4.8 Article

The MerR-like protein BldC binds DNA direct repeats as cooperative multimers to regulate Streptomyces development

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-03576-3

关键词

-

资金

  1. BBSRC [BB/H006125/1]
  2. BBSRC Institute Strategic Programme Grant [BB/J004561/1]
  3. National Institutes of Health [GM115547]
  4. National Institutes of Health
  5. National Institute of General Medical Sciences
  6. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  7. Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, of the U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  8. University of California Office of the President, Multicampus Research Programs, and Initiatives grant [MR-15-328599]
  9. Sandler Foundation
  10. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [R35GM130290, R01GM115547] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  11. BBSRC [BBS/E/J/000PR9791] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Streptomycetes are notable for their complex life cycle and production of most clinically important antibiotics. A key factor that controls entry into development and the onset of antibiotic production is the 68-residue protein, BldC. BldC is a putative DNA-binding protein related to MerR regulators, but lacks coiled-coil dimerization and effector-binding domains characteristic of classical MerR proteins. Hence, the molecular function of the protein has been unclear. Here we show that BldC is indeed a DNA-binding protein and controls a regulon that includes other key developmental regulators. Intriguingly, BldC DNA-binding sites vary significantly in length. Our BldC-DNA structures explain this DNA-binding capability by revealing that BldC utilizes a DNA-binding mode distinct from MerR and other known regulators, involving asymmetric head-to-tail oligomerization on DNA direct repeats that results in dramatic DNA distortion. Notably, BldC-like proteins radiate throughout eubacteria, establishing BldC as the founding member of a new structural family of regulators.

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

4.8
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