research papers
Right-handed Z-DNA at ultrahigh resolution: a tale of two hands and the power of the crystallographic method
aInstitute of Bioorganic Chemistry, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznan, Poland, and bDepartment of Crystallography, Faculty of Chemistry, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland
*Correspondence e-mail: mariuszj@amu.edu.pl
We dedicate this paper to Professor Anna Gasowska and Professor Lechoslaw Lomozik, who stimulated our interest in the interactions of biogenic polyamines and metal cations with nucleic acid fragments.
The self-complementary L-d(CGCGCG)2 purine/pyrimidine hexanucleotide was crystallized in complex with the polyamine cadaverine and potassium cations. Since the oligonucleotide contained the enantiomeric 2′-deoxy-L-ribose, the Z-DNA duplex is right-handed, as confirmed by the ultrahigh-resolution determined at 0.69 Å resolution. Although the X-ray diffraction data were collected at a very short wavelength (0.7085 Å), where the anomalous signal of the P and K atoms is very weak, the signal was sufficiently outstanding to clearly indicate the wrong hand when the structure was mistakenly solved assuming the presence of 2′-deoxy-D-ribose. The electron density clearly shows the entire cadaverinium dication, which has an occupancy of 0.53 and interacts with one Z-DNA duplex. The K+ cation, with an occupancy of 0.32, has an irregular coordination sphere that is formed by three OP atoms of two symmetry-related Z-DNA duplexes and one O5′ hydroxyl O atom, and is completed by three water sites, one of which is twofold disordered. The K+ site is complemented by a partial water molecule, the hydrogen bonds of which have the same lengths as the K—O bonds. The sugar-phosphate backbone assumes two conformations, but the base pairs do not show any sign of disorder.
Keywords: Z-DNA; handedness; anomalous signal; 2′-deoxy-L-ribose; dual-conformation backbone; cadaverinium cation; biogenic polyamines; biological potassium complex.
1. Introduction
Natural D-deoxyoligonucleotides [for example D-d(CGCGCG)2; D-DNA] and their synthetic enantiomers [L-d(CGCGCG)2, L-DNA] with the same sequence have the same physical (for example duplex stability or solubility) and chemical properties (Hauser et al., 2006). However, the L-enantiomers do not interact with biological partners and, not surprisingly, they cannot serve as templates for DNA or RNA polymerases (Hayashi et al., 2005; Hauser et al., 2006). The L-enantiomers are also resistant to nuclease degradation and to many off-target interactions that plague traditional D-oligonucleotide-based technologies (Anderson et al., 1984; Asseline et al., 1991; Damha et al., 1994; Williams et al., 1997; Hauser et al., 2006). This makes them ideal for biomedical applications (for example as aptamers or biosensors), as well as attractive objects for molecular biology (for example for chiral separations) or DNA nanotechnology (Young et al., 2019).
It has been shown that polyamines are able to induce secondary-structure transitions of DNA, with the B–Z transition of alternating purine/pyrimidine et al., 2002). Cadaverine2+ [Cad2+; ], a biogenic amine, is a positively charged organic dication under physiological ionic and pH conditions and hence can interact with negatively charged macromolecules such as DNA and RNA. In solution, 1,3-diaminopropane (DAP) and diaminoethane are similarly effective in the B–Z conversion, with both being slightly more effective than putrescine2+ [Put2+; ] and more effective than Cad2+ (Behe & Felsenfeld, 1981). In another study, thermodynamic analysis of the interactions of biogenic polyamines with genomic DNA showed that polyamines bound more strongly to AT-rich DNA compared with DNA with a high GC content and that the binding efficiency varied depending on the charge of the polyamine as follows: spermine4+ > spermidine3+ > putrescine2+ > cadaverine2+ (Kabir & Kumar, 2013). However, the Cad2+ ion is specified as a ligand in only a few protein structures deposited in the PDB (Berman et al., 2000). Thus, Cad2+ is very poorly characterized in the context of its interactions with nucleic acids.
in solution being particularly enhanced by polyamines (van DamIn this paper, we describe an ultrahigh-resolution L-d(CGCGCG)2, in which the natural 2′-deoxy-D-ribose was replaced with its L-enantiomer. This is the first determination of right-handed Z-DNA, with the caveat that the right-handed was also present, together with the natural left-handed duplex, in the centrosymmetric of the same DNA (Doi et al., 1993; Drozdzal et al., 2016).
of Z-DNA with the sequenceThe story behind this project is very interesting and demonstrates the power and sensitivity of the crystallographic method. The postdoc who was synthesizing the d(CGCGCG)2 duplex for a crystallization experiment with cadaverine2+ ran out of the 2′-deoxy-D-ribose oligonucleotide, and thinking (basically correctly, if handedness is neglected) that it would not matter very much, used for this purpose the 2′-deoxy-L-ribose oligonucleotide at hand, a leftover from a `centrosymmetric project' (Drozdzal et al., 2016). He grew excellent crystals and then left. The ultrahigh-resolution X-ray diffraction data, obviously collected at a very short wavelength (0.7085 Å), were inherited by another postdoc, who was unaware of the swap of hands in the crystallization experiment. He was extremely puzzled when his high-resolution refinements kept telling him that the model was wrong and that the structure should be inverted. This indication was given by the Flack and Pearson tests (Flack, 1983; Flack & Bernardinelli, 2008), as included in the SHELXL (Sheldrick, 2015) software, and also by the Hooft test (Hooft et al., 2008) as implemented in PLATON (Spek, 2009). After switching the structure the was unproblematic, but the Z-DNA duplex became right-handed. The first postdoc was then contacted and he explained his experiment. At this point everything started making sense again.
In addition to describing an ultrahigh-resolution structure of a right-handed Z-DNA duplex, this paper also provides, for the first time, insight into the interaction of (Z-)DNA with the cadaverinium dication (Cad2+). After inspection of all of the crystal structures of Z-form DNA in the PDB as well as those described in the scientific literature, we compiled a list of 68 nucleic acid structures in complex with polyamines and/or metal cations (Supplementary Table S1). Among these crystal structures, there are 44 Z-DNA/metalm+ complexes, 16 Z-DNA/polyaminen+/metalm+ and eight Z-DNA/polyaminen+ complexes, none them with cadaverine.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Oligonucleotide synthesis, purification and crystallization
The methods for the synthesis, deprotection and purification of the oligodeoxynucleotide have been described previously (Xia et al., 1998; Drozdzal et al., 2013). A 1.5 mM water solution of the 2′-deoxy-L-ribose-containing DNA oligonucleotide with the self-complementary sequence L-d(CGCGCG) was heated at 338 K for 10 min and then slowly annealed to room temperature overnight. Single crystals of L-d(CGCGCG)2/Cad2+/K+ were grown at 292 K by the hanging-drop vapor-diffusion method by mixing 2 µl nucleic acid solution and 2 µl precipitating solution consisting of 10%(v/v) (±)-2-methyl-2,4-pentanediol (MPD), 40 mM sodium cacodylate pH 6.0, 80 mM KCl, 12 mM NaCl, 14 mM cadaverinium dichloride. The drops were equilibrated against 0.5 ml 80%(v/v) MPD. Crystals appeared within one week and grew to dimensions of 0.3 × 0.1 × 0.1 mm.
2.2. X-ray data collection and processing
X-ray diffraction data for the L-d(CGCGCG)2/Cad2+/K+ complex were measured to 0.69 Å resolution on the EMBL P13 beamline at the PETRA III synchrotron at DESY, Hamburg. The crystal was vitrified in a stream of cold nitrogen gas at 100 K. The mother liquor served as a cryoprotectant. The diffraction data were collected at a wavelength of 0.7085 Å and were indexed, integrated and scaled using the XDS package (Kabsch, 2010), as summarized in Table 1.
‡Correlation between intensities from random half sets as defined by Karplus & Diederichs (2012). §Rmerge = , where Ii(hkl) is the intensity of observation i of reflection hkl. ¶R = , where Fobs and Fcalc are the observed and calculated structure factors, respectively. Rfree was calculated analogously for the test reflections, which were randomly selected and excluded from the |
2.3. Structure solution and refinement
The structure was solved by Phaser (McCoy et al., 2007). The postdoc performing the structure-solution step was unaware that the crystal contained the L-d(CGCGCG)2 `spiegelmer' of the oligonucleotide and he used, quite naturally, the DNA part of PDB entry 7atg, corresponding to our earlier model of the D-d(CGCGCG)2/Put2+/K+ complex (Drozdzal et al., 2021), as the molecular probe. Since Friedel's law makes the diffraction pattern centrosymmetric (with the exception of the, usually small, deviations caused by anomalous scattering), a noncentrosymmetric can be solved equally well, of course, by both enantiomers of the molecular model.
usingIn the initial stages of the REFMAC5 (Murshudov et al., 2011) from the CCP4 suite (Winn et al., 2011). The final anisotropic was carried out with SHELXL (Sheldrick, 2015) using the full resolution of the diffraction data. The details of the SHELXL were the same as described for our previous Z-DNA structures (Drozdzal et al., 2013, 2015). At this resolution, no stereochemical restraints are necessary to supplement the experimental observations (Jaskolski, 2017). However, restraints may still be needed for some disordered or highly mobile fragments. In the present structure, restraints were only applied to the cadaverinium dication and to the bonds and angles of dual-conformation Z-DNA fragments. The ideal geometry targets for Cad2+ were taken from a high-quality X-ray structure of cadaverinium dichloride (Pospieszna-Markiewicz et al., 2006). Conformation-dependent geometrical restraints on bond lengths (DFIX) and bond angles (DANG) for the polynucleotide chains were generated using the RestraintLib server (https://achesym.ibch.poznan.pl/restraintlib/) as described by Kowiel et al. (2016, 2020) and Gilski et al. (2019). The CSD-derived conformation-dependent RestraintLib dictionary supersedes the classic nucleic acid restraints compiled by Clowney et al. (1996), Gelbin et al. (1996) and Parkinson et al. (1996). The final cycles of CGLS (conjugate-gradient least-squares) converged with an R and Rfree of 10.32% and 12.83%, respectively. The very last round of calculated with the test reflections included in the working set, converged with R = 10.39%. In order to provide estimations of standard uncertainties in all individual refined parameters and all derived geometrical parameters, in the final stage of the one cycle of full-matrix least-squares minimization was calculated. The placement of the model in the was standardized using the ACHESYM server (Kowiel et al., 2014).
the model was refined usingAt the wavelength used in the diffraction experiment (0.7085 Å), the imaginary components of the f′′) of K and P atoms are 0.252 and 0.098 electron units, respectively (Cromer, 1983). Anomalous signal is visible in the diffraction data up to ∼0.9 Å resolution and therefore the was carried out against unmerged anomalous data. The signal was quite weak, however, as no clear peaks were located in the anomalous electron-density map contoured at the 3σ level that could correspond to the positions of the K+ ion and P atoms.
(Coot (Emsley et al., 2010) was used for visualization of the electron-density maps and manual rebuilding of the atomic model.
2.4. Determination of the of the d(CGCGCG)2 DNA hexamer
Intriguingly, at this stage the structure SHELXL (Sheldrick, 2015) indicated an unexplained issue with model The Flack and Pearson parameters (Flack, 1983; Flack & Bernardinelli, 2008) calculated by the SHELXL program were 0.90 (8) and 0.95 (3), respectively. Moreover, model validation performed with PLATON (Spek, 2009) gave a similar warning, as the Flack, Pearson and Hooft (Hooft et al., 2008) parameters were 0.95 (3), 0.80 (2) and 0.89 (2), respectively. These results attracted our attention, as they obviously indicated the wrong configuration of the refined model. When it became clear that 2′-deoxy-L-ribose derivatives had been used instead of their natural D-counterparts in the synthesis of the deoxyoligonucleotide, the of the structure was inverted through the use of the MOVE command in SHELXL. When the inverted model was checked again with PLATON, the Flack, Pearson and Hooft parameters were calculated to be 0.03 (3), 0.12 (2) and 0.08 (2), respectively, clearly indicating the correct handedness, which corresponds to the right-handed L-d(CGCGCG)2 DNA duplex. Also, the Flack and Pearson parameters calculated by the SHELXL program [0.03 (8) and 0.03 (3), respectively] confirmed the correct of the new model. Based on the final and correct model, the 3DNA program (Lu & Olson, 2003) was used to calculate the geometrical parameters of the L-DNA molecule. Figures illustrating the atomic models and the electron density were prepared with PyMOL (DeLano, 2002).
performed with3. Results
3.1. Quality of the results
The estimated L-d(CGCGCG)2/Cad2+/K+ structure are in the ranges 0.006–0.052 Å for C atoms, 0.005–0.009 Å for N atoms, 0.006–0.101 Å for O atoms and 0.002–0.003 Å for P atoms. The positional uncertainty of the K+ cation is 0.021 Å. The e.s.u. values for full-occupancy covalent bonds are ∼0.006, ∼0.006, ∼0.005 and ∼0.004 Å for C—C, C—O, C—N and P—O, respectively. The r.m.s.d. agreement with stereochemical standards is 0.012 Å for bond lengths and 2.10° for bond angles.
(e.s.u.) values of fully occupied DNA atomic positions in the3.2. Overall structure and helical parameters
The L-d(5′-CGCGCG-3′) of the L-d(CGCGCG)2 duplex in the (Fig. 1) are numbered from 1 to 6 in chain A and from 12 to 7 in the complementary L-d(3′-GCGCGC-5′) strand B. The base-pair scheme is C1·G12, G2·C11, …, G6·C7. There are only five internucleoside phosphate linkages in each CGCGCG strand, as there are no phosphate groups at the 5′- and 3′-ends. Within the DNA molecule, two alternative conformations (labeled I and II) are clearly visible in the electron-density map at the inter-nucleotide phosphate linkages between C3–G4, G4–C5, C5–G6 and G8–C9, the refined occupancies of which converged at 0.575 (21)/0.425 (22), 0.556 (6)/0.444 (6), 0.597 (13)/0.403 (13) and 0.80 (12)/0.20 (12), respectively. Moreover, the mFo − DFc electron-density map indicated one additional discrete position (peak height ∼6.5σ) for the P atom of the C3 nucleotide. However, an additional phosphate group placed at this peak refined with an occupancy below 0.20. Therefore, no alternative conformer was modeled to interpret this peak. No alternative conformations were observed for the base moieties.
The geometry of the duplex agrees well with the expected stereochemistry and with other crystallographic models of Z-DNA, including the ultrahigh-resolution PDB entry 3p4j (Supplementary Table S2) determined at 0.55 Å resolution (Brzezinski et al., 2011). The pseudorotation of the deoxyribose moieties, analyzed according to the method of Jaskólski (1984), is typical for Z-DNA models and corresponds to the C2′-endo/C3′-endo pucker of the pyrimidine/purine 3′,5′-nucleotides. Also in the present complex, the sugars at the 3′-termini do not have the alternating C2′-endo/C3′-endo pucker for the pyrimidine/purine as is typical for Z-DNA, but all assume the C2′-endo conformation. There are two conformational subforms of Z-DNA, namely ZI and ZII, differing in the torsion angles α [defined as O3′(i − 1)—P—O5′—C5′] and ζ [C3′—O3′—P(i + 1)—O5′(i + 1)] (Saenger, 1984), stabilized by hydrogen bonding of a phosphate group to a hydrated metal cation or water molecule(s). Here, the ZII conformation of the phosphate group can only be assigned to G4(I), with ζ = 62.7° (the signed ζ torsion angle is given for the reference 2′-deoxy-D-ribose enantiomer). This alternative ZII conformer is stabilized by hydrogen bonds to the N1 atom of Cad2+ and a water molecule. The remaining phosphate groups have the ZI conformation.
3.3. Binding of the cadaverinium dication
The entire cadaverinium dication is well defined in the electron-density map (Fig. 2) despite its partial occupancy of 0.526 (13). It has the all-trans conformation, with the following torsion angles: 170 (1), −173 (1), 172 (1) and 175 (2)°. The Cad2+ dication is only involved in hydrogen-bonding interactions with the O atoms of the phosphate groups of one DNA molecule (Figs. 1 and 2). The N1 atom of the Cad2+ dication forms hydrogen bonds to phosphate groups of the major (I) and minor (II) conformer. These include interactions with OP1(I)_G4 and OP1(II)_G4 at distances of 2.776 (22) and 2.833 (34) Å, respectively. The N2 atom is hydrogen-bonded to OP2(I)_C5 and OP1(II)_C5 at 2.760 (15) and 2.842 (15) Å, respectively. Additionally, the Cad2+ ion forms hydrogen bonds to water molecules, which in turn interact with other phosphate groups of two symmetry-related molecules, indicated as i (−x, y + 1/2, −z + 1/2) and ii (x + 1/2, −y + 1/2, −z). It is of note that the Cad2+ cation does not form any direct hydrogen bonds to symmetry-related Z-DNA molecules. We point out that since cadaverine is an achiral molecule, its interactions with both enantiomers of the Z-DNA molecule will be the same.
3.4. Coordination of the K+ cation
The electron-density maps clearly revealed one metal coordination site, initially interpreted as K+ (Fig. 3). Since the occupancy of this monovalent cation refined to a fractional value of 0.553 (9), a complementary water molecule was also modeled in the 2mFo − DFc map at this site. After of this model, the occupancies of K+ and the water molecule were 0.318 (17) and 0.682 (17), respectively. There are seven O atoms in the immediate vicinity of this site, four from the Z-DNA backbone (three OP atoms of two symmetry-related Z-DNA duplexes and one O5′ hydroxyl O atom) and three from water molecules W4, W11 and W107 (the latter water molecule is partially disordered and has been modeled in two distinct positions). As in the previously studied Z-DNA/Put2+/K+ complex (Drozdzal et al., 2021), the K+ cation in the present structure is also located between two Z-DNA phosphate groups [OP1(II)_G6 and OP1/2(II)_C9i]. The K+—O bond distances are in the range 2.491 (12) to 3.017 (33) Å. The lengths of the M+—O bonds support the presence of K+ rather than the presence of Na+ at higher occupancy. The CheckMyMetal server (Zheng et al., 2014) also predicted potassium as the most likely cation at this site. The coordination sphere (coordination number seven) can be considered as distorted pentagonal bipyramid or a capped octahedron. The angles within the coordination sphere are irregular (Table 2).
3.5. Solvent structure and hydration of the right-handed Z-DNA helix
The crystallographic model presented in this work is similar to other high-resolution Z-DNA structures, also from the point of view of the architecture of the hydration shells (Drozdzal et al., 2013, 2015, 2021). Specifically, the contains complicated hydrogen-bonded networks involved in crystal packing and stabilization of the conformation of the Not surprisingly, there are no significant differences in the hydration of the enantiomeric forms of Z-DNA. The contains 121 water sites, which were refined anisotropically without positional restraints. There was no attempt to model the H atoms of the water molecules. There are 29 close pairs of water molecules with a combined occupancy of 1.0. The remaining water sites were classified as fully (25) or partially (67) occupied. Summation of all the water occupancies in the gives a total of 90.30 water molecules. It should be noted that our final model (DNA + solvent region) generates a problem of electrostatic neutrality of the The ten negatively charged phosphate groups are only partially neutralized by the two protonated amine groups of the partially occupied Cad2+ dication and by the fractional potassium cation. Our attempts to identify other positively charged species within the that would ensure electrostatic neutrality were unsuccessful. A similar problem was also unresolved even for the ultrahigh-resolution Z-DNA structure at 0.55 Å resolution (Brzezinski et al., 2011).
4. Discussion
In this work, we have presented a new 2+ and K+ cations. It is the first example of interaction of cadaverine2+ with a DNA molecule. Since many functional L-DNA constructs are beginning to emerge, structural elucidation of L-DNA isomers and their complexes with biomacromolecules at the atomic level will be important for understanding how mirror DNA can be integrated into biological systems (An et al., 2020). Comparison of the positions of the potassium cations in the structures of left-handed Z-DNA with Put2+ and of right-handed Z-DNA with Cad2+ shows that despite the different of the Z-DNA duplexes, the K+ ion has a preference for binding at OP_G6. Our studies of the interactions of Z-DNA with metal and biogenic polyamine cations confirm the notion that the `ionic atmosphere' created by these positively charged species not only plays an important role in neutralizing the net charge of the nucleic acid, but also affects the structural stability of the DNA (Xiao et al., 2014). It is remarkable that in four of the five metal complexes studied by us, the lability of the DNA molecules manifested itself as multiple conformations of the phosphate groups and even as double conformations of the bases (Zn2+, Cr3+, Mg2+ and K+ complexes; Drozdzal et al., 2013, 2015, 2016, 2021). The above studies support the widely held opinion that from a chemical point of view, nucleic acid crystals are actually salts (or complexes) of metal ions. Thus, it is impossible to separate the behavior of these macromolecules from their interactions with metal cations (Kazakov & Hecht, 2006). In addition, double conformations of Z-DNA duplexes, often correlated with the presence of metals, may be important in mediating nucleic acid–protein interactions. To date, specific interactions of left-handed DNA with the Zα domain of six binding proteins have been reported (Bartas et al., 2022).
of right-handed Z-DNA in complex with cadaverineAnalysis of the torsion angles of the Cad2+ dication in this high-resolution structure, as well as in high-resolution structures of protein complexes with cadaverine (PDB entries 3qj5, 4ofg and 6ye7), indicates that in biological systems this simple diamine can adopt diverse conformations and consequently enter into a variety of interactions with biomacromolecular partners. Although the stabilization of by polyaminen+ cations has been studied for many years (Hou et al., 2001), the structures that we have presented so far mostly show that the interaction of biogenic polyamine polycations with DNA is not entirely synonymous with the absence of alternate conformations of the DNA sugar-phosphate backbone. It was noted early on that the distances between the cationic centers of biogenic polyamines correspond well to the distances between the phosphate groups in DNA (Tsuboi, 1964; van Dam et al., 2002). As illustrated by our structure, this assumption is especially true for Cad2+, where the N1+⋯N2+ distance of 7.451 (23) Å allows the formation of four hydrogen bonds to adjacent phosphate groups of the Z-DNA duplex (in the ideal Z-DNA hexamer, the P⋯P distances are in the range ∼5.69 to ∼7.18 Å). However, given the ability of polyaminen+ cations to adopt different conformations depending on the chemical environment in the crystal structures, it is reasonable to conclude that for both putrescine2+ and cadaverine2+ their (Z-)DNA binding site could change depending on the ionic conditions of the crystallization solution.
To summarize, the L-Z-DNA/Cad2+/K+, Z-DNA/Put2+/K+, Z-DNA/Spm4+/Zn2+ (Drozdzal et al., 2013), Z-DNA/Mg2+, Z-DNA/Cr3+ (Drozdzal et al., 2015) and Z-DNA-RNA/Ba2+ (Gilski et al., 2016) structures support the statement that metal cations can modulate the DNA structure in a sequence-dependent manner by screening the repulsion between the negatively charged phosphates along the polymer, thus increasing its bending flexibility (Drozdetski et al., 2016). Our results also confirm that mirror images of (`spiegelmers') are good candidates for studying the interactions in nucleic acid/metalm+/polyaminen+ complexes.
It is worth mentioning that not only mirror-image et al. (2019) showed that the drug actinomycin D can tightly bind to G:G mismatched DNA duplexes through large-scale structural rearrangements, resulting in a right-handed Z-DNA-type structure (PDB entry 6j0h). It could be interesting to investigate whether other drugs (antibiotics) or ligands could cause similar distortions of nucleic acid fragments.
can be used for the formation of right-handed Z-DNA. SatangeFinally, the picturesque story of the present
underlies the notion that high-quality diffraction data do not lie, and that by the thorough and accurate observance of state-of-the-art crystallographic practices one can even detect and rectify potential mishaps related to poor communication or to project transfer.5. Data availability
The atomic coordinates and anisotropic ADPs, as well as the processed structure factors corresponding to the final model presented in this work, have been deposited in the PDB with accession code 8a71. The raw X-ray diffraction images, together with the complete SHELXL structure-factor input and output files, have been deposited in the Macromolecular Xtallography Raw Data Repository (MX-RDR) with DOI https://doi.org/10.18150/D5XSNJ.
6. Related literature
The following references are cited in the supporting information for this article: Dong (2003), Gao et al. (1993), Gessner et al. (1985) and Jean et al. (1993).
Supporting information
Link https://doi.org/10.18150/D5XSNJ
Raw diffraction images.
Supplementary Tables. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S2059798322011937/dw5233sup1.pdf
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Professor Ryszard Kierzek for the use of a DNA synthesizer and fruitful discussions. The synchrotron data were collected using beamline P13 (Cianci et al., 2017) operated by EMBL Hamburg at the PETRA III storage ring, DESY, Hamburg, Germany. We would like to thank Michele Cianci for assistance in using the beamline.
Funding information
This work was supported in part by National Science Centre (NCN) grant 2013/10/M/NZ1/00251 to MJ.
References
An, J., Choi, J., Hwang, D., Park, J., Pemble, C. W., Duong, T. H. M., Kim, K.-R., Ahn, H., Chung, H. S. & Ahn, D.-R. (2020). Chem. Commun. 56, 2186–2189. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Anderson, D. J., Reischer, R. J., Taylor, A. J. & Wechter, W. J. (1984). Nucleosides Nucleotides, 3, 499–512. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Asseline, U., Hau, J.-F., Czernecki, S., Le Diguarher, T., Perlat, M.-C., Valery, J.-M. & Thuong, N. T. (1991). Nucleic Acids Res. 19, 4067–4074. CrossRef PubMed CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Bartas, M., Slychko, K., Brázda, V., Červeň, J., Beaudoin, C. A., Blundell, T. L. & Pečinka, P. (2022). Int. J. Mol. Sci. 23, 768. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
Behe, M. & Felsenfeld, G. (1981). Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 78, 1619–1623. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Berman, H. M., Westbrook, J., Feng, Z., Gilliland, G., Bhat, T. N., Weissig, H., Shindyalov, I. N. & Bourne, P. E. (2000). Nucleic Acids Res. 28, 235–242. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Brzezinski, K., Brzuszkiewicz, A., Dauter, M., Kubicki, M., Jaskolski, M. & Dauter, Z. (2011). Nucleic Acids Res. 39, 6238–6248. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Cianci, M., Bourenkov, G., Pompidor, G., Karpics, I., Kallio, J., Bento, I., Roessle, M., Cipriani, F., Fiedler, S. & Schneider, T. R. (2017). J. Synchrotron Rad. 24, 323–332. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Clowney, L., Jain, S. C., Srinivasan, A. R., Westbrook, J., Olson, W. K. & Berman, H. M. (1996). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 118, 509–518. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Cromer, D. T. (1983). J. Appl. Cryst. 16, 437. CrossRef Web of Science IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Dam, L. van, Korolev, N. & Nordenskiöld, L. (2002). Nucleic Acids Res. 30, 419–428. Web of Science PubMed Google Scholar
Damha, M. J., Giannaris, P. A. & Marfey, P. (1994). Biochemistry, 33, 7877–7885. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
DeLano, W. L. (2002). PyMOL. https://www.pymol.org. Google Scholar
Doi, M., Inoue, M., Tomoo, K., Ishida, T., Ueda, Y., Akagi, M. & Urata, H. (1993). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 115, 10432–10433. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Dong, X. (2003). Acta Cryst. D59, 1336–1338. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Drozdetski, A. V., Tolokh, I. S., Pollack, L., Baker, N. & Onufriev, A. V. (2016). Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 028101. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
Drozdzal, P., Gilski, M. & Jaskolski, M. (2016). Acta Cryst. D72, 1203–1211. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Drozdzal, P., Gilski, M. & Jaskolski, M. (2021). Acta Cryst. B77, 331–338. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Drozdzal, P., Gilski, M., Kierzek, R., Lomozik, L. & Jaskolski, M. (2013). Acta Cryst. D69, 1180–1190. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Drozdzal, P., Gilski, M., Kierzek, R., Lomozik, L. & Jaskolski, M. (2015). J. Biol. Inorg. Chem. 20, 595–602. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Emsley, P., Lohkamp, B., Scott, W. G. & Cowtan, K. (2010). Acta Cryst. D66, 486–501. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Flack, H. D. (1983). Acta Cryst. A39, 876–881. CrossRef CAS Web of Science IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Flack, H. D. & Bernardinelli, G. (2008). Chirality, 20, 681–690. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Gao, Y.-G., Sriram, M. & Wang, A. H.-J. (1993). Nucleic Acids Res. 21, 4093–4101. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Gelbin, A., Schneider, B., Clowney, L., Hsieh, S.-H., Olson, W. K. & Berman, H. M. (1996). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 118, 519–529. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Gessner, R. V., Quigley, G. J., Wang, A. H.-J., van der Marel, G. A., van Boom, J. H. & Rich, A. (1985). Biochemistry, 24, 237–240. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Gilski, M., Drozdzal, P., Kierzek, R. & Jaskolski, M. (2016). Acta Cryst. D72, 211–223. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Gilski, M., Zhao, J., Kowiel, M., Brzezinski, D., Turner, D. H. & Jaskolski, M. (2019). Acta Cryst. B75, 235–245. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Hauser, N. C., Martinez, R., Jacob, A., Rupp, S., Hoheisel, J. D. & Matysiak, S. (2006). Nucleic Acids Res. 34, 5101–5111. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Hayashi, G., Hagihara, M. & Nakatani, K. (2005). Nucleic Acids Symp. Ser. 49, 261–262. CrossRef Google Scholar
Hooft, R. W. W., Straver, L. H. & Spek, A. L. (2008). J. Appl. Cryst. 41, 96–103. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Hou, M.-H., Lin, S.-B., Yuann, J.-M. P., Lin, W., Wang, A. H.-J. & Kan L. (2001). Nucleic Acids Res. 29, 5121–5128. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Jaskólski, M. (1984). Acta Cryst. A40, 364–366. CrossRef Web of Science IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Jaskolski, M. (2017). Methods Mol. Biol. 1607, 549–563. CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Jean, Y.-C., Gao, Y.-G. & Wang, A. H.-J. (1993). Biochemistry, 32, 381–388. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Kabir, A. & Suresh Kumar, G. (2013). PLoS One, 8, e70510. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
Kabsch, W. (2010). Acta Cryst. D66, 125–132. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Karplus, P. A. & Diederichs, K. (2012). Science, 336, 1030–1033. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Kazakov, S. A. & Hecht, S. M. (2006). In Encyclopedia of Inorganic Chemistry, edited by R. B. King, R. H. Crabtree, C. M. Lukehart, D. A. Atwood & R. A. Scott. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar
Kowiel, M., Brzezinski, D., Gilski, M. & Jaskolski, M. (2020). Nucleic Acids Res. 48, 962–973. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Kowiel, M., Brzezinski, D. & Jaskolski, M. (2016). Nucleic Acids Res. 44, 8479–8489. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Kowiel, M., Jaskolski, M. & Dauter, Z. (2014). Acta Cryst. D70, 3290–3298. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Lu, X.-J. & Olson, W. K. (2003). Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 5108–5121. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
McCoy, A. J., Grosse-Kunstleve, R. W., Adams, P. D., Winn, M. D., Storoni, L. C. & Read, R. J. (2007). J. Appl. Cryst. 40, 658–674. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Murshudov, G. N., Skubák, P., Lebedev, A. A., Pannu, N. S., Steiner, R. A., Nicholls, R. A., Winn, M. D., Long, F. & Vagin, A. A. (2011). Acta Cryst. D67, 355–367. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Parkinson, G., Vojtechovsky, J., Clowney, L., Brünger, A. T. & Berman, H. M. (1996). Acta Cryst. D52, 57–64. CrossRef CAS Web of Science IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Pospieszna-Markiewicz, I., Radecka-Paryzek, W. & Kubicki, M. (2006). Acta Cryst. C62, o399–o401. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Saenger, W. (1984). Principles of Nucleic Acid Structure. New York: Springer-Verlag. Google Scholar
Satange, R., Chuang, C. Y., Neidle, S. & Hou, M. H. (2019). Nucleic Acids Res. 47, 8899–8912. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Sheldrick, G. M. (2015). Acta Cryst. C71, 3–8. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Spek, A. L. (2009). Acta Cryst. D65, 148–155. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Tsuboi, M. (1964). Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn, 37, 1514–1522. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Williams, K. P., Liu, X.-H., Schumacher, T. N. M., Lin, H. Y., Ausiello, A., Kim, P. S. & Bartel, D. P. (1997). Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 94, 11285–11290. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Winn, M. D., Ballard, C. C., Cowtan, K. D., Dodson, E. J., Emsley, P., Evans, P. R., Keegan, R. M., Krissinel, E. B., Leslie, A. G. W., McCoy, A., McNicholas, S. J., Murshudov, G. N., Pannu, N. S., Potterton, E. A., Powell, H. R., Read, R. J., Vagin, A. & Wilson, K. S. (2011). Acta Cryst. D67, 235–242. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Xia, T., SantaLucia, J., Burkard, M. E., Kierzek, R., Schroeder, S. J., Jiao, X., Cox, C. & Turner, D. H. (1998). Biochemistry, 37, 14719–14735. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Xiao, S., Zhu, H., Wang, L. & Liang, H. (2014). Soft Matter, 10, 1045–1055. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Young, B. E., Kundu, N. & Sczepanski, J. T. (2019). Chem. Eur. J. 25, 7981–7990. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Zheng, H., Chordia, M. D., Cooper, D. R., Chruszcz, M., Müller, P., Sheldrick, G. M. & Minor, W. (2014). Nat. Protoc. 9, 156–170. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are cited.