Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AEM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AEM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Enzymology and Protein Engineering

Processivity, Substrate Binding, and Mechanism of Cellulose Hydrolysis by Thermobifida fusca Cel9A

Yongchao Li, Diana C. Irwin, David B. Wilson
Yongchao Li
1Field of Microbiology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14850
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Diana C. Irwin
2Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David B. Wilson
2Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: dbw3@cornell.edu
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.02960-06
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • FIG. 1.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 1.

    Space-filled structure of Cel9A-68 (4TF4) with six glucose molecules in the catalytic cleft. This enzyme product structure was obtained after soaking the crystals in cellopentaose (G5). G5 was cleaved to G4 and G1 or G3 and G2, and density for six glucose residues can be seen in the structure because G5 can bind from the position of Glc(−3) to Glc(+2) or from Glc(−4) to Glc(+1). The CBM residues chosen for mutation are shown in dark gray.

  • FIG. 2.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 2.

    Cel9A-68 product complex structure (4TF4) showing amino acids chosen for mutation around the catalytic center in light gray and the six sugar residues in dark gray. Hydrogen bonds are shown as dashed lines. Cleavage occurs between Glc(−1) and Glc(+1).

  • FIG. 3.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 3.

    Sodium azide rescue test. The samples were treated with various concentrations of azide (0 M to 0.6 M) for 16 h, and then SWC activity was assayed and calculated [μmol of cellobiose/(min·μmol of enzyme)]. The average coefficients of variation were 4%, 5%, 3%, and 4% for wild-type and E424, D55, and D58 mutant enzymes, respectively.

  • FIG. 4.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 4.

    Enzyme product complex (4TF4) showing the hydrogen bond network between Y206, D55, Glc(−1), D58, and H125. The hydrogen bonds from the catalytic acid E424 to Glc(−1) and Glc(+1) are also shown.

  • FIG. 5.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 5.

    Structure-based sequence alignment of family 3 CBMs. Secondary structural β-strands are indicated by arrows and enumerated. Proposed cellulose binding residues are shown in dashed boxes, and for T. fusca Cel9A-68, they are F476, D513, Y520, Q561, and R563. Residues shown in solid boxes are conserved, and those T. fusca residues are V465, Y501, Y538, E559, N574, D575, S577, Y594, V600, and P605. Sequences were obtained from the respective GenBank accession codes (included parenthetically) as follows: Cel9A_Thefu, from Thermobifida fusca (M73322); CelQ_Cloth, from Clostridium thermocellum (AB047845); Cel9G_Cloce, from Clostridium cellulolyticum (M87018); EngH_Cloce, from Clostridium cellulovorans (U34793); CelZ2_Clost, from Clostridium stercorarium (X55299); Cel9I2_Cloth, from Clostridium thermocellum (L04735); Cel9B_Cloth, from Clostridium thermocellum (X60545); Cel9A_Celfi, from Cellulomonas fimi (M64644); CipC_Cloce, from Clostridium cellulolyticum (U40345); CipA1_Cloth, from Clostridium thermocellum (X67406); CbpA_Cloce, from Clostridium cellulovorans (M73817); CipA_Clojo, from Clostridium josui (AB004845); CelZ1_Clost, from Clostridium stercorarium (X55299); CelA_Calsa, from Caldicellulosiruptor saccharolyticus (M36063); CelA_Paela, from Paenibacillus lautus (M76588); and Cel9I1_Cloth, from Clostridium thermocellum (L04735).

Tables

  • Figures
  • TABLE 1.

    Activity and binding characteristics of mutant enzymes

    EnzymeActivity on substratea (μmol cellobiose min−1 μmol enzyme−1):Processivityb (ratio of soluble/insoluble reducing ends produced)Binding to:
    CMCSWCBCFPBCb (% bound)MUG3 (dissociation constant [μM])
    Cel9A-68 amino acids 1-613
        Wild type27910.53.30.283.1150.57
    Key catalytic residue mutants
        E424A0.28d0.03d0.01d401.23d
        D55A0.6d0.14d0.03d2.21d
        D55C9.30.332
        D58A0.9d0.21d0.07d0.50d
        Y206S1.0d0.15d0.040d0.06d0d5Poord
        H125N7.90.40.110.070.325
        H125A6.70.70.090.050360.73
    CD mutants interacting with Glc(−1) to Glc(−4)
        F205A964.40.330.141.4112.30
        Y429A583.00.370.151.3260.26
        W313G100.60.100.081.013Poor
        W313D8.40.50.080.060.916Poor
        W209S62910.50.460.182.621
        W256A1,0807.40.260.131.816
        R317K4439.20.440.182.219
        D261A7589.60.490.172.620
        D261N1,51010.00.370.161.618
    CD mutants interacting with Glc(+1), Glc(+2), and putative Glc(+3)
        R378K2709.63.40.264.320
        W128A320.40.250.121.918
    CD double mutant
        D261A/R378K5033.00.180.101.318
    CBM mutants
        Y520A3028.21.10.222.714
        D513A27912.14.00.303.720
        I514H2909.63.70.293.423
        R557A/E559A2527.90.480.213.315
        F476A270112.60.284.521
        R563A2707.41.70.264.020
    Cel9A-51 amino acids 1-463
        Wild type240.60.2c0.13c0.6c8
        D55C0.90.110
    • ↵ a The average coefficients of variation were 3%, 4%, 3%, and 2% for CMC, SWC, BC, and FP, respectively.

    • ↵ b The average coefficients of variation for processivity and BC binding were each 3%.

    • ↵ c Data from reference 4.

    • ↵ d Data from reference 21.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Processivity, Substrate Binding, and Mechanism of Cellulose Hydrolysis by Thermobifida fusca Cel9A
Yongchao Li, Diana C. Irwin, David B. Wilson
Applied and Environmental Microbiology May 2007, 73 (10) 3165-3172; DOI: 10.1128/AEM.02960-06

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Applied and Environmental Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Processivity, Substrate Binding, and Mechanism of Cellulose Hydrolysis by Thermobifida fusca Cel9A
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Applied and Environmental Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Applied and Environmental Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Processivity, Substrate Binding, and Mechanism of Cellulose Hydrolysis by Thermobifida fusca Cel9A
Yongchao Li, Diana C. Irwin, David B. Wilson
Applied and Environmental Microbiology May 2007, 73 (10) 3165-3172; DOI: 10.1128/AEM.02960-06
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Actinomycetales
Cellulases
cellulose

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AEM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AppEnvMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

 

Print ISSN: 0099-2240; Online ISSN: 1098-5336