Biomedical subjects

Joachim Jager

Publications and source records attributed to Joachim Jager.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2002

Threonine 79 is a hinge residue that governs the fidelity of DNA polymerase beta by helping to position the DNA within the active site.

DNA polymerase beta (pol beta) is an ideal system for studying the role of its different amino acid residues in the fidelity of DNA synthesis. In this study, the T79S variant of pol beta was identified using an in vivo genetic screen. T79S is located in the N-terminal 8-kDa domain of pol beta and has no contact with either the DNA template or the incoming dNTP substrate. The T79S protein produced 8-fold more multiple mutations in the herpes simplex virus type 1-thymidine kinase assay than wild-type pol beta. Surprisingly, T79S is a misincorporation mutator only when using a 3'-recessed primer-template. In the presence of a single nucleotide-gapped DNA substrate, T79S displays an antimutator phenotype when catalyzing DNA synthesis opposite template C and has similar fidelity as wild type opposite templates A, G, or T. Threonine 79 is located directly between two helix-hairpin-helix motifs located within the 8-kDa and thumb domains of pol beta. As the pol beta enzyme closes into its active form, the helix-hairpin-helix motifs appear to assist in the production and stabilization of a 90 degrees bend of the DNA. The function of the bent DNA is to present the templating base to the incoming nucleotide substrate. We propose that Thr-79 is part of a hydrogen bonding network within the helix-hairpin-helix motifs that is important for positioning the DNA within the active site. We suggest that alteration of Thr-79 to Ser disrupts this hydrogen bonding network and results in an enzyme that is unable to bend the DNA into the proper geometry for accurate DNA synthesis.

Base Sequence↗

PubMed2002

Structural plasticity and noncovalent substrate binding in the GroEL apical domain. A study using electrospay ionization mass spectrometry and fluorescence binding studies.

Advances in understanding how GroEL binds to non-native proteins are reported. Conformational flexibility in the GroEL apical domain, which could account for the variety of substrates that GroEL binds, is illustrated by comparison of several independent crystallographic structures of apical domain constructs that show conformational plasticity in helices H and I. Additionally, ESI-MS indicates that apical domain constructs have co-populated conformations at neutral pH. To assess the ability of different apical domain conformers to bind co-chaperone and substrate, model peptides corresponding to the mobile loop of GroES and to helix D from rhodanese were studied. Analysis of apical domain-peptide complexes by ESI-MS indicates that only the folded or partially folded apical domain conformations form complexes that survive gas phase conditions. Fluorescence binding studies show that the apical domain can fully bind both peptides independently. No competition for binding was observed, suggesting the peptides have distinct apical domain-binding sites. Blocking the GroES-apical domain-binding site in GroEL rendered the chaperonin inactive in binding GroES and in assisting the folding of denatured rhodanese, but still capable of binding non-native proteins, supporting the conclusion that GroES and substrate proteins have, at least partially, distinct binding sites even in the intact GroEL tetradecamer.

Binding Sites↗