Difference between revisions of "Team:Bielefeld-CeBiTec/Project/translational system/translation mechanism"
Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
− | The first step of the two-step reaction is the formation of an aminoacylated intermediate by the reaction of the amino acid and ATP. This is possible through the Rossmann fold | + | The first step of the two-step reaction is the formation of an aminoacylated intermediate by the reaction of the amino acid and ATP. This is possible through the Rossmann fold, a domain consiting of a six-stranded parallel β-sheet with connecting helices. The Rossmann fold acts analog to the active site of hydrogenases and is responsible for binding ATP, the amino acid, and the 3’-terminus of the tRNA. |
</article> | </article> | ||
Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
The second step is the nucleophilic attack of the carbonyl group of the anhydride from either the 2’-OH or the 3’-OH group on the 3’-terminus of the tRNA. This leads to the delivery of the amino acid to the tRNA. | The second step is the nucleophilic attack of the carbonyl group of the anhydride from either the 2’-OH or the 3’-OH group on the 3’-terminus of the tRNA. This leads to the delivery of the amino acid to the tRNA. | ||
− | The synthetase can either recognize directly a base specific functional group or the enzyme | + | The synthetase can either recognize directly a base specific functional group or the enzyme binds directly to the nonspecific portions of the tRNA. Both readouts function within the context of mutual induced fit, so conformational changes in both interaction partners occur while forming a catalytic complex. |
− | The recognition requires determinants in the tRNA which are often located in the acceptor stem and the anticodon loop, but the identity signal can be in the tertiary core region as well (Krebs<i> et al.</i></i>, 2014). | + | The recognition requires determinants in the tRNA which are often located in the acceptor stem and the anticodon loop, but the identity signal can be located in the tertiary core region as well (Krebs<i> et al.</i></i>, 2014). |
aaRS can be categorized into two classes, based on mutually exclusive sets of sequence motifs and properties of structural domains. The synthetases of these two classes are functionally different. While the class I synthetases aminoacylate tRNAs at the 2’-OH position of A76, the class II synthetases aminoacylate tRNAs at the 3’-OH position. Nevertheless, the position of the initial aminoacylation is related to the binding orientation of the tRNA to the enzyme. | aaRS can be categorized into two classes, based on mutually exclusive sets of sequence motifs and properties of structural domains. The synthetases of these two classes are functionally different. While the class I synthetases aminoacylate tRNAs at the 2’-OH position of A76, the class II synthetases aminoacylate tRNAs at the 3’-OH position. Nevertheless, the position of the initial aminoacylation is related to the binding orientation of the tRNA to the enzyme. | ||
Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
<div class="contentline"> | <div class="contentline"> | ||
<div class="half left"> | <div class="half left"> | ||
− | The class I synthetases are monomeric synthetases and feature all structurally similar active site Rossmann fold domains in the region of the N- | + | The class I synthetases are monomeric synthetases and feature all structurally similar active site Rossmann fold domains in the region of the N-terminus. Beside this region, there are no significant structural or sequence similarities among the class I enzymes. |
There is an acceptor binding site inserted into the Rossmann-fold domain at a common location which binds the single stranded terminal end of the tRNA, while its C-terminal domain binds in the minor groove of the L-shaped tRNA and the anticodon arm. That is the point for the discrimination among the different tRNAs. The binding requires the formation of a hairpin structure of the single stranded 3’-terminus with the amino acid and the ATP in the active site (Chang<i> et al.</i></i>, 2010, Krebs<i> et al.</i></i>, 2014). | There is an acceptor binding site inserted into the Rossmann-fold domain at a common location which binds the single stranded terminal end of the tRNA, while its C-terminal domain binds in the minor groove of the L-shaped tRNA and the anticodon arm. That is the point for the discrimination among the different tRNAs. The binding requires the formation of a hairpin structure of the single stranded 3’-terminus with the amino acid and the ATP in the active site (Chang<i> et al.</i></i>, 2010, Krebs<i> et al.</i></i>, 2014). | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
<article> | <article> | ||
− | The class II synthetases build a quaternary structure, which in general consists of dimers. They own a structurally conserved active side domain, located towards the C-terminal end of the synthetase. This domain | + | The class II synthetases build a quaternary structure, which in general consists of dimers. They own a structurally conserved active side domain, located towards the C-terminal end of the synthetase. This domain ofcomprises antiparallel β-sheed folds, flanked by α-helices, which is dissimilar to the Rossmann-fold (see class I synthetase) (Wang<i> et al.</i></i>, 2000). In this domain, there are three conserved short sequences. One of these sequences is important for the multimerization and the other two are essential for the enzymatic activity. The class II synthetases bind to the major groove side of the tRNA acceptor stem, whereby unlike the class I synthetases no hairpin structure of the single stranded 3’-terminus into the active site is required (Chang<i> et al.</i></i>, 2010, Krebs<i> et al.</i></i>, 2014). |
</article> | </article> |
Revision as of 18:42, 1 November 2017
Translational Mechanism
Short Summary
The incorporation of non-canonical amino acids (ncAAs) is only possible if the translational mechanism are adapted. One possible ways to incorporate the ncAAs are the repurposing of codons like the amber stop or rarely used leucine codons, another way would be the incorporation of an unnatural base into the DNA to get new codons. For both, an orthogonal tRNA/aminoacyl-synthetase is necessary, which could charge the ncAA to the tRNA.
Adaption of the Translational Mechanism to Incorporate Non-canonical Amino Acids
By the incorporation of the unnatural base pairs (UBP), the translational system enables the recognition of the new bases and the interaction of a matching tRNA/synthetase pair. That is the starting point for the engineering the of an orthogonal tRNA/synthetase pair for the translational incorporation of certain non-canonical amino acids (ncAA). In the process of protein biosynthesis, the DNA is first transcribed into mRNA and in the next step into amino acid polypeptides. Therefore, the ribosome binds on a certain position for the mRNA and supports the binding of the interaction for the mRNA and the matching amino acyl tRNA. The ribosome contains three binding sites. The tRNA first binds in the A site and the peptidyl tRNA is bound in the P-site. The polypeptide is then transferred from the peptidyl tRNA in the P-site to the aminoacyl-tRNA in the A-site. In the process of translocation, the ribosome moves on to the next codon on the mRNA and the tRNA is aminoacylated by the tRNA synthetase (aaRS). The tRNA leaves the complex of mRNA and ribosome through the E-site. Thus, the polypeptide chain is extended in numerous of these processes and the polypeptide is formed. This complex mechanism had to be adapted due to the use of UBPs.
tRNA/Aminoacyl-Synthetase
The first step of the two-step reaction is the formation of an aminoacylated intermediate by the reaction of the amino acid and ATP. This is possible through the Rossmann fold, a domain consiting of a six-stranded parallel β-sheet with connecting helices. The Rossmann fold acts analog to the active site of hydrogenases and is responsible for binding ATP, the amino acid, and the 3’-terminus of the tRNA.
The class I synthetases are monomeric synthetases and feature all structurally similar active site Rossmann fold domains in the region of the N-terminus. Beside this region, there are no significant structural or sequence similarities among the class I enzymes.
There is an acceptor binding site inserted into the Rossmann-fold domain at a common location which binds the single stranded terminal end of the tRNA, while its C-terminal domain binds in the minor groove of the L-shaped tRNA and the anticodon arm. That is the point for the discrimination among the different tRNAs. The binding requires the formation of a hairpin structure of the single stranded 3’-terminus with the amino acid and the ATP in the active site (Chang et al., 2010, Krebs et al., 2014).
Figure 1: Crystal structure of a class I tRNA/aminoacyl synthetase.
The tRNA is shown in red and the protein in blue (Krebs et al., 2014).
An Orthogonal tRNA/Aminoacyl-Synthetase Pair
Since the tRNA recognition by the aaRS can be domain or species specific (Kwok et al., 1980) a heterologous aaRS/tRNA pair from a different organism is used. A possible source for an orthogonal tRNA/synthetase pair to be applied in bacterial cells can be eukaryotic. However, the adaption of these tRNA/aaRS pair which aminoacylates in Escherichia coli is very difficult (Liu et al., 1999). In contrast, evolved synthetases from archaea can be expressed efficiently in E. coli (Wang et al., 2001, Wang et al., 2000) and at the same time are more similar to eukaryotic organisms than to the prokaryotic (Kwok et al., 1980, Zhang et al., 2005). The reason are significant differences in the acceptor stem and anticodon binding recognition domain between prokaryotic and archaea tRNA/aaRS (Wang et al., 2000).
One possible orthogonal tRNA/aaRS pair is the tyrosine tRNA/aaRS pair of Methanococcus jannaschii, where the first base pair of the acceptor stem CG as a tRNATyridentity element differs from those of E. coli tRNATyr containing a GC (Wang et al., 2001). The orthogonal tRNA/aaRS pair is incorporated as a response of the amber stop codon, which does not incorporate any of the 20 canonical amino acids. We use the amber stop codon (UAG), because this codon is rare in E.coli and incorporation of random amino acids has been shown before.
References
Wang L, Xie J, Schultz PG. (2006). Expanding the Genetic Code. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 2006;35:225–49.
Liu CC, Schultz PG. (2010). Adding New Chemistries to the Genetic Code. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2010;79:413–44.
Kwok Y, Wong JT. (1980). Evolutionary relationship between Halobacterium cutirubrum and eukaryotes determined by use of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases as phylogenetic probes. Canadian Journal of Biochemistry. 58(3): 213-218
Krebs J.(2014) Lewin's GENES XI
Nov Y. 2011. When Second Best Is Good Enough: Another Probabilistic Look at Saturation Mutagenesis, Applied and Environmental Microbiology 0099-2240/12/12.00
Anaëlle, Lerche , Spicer, Davis. (2015), Designing logical codon reassignment–expanding the chemistry in biology. Chemical Science 6.1 (2015): 50-69
Stephen W. Santoro, Wang, Herberich, King, Schultz. (2002) An efficient system for the evolution of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase specificity." Nature biotechnology 20.10