4.7 Article

Structure of the RNA Binding Domain of a DEAD-Box Helicase Bound to Its Ribosomal RNA Target Reveals a Novel Mode of Recognition by an RNA Recognition Motif

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
卷 402, 期 2, 页码 412-427

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2010.07.040

关键词

DEAD-box RNA helicase; RNA recognition motif; RNA binding; ribosomal RNA folding; X-ray crystallography

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [GM71696]
  2. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  3. Department of Energy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

DEAD-box RNA helicases of the bacterial DbpA subfamily are localized to their biological substrate when a carboxy-terminal RNA recognition motif domain binds tightly and specifically to a segment of 23S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) that includes hairpin 92 of the peptidyl transferase center. A complex between a fragment of 23S rRNA and the RNA binding domain (RBD) of the Bacillus subtilis DbpA protein YxiN was crystallized and its structure was determined to 2.9 angstrom resolution, revealing an RNA recognition mode that differs from those observed with other RNA recognition motifs. The RBD is bound between two RNA strands at a three-way junction. Multiple phosphates of the RNA backbone interact with an electropositive band generated by lysines of the RBD. Nucleotides of the single-stranded loop of hairpin 92 interact with the RBD, including the guanosine base of G2553, which forms three hydrogen bonds with the peptide backbone. A G2553U mutation reduces the RNA binding affinity by 2 orders of magnitude, confirming that G2553 is a sequence specificity determinant in RNA binding. Binding of the RBD to 23S rRNA in the late stages of ribosome subunit maturation would position the ATP-binding duplex destabilization fragment of the protein for interaction with rRNA in the peptidyl transferase cleft of the subunit, allowing it to melt out unstable secondary structures and allow proper folding. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据