research communications
Structure of the 4-hydroxy-tetrahydrodipicolinate synthase from the thermoacidophilic methanotroph Methylacidiphilum fumariolicum SolV and the phylogeny of the aminotransferase pathway
aDepartment of Microbiology, Institute for Water and Wetland Research, Radboud University Nijmegen, 6525 AJ Nijmegen, The Netherlands, and bDepartment of Biomolecular Mechanisms, Max Planck Institute for Medical Research, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
*Correspondence e-mail: h.opdencamp@science.ru.nl, thomas.barends@mpimf-heidelberg.mpg.de
The enzyme 4-hydroxy-tetrahydrodipicolinate synthase (DapA) is involved in the production of lysine and precursor molecules for L-aspartate-4-semialdehyde to 4-hydroxy-2,3,4,5-tetrahydrodipicolinic acid. In many organisms, lysine binds allosterically to DapA, causing negative feedback, thus making the enzyme an important regulatory component of the pathway. Here, the 2.1 Å resolution of DapA from the thermoacidophilic methanotroph Methylacidiphilum fumariolicum SolV is reported. The enzyme crystallized as a contaminant of a protein preparation from native biomass. Genome analysis reveals that M. fumariolicum SolV utilizes the recently discovered aminotransferase pathway for lysine biosynthesis. Phylogenetic analyses of the genes involved in this pathway shed new light on the distribution of this pathway across the three domains of life.
synthesis. In a multistep reaction, DapA converts pyruvate andKeywords: 4-hydroxy-tetrahydrodipicolinate synthase; Methylacidiphilum fumariolicum SolV; methanotroph; aminotransferase pathway.
PDB reference: 4-hydroxy-tetrahydrodipicolinate synthase, 6t3t
1. Introduction
Animals rely on prokaryotes and plants for the production of the essential amino acid lysine. Two dissimilar lysine biosynthesis pathways have evolved independently over time: (i) the α-aminoadipate pathway and (ii) the diaminopimelate (DAP) pathway (Pearce et al., 2017). In the DAP pathway, lysine biosynthesis is initiated by the enzyme 4-hydroxy-tetrahydrodipicolinate synthase (DapA; EC 4.3.3.7), which catalyses a multistep reaction. In the first step of this reaction, a conserved catalytic lysine residue in the active site of DapA reacts with pyruvate, forming a Schiff base linkage and resulting in a covalent enamine intermediate (Blickling & Knäblein, 1997). This enamine subsequently reacts with L-aspartate-4-semialdehyde (ASA), creating a second covalent intermediate. Finally, this intermediate is cyclized to form (2S,4S)-4-hydroxy-2,3,4,5-tetrahydrodipicolinic acid (HTPA) (Fig. 1). After this, a water molecule is removed from HTPA and the resulting double bond is reduced by the enzyme 4-hydroxy-tetrahydrodipicolinate reductase (DapB; EC 1.17.1.8) to form 2,3,4,5-tetrahydrodipicolinate (THDP) (Devenish et al., 2010). THDP is then converted into meso-DAP, the direct precursor for lysine and for the synthesis pathway (Pillai et al., 2009), via a variety of routes. One of these, the aminotransferase pathway, was discovered only relatively recently in plants and subsequently in a few microorganisms such as methanococci (Hudson et al., 2006; Liu et al., 2010). In this pathway, the enzyme L,L-diaminopimelate (LL-DAP) aminotransferase (DapL; EC 2.6.1.83) converts THDP into LL-DAP in a single step (Hudson et al., 2006, 2008). LL-DAP is then converted into the final lysine precursor meso-DAP. DapA is of pivotal importance for the regulation of the lysine biosynthesis pathway by means of negative feedback, since this enzyme is inhibited allosterically by lysine, which binds in a dedicated pocket close to the interface between two adjacent monomers (Mazelis et al., 1977; Geng et al., 2013). Given its central role in bacterial amino-acid biosynthesis, structures of DapA from a broad range of prokaryotic species have been determined, such as Escherichia coli (Mirwaldt et al., 1995), Clostridium botulinum (Atkinson et al., 2009), Aquifex aeolicus (Sridharan et al., 2014) and several others (Christensen et al., 2016; Conly et al., 2014; Devenish et al., 2009; Girish et al., 2008; Kaur et al., 2011; Kefala et al., 2008; Mank et al., 2015; Naqvi et al., 2016; Padmanabhan et al., 2009; Pearce et al., 2011; Phenix et al., 2008; Rice et al., 2008; Voss et al., 2010). Moreover, DapA is a potential target for antibiotic development, since humans lack this enzyme (Skovpen et al., 2016). Structural studies have shown that DapA displays a TIM-barrel fold and occurs in microorganisms either as tetramers of approximate 222 point-group symmetry (Griffin et al., 2008, 2010, 2012; Voss et al., 2010) or, in some cases, as dimers (Burgess et al., 2008; da Costa et al., 2016). Here, we report the first of DapA from a methanotroph, Methylacidiphilum fumariolicum SolV. This thermoacidophile was isolated from a hot and extremely acidic volcanic ecosystem and belongs to the phylum Verrucomicrobia, which mainly represents (volcanic) soil bacteria. It can grow below pH 1 and at up to 65°C, and is dependent on rare-earth elements for growth (Pol et al., 2007, 2014). We also show that M. fumariolicum SolV encodes DapL and thus is likely to use the aminotransferase pathway for lysine biosynthesis. Phylogenetic analyses were conducted to assess the phylogenies of DapA and DapL among prokaryotic and eukaryotic phyla.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Macromolecule production
During the purification procedure of an [NiFe] hydrogenase from M. fumariolicum SolV, DapA copurified as a contaminant. M. fumariolicum SolV was grown as a pure culture in a chemostat as described previously (Pol et al., 2007). Cell lysis and protein purification were performed as described previously (Schmitz et al., 2020). Briefly, the cell membranes were homogenized and gently stirred with 1%(w/v) n-dodecyl-β-D-maltoside for 1 h at room temperature. The resulting mixture was clarified by ultracentrifugation (1 h, 137 000g, 4°C) and the supernatant was used for further purification by three chromatographic steps, each in the presence of 0.02%(w/v) n-dodecyl-β-D-maltoside. Firstly, the solution was loaded onto a Q Sepharose column (GE Healthcare, Chicago, Illinois, USA) equilibrated with 20 mM bis-Tris pH 7.0. After washing with 20 mM bis-Tris, 100 mM NaCl pH 7.0 and with 20 mM bis-Tris, 200 mM NaCl pH 7.0, the most active fractions in terms of hydrogenase activity as determined by the method described by Schmitz et al. (2020) were pooled. After exchanging the buffer for 20 mM potassium phosphate pH 7.0 and concentrating the sample, it was loaded onto a ceramic hydroxyapatite column (Bio-Rad, Hercules, California, USA) which had been pre-equilibrated with 20 mM potassium phosphate pH 7.0. Elution was carried out with a gradient to 500 mM potassium phosphate pH 7.0 over 30 column volumes. After combining the fractions with the strongest hydrogenase activity, the buffer of the sample was exchanged to 20 mM bis-Tris pH 7.0. The final chromatographic step was then carried out on a TSKgel DEAE-5PW column (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) that had been pre-equilibrated with 20 mM bis-Tris pH 7.0 using a gradient to 20 mM bis-Tris, 300 mM NaCl pH 7.0 over 20 column volumes. The resulting protein mixture was flash-frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80°C. To assess the protein purity, SDS–PAGE (Precast Mini-Protean TGX Tris–Glycine 4–20% Gradient gel; Bio-Rad) was performed. The protein bands were manually excised and digested with trypsin. Stable proteolytic fragments were analyzed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) on an Axima Performance (Shimadzu Biotech, Duisburg, Germany) using α-cyano-4-hydroxycinnamic acid as the matrix compound. Characteristic tryptic were identified by MASCOT (Matrix Science, Massachusetts, USA).
2.2. Crystallization
Crystallization trials with this preparation were performed using a Mosquito pipetting robot (SPT Labtech, Melbourne, UK). Colourless, needle-shaped crystals grew within one day in condition G4 of the commercially available MemGold I screen (Molecular Dimensions, Newmarket, UK). These were flash-cooled in liquid nitrogen after soaking for a few seconds in mother liquor supplemented with 25%(v/v) ethylene glycol. Details of the crystallization conditions are given in Table 1.
|
2.3. Data collection and processing
X-ray diffraction data were collected at the Swiss Light Source (SLS), Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland. The data were processed with XDS (Kabsch, 2010), which indicated P4x space-group symmetry. allowed the identification of the as P42. Details and statistics of data collection and processing are given in Table 2.
|
2.4. Structure solution and refinement
As the original target of the investigation was an iron-containing protein, the lack of colour in the crystals was puzzling. M. fumariolicum SolV: the chaperone protein ClpB (MfumV2_0146), the large and small subunits of the [NiFe] hydrogenase (MfumV2_0979 and MfumV2_0978, respectively), DapA (MfumV2_0415) and the elongation factor Ts (MfumV2_2094) (Fig. 2).
measurements at the beamline (not shown) also failed to detect any iron, leaving the possibility that the crystals contained a proteolysis product of the [NiFe] hydrogenase without the cofactors. Electrophoretic separation of the protein preparation by SDS–PAGE showed several bands, including one at an apparent molecular weight of ∼35 kDa. Excision of this band followed by MALDI peptide-mass fingerprinting identified several proteins fromFor some of these, the structures of closely related proteins were available in the Protein Data Bank. These were therefore used as search models for Phaser (McCoy et al., 2007). A very clear solution was found (translation-function Z score of 44.9) using the structure of dihydrodipicolinate synthase from Methanocaldococcus jannaschii (PDB entry 2yxg; Padmanabhan et al., 2009; 45.3% sequence identity), revealing the identity of the protein in the crystals to be DapA. A starting model was quickly and conveniently constructed by MOLREP using the known sequence (Vagin & Teplyakov, 2010). The final structure was obtained through iterative cycles of rebuilding in Coot (Emsley & Cowtan, 2004; Emsley et al., 2010) and with Phenix (Adams et al., 2010; Liebschner et al., 2019). Several tetrahedrally shaped density peaks were identified that could be either sulfate or phosphate ions, given that both were present during crystallization. The data do not allow distinction between the two ions, but since sulfate was present at a somewhat higher concentration than phosphate, these entities were modelled as sulfate ions. The final model contains four molecules in the and has excellent statistics, as shown in Table 3. Structural figures were prepared with PyMOL (Schrödinger, New York, USA). The model and structure-factor amplitudes have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank as entry 6t3t.
with
|
2.5. Distribution and phylogeny of DapL and DapA
DapL sequence counts per domain and per phylum were obtained by using the following query in UniProt (The UniProt Consortium, 2019): `LL-diaminopimelate aminotransferase NOT acetyl NOT succinyl fragment:no' and sorting the results based on taxonomy. DapL amino-acid sequences were retrieved from UniProt in FASTA format, aligned using MUSCLE 3.8.31 (Edgar, 2004) and then filtered using trimAl 1.2 revision 59 (Capella-Gutiérrez et al., 2009) to only include positions with at most 5% gaps. Neighbour-joining trees were generated using MEGA7 (Kumar et al., 2016) with a Poisson substitution model, gamma-distributed rates (gamma parameter 5) and 500 bootstrap replicates. N-Acetyl-L,L-DAP-aminotransferase (DapX) sequences from Firmicutes were used as an outgroup (not shown in the figure). The DapA tree was generated using the same method, but with N-acetylneuraminate lyase (NanA) sequences from Firmicutes as the outgroup instead.
3. Results and discussion
A protein mixture was obtained from native biomass of M. fumariolicum SolV with a view to studying the [NiFe] hydrogenase from this organism. Upon screening for crystallization conditions for the hydrogenase, the contaminating protein DapA from M. fumariolicum SolV crystallized and its was determined at 2.1 Å resolution. The crystallization of contaminants has been reported by several researchers before, as reviewed in, for example, Niedzialkowska et al. (2016), and a database of often-encountered, easily crystallizing contaminants has been set up to enable the rapid identification of the most common ones (Hungler et al., 2016). In this case, the predicted of DapA (pI = 6.4) is close to that of the large hydrogenase subunit (pI = 6.7), which is likely to have contributed to its copurification, as the purification protocol relied heavily on separation by charge. However, the structure of M. fumariolicum SolV DapA represents a structure that has not previously been described and is the first structure available of a DapA from a methanotroph. The enzyme complex consists of a dimer of dimers forming a homotetramer with a large central cavity, as is typical for DapA enzymes. In the tetramer, each monomer contacts only two adjacent monomers, via either a strong or a weak dimer interface (Fig. 3). This feature results in a large central cavity, similar to the DapA structures from other microorganisms and certain plants (Pearce et al., 2017). The DapA structures from the wild tobacco plant (Nicotiana sylvestris) and the common grapevine (Vitis vinifera), however, form a so-called `back-to-back' (Blickling & Knäblein, 1997; Atkinson et al., 2012). In the strong dimer interfaces of the DapA enzymes from most organisms, both the active site and the binding site for allosteric inhibition by lysine can be found (Fig. 3). Initially, it was believed that only DapA enzymes from Gram-negative bacteria possess this allosteric inhibition site and that those from Gram-positive organisms do not. However, this was recently disproved, and the presence of a histidine or glutamate residue in position 56 (E. coli numbering) was introduced as an accurate predictor of the occurrence of allosteric inhibition (da Costa et al., 2016).
Each monomer displays an eightfold α/β-barrel (TIM barrel) and a C-terminal α-helix, as is typical for DapA enzymes (Christensen et al., 2016; Conly et al., 2014; Devenish et al., 2009; Girish et al., 2008; Kaur et al., 2011; Kefala et al., 2008; Mank et al., 2015; Mirwaldt et al., 1995; Naqvi et al., 2016; Padmanabhan et al., 2009; Pearce et al., 2011; Phenix et al., 2008; Rice et al., 2008; Sridharan et al., 2014; Voss et al., 2010). However, in M. fumariolicum SolV DapA the C-terminal helix is longer by three turns in comparison to other DapA structures. This helix is thought to be important in maintaining the tetramer, since the of DapA from E. coli is disrupted upon truncation of the C-terminus (Guo et al., 2009). As is the case in the DapA structure from Acinetobacter baumannii (PDB entry 3pue; O. Jithesh, S. Yamini, N. Kaur, A. Gautam, R. Tewari, G. S. Kushwaha, P. Kaur, A. Srinivasan, S. Sharma & T. P. Singh, unpublished work), a sulfate ion is bound to the active site of each monomer. This ion assumes the position of the carboxylate group of the enamine intermediate produced by incubating the enzyme with pyruvate, as was found in the DapA structures from Campylobacter jejuni (Conly et al., 2014) and Clostridium botulinum (Atkinson et al., 2009). The residues around the catalytic Lys162 are identical to those in other DapA structures, including the catalytic triad (Fig. 4a) identified in E. coli DapA which functions as a proton relay between the active site and the outside of the protein (Dobson et al., 2004). Moreover, superposition of the DapA structure from M. fumariolicum SolV with the DapA structure from C. jejuni reveals a pocket that is virtually identical to the allosteric binding site in the C. jejuni enzyme (Conly et al., 2014). All of the residues that coordinate the allosteric lysine in DapA from C. jejuni are present in DapA from M. fumariolicum SolV (Conly et al., 2014; Fig. 4b). This includes His56, which was identified as diagnostic of allosteric regulation (da Costa et al., 2016), and Glu84, which is partially conserved in allosterically inhibited enzymes (Supplementary Fig. S1). However, no lysine was present during crystallization, and no density for a copurified lysine molecule could be observed. Investigation of the domain dynamics of DapA from C. jejuni using DynDom (Hayward & Lee, 2002) revealed a subtle hinging motion upon lysine binding that has been implicated in allosteric regulation (Conly et al., 2014). We therefore superimposed the DapA structure from M. fumariolicum SolV with one of the two domains identified in the C. jejuni enzyme (distal to the allosteric pocket) and observed that the mutual orientation of the domains in DapA from M. fumariolicum SolV corresponded most closely to the structure of uninhibited (i.e. lysine-free) DapA from C. jejuni (Fig. 5).
Since M. fumariolicum SolV is a thermophile that can grow at temperatures of up to 65°C, it is conceivable that the enzymes in this bacterium are more thermostable compared with homologous enzymes in mesophilic microorganisms (Pol et al., 2007). This was recently shown for one of the hydrogenases encoded by M. fumariolicum SolV (Schmitz et al., 2020). Therefore, we searched for structural motifs that could enhance thermostability. The of DapA from A. aeolicus shows a unique disulfide bond involving the Cys139 residues of two monomers (Sridharan et al., 2014). This bond is located at the allosteric interface, but distal to the allosteric binding site, and aids in maintenance of the at high temperatures. Interestingly, in the sequence of M. fumariolicum DapA a cysteine residue is found just prior to this position. However, the shows that the side chain of this residue points away from the allosteric interface, and a considerable change in the local structure would be required to bring these residues to within bonding distance (Fig. 6). Since A. aeolicus grows at temperatures of up to 95°C, significantly higher than the maximum growth temperature of M. fumariolicum SolV, it is conceivable that such a disulfide bond is only required for stabilization at very high temperatures (Deckert et al., 1998).
Following the production of HTPA by DapA, organisms use various routes to convert this molecule into lysine. Investigating the M. fumariolicum SolV genome revealed the presence of a DapL-encoding gene (Mfumv2_2169, previously annotated as a hypothetical protein). It is thus highly likely that this organism uses the aminotransferase pathway for this purpose. Moreover, genes encoding enzymes involved in other lysine-biosynthesis pathways were not found. We therefore investigated the phylogenies of M. fumariolicum SolV DapA and DapL. Although described only relatively recently, the aminotransferase pathway for lysine biosynthesis may be used by a diverse group of organisms. In this pathway, L,L-diaminopimelate is produced from 2,3,4,5-tetrahydrodipicolinate in a single step catalysed by DapL (Hudson et al., 2006). We investigated the distribution of DapL across the three domains of life (Fig. 7a). In Eukarya the occurrence of DapL is mostly limited to green plants (Viridiplantae) and in Archaea mostly to the Euryarchaeota, a phylum containing the Indeed, DapL was first discovered in the model plant organism Arabidopsis thaliana and subsequently also in methanococci (Liu et al., 2010). DapL is found in a broader range of phyla among the Bacteria, including the phylum Verrucomicrobia, to which M. fumariolicum SolV belongs. Importantly, this analysis does not take into account the amount of sequencing data that is available for each group, which will inevitably be higher for bacteria (and to a lesser extent archaea) than for eukaryotes. Accordingly, this phylogenetic analysis strictly represents the current knowledge of the prevalence of the aminotransferase pathway, and the distribution shown may change dramatically as more sequence data become available. Surprisingly, a clear difference in the phylogeny of DapA and DapL from M. fumariolicum SolV was found (Fig. 7b). The tree for DapA mostly follows the expected phylogenetic divergence, with the exception of the second Verrucomicrobia clade (and the lone `Candidatus Moanabacter tarae'). All of the taxa in this clade contain multiple DapA sequences, at least one of which is part of the Verrucomicrobia I group. This is expected as DapA is essential for lysine biosynthesis, whereas DapL catalyses a reaction for which multiple alternatives exist. The DapL phylogenetic tree suggests one or more horizontal gene-transfer events, as several groups of organisms are broken up into multiple clades, all of which are strongly supported by bootstrap analysis. Interestingly, the verrucomicrobial methanotrophs (which belong to the order Methylacidiphilales) form a clade with the euryarchaeotal methanococci. These methanogenic methanococci were shown not to cluster with the typical phylogenetic groups DapL1 and DapL2 (Liu et al., 2010; Hudson et al., 2008). Furthermore, the bacterial order Methylacidiphilales clusters with the archaeal class Methanomicrobia and members of the archaeal phylum Lokiarchaeota. All other Verrucomicrobia instead cluster with the euryarchaeotal Methanobacteria. While this could reflect factors such as the co-occurrence of different phylogenetic groups in specific habitats, a detailed analysis of this falls outside the scope of this study. In conclusion, we present the 2.1 Å resolution of the essential 4-hydroxy-tetrahydrodipicolinate synthase (DapA) from the thermoacidophilic methanotroph M. fumariolicum SolV. This homotetrameric enzyme is structurally highly conserved in comparison to the DapA structures from other microorganisms and possesses the crucial His56 residue, strongly suggesting allosteric inhibition of DapA by lysine as a regulatory mechanism for lysine biosynthesis in M. fumariolicum SolV. Analysis of the gene encoding DapL indicates that M. fumariolicum SolV uses the aminotransferase pathway to synthesize lysine and that this pathway is found across the three domains of life.
Supporting information
PDB reference: 4-hydroxy-tetrahydrodipicolinate synthase, 6t3t
Supplementary Fig. S1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S2053230X20005294/tb5158sup1.pdf
Supplementary Table S1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S2053230X20005294/tb5158sup2.xlsx
Acknowledgements
The authors declare no conflict of interest. We thank the staff at the Swiss Light Source for their excellent support and facilities. We also thank Chris Roome for outstanding computational support. TRMB is very grateful to Ilme Schlichting for continuous support. Open access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.
Funding information
RAS, TB and HJMOdC were supported by the European Research Council (ERC Advanced Grant project VOLCANO 669371). AD, MM and TRMB were funded by the Max Planck Society.
References
Adams, P. D., Afonine, P. V., Bunkóczi, G., Chen, V. B., Davis, I. W., Echols, N., Headd, J. J., Hung, L.-W., Kapral, G. J., Grosse-Kunstleve, R. W., McCoy, A. J., Moriarty, N. W., Oeffner, R., Read, R. J., Richardson, D. C., Richardson, J. S., Terwilliger, T. C. & Zwart, P. H. (2010). Acta Cryst. D66, 213–221. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Atkinson, S. C., Dobson, R. C. J., Newman, J. M., Gorman, M. A., Dogovski, C., Parker, M. W. & Perugini, M. A. (2009). Acta Cryst. F65, 253–255. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Atkinson, S. C., Dogovski, C., Downton, M. T., Pearce, F. G., Reboul, C. F., Buckle, A. M., Gerrard, J. A., Dobson, R. C. J., Wagner, J. & Perugini, M. A. (2012). PLoS One, 7, e38318. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
Blickling, S. & Knäblein, J. (1997). Biol. Chem. 378, 207–210. CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Burgess, B. R., Dobson, R. C. J., Bailey, M. F., Atkinson, S. C., Griffin, M. D. W., Jameson, G. B., Parker, M. W., Gerrard, J. A. & Perugini, M. A. (2008). J. Biol. Chem. 283, 27598–27603. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Capella-Gutiérrez, S., Silla-Martínez, J. M. & Gabaldón, T. (2009). Bioinformatics, 25, 1972–1973. PubMed Google Scholar
Christensen, J. B., Soares da Costa, T. P., Faou, P., Pearce, F. G., Panjikar, S. & Perugini, M. A. (2016). Sci. Rep. 6, 37111. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
Conly, C. J. T., Skovpen, Y. V., Li, S., Palmer, D. R. J. & Sanders, D. A. R. (2014). Biochemistry, 53, 7396–7406. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Deckert, G., Warren, P. V., Gaasterland, T., Young, W. G., Lenox, A. L., Graham, D. E., Overbeek, R., Snead, M. A., Keller, M., Aujay, M., Huber, R., Feldman, R. A., Short, J. M., Olsen, G. J. & Swanson, R. V. (1998). Nature, 392, 353–358. CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Devenish, S. R. A., Huisman, F. H. A., Parker, E. J., Hadfield, A. T. & Gerrard, J. A. (2009). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1794, 1168–1174. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Devenish, S. R. A., Blunt, J. W. & Gerrard, J. A. (2010). J. Med. Chem. 53, 4808–4812. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Dobson, R. C. J., Valegård, K. & Gerrard, J. A. (2004). J. Mol. Biol. 338, 329–339. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Edgar, R. C. (2004). Nucleic Acids Res. 32, 1792–1797. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Emsley, P. & Cowtan, K. (2004). Acta Cryst. D60, 2126–2132. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals 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
Geng, F., Chen, Z., Zheng, P., Sun, J. & Zeng, A. P. (2013). Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 97, 1963–1971. CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Girish, T. S., Sharma, E. & Gopal, B. (2008). FEBS Lett. 582, 2923–2930. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Griffin, M. D. W., Billakanti, J. M., Wason, A., Keller, S., Mertens, H. D. T., Atkinson, S. C., Dobson, R. C. J., Perugini, M. A., Gerrard, J. A. & Pearce, F. G. (2012). PLoS One, 7, e40318. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
Griffin, M. D. W., Dobson, R. C. J., Gerrard, J. A. & Perugini, M. A. (2010). Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 494, 58–63. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Griffin, M. D. W., Dobson, R. C. J., Pearce, F. G., Antonio, L., Whitten, A. E., Liew, C. K., Mackay, J. P., Trewhella, J., Jameson, G. B., Perugini, M. A. & Gerrard, J. A. (2008). J. Mol. Biol. 380, 691–703. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Guo, B. B. B., Devenish, S. R. A., Dobson, R. C. J., Muscroft-Taylor, A. C. & Gerrard, J. A. (2009). Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 380, 802–806. CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Hayward, S. & Lee, R. A. (2002). J. Mol. Graph. Model. 21, 181–183. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Hudson, A. O., Gilvarg, C. & Leustek, T. (2008). J. Bacteriol. 190, 3256–3263. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Hudson, A. O., Singh, B. K., Leustek, T. & Gilvarg, C. (2006). Plant Physiol. 140, 292–301. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Hungler, A., Momin, A., Diederichs, K. & Arold, S. T. (2016). J. Appl. Cryst. 49, 2252–2258. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Kabsch, W. (2010). Acta Cryst. D66, 125–132. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Kaur, N., Gautam, A., Kumar, S., Singh, A., Singh, N., Sharma, S., Sharma, R., Tewari, R. & Singh, T. P. (2011). Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 48, 779–787. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Kefala, G., Evans, G. L., Griffin, M. D. W., Devenish, S. R. A., Pearce, F. G., Perugini, M. A., Gerrard, J. A., Weiss, M. S. & Dobson, R. C. J. (2008). Biochem. J. 411, 351–360. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Kumar, S., Stecher, G. & Tamura, K. (2016). Mol. Biol. Evol. 33, 1870–1874. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Liebschner, D., Afonine, P. V., Baker, M. L., Bunkóczi, G., Chen, V. B., Croll, T. I., Hintze, B., Hung, L.-W., Jain, S., McCoy, A. J., Moriarty, N. W., Oeffner, R. D., Poon, B. K., Prisant, M. G., Read, R. J., Richardson, J. S., Richardson, D. C., Sammito, M. D., Sobolev, O. V., Stockwell, D. H., Terwilliger, T. C., Urzhumtsev, A. G., Videau, L. L., Williams, C. J. & Adams, P. D. (2019). Acta Cryst. D75, 861–877. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Liu, Y., White, R. H. & Whitman, W. B. (2010). J. Bacteriol. 192, 3304–3310. CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Mank, N., Arnette, A., Klapper, V., Offermann, L. & Chruszcz, M. (2015). Acta Cryst. F71, 449–454. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Mazelis, M., Whatley, F. R. & Whatley, J. (1977). FEBS Lett. 84, 236–240. CrossRef CAS PubMed 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
Mirwaldt, C., Korndörfer, I. & Huber, R. (1995). J. Mol. Biol. 246, 227–239. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Naqvi, K. F., Staker, B. L., Dobson, R. C. J., Serbzhinskiy, D., Sankaran, B., Myler, P. J. & Hudson, A. O. (2016). Acta Cryst. F72, 2–9. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Niedzialkowska, E., Gasiorowska, O., Handing, K. B., Majorek, K. A., Porebski, P. J., Shabalin, I. G., Zasadzinska, E., Cymborowski, M. & Minor, W. (2016). Protein Sci. 25, 720–733. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Padmanabhan, B., Strange, R. W., Antonyuk, S. V., Ellis, M. J., Hasnain, S. S., Iino, H., Agari, Y., Bessho, Y. & Yokoyama, S. (2009). Acta Cryst. F65, 1222–1226. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Pearce, F. G., Dobson, R. C. J., Jameson, G. B., Perugini, M. A. & Gerrard, J. A. (2011). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1814, 1900–1909. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Pearce, F. G., Hudson, A. O., Loomes, K. & Dobson, R. C. J. (2017). Subcell. Biochem. 83, 271–289. CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Phenix, C. P., Nienaber, K., Tam, P. H., Delbaere, L. T. & Palmer, D. R. (2008). ChemBioChem, 9, 1591–1602. CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Pillai, B., Moorthie, V. A., van Belkum, M. J., Marcus, S. L., Cherney, M. M., Diaper, C. M., Vederas, J. C. & James, M. N. G. (2009). J. Mol. Biol. 385, 580–594. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Pol, A., Barends, T. R. M., Dietl, A., Khadem, A. F., Eygensteyn, J., Jetten, M. S. M. & Op den Camp, H. J. M. (2014). Environ. Microbiol. 16, 255–264. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Pol, A., Heijmans, K., Harhangi, H. R., Tedesco, D., Jetten, M. S. M. & Op den Camp, H. J. M. (2007). Nature, 450, 874–878. CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Rice, E. A., Bannon, G. A., Glenn, K. C., Jeong, S. S., Sturman, E. J. & Rydel, T. J. (2008). Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 480, 111–121. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Schmitz, R. A., Pol, A., Mohammadi, S. S., Hogendoorn, C., van Gelder, A. H., Jetten, M. S. M., Daumann, L. J. & Op den Camp, H. J. M. (2020). ISME J., https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-020-0609-3. Google Scholar
Skovpen, Y. V., Conly, C. J., Sanders, D. A. & Palmer, D. R. (2016). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 138, 2014–2020. CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Soares da Costa, T. P., Desbois, S., Dogovski, C., Gorman, M. A., Ketaren, N. E., Paxman, J. J., Siddiqui, T., Zammit, L. M., Abbott, B. M., Robins-Browne, R. M., Parker, M. W., Jameson, G. B., Hall, N. E., Panjikar, S. & Perugini, M. A. (2016). Structure, 24, 1282–1291. CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Sridharan, U., Ebihara, A., Kuramitsu, S., Yokoyama, S., Kumarevel, T. & Ponnuraj, K. (2014). Extremophiles, 18, 973–985. CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
The UniProt Consortium (2019). Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D506–D515. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
Vagin, A. & Teplyakov, A. (2010). Acta Cryst. D66, 22–25. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Voss, J. E., Scally, S. W., Taylor, N. L., Atkinson, S. C., Griffin, M. D. W., Hutton, C. A., Parker, M. W., Alderton, M. R., Gerrard, J. A., Dobson, R. C. J., Dogovski, C. & Perugini, M. A. (2010). J. Biol. Chem. 285, 5188–5195. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS 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.