-巯基乙醇)冻存于 −80 °C。
纯化时菌体在 CEXA 中稀释(终比例 8:1 v/w),加 100 U 冷活性核酸酶与 10 mM MgCl2,冰上超声裂解,18,000×g、4 °C 离心 30 min;上清过 5 mL Hitrap SP HP 柱,用 0–50% CEXB 线性梯度洗脱;收集含 SUMO 融合蛋白的组分,按 1:250(质量比)加重组 SUMO 水解酶,冰上 10 min 即可切开(因为起始残基前多了一个甘氨酸,标签更柔顺);随后在 1 L 缓冲液(20 mM Tris-HCl pH 7、10% w/v 甘油、5 mM β-巯基乙醇)中 4 °C 透析过夜、再换新鲜缓冲液透析 2 h 彻底去盐;再上一次 SP 柱去掉标签、水解酶与杂质,流穿液上 Hitrap Q HP 阴离子交换柱(0–40% AEXB 线性梯度、20 个柱体积);浓缩到 30 mg/mL(10 kDa 截留),液氮速冻、−80 °C 保存。EcLeuRS-M536G 用同样的定点突变与纯化流程,模板为已报道的 pETRUK-EcLeuRS。
结晶与浸泡。结晶前用 Superdex 200 凝胶过滤(10 mM Tris-HCl pH 7、100 mM NaCl、2.5 mM β-巯基乙醇)进一步纯化,浓缩到 10 mg/mL。所有 NgLeuRS 变体都用悬滴气相扩散、并结合晶种接种(seeding)得到高质量晶体:蛋白与 100 mM Bis-tris propane-HCl pH 8.5、100 mM MgCl2、20%(w/v)PEG3350 及晶种悬液按 0.75:1.0:0.25(v/v/v)混合;晶种来自早期同一构建体晶体的研磨稀释液。L550A 的最佳条件是把沉淀剂 pH 调到 8.0。
各复合物通过把脱辅基晶体转移到含相应底物的溶液获得:NgLeuRS·Leu 用 10 mM Leu;NgLeuRS·ATP·亮氨醇用 5 mM L-亮氨醇与 5 mM ATP 同时浸泡;ATP 构象 1 用 10 mM ATP 浸泡,构象 2 则用 10 mM ATP 共结晶;NgLeuRS·Leu-AMP 用 5 mM Leu 与 5 mM ATP 同时浸泡。所有晶体浸泡 2 h,随后用冷冻环捞取、液氮速冻。冷冻条件为 100 mM Bis-tris propane-HCl pH 8.5、100 mM MgCl2、20% PEG3350、22%(v/v)乙二醇(L550A 用 pH 8.0 版本)。
数据与结构解析。衍射数据在 100 K 下于 ESRF(Grenoble)与 Soleil(Paris)的不同线站收集,用 autoPROC 处理。结构用 Phaser 做分子置换,搜索模型为此前发表的、同一酶结合中间体类似物的脱辅基结构(蛋白链加一个锌离子);在 Coot 里多轮手工修正、在 Phenix.refine 里精修,随后按 Phenix 自动划分的组做 TLS 精修,最后一步自动优化立体化学约束的权重;模型质量用 wwPDB 验证服务器检查。分子图形与结构比较在 PyMol 2.0.4 中完成,蛋白-配体相互作用分析用 Schrödinger(2021-2 版)。
动力学。三套实验,对应反应的三段。① ATP-PPi 交换(测活化):100 mM HEPES-KOH pH 7.5、30 mM MgCl2、150 mM KCl、0.1 mg/mL BSA、5 mM DTT、1 mM [32P]-PPi(0.2–0.4 Ci/mol),10–20 nM 酶,37 °C;反应由加底物启动、在淬灭液(750 mM NaOAc pH 4.5、0.1% w/v SDS)中终止;[32P]-ATP 与 [32P]-PPi 用薄层色谱分离(750 mM KH2PO4 pH 3.5、4 M 尿素),磷屏成像定量;KM 与 kcat 用 Michaelis-Menten 方程直接拟合。② 单轮转移(测氨酰转移):100 mM HEPES-KOH pH 7.5、10 mM MgCl2、150 mM KCl、BSA、DTT、8 mM ATP、0.008 U/µL 无机焦磷酸酶、5 mM Leu、1 µM [32P]-tRNALeu、10–20 µM 酶;酶先与 ATP、Leu 在 37 °C 预孵育 5 min 原位形成 LeuRS:Leu-AMP 复合物,再与等体积复性后的 tRNA 用快速化学淬灭仪(RQF3,KinTek)混合;淬灭后用 P1 核酸酶(≥0.01 U/µL,300 mM NaOAc pH 5.0、0.15 mM ZnCl2,室温 1 h)切掉 tRNA 末端腺苷,再用 TLC 分离氨酰化的 [32P]-AMP;ktrans 用单指数方程 Y = Y0 + A·e−ktrans·t 拟合。③ 总氨酰化(稳态、多轮):37 °C,100 mM HEPES-KOH pH 7.5、150 mM KCl、20 mM MgCl2、1 mM DTT、8 mM ATP、5 mM Leu、BSA、0.004 U/µL 焦磷酸酶、最多 40 µM 活性 [32P]-tRNALeu、10 nM 酶;kobs 由产物生成曲线的斜率除以酶浓度得到(底物饱和时 kobs 接近 kcat)。所有 [32P]-tRNALeu 的接受活性为 69 ± 2%,速率常数已按此校正。统计用 GraphPad Prism 6,均值 ± 标准误,三重复。
方法里最该记住的一句是“浸泡 2 h”。晶体里的酶一直在工作:你把它泡进底物,它就开始反应;2 小时之后你看到的,是它停下来时的那个状态。所以“晶体里的反应”(in crystallo)既是技术,也是解释力的边界——它告诉你哪些状态能稳定存在,不告诉你每个状态各活了多久。
这篇在轨迹里的位置
先把时间与地点摆正。这篇 2022 年发在 Communications Biology,工作是在鲁汶大学 Stephen Weeks 的实验室做的,动力学部分由萨格勒布大学 Ita Gruic-Sovulj 的组完成(Vladimir Zanki 与 I. G.-S. 设计并执行了酶学动力学实验)。作者贡献里写得很清楚:庞露苹与 S.D.W. 构思项目、设计大部分实验;她克隆、表达、纯化了所有 NgLeuRS 与 EcLeuRS 变体,用于结晶与生化研究;她制备并收获各种 NgLeuRS 晶体复合物、收集衍射数据、解析结构并做生物信息学分析。这是结构生物学里很典型的一种分工:一边管“把蛋白变成晶体、把晶体变成坐标”,一边管“把坐标变成速率”。
它在本专区里的位置,得跟 01 页对照着看才清楚。01 页(2021,IJMS)是“拿一个已经看清的口袋去设计分子”——人源 ProRS,ATP 竞争性抑制剂,共晶,选择性建模。02 页(2022,Communications Biology)反过来,是“先把一个还没看清的酶看清”——细菌 LeuRS,第一步催化的每个状态,加一个肽平面翻转。按发表年份,01 在 02 前面;按逻辑,02 是 01 的地基:你得先知道口袋什么时候开、什么时候关、被什么控制,才谈得上“设计一个卡在里面的分子”。
而且这两篇有一个共同的“母题”,只是 01 页没点破:决定成败的往往是一个很小的局部变化。01 页里是“Pro 结合让 Arg1152 让开一点,化合物才能进去”——一个残基的侧链构象;02 页里是“L550 的主链翻个面,口袋才重新打开”——一个肽平面的 ω 角。一个侧链、一个主链二面角,都是纳米级的动作,却各自决定了一整条通路走不走得通。你在读结构文章时,专门去找这种“小动作”,比记住十大结构域的名字有用得多。
往前看,鲁汶那几年她留下两条腿:一条是 02 页这样的机制,一条是 01 页那样的抑制剂。往后看,2022 年还有一篇 IJMS,做的是 MshC 抑制的结构基础——靶点从人源酶换成了细菌酶;2023 年 STTT 是一篇 CLK 激酶的综述,属于“药物化学那一侧”的整理与盘点;2026 年 JBC 把 MshC 放回真正的病原体(脓肿分枝杆菌)里当靶点;2026 年 ACS Omega 又回到吡嗪酰胺衍生物,这次是抗结核。看明白了吗——机制那条腿和药物那条腿,她一直没有放下,只是换着走。
所以这一页在整条轨迹上是哪一格?是“机制”那一格的最高点。往后所有关于“靶点”“抑制剂”“候选化合物”的页,脚下的结构依据,多半都能追到这一页这种工作上来。一句话概括这条线:先把酶怎么工作看清楚(机制),再把它当靶点设计分子(结构 + 药物化学),最后推到真正的病原体和候选化合物上。
给刚进组的你
这一页比 01 页“硬”,因为它没有化合物、没有 EC50、没有可以拿去讲的故事线,全是状态、角度、速率。但它教给你的东西更通用。我挑三样。
第一,一个概念:分期可以靠时间,不必靠空间。一个活性位点要干两件先后不能乱的事,最直觉的方案是“分成两个房间”(空间分割);但绝大多数酶没这么多地方,它们用的是“同一间屋子,先关门做第一件事,再开门做第二件事”(时间分割)。这一页讲的就是那个门闩——一个肽平面的翻转。你以后遇到任何一个“多步反应共用一个位点”的酶(这类酶非常多),都可以先问一句:它靠什么保证顺序?是构象、是底物浓度、还是产物释放?
第二,一个手法:想知道“坏在哪一步”,就把反应拆开测。这一页的三套实验,你以后八成会用到其中至少一套:ATP-PPi 交换测活化、单轮淬灭测转移、稳态测总反应。它们的区别不是“高级不高级”,而是把哪一段单独切出来。你在组里测酶活,先问自己:我要的是初速度、是某一步的速率、还是整个通量?问清楚了再选方法,比照着别人的 protocol 抄一遍靠谱得多。
第三,一个可以问的问题:“这个突变体坏在哪一步?”这句话是实验设计的分水岭。只看总反应,你只知道“变慢了”;拆开测,你才知道是“活化学不会”还是“转移搬不动”。而且——这一页最漂亮的地方在于,两个突变体给出了完全互补的答案:L550G 坏在转移,E169G 坏在活化。如果一个突变体什么都坏,你其实什么也没学到;能定位到一步,才算做出了信息。
再说两句实在的。第一,做结构的人最花时间的不是解结构,是养晶体——它跟养细胞一个脾气,你越着急它越不长;反过来,条件对了,它一夜就出来。第二,纯化的质量决定后面所有事的质量:这一页里 SUMO 标签切不干净、蛋白聚集、Mg2+ 没加够,任何一个都会让你在电子密度图上看到一片模糊,然后误以为“这个状态不存在”。你在实验室做 WB 时看到的“条带很弱”,很多时候也是同一个原因。
最后一句。她 2020 年 9 月在鲁汶拿到生物医学博士,博士期间做的就是氨酰-tRNA 合成酶的结构、功能、催化机制与小分子抑制剂;2020.09–2021.08 在鲁汶做博后;2021 年 10 月入职郑州大学医学科学院,现在的方向是用分子生物学、生物化学与结构生物学研究肿瘤与代谢性疾病相关蛋白的结构与机制,并基于结构做小分子抑制剂/激动剂。这意味着:这条“看清机制 → 设计分子 → 推到病原体”的路,她是自己走完过一遍的。你想学怎么走,最直接的办法是去读她的文章顺序,而不是去背知识点。
▲ 本页翻译难点(对照学习用)
附录 · 英文原文
Partitioning of the initial catalytic steps of leucyl-tRNA synthetase is driven by an active site peptide-plane flip
Abstract
To correctly aminoacylate tRNALeu, leucyl-tRNA synthetase (LeuRS) catalyzes three reactions: activation of leucine by ATP to form leucyl-adenylate (Leu-AMP), transfer of this amino acid to tRNALeu and post-transfer editing of any mischarged product. Although LeuRS has been well characterized biochemically, detailed structural information is currently only available for the latter two stages of catalysis. We have solved crystal structures for all enzymatic states of Neisseria gonorrhoeae LeuRS during Leu-AMP formation. These show a cycle of dramatic conformational changes, involving multiple domains, and correlate with an energetically unfavorable peptide-plane flip observed in the active site of the pre-transition state structure. Biochemical analyses, combined with mutant structural studies, reveal that this backbone distortion acts as a trigger, temporally compartmentalizing the first two catalytic steps. These results unveil the remarkable effect of this small structural alteration on the global dynamics and activity of the enzyme.
Subject terms: Enzyme mechanisms, X-ray crystallography
Introduction
Adenylate-forming enzymes are a superfamily of structurally diverse proteins found in all three kingdoms of life which are involved in various essential cellular biological processes, including amino acid[1],[2] and nucleoside/nucleotide biosynthesis[3],[4], fatty acid metabolism[5]–[7], post-transcriptional modification[4] and aminoacylation[8],[9] of tRNA necessary for protein biosynthesis. Based on the structural differences of the catalytic core, these enzymes can be clustered into a number of classes[10],[11]. Despite being structurally and functionally distinct, they all generally catalyze a two-step reaction[10],[11]. Carboxylate-containing substrates are first activated by condensation with adenosine-5′-triphosphate (ATP) to form a highly reactive and tightly bound acyl-adenylate intermediate (Acyl-AMP) with the concomitant release of inorganic pyrophosphate (PPi). In the second step, the Acyl-AMP is attacked by a nucleophile resulting in an amide, ester or thioester product and the liberation of AMP[10],[11]. For the majority of adenylate-forming enzymes these distinct steps occur in a single active site[11],[12]. Therefore, for efficient sequential catalysis, members of this superfamily must differentiate between the various substrates and coordinate their association based on intermediate product formation. How this is manifested at the atomic level is not known.
Mechanistically similar to other adenylate-forming enzymes, the class Ia aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase (aaRS) LeuRS charges tRNALeu isoacceptors, which are essential substrates for protein translation. LeuRS recognizes leucine (Leu) and ATP to form a leucyl-adenylate (Leu-AMP) intermediate, a reaction that proceeds via a pentavalent transition state[13]–[15]. Upon Leu-AMP formation, the acceptor arm of tRNALeu enters the synthetic site and the leucyl moiety is transferred to the 2′-OH group of the 3′-terminal ribose of this tRNALeu to generate the final product leucyl-tRNALeu (Leu-tRNALeu) with the release of AMP[8]. These steps are all catalyzed within the aminoacylation domain. This domain, which is commonly shared amongst other class I aaRSs, belongs to the HUP domain superfamily and topologically resembles a Rossmann fold (Fig.)[9],[10],[16],[17]. In addition to charging the Leu-tRNALeu, LeuRS also has the capacity to hydrolyze incorrectly acylated tRNALeu species resulting from the mis-activation and subsequent aminoacyl transfer of non-proteinogenic amino acid[18],[19]. This post-transfer editing occurs at a separate editing domain found inserted in a region of LeuRS dubbed the connective polypeptide 1 (CP1), which separates the aminoacylation domain into two halves at the primary sequence level[20]–[25] (Fig.). Crystal structures of bacterial LeuRS with tRNALeu bound in the aminoacylation and the editing conformation, have provided a detailed molecular view of the aminoacyl transfer and post-transfer editing stages[26],[27]. In contrast, structural details corresponding to the first step of amino acid activation and their relationship to the conformation of the enzyme during aminoacyl transfer have remained elusive.
[Fig. 1] Biochemical and structural boundaries of N. gonorrhoeae LeuRS.a The enzymatic steps catalyzed by LeuRS. The first two stages occur in the aminoacylation domain (green box) while the post-transfer editing of mischarged Nva-tRNALeu is processed in the editing domain (cyan box). Nva is the abbreviation of non-canonical amino acid l-norvaline. b The domain structure of N. gonorrhoeae LeuRS and c its corresponding cartoon representation. The aminoacylation domain (green) is split by multiple insertions: connective polypeptide 1 (CP1 hairpin, purple) and 2 (CP2, slate); the editing domain (cyan); the zinc-binding domain (Zn2, yellow) and the leucine specific domain (LS, orange). The aminoacylation domain is followed by the anti-codon binding domain (ACBD, magenta) and the C-terminal domain (CTD, brown). A zinc ion is shown as a gray sphere.
To date, our understanding of the reaction mechanism of aaRS, and the adenylate-forming superfamily as a whole, have in part come from pioneering studies characterizing the class Ic tyrosyl- and tryptophanyl-tRNA synthetases and the class Ib glutamyl- and glutaminyl-tRNA synthetases[14],[28]–[35]. However, the atomic details of the adenylation reaction in the larger subclass Ia group, which also includes methionyl-, valyl-, isoleucyl- arginyl- and cysteinyl-tRNA synthetases have not been resolved[8],[36]. Here we present high-resolution crystal structures of Neisseria gonorrhoeae LeuRS (NgLeuRS) in complex with various substrates representing the different enzymatic states during Leu-AMP formation. Comparison of these structures provides an atomic description of a dynamic cycle that involves the rearrangement of the active site and accessory domains. Intriguingly, a peptide-plane flip of a residue in an α-helix in the aminoacylation domain appears to play a key role in re-opening the active site following intermediate formation. Additional structural and enzymatic kinetic studies of NgLeuRS mutants show that this peptide-plane flip is necessary for the catalytically productive positioning of the 3′-end of the incoming tRNALeu as well as the temporal compartmentalization of the pre-transition and aminoacylation states. This work not only furthers our structural understanding of the whole catalytic cycle of LeuRS, but also illuminates one mechanism in the adenylate-forming enzyme superfamily for distinctly separating individual steps of catalysis within the same active site.
Results
NgLeuRS structures in different catalytic states
To capture the different enzymatic states of the first catalytic step of LeuRS, crystals of the N. gonorrhoeae apoenzyme were soaked with Leu, ATP, ATP and l-leucinol, ATP and Leu. High-resolution diffraction data were collected for each complex and the structures were solved by molecular replacement using the structure of NgLeuRS complexed with an intermediate analog reported in our previous work (Fig. and Supplementary Data)[37]. In each case unambiguous electron density was observed for the associated ligand (Supplementary Fig.). Despite being derived from the same initial crystals it was only possible to trace the full protein sequence in the NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol ternary complex (Fig.). This structure shows the aminoacylation domain, which contains two signature sequence motifs (HIGH and KMSKS) that are highly conserved in all class I aaRSs[9],[16], connected with six auxiliary domains: CP1 hairpin, editing, CP2 domain, leucine specific (LS) domain, anti-codon binding domain (ACBD) and the C-terminal domain (CTD) (Fig. b, c). The LS and CTD are typically disordered in the other solved structures, despite all having the same space group and a single molecule in the asymmetric unit (Supplementary Data).
[Fig. 2] Snapshots of each catalytic step during Leu-AMP formation.All protein structures are shown as cartoon representations whereas ligands and interacting protein residues are shown as sticks. All H-bonds and salt bridges are shown as black dashed lines. A magnesium ion is shown as a gray sphere while its coordinating water molecules are shown as small red spheres. All structural domains are colored as shown in Fig.. Substrates ATP (cyan), Leu (yellow), Leu analog l-leucinol (salmon), and the reaction intermediate Leu-AMP (orange) are shown as sticks. The NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol ternary complex mimics the pre-transition state where both ATP and Leu are bound in the productive conformation in the aminoacylation site.
As has been previously recognized, the active site of NgLeuRS is large (approximately 758 Å3 in the apo form), which is necessary for association of the various substrates. In all soaked structures substantial rearrangements of residues lining this site are observed (Fig. and Supplementary Fig.). Leu is present in a hydrophobic cavity surrounded by residues conserved across all species[17]. Compared to the apo structure, the binding of Leu induces the side chain of Y43, an invariant residue in all LeuRSs[26],[38], to rotate 103.5° toward the Leu binding pocket to form a stacking interaction with the plane defined by the N-Cα-C of the Leu substrate (Fig. and Supplementary Fig.). The α-amino group of Leu forms H-bonds with the side chain Oδ2 of D80 and the main chain carbonyl oxygen of F41 (Fig.). In addition, a rearrangement of polypeptide loop region 544GIEHA548, which we will name the priming loop, is observed (Supplementary Fig., c). Compared to the apo state, the backbone of this region shifts a maximum of 2.8 Å bringing the side chains of the loop residues into the active site as a result of a H-bond between Nε1 of H547 and the carboxylate of Leu. This interaction is likely important for selecting the correct amino acid chirality.
The ATP-bound NgLeuRS structures were obtained by both soaking and co-crystallization (Fig., Supplementary Fig. and Supplementary Data). In both structures, the adenosine moiety can be fitted unambiguously and are almost identical. Binding of the nucleoside results in a 3.5 Å inward movement of the 634KMSKS638 loop (Supplementary Fig.) because of a backbone interaction mediated by M635 with the N6 of the base. The position of the base moiety is additionally stabilized by H-bonds with the backbone atoms of V583 and a sulfur-π stacking interaction resulting from the inward rotation of the side chain of M582 (Fig. and Supplementary Fig.). Both the 2′ and 3′-OH of the ribose group form H-bonds with the backbone nitrogen of G544, which drives a similar shift of the priming loop 544GIEHA548 as seen for the Leu-bound state (Supplementary Fig.). These two hydroxyl groups also interact with the side chain Nε2 of Q580 and the side chain Oδ1 of N55, respectively (Fig.). The former residue, which is highly conserved in LeuRS homologs across all kingdoms, specifically recognizes the ribose 2′-OH and is likely necessary for discriminating the ribose over the deoxyribose analog as a substrate. Although the overall protein backbone (all-atom RMSD of 0.137 Å) and the adenosine positions of ATP are nearly identical in the structures obtained by either soaking or co-crystallization, the triphosphate group of ATP in these structures is found in different positions. Surprisingly, neither of these two binding states of ATP are in productive conformation (Supplementary Fig.). A Mg2+ ion has been proven to be important for octahedral coordination with the triphosphate group of ATP in class I aaRSs to promote the adenylation reaction[30],[33],[39],[40]. Despite the presence of Mg2+ in the crystallization condition no density was observed for this ion.
Large conformational changes accompany Leu-AMP formation
To capture the pre-transition state, Leu and ATP were co-soaked with the NgLeuRS crystals, but only the intermediate Leu-AMP was observed in the active site indicating that the enzyme is active in this crystal form. Therefore, l-leucinol, a reduced Leu analog, and ATP were soaked together into equivalent crystals obtaining the NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol structure. LeuRS, together with IleRS, ValRS, and MetRS is a class Ia aaRS[8],[9],[36],[41], thus to the best of our knowledge this ternary structure provides the first structural insights into the pre-transition state of this aaRS subclass. In this complex, leucinol and the adenosine moiety of ATP are recognized in the same manner as seen for Leu or ATP alone (Fig.). The triphosphate group of ATP is fully ordered, coordinating a Mg2+ ion and making extensive interactions with residues of the class I signature HIGH motif which has the sequence of 49HMGH52 in NgLeuRS, with the KMSKS loop and the CP1 hairpin (Fig.). This results in a more dramatic movement of KMSKS loop into the aminoacylation site with a maximum distance of 8.6 Å compared to apo-form structure (Supplementary Fig.). The α-phosphate is H-bonded with the side chain Nε2 of H52 and Nζ of K637 and backbone nitrogen of Y43. The β-phosphate is stabilized by forming H-bonds with the side chain Nε2 of H49, Nζ of K634 and K637, and the backbone of K637, while the γ-phosphate establishes a salt bridge with R178 from the CP1 hairpin and forms H-bonds with side chain Oγ and main chain nitrogen of S638. In addition, the α, β, γ-phosphates of ATP and three additional ordered water molecules coordinate a Mg2+ ion, forming an ideal octahedral geometry with an average distance around 2 Å between Mg2+ and the contacting atoms (Fig. and Supplementary Fig.).
Superposition of the Leu-bound structure onto the pre-transition state model shows that the carboxylate oxygen atom which is in the syn conformation with the α-amino group of the Leu substrate is located in the required position to allow nucleophilic attack on the α-phosphate of ATP at a (O-P) distance of 2.9 Å (Supplementary Fig.). This positioning is in good agreement with the theoretical computational models that show the syn oxygen atom is the preferred attacking atom in class I aaRSs[42]. The other carboxylic oxygen of the substrate Leu, equivalent to the hydroxyl group of leucinol, and α-phosphate oxygen directly interacts with one of three structural water molecules further assisting in the stabilization of the water shell surrounding Mg2+ and suggesting the synergistic binding of ATP and Leu, in the presence of Mg2+. In addition, superposition of Geobacillus stearothermophilus TrpRS·ATP·tryptophanamide and our NgLeuRS ternary structure based on the adenosine moiety of ATP (RMSD 0.09 Å for all ATP atoms) shows that the triphosphate group of ATP in both structures shares a very similar extended conformation with the triphosphate of ATP equivalently coordinating with a Mg2+ ion. However, the three structured water molecules surrounding Mg2+ seen in the NgLeuRS structure are not observed in the former complex, suggesting that the NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol structure can be a better model of the pre-transition state of other class I aaRSs (Supplementary Fig.).
In comparison to the above structures, in the Leu-AMP bound complex the leucyl and AMP moieties make the same interactions as the single substrates alone. Relative to the pre-transition state, the release of PPi byproduct leads to the loss of the corresponding interactions with KMSKS loop and R178 of the CP1 hairpin. Consequently, the KMSKS loop is located in the same semi-open conformation as observed in the ATP-bound structure (Fig. and Supplementary Fig.).
Zooming out and focusing on the global changes, the transition between the different enzyme-bound states results in considerable domain rearrangements. Comparison of the NgLeuRS apo structure to that of the NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol ternary complex shows that the CP1 hairpin (residues 147–194) together with a structurally associated α-helix (residues 84–93) rotates 31° (Supplementary Fig.) toward the active site pushing the editing domain (residues 225–427) 29° away from the same region. The LS domain along with KMSKS loop (residues 586–638) are simultaneously rotated 38° inward forming a more compact active site (Fig.). This feature brings in conserved interactions with the triphosphate moiety of ATP and allows the carboxylate group of Leu to be positioned close enough for the subsequent reaction with the α-phosphate of ATP (Supplementary Fig.).
[Fig. 3] Structural comparison of different catalytic states of NgLeuRS.a Top, ribbon representation of the superposition of the ternary structure of NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol (magenta) with NgLeuRS (slate). Bottom, superposition of the ternary structure of NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol (magenta) with NgLeuRS·Leu-AMP (green). In both panels the aminoacylation domain, CP2, Zn2, ACBD and CTD of the NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol structure are additionally shown as a surface representation. b Top panels, the relative position of the CP1 hairpin (cartoon backbone representation) to the L550-containing α-helix (cartoon and stick representation) in different catalytic states. Ligands are shown as sticks representations while the Mg2+ ion is shown as a gray sphere. Bottom, zoom of the L550 region. 2Fo-Fc electron density maps countered at 1.5 σ (gray mesh). c Comparison of the Ramachandran plot of L550 (green square) and H551 (red circle) in NgLeuRS/NgLeuRS·Leu-AMP and NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol structures. d Polar interactions between E169 in the CP1 hairpin and surrounding protein residues in the NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol complex. H-bonds are shown as black dashed lines.
A peptide-plane flip drives global conformational changes
Intriguingly, careful examination of the different X-ray structures shows the presence of a peptide-plane flip between L550 and H551 in the NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol complex, that is absent in the apo and the intermediate bound structures (Fig.). These residues are found at the N-terminus of a structurally conserved α-helix (residues 549–564) that lines the substrate binding pocket, and the peptide-plane flip disrupts the secondary structure of these helix capping residues. This transition is clearly reflected in the Ramachandran plots, which show that L550 moves from a right-handed α-helix (αR) to β-sheet position, while H551 moves from αR region to an unfavorable zone upon formation of the pre-transition complex (Fig.).
The NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol structure suggests that the peptide-plane flip is induced by the closure of the CP1 hairpin in order to avoid the steric clash between the side chains of L550 and the CP1 hairpin E169. Compared to the individual substrate-bound states, the energetically unfavorable peptide-plane flip and closed conformation of the CP1 hairpin in the pre-transition state is stabilized by a salt bridge between R178 from the CP1 hairpin and the γ-phosphate of ATP and polar interactions between the side chain of E169 from the CP1 hairpin and the side chains of Y554 from L550-containing helix and W223 located at the C-terminus of the CP2 domain (Fig.). In addition, this peptide-plane flip is further accommodated by the movement of the priming loop 544GIEHA548 induced by substrate binding (Supplementary Fig.).
To understand the role of this peptide-plane flip on the global conformational changes and its effects on enzymatic catalysis, L550 was mutated to an alanine or glycine and the crystallization of both mutants was performed. These mutants gave rise to the same crystal form as the WT protein by seeding. However, while the NgLeuRS-L550A diffracted as well as WT protein crystals, the NgLeuRS-L550G showed slightly lower diffraction quality in the range of 2.7–3.3 Å (Supplementary Data). Similar to WT, soaking of the crystals with ATP and Leu resulted in the formation of Leu-AMP indicating that both mutants retain the capability to carry out the first step of the aminoacylation reaction (Fig., Supplementary Data and Supplementary Fig., b).
[Fig. 4] The effects of L550A and E169G mutants on NgLeuRS catalytic efficiency.a Schematics of assays for Leu activation (top) and Leu transfer (bottom). The former is performed by ATP-PPi exchange assay to measure the effects of L550A and E169G mutants on Leu activation while the latter was used to evaluate the second stage Leu transfer to tRNALeu. b Upper panels: the relative position of the CP1 hairpin to the L550A-containing α-helix in the NgLeuRS-L550A mutant in different trapped catalytically states. Lower panels: zoom of the L550A region. The CP1 hairpin remains in the closed conformation following Leu-AMP formation. 2Fo-Fc electron density maps (gray mesh) are all countered at 1.5 σ. c Relative position of CP1 hairpin to the L550-containing α-helix in NgLeuRS-E169G mutant. The CP1 hairpin of the E169G mutant remains in an open conformation during Leu activation. Omit maps (gray mesh) of ligands are countered at 3.5–5 σ. In b, c the CP1 hairpin is shown as cartoon backbone representations while the L550-containing α-helix is a mixed cartoon and stick representation. The ligands are shown as sticks while the catalytic magnesium ion is shown as a gray sphere.
Comparison of the captured apo and pre-transition states of both mutants show the same large domain movement, including closure of the active site by the CP1 hairpin and structurally associated α-helix (M84-N93), that were seen for the WT structures. Despite the occurrence of these substrate-induced changes, including the shift of the priming loop, no peptide-plane flip was observed in either mutant pre-transition state structure. This is likely the result of the absence of the clash between the side chains of E169 of the CP1 hairpin and A550/G550 although the side chain of E169 maintains the same interactions as seen for the WT pre-transition structure (Fig. and Supplementary Fig., b).
While the apo and pre-transition states globally look similar to the equivalent structures of the WT protein, for Leu-AMP bound structures of both NgLeuRS L550 mutants, the CP1 hairpin and associated α-helix (M84-N93) are found in the closed conformation (Supplementary Fig., b). These structures are superposable to the corresponding pre-transition state of both mutants, whereas the CP1 hairpin in the equivalent Leu-AMP bound structure for WT is opened and resembles the apo state (Figs. a and and Supplementary Fig., b). This suggests that when soaking ATP and Leu in WT crystals, the CP1 hairpin closes during the Leu activation reaction but then repositions once this reaction is completed. The failure of the CP1 hairpin to reopen in both mutants appears to be correlated with the absence of the peptide-plane flip. When compared to available structures of EcLeuRS in complex with tRNALeu mimicking the aminoacylation state[26] (PDB ID: 4AQ7), this closed state is incompatible with the entry of the acceptor arm of the cognate tRNALeu for the second step of aminoacylation and therefore may have an effect on the full aminoacylation reaction.
To further investigate the catalytic role of the L550 peptide-plane flip, the NgLeuRS-L550G mutant was tested for Leu-tRNALeu formation under steady-state (multi-turnover) conditions. A 25-fold decrease in the aminoacylation rate constant was observed (5.8 s−1 vs 0.26 s−1; Table) indicating an important role of the peptide-plane flip in LeuRS turnover. However, both catalytic steps: Leu activation and leucyl transfer to tRNALeu, may influence the rate of aminoacylation turnover. To localize the catalytic role of the peptide-plane flip, we independently tested amino acid activation by an ATP-PPi exchange assay, and the aminoacyl transfer step by single-turnover experiments (Fig. and Supplementary Fig.). In the first assay NgLeuRS-L550G showed only a twofold decrease in the kcat/KM for Leu activation relative to the WT protein (Table). Thus, even though the peptide-plane flip is not observed in the pre-transition structure of this mutant, the kinetic data clearly show that the absence of this backbone alteration does not impose a kinetic penalty during activation. Next, we isolated and separately tested the leucyl transfer step. The transient kinetic analysis unambiguously demonstrated a kinetic defect manifested as a 31-fold drop in the single-turnover rate constants for L550G mutant as compared with WT NgLeuRS (1.7 s−1 vs 52 s−1, Table). Therefore, our data unveil the peptide-plane flip as an essential part of the second step of the aminoacylation reaction, with a proposed role in re-opening of the synthetic site that accompanies Leu-AMP formation and is a prerequisite for productive positioning of the 3′-end of tRNALeu.
[Table 1] Kinetic parameters for wild type and mutant LeuRSs from N. gonorrhoeae and E. coli.
| Amino acid activation | Aminoacyl transfer | Aminoacylation | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enzyme | Leu | ATP | |||||
| kcat (s−1) | KM (µM) | kcat/KM (s−1 µM−1) | KM (mM) | kcat/KM (s−1 mM−1) | ktrans (s−1) | kobs (s−1) | |
| EcLeuRS WT | 66.7 ± 0.8 | 31.4 ± 2.9 | 2.12 | 3.3 ± 0.3 | 20.21 | 58 ± 5a | 4.9 ± 0.2 |
| EcLeuRS-M536G | 34.2 ± 1.7 | 52.3 ± 5.9 | 0.65 | 7.4 ± 0.8 | 4.62 | 15.0 ± 0.8 | 1.41 ± 0.03 |
| NgLeuRS-WT | 90 ± 1 | 14.3 ± 0.8 | 6.3 | 2.5 ± 0.2 | 36.0 | 52 ± 4 | 5.8 ± 0.4 |
| NgLeuRS-L550G | 54.2 ± 1.3 | 15.3 ± 1.0 | 3.54 | 2.9 ± 0.3 | 18.69 | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 0.26 ± 0.02 |
| NgLeuRS-E169G | 21.7 ± 1.3 | 76.6 ± 7.4 | 0.28 | 5.8 ± 0.8 | 3.74 | 78 ± 7 | 1.35 ± 0.08 |
Multi-genome analysis of bacterial LeuRSs shows high sequence and predicted secondary structure similarity, both within the L550-containing α-helix, and the surrounding active site residues (Supplementary Fig.). Interestingly, L550 is not fully conserved among all LeuRSs and is substituted by a methionine residue in some enzymes (e.g. Escherichia coli LeuRS). EcLeuRS has been well characterized[18],[19],[43] and the overall full-length sequence identity and similarity between NgLeuRS and EcLeuRS are 57 and 71%, respectively[10]. To see if M536 in EcLeuRS has the same role as L550 in NgLeuRS, EcLeuRS-M536G was produced and kinetically tested as described above. The effect of M536G mutation in EcLeuRS parallels the effect of L550G mutation in NgLeuRS showing threefold defect in kcat/KM during the activation step that is accompanied by a fourfold decrease in the rate of the leucyl transfer step (Table and Supplementary Fig.). Overall (two-step) aminoacylation is decreased by threefold (Table). Taken together, the M536G mutation in EcLeuRS produced similar but less disruptive effects as compared with L550G in NgLeuRS, suggesting that the use of the peptide-plane flip for catalysis could be shared among other bacterial LeuRSs (Table). These combined results demonstrate that the peptide-plane flip of L550 drives the re-opening of the CP1 hairpin upon Leu-AMP formation which is essential for the subsequent entry of the 3′-end of tRNALeu. Therefore, this flip appears to act as a catalytic-step-dependent trigger that promotes the acyl transfer reaction.
The CP1 hairpin swing is mediated by L550-E169 partnership
As the substrate-induced peptide-plane flip results from the clash with the incoming side chain of E169 (Fig.), we next generated a NgLeuRS-E169G mutant to investigate its corresponding effects on aminoacylation. The mutant was readily expressed and crystallized, and high-resolution structures of the NgLeuRS-E169G apo, and soaked NgLeuRS-E169G·ATP·leucinol and NgLeuRS-E169G·Leu-AMP were determined (Supplementary Data). These three structures can be fully overlaid with each other (and WT apo) with an all-atom RMSD of 0.186 Å (Supplementary Fig.) indicating no obvious conformational changes between apo, pre-transition and intermediate states which strongly contrasts with what was observed for the WT enzyme. This is reflected in the fact that in all states the CP1 hairpin remains in the open conformation (Fig.). In the case of NgLeuRS-E169G·ATP·leucinol complex this results in the loss of the essential salt bridge between the side chain of R178 and γ-phosphate group of substrate ATP (Figs. and). Consequently, the triphosphate group of ATP is in a flexible non-productive conformation as implied by its high crystallographic B-factors compared to the equivalent WT complex. In particular, the carboxylate oxygen atom of Leu is incapable of reacting with the α-phosphate of ATP residing at a distance of 3.7 Å. However, when the crystal is soaked with Leu and ATP, the intermediate is still formed as evidenced by the electron density map (Fig.). This suggests that despite the high mobility of triphosphate group of ATP, the mutant enzyme is still able to reach the productive conformation and complete the reaction during the two hours of soaking of the crystals with ATP and Leu at concentrations that exceed their respective Km values.
The inability of the bound l-leucinol and ATP to induce closure of the CP1 hairpin in the E169G mutant, despite the removal of the L550 clashing side chain, suggests that the substrates alone cannot promote the closed active site conformation. The interactions mediated by E169 with Y554 and W223 (Fig.) are thus additionally required to stabilize the closed CP1 hairpin position in the pre-transition state to promote the formation of Leu-AMP. In line with this model, independently tested amino acid activation demonstrated that substitution of E169 with a glycine results in up to fivefold increase in KM (Leu) and fourfold decrease in kcat yielding the 24-fold less efficient enzyme in Leu activation relative to the WT protein (Table and Supplementary Fig.). Thus, opposite to the L550G mutant which captures the “closed conformation” and displays a defect in the aminoacyl transfer step, mutation at the CP1 hairpin which stabilizes the “open conformation” affects only the activation step.
Discussion
In this work, we have revealed five NgLeuRS structures representing each enzymatic state during Leu activation. In addition to these, crystal structures mimicking the aminoacylation state with the 3′-end of tRNALeu in the synthetic site have been reported for EcLeuRS[26] (PDB ID: 4AQ7) and Pyrococcus horikoshii LeuRS[44] (PDB ID: 1WZ2), and structures representing the post-transfer editing conformation with the 3′-end of tRNALeu in the editing site have been described for E. coli and Thermus thermophilus LeuRSs[26],[27]. Since N. gonorrhoeae LeuRS shows a high sequence and structural similarity with E. coli and T. thermophilus orthologues, the tRNALeu bound LeuRS structures from the latter two bacterial species provide complementary mechanistic information allowing us to propose a full structural description of the whole catalytic cycle of NgLeuRS (Fig.).
[Fig. 5] The proposed structural dynamics during the catalytic cycle of NgLeuRS.Color coding for each structural domain is shown the same as Fig. with Leu represented as a yellow triangle, the adenosine and phosphate groups are dark blue and tRNALeu is colored in gray. The C-terminal domain is highly dynamic and poorly ordered before tRNALeu binding. The conformational state of the CP1 hairpin, the KMSKS loop and associated LS domain, and the peptide plane of L550 are shown in the left corner boxes for each catalytic step. White represents an open conformation or a regular peptide plane, while the black box represents a closed state or flipped peptide plane, and gray represents a semi-open conformation.
In the apo state, the synthetic site of NgLeuRS is fully open allowing the entry of all substrates. In the amino acid activation step, the association of both Leu and ATP results in a dramatic compaction of this site by inducing protein rearrangements at three distinct faces of the pre-transition state structure. These movements involve the CP1 hairpin and associated α-helix (M84-N93) that are in proximity of the Y43 capped Leu binding site, the conserved KMSKS loop and LS domain close to the adenine binding site, and the priming loop that borders the ribose (Fig. and Supplementary Fig.). Combined, these changes result in a greater than 60% reduction of the active site volume that protects and stabilizes the pre-transition state and excludes the entry of the acceptor stem of tRNALeu. In this high complementarity state, the carboxylate oxygen atom of Leu is positioned for nucleophilic attack on the α-phosphate of ATP. Crucially, the initial substrate-induced macroscopic rearrangements lead to a peptide-plane flip of L550, caused by the steric occlusion of the side chain of this residue by that of E169, the latter being present on the zinc knuckle of the incoming CP1 hairpin. Our biochemical data show that in the absence of steric constraints the peptide-plane flip is not necessary for the amino acid activation. Instead, the flip back to its favored position once the intermediate is formed, enables the aminoacyl transfer step by promoting the repositioning of the CP1 hairpin. Additionally, formation of the intermediate results in a relaxation of the KMSKS loop leading to a semi-open active site (Supplementary Fig.). The combined re-opening of the active site permits the release of the PPi byproduct and allows the entry of the acceptor arm of the cognate tRNALeu.
During Leu activation, our crystal structures show an anti-parallel movement of the editing domain relative to that of the CP1 hairpin. The former has to move out of the way to accommodate the substrate-induced closure of the latter. Based on the structure of EcLeuRS in complex with tRNALeu in the aminoacylation state[26] (PDB ID: 4AQ7), we propose that after the intermediate is formed, the CP1 hairpin is repositioned as a result of the L550 peptide-plane flip and the editing domain can move toward the active site bringing in the 3′-end of tRNALeu (Fig.). The side chain of Y43, which is stacked on the leucyl moiety of Leu-AMP, switches to an open conformation that provides the space for the binding and reaction with the 3′-terminal adenosine of tRNALeu. The KMSKS loop and connected LS domain fully close again to stabilize the tRNALeu positioning. In addition, a loop region of the editing domain (residues G297-M307 in NgLeuRS) stacks against the CCA tail of tRNALeu acceptor arm. A conserved glutamate (E292 in EcLeuRS corresponding to E301 in NgLeuRS) in this loop region forms an essential salt bridge with an invariant arginine (R416 in EcLeuRS and R428 in NgLeuRS) in the C-terminus of the editing domain that further stabilizes the 3′-end of tRNALeu in the synthetic site[26],[45]. Once this complex is formed, the nucleophilic reaction is proposed to proceed by assistance of a Mg2+ co-factor, the α-amino group of Leu and two conserved amino acid residues (D80 and E532 in EcLeuRS corresponding to D80 and E546 in NgLeuRS)[26],[46]. In this step, the essential salt bridge described above constrains the 3′-end of tRNALeu in the synthetic site and partitions the aminoacylation and post-transfer editing processes.
To ensure fidelity following Leu-tRNALeu formation, the charged 3′-end of tRNALeu is translocated to the editing domain, where mischarged products are hydrolyzed[21],[47],[48]. Previously, it was proposed that positioning of the tRNALeu in the editing conformation is promoted by the reclosure of the CP1 hairpin and movement of KMSKS associated LS domain[26],[27]. However, our structures of the initial step of aminoacylation show that the movement of the CP1 hairpin is highly dependent on the binding of Leu and ATP (Fig. and Supplementary Fig.). The presented structures rather point to a model where the translocation of the charged tRNALeu to the editing site could be the result of movements of the priming and KMSKS loops (Fig.). Upon leucyl transfer to tRNALeu, the loss of synthetic site interactions with the aminoacyl moiety and the release of AMP lead to the return of the priming loop to its initial apo conformation (Fig.). Superposition of our NgLeuRS apo structure with that of the homologous E. coli enzyme bound to tRNALeu (PDB ID: 4AQ7) suggests that the repositioning of the priming loop would lead to a steric clash with the 3′-end of tRNALeu forcing the acceptor arm of this large substrate out of the synthetic site (Supplementary Fig.). Furthermore, a loss of substrate interactions with the KMSKS loop would result in repositioning of this region and the structurally associated tRNALeu binding LS domain. Together these changes would result in expulsion of the acceptor arm of the tRNALeu from the synthetic site allowing it to move toward the editing site of the editing domain.
Once formed, the release of the charged tRNA product has been shown to limit the overall rate of two-step aminoacylation in class I aaRSs[49]. This observation is further supported by the kinetic analysis data of NgLeuRS in this work (Table). Interestingly, the NgLeuRS mutants mimic the WT enzymes in having rate-limiting product release (Table). Accordingly, the observed drop in mutants’ aminoacylation rates (for example 1.35 s−1 vs 5.8 s−1 for E169G and WT) additionally suggests that the introduced mutations also slow down the product release step. This in turn indicates that the mobility of CP1 hairpin influenced by both L550 and E169 appears to be important for the disassociation of the final product. Detailed studies of IleRS, an enzyme belonging to the same aaRS subclass as LeuRS have demonstrated that the rebinding of Ile and ATP, or formation of the catalytic cycle intermediate Ile-AMP, occurs first and promotes the release of Ile-tRNAIle [50]–[52]. Similarly, we hypothesize that LeuRS may also start the next cycle of Leu activation leading to closure of the CP1 hairpin which promotes the dissociation of Leu-tRNALeu (Fig.).
Taken together, the repositioning of the substrate-induced L550 peptide-plane flip drives the re-opening of CP1 hairpin and promotes the subsequent aminoacylation reaction. This peptide-plane flip therefore functions as a temporal marker, triggering the switch between an active site conformation necessary for Leu activation, to that required for the subsequent aminoacyl transfer step. Additionally, the triggered movement of the CP1 hairpin not only plays an essential role in aminoacylation but also is important in the final product release. Thus, this subtle backbone alteration, and the correlated large-scale domain motions it induces, are important in modulating the multi-step NgLeuRS catalysis. As the associated components are conserved amongst bacterial LeuRS homologs the critical role of this peptide-plane flip is likely shared (Supplementary Fig. and Table).
A systematic examination of peptide-plane flips in available crystal structures has identified that most are located in mobile loop regions, and typically occur for glycine residues[53]. In contrast, the peptide-plane flip of L550 observed in the pre-transition state structure of NgLeuRS is quite exceptional, being highly energetically unfavorable because of the distortion of the structurally conserved secondary structure of the α-helix where this residue resides (Fig.). Peptide-plane flips are known to have an important role during protein folding but only an extremely limited number of examples have been observed to modulate enzymatic activity. A peptide-plane flip in ubiquitin allosterically affects the switch of expansion and contraction of the entire protein which in turn modulates its binding to a ubiquitin-specific protease, although not being directly involved in the interface with the latter[54]. Another example can be found in flavodoxins, where a peptide-plane flip has been observed between oxidized and reduced states and is important for stabilization of the semiquinone and modulating redox potential[55]. In both examples the associated peptide-plane flip involves a residue pair where one of the amino acids is a glycine. The use of this more flexible residue is in stark contrast to the large side chains of L550-H551 in NgLeuRS, that must accommodate a transition to the unfavorable region of the Ramachandran plot. This transition though is crucial in defining the properties of this active site switch.
In summary, our structural characterization of N. gonorrhoeae LeuRS provides a high-resolution structural framework providing insight into the amino acid activation mechanism of class Ia aaRSs. This study demonstrates that the activation of Leu with ATP by LeuRS involves a cycle of dramatic conformational changes, involving multiple domains, that parallels motions seen during post-transfer editing[26]. The structures, supported by biochemical studies, point to the unique role of a peptide-plane flip in acting as a switch that partitions the first two catalytic steps of this enzyme. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first example of a partitioning mechanism for a member of the adenylate-forming enzyme superfamily. It highlights how, at the molecular level, an enzyme uses the same synthetic site for distinct catalytic stages, while transitioning between these steps in a controlled manner.
Methods
Preparation of N. gonorrhoeae and E. coli LeuRSs
The encoding sequence of full-length N. gonorrhoeae LeuRS was amplified by a one-step PCR from isolated genomic DNA. The reaction was conducted by using the high-fidelity Q5 DNA polymerase (New England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA, USA) with the forward primer 5′-gcgaacagattggtggtggtATGCAAGAACATTACCAGCCCG-3′ and the reverse primer 5′-ttgttagcagaagcttaTTAGACGACGATGTTCACCAGT-3′. The small-caps bases represent the adapter sequence complementary to plasmid cloning site, while the large-cap bases are the annealing sequences and the underscored triplet correspond to a non-native glycine residue, which was inserted before the start codon of NgLeuRS to facilitate the cleavage of the SUMO tag during purification. The PCR product was visualized and separated by an agarose gel, followed by gel extraction and in-fusion ligation with the linearized pETRUK vector containing an N-terminal pI enhanced SUMO tag as described in previous publication[37]. The recombinant plasmid pETRUK-NgLeuRS was first propagated in E. coli NEB5α and then verified through DNA sequencing (LGC genomics, Berlin, Germany). Three mutant constructs of pETRUK-NgLeuRS-L550A, pETRUK-NgLeuRS-L550G and pETRUK-NgLeuRS-E169G were generated by site-directed mutagenesis. Briefly, forward and reverse primers were designed with around 16 base pairs (bp) overlap containing the mutation. These primers were used for PCR-based amplification using the pETRUK-NgLeuRS plasmid as a template. Following DpnI treatment to digest the template, the PCR product was further separated by DNA electrophoresis. Purified PCR products were then directly transformed into E. coli NEB5α. The mutant genes were sequenced to confirm they contained only the desired single-site mutations.
The NgLeuRS and its corresponding mutants were expressed and purified using an identical protocol as described in our prior study[56]. The NgLeuRS construct was transformed into E. coli Rosetta 2 (DE3) pLysS expression host. A single colony was inoculated into 2 mL LB medium supplemented with 100 μg/mL ampicillin and 30 μg/mL chloramphenicol and grown at 37 °C with 250 rpm for 8 h. Then the pre-culture was inoculated into 2 L ZYP-5052 auto-induction medium[57] with addition of a final concentration of 1 mM ZnSO4 (Sigma Aldrich, Burlington, USA) and 1 mL of antifoam SE-15 (Sigma Aldrich, Burlington, USA). The culture was grown overnight at 24 °C and when an OD600nm of 4.0 was reached, the temperature was decreased to 18 °C. After another 24 h of growth, cells were harvested by centrifugation at 7500 × g and 4 °C and the resulting cell pellets were resuspend in cation exchange buffer A (CEXA) containing 25 mM HEPES-NaOH pH 8, 200 mM NaCl, 5 mM β-mercaptoethanol (β-ME) and frozen at −80 °C.
For protein purification, cell lysis was initiated by thawing the cell pellet along with further dilution with CEXA in a final 8:1 v/w (CEXA: weight of pellet) ratio and the addition of 100 U cryonase cold-active nuclease (Takara, Shiga, Japan) and 10 mM MgCl2. Cells were lysed by sonication on ice and then clarified by centrifugation at 18,000 × g at 4 °C for 30 min. The clarified supernatant was loaded onto a 5 mL Hitrap SP HP column (Cytiva, Marlborough, MA, USA). SUMO tag fused NgLeuRS protein bound onto the column and was eluted by applying a linear gradient 0–50% cation exchange buffer B (CEXB) comprising of 25 mM HEPES-NaOH pH 8, 1000 mM NaCl, 5 mM β-ME. The appropriate protein fractions were pooled, and the SUMO tag was cleaved with addition of recombinant SUMO hydrolase in a 1:250 (mass/mass) ratio. Due to the presence of the additional glycine residue in front of the starting residue of target protein, the SUMO tag was more flexible and easily cleaved by 10 min incubation on ice. The cleaved protein was dialyzed against 1 L buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl pH 7, 10% w/v glycerol and 5 mM β-ME) overnight at 4 °C and further dialyzed in the fresh buffer for another 2 h to remove all salt. Then the protein was loaded onto a HiTrap SP HP column to subtract the SUMO tag, SUMO hydrolase and other contaminants followed by applying the flowthrough onto an anion exchange Hitrap Q HP column (Cytiva, Marlborough, MA, USA). The captured protein was eluted from the anion exchanged using a 0–40% linear gradient of AEXB buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl pH 7, 1 M NaCl and 5 mM β-ME) over 20 column volumes. After collecting the fractions from anion exchange chromatography, the protein was further concentrated to 30 mg/mL using a 15 mL spin concentrator (10 kDa molecular weight cut-off, Millipore, Burlington, MA, USA) by centrifugation at 4 °C, 4000 rpm and then flash frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored in −80 °C.
The E. coli LeuRS mutant (pETRUK-EcLeuRS-M536G) was produced using the similar quick-change mutagenesis protocol as described above by utilizing the previously reported pETRUK-EcLeuRS[37] construct as the PCR template. The expression and purification of the E. coli LeuRS variant was carried out as for wild-type E. coli LeuRS as discussed in our previous work[37],[58].
Crystallization of wild-type and mutant NgLeuRSs
Prior to crystallization the wild-type and NgLeuRS mutants were further purified by size exclusion chromatography on a Superdex 200 column (Cytiva, Marlborough, MA, USA) equilibrated in 10 mM Tris-HCl pH 7, 100 mM NaCl, 2.5 mM β-ME. Pooled fractions were concentrated to 10 mg/mL using a microcentrifuge concentrator. For all NgLeuRS variants high quality diffracting crystals were obtained by hanging drop vapor diffusion, in a iterative process using a previously described crystallization condition with the assistance of seeding[37]. Briefly, the SEC purified wild type, E169G and L550G NgLeuRS proteins were mixed with 100 mM Bis-tris propane-HCl pH 8.5, 100 mM MgCl2, 20% (w/v) PEG 3350 and a crystal seed stock in a 0.75:1.0:0.25 (v/v/v) ratio. The seed stock was prepared from crystals of the same construct generated in early rounds of crystallization, that were crushed and diluted in the same precipitant solution. For the NgLeuRS-L550A construct the best crystals were obtained when the pH of the precipitant solution was adjusted to 100 mM Bis-tris propane-HCl pH 8.0, 100 mM MgCl2, 20% (w/v) PEG 3350.
The various NgLeuRS complexes were obtained by transferring apo crystals to a new solution containing the appropriate substrate. NgLeuRS·Leu was obtained by soaking suitable crystals with 10 mM Leu diluted in the cryo-condition consisting of 100 mM Bis-tris propane-HCl pH 8.5, 100 mM MgCl2, 20% (w/v) PEG 3350, 22% (v/v) ethylene glycol; NgLeuRS·ATP·leucinol was obtained by soaking suitable crystals with 5 mM l-leucinol and 5 mM ATP simultaneously in the cryo-condition; NgLeuRS·ATP conformation 1 was obtained by soaking suitable crystals with 10 mM ATP whereas NgLeuRS·ATP conformation 2 was obtained by co-crystallizing NgLeuRS with 10 mM ATP using the above conditions. NgLeuRS·Leu-AMP was obtained by soaking suitable crystals with 5 mM Leu and 5 mM ATP simultaneously in the cryo-condition.
The substrate and intermediate bound complexes of the NgLeuRS-L550G and E169G mutants were also obtained by soaking suitable crystals of the appropriate mutant protein. For all three mutants the ATP·leucinol complex was generated by transferring crystals to a solution of 5 mM ATP and 5 mM l-leucinol diluted in 100 mM Bis-tris propane-HCl pH 8.5, 100 mM MgCl2, 20% (w/v) PEG 3350, 22% (v/v) ethylene glycol. The Leu-AMP complex was achieved by soaking crystals with 5 mM ATP and 5 mM Leu diluted in the same cryo-protection solution. For the NgLeuRS-L550A crystals the ligand-bound complexes were generated by soaking in solutions with the same concentrations of substrate diluted in the lower pH 100 mM Bis-tris propane-HCl pH 8.0, 100 mM MgCl2, 20% (w/v) PEG 3350, 22% (v/v) ethylene glycol cryo-protection. All crystals were soaked for 2 h with the appropriate substrate and subsequently caught in a mounted cryo-loop and flash cooled in liquid nitrogen.
Data collection and structure determination
Crystal diffraction data were collected at 100 K on different beamlines at the synchrotron facilities ESRF (Grenoble, France) and Soleil (Paris, France) using a standard data collection strategy. All the data were processed using the autoPROC package[59]. The structures of NgLeuRS complexes in the different catalytic states were initially solved by molecular replacement using Phaser[60] employing the apoenzyme structure (the protein chain plus a zinc ion) from our previously published structure of the same enzyme bound to an intermediate analog[37]. Iterative improvement of the structural models was carried out by multiple rounds of manual correction in Coot[61] and refinement in Phenix.refine[62]. After several rounds of refinement, TLS modeling using groups automatically defined by the Phenix package was applied, and in the final refinement step target weights for stereochemical restraints were automatically optimized. The quality of the final models was validated with wwPDB validation server (https://validate-rcsb-2.wwpdb.org/). Data collection, processing and refinement statistics are summarized in Supplementary Data.
All the molecular graphics were generated, and structural comparisons were performed in Pymol (version 2.0.4) and their protein-ligand interactions were analyzed in Schrödinger (release 2021-2).
Standard kinetic methodology
[32P]-tRNALeu was prepared as described previously[18],[19],[63]. The 3′-terminal adenosine of purified Ec-tRNALeu was labeled using tRNA nucleotidyltransferase to exchange A76 of tRNALeu with [α-32P]-ATP. Acceptor activity after labeling was 69 ± 2%, and all rate constants were corrected by this factor to account for the proportion of the functional [32P]-tRNALeu. Ec-tRNALeu was renatured before use by incubation for 3 min at 80 °C, following addition of pre-heated MgCl2 in a final concentration of 10 mM and slowly cooling to ambient temperature.
Amino acid activation was assayed by ATP-PPi exchange, in 100 mM HEPES-KOH, pH 7.5, 30 mM MgCl2, 150 mM KCl, 0.1 mg/mL bovine serum albumin (BSA), 5 mM dithiothreitol (DTT) and 1 mM [32P]-PPi (0.2–0.4 Ci/mol) using 10–20 nM enzyme at 37 °C. For determining steady-state kinetic parameters, Leu was present at 1 mM and the concentration of ATP was varied between 0.1 × KM and 5−10 × KM, or ATP was present at 25 mM and the concentration of Leu was varied between 0.1 × KM and 10 × KM. Reactions were started by addition of substrate and stopped in quench solution (750 mM NaOAc pH 4.5 and 0.1 % w/v SDS). Separation of [32P]-ATP and [32P]-PPi was performed by thin-layer chromatography (TLC) in buffer containing 750 mM KH2PO4 pH 3.5 and 4 M urea. Quantization was performed by phosphorimaging using Typhoon Phosphorimager (GE Healthcare) and quantified using ImageQuant as described[64]. Kinetic parameters (KM and kcat) were determined by fitting the data directly to the Michaelis-Menten equation using GraphPad Prism (version 6.0).
The isolated transfer step was assayed in 100 mM HEPES-KOH, pH 7.5, 10 mM MgCl2, 150 mM KCl, 0.1 mg/mL BSA, 5 mM DTT, 8 mM ATP, 0.008 U/µL inorganic pyrophosphatase, 5 mM Leu, 1 µM [32P]-tRNALeu, 10–20 µM enzyme at 37 °C. The LeuRS:Leu-AMP complex was preformed in situ by incubating enzyme (20–40 µM) with ATP and Leu for 5 min at 37 °C and mixed with the equal volume of renatured [32P]-tRNALeu (2 µM) using rapid chemical quench instrument (RQF3, KinTek Corp). The LeuRS·Leu-AMP to tRNA ratio higher than one ensures single-turnover conditions. The reaction mixtures were quenched in 600 mM NaOAc, pH 4.5 and 0.1 % (w/v) SDS. [32P]-tRNALeu was further hydrolyzed with ≥ 0.01 U/µL P1 nuclease in 300 mM NaOAc pH 5.0 and 0.15 mM ZnCl2 for 1 h at room temperature to degrade the terminal adenosine of tRNA. Aminoacylated [32P]-AMP was separated from [32P]-AMP by TLC[65] in 100 mM NaOAc and 5% (v/v) HOAc. Kinetic parameter (ktrans) was determined by fitting the data to a single exponential equation Y = Y0 + A × e−ktrans × t, where Y0 is the y intercept, A is the amplitude, ktrans is the apparent transfer rate constant, and t is the time.
Aminoacylation assays of the EcLeuRS and NgLeuRS variants were performed at 37 °C in reaction buffer containing 100 mM HEPES-KOH pH 7.5, 150 mM KCl, 20 mM MgCl2, 1 mM DTT, 8 mM ATP, 5 mM Leu, 0.1 mg/mL BSA, 0.004 U/µL inorganic pyrophosphatase, up to 40 µM active [32P]-tRNALeu, 10 nM enzyme. Steady-state (multi-turnover) conditions were ensured by surplus of substrates over the enzyme. In this assay two-step aminoacylation reaction comprising both the activation and the transfer step is followed. Reactions were started by addition of Leu and stopped in quench solution (750 mM NaOAc pH 4.5, 0.1% w/v SDS). The quenched reactions were further treated with P1 nuclease and separated by TLC. Apparent rate constant (kobs) was calculated from the slope of product formation in time divided by the enzyme concentration. Since saturating concentrations of all substrates were used, apparent rate constant closely resembles kcat.
Statistics and reproducibility
Analysis of the data was performed using GraphPad Prism version 6.0 (San Diego, CA, USA). All values are presented as the means ± standard error of the means. Experiments were performed in triplicates.
Reporting summary
Further information on research design is available in the linked to this article.
Supplementary information
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Research Fund Flanders [Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, G077814N to S.V.S. and A.V.A., G0A4616N to S.D.W. and A.V.A.], the KU Leuven Research Fund [3M14022 to S.D.W. and A.V.A.], Croatian Science Foundation [Grant IP-2016-06-6272 to I.G.-S.] and the CSC scholarship to L.P. We further greatly appreciate the support from the beamline scientists at the PROXIMA 1 and PROXIMA 2 (Soleil Synchrotron, France), and ID23-1 and MASSIF-3 (ESRF, France) beamlines.
Author contributions
L.P. and S.D.W. conceived the project and designed most of the experiments. L.P. cloned, expressed and purified all NgLeuRS and EcLeuRS variants for crystallization and biochemical studies. L.P produced and harvested the different NgLeuRS crystal complexes, collected the X-ray diffraction datasets, determined the structures and performed the bioinformatic analyses with the assistance of S.D.W. All efforts by L.P. were guided by S.D.W, S.V.S and A.V.A. V.Z. and I.G.-S. designed and performed enzymatic kinetic studies of the various LeuRS mutants and analyzed and interpreted the data. L.P. and S.D.W. wrote the manuscript with contributions from V.Z. and I.G.-S. All authors discussed the results and were involved in editing of the final version of the manuscript.
Peer review
Peer review information
Communications Biology thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary handling editor: Gene Chong. are available.
Data availability
Atomic coordinates and structure factors have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank (PDB) with the following accession codes: 7NU4 (NgLeuRS), 7NU5 (NgLeuRS in complex Leu), 7NU6 (NgLeuRS in complex with ATP in conformation 1), 7NU7 (NgLeuRS in complex with ATP in conformation 2), 7NU8 (NgLeuRS in complex with Leu-AMP), 7NU9 (NgLeuRS in complex with ATP and l-leucinol), 7NTY (NgLeuRS-L550A), 7NTZ (NgLeuRS-L550A in complex with Leu-AMP), 7NU0 (NgLeuRS-L550A in complex with ATP and l-leucinol), 7NUA (NgLeuRS-L550G), 7NUB (NgLeuRS-L550G in complex with Leu-AMP), 7NUC (NgLeuRS-L550G in complex with ATP and l-leucinol), 7NU1 (NgLeuRS-E169G), 7NU2 (NgLeuRS-E169G in complex with Leu-AMP), 7NU3 (NgLeuRS-E169G in complex with ATP and l-leucinol). The data used for the generation of the plots in Supplementary Fig., from which the enzymatic kinetic parameters presented in Table were determined, are provided in the Supplementary Data file.
Competing interests
L.P., V.Z., S.V.S., A.V.A., and I.G.-S. declare no competing interests. S.D.W. is an employee of Pledge Therapeutics B.V. and therefore declares a potential competing interest.
Footnotes
Contributor Information
Arthur Van Aerschot, Email: arthur.vanaerschot@kuleuven.be.
Ita Gruic-Sovulj, Email: gruic@chem.pmf.hr.
Stephen D. Weeks, Email: sweeks@pledge-tx.com
Supplementary information
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s42003-022-03825-8.
References
Associated Data
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
Atomic coordinates and structure factors have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank (PDB) with the following accession codes: 7NU4 (NgLeuRS), 7NU5 (NgLeuRS in complex Leu), 7NU6 (NgLeuRS in complex with ATP in conformation 1), 7NU7 (NgLeuRS in complex with ATP in conformation 2), 7NU8 (NgLeuRS in complex with Leu-AMP), 7NU9 (NgLeuRS in complex with ATP and l-leucinol), 7NTY (NgLeuRS-L550A), 7NTZ (NgLeuRS-L550A in complex with Leu-AMP), 7NU0 (NgLeuRS-L550A in complex with ATP and l-leucinol), 7NUA (NgLeuRS-L550G), 7NUB (NgLeuRS-L550G in complex with Leu-AMP), 7NUC (NgLeuRS-L550G in complex with ATP and l-leucinol), 7NU1 (NgLeuRS-E169G), 7NU2 (NgLeuRS-E169G in complex with Leu-AMP), 7NU3 (NgLeuRS-E169G in complex with ATP and l-leucinol). The data used for the generation of the plots in Supplementary Fig., from which the enzymatic kinetic parameters presented in Table were determined, are provided in the Supplementary Data file.