4.5 Article

Crystal structure and functional characterization of a glucosamine-6-phosphate N-acetyltransferase from Arabidopsis thaliana

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL JOURNAL
卷 443, 期 -, 页码 427-437

出版社

PORTLAND PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.1042/BJ20112071

关键词

Arabidopsis thaliana; glucosamine-6-phosphate N-acetyltransferase (GNA); glycosylation; N-acetyl glucosamine biosynthesis; nucleotide sugar

资金

  1. Max Planck Society
  2. Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung [315426C]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

GlcNAc (N-acetylglucosamine) is an essential part of the glycan chain in N-linked glycoproteins. It is a building block for polysaccharides such as chitin, and several glucosaminoglycans and proteins can be O-GlcNAcylated. The deacetylated form, glucosamine, is an integral part of GPI (glycosylphosphatidylinositol) anchors. Both are incorporated into polymers by glycosyltransferases that utilize UDP-GlcNAc. This UDP-sugar is synthesized in a short pathway comprising four steps starting from fructose 6-phosphate. GNA (glucosamine-6-phosphate N-acetyltransferase) catalyses the second of these four reactions in the de novo synthesis in eukaryotes. A phylogenetic analysis revealed that only one GNA isoform can be found in most of the species investigated and that the most likely Arabidopsis candidate is encoded by the gene At5g15770 (AtGNA). qPCR (quantitative PCR) revealed the ubiquitous expression of AtGNA in all organs of Arabidopsis plants. Heterologous expression of AtGNA showed that it is highly active between pH 7 and 8 and at temperatures of 30-40 degrees C. It showed K-m values of 231 mu M for glucosamine 6-phosphate and 33 mu M for acetyl-CoA respectively and a catalytic efficiency comparable with that of other GNAs characterized. The solved crystal structure of AtGNA at a resolution of 1.5 angstrom (1 angstrom = 0.1 nm) revealed a very high structural similarity to crystallized GNA proteins from Homo sapiens and Saccharomyces cerevisiae despite less well conserved protein sequence identity.

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

4.5
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