NMR solution structures of two mutants of desulforedoxin.

The differences in geometry at the metal centres in the two known [Fe-4S] proteins rubredoxin (Rd) and desulforedoxin (Dx) are postulated to be a result of the different spacing of the C-terminal cysteine pair in the two proteins. In order to address this question, two mutants of Desulfovibrio gigas Dx with modified cysteinyl spacing were prepared and their solution structures have been determined by NMR. Mutant 1 of Dx (DxM1) has a single glycine inserted between the adjacent cysteines (C28 and C29) found in the wild type Dx sequence. Mutant 3 (DxM3) has two amino acid residues, -P-V-, inserted between C28 and C29 in order to mimic the primary sequence found in Rd from Desulfovibrio gigas. The solution structure of DxM1 exists, like wild type Dx, as a dimer in solution although the single glycine inserted between the adjacent cysteines disrupts the stability of the dimer resulting in exchange between a dimer state and a small population of another, probably monomeric, state. For DxM3 the two amino acid residues inserted between the adjacent cysteines results in a monomeric protein that has a global fold near the metal centre very similar to that found in Rd.

Gene sequence and crystal structure of the aldehyde oxidoreductase from Desulfovibrio desulfuricans ATCC 27774.

The aldehyde oxidoreductase (MOD) isolated from the sulfate reducer Desulfovibrio desulfuricans (ATCC 27774) is a member of the xanthine oxidase family of molybdenum-containing enzymes. It has substrate specificity similar to that of the homologous enzyme from Desulfovibrio gigas (MOP) and the primary sequences from both enzymes show 68 % identity. The enzyme was crystallized in space group P6(1)22, with unit cell dimensions of a=b=156.4 A and c=177.1 A, and diffraction data were obtained to beyond 2.8 A. The crystal structure was solved by Patterson search techniques using the coordinates of the D. gigas enzyme. The overall fold of the D. desulfuricans enzyme is very similar to MOP and the few differences are mapped to exposed regions of the molecule. This is reflected in the electrostatic potential surfaces of both homologous enzymes, one exception being the surface potential in a region identifiable as the putative docking site of the physiological electron acceptor. Other essential features of the MOP structure, such as residues of the active-site cavity, are basically conserved in MOD. Two mutations are located in the pocket bearing a chain of catalytically relevant water molecules. As deduced from this work, both these enzymes are very closely related in terms of their sequences as well as 3D structures. The comparison allowed confirmation and establishment of features that are essential for their function; namely, conserved residues in the active-site, catalytically relevant water molecules and recognition of the physiological electron acceptor docking site.