NMR study of human macroPARPs domains: 1H, 15N and 13C resonance assignment of hPARP14 macro domain 2 in the free and the ADPr bound state.

hPARP14 is a human ADP-ribosyl-transferase (ART) that belongs to the macroPARPs family, together with hPARP9 and hPARP15. It contains a tandem of three macro domains (MD) while each of them has different properties. The first one, namely MD1, has not been reported to exhibit a high binding affinity for ADP-ribose (ADPr) in contrast to the following two (MD2 and MD3). All three MDs exhibit an α/ß/α sandwich-like fold as reported by the deposited crystallographic structures. MD2 and MD3 recognize mono-ADP-ribosylated (MARylated) but not poly-ADP-ribosylated (PARylated) substrates and thus they allow hPARP14 to bind its targets, which can be potentially MARylated by its catalytic domain (CD). hPARP14 participates in DNA damage repair process and immune response against viruses like SARS-CoV-2, which also harbors an MD fold. Furthermore, hPARP14 like the other two macroPARPs (hPARP9 and hPARP15), is implicated in numerous types of cancer, such as B-aggressive lymphoma and sarcoma, rendering its MDs as potential important drug targets. Herein, we report the complete NMR backbone and side chain assignment (1H, 13C, 15N) of hPARP14 MD2 in the free and ADPr bound states and the NMR chemical shift-based prediction of its secondary structure elements. This is the first reported NMR study of a hPARP macro domain, paving the way to screen by NMR chemical compounds which may alter the ability of hPARP14 to interact with its substrates affecting its function.

Degradation and adsorption of terbuthylazine and chlorpyrifos in biobed biomixtures from composted cotton crop residues.

BACKGROUND: Biobeds have been well studied in northern Europe, whereas little is known regarding their use in southern Europe. The degradation and adsorption of terbuthylazine (TA) and chlorpyrifos (CP) were studied in three different biomixtures composed of composted cotton crop residues, soil and straw in various proportions, and also in sterilised and non-sterilised soil. RESULTS: Compost biomixtures degraded the less hydrophobic TA at a faster rate than soil, while the opposite was evident for the more hydrophobic CP. These results were attributed to the rapid abiotic hydrolysis of CP in the alkaline soil (pH 8.5) compared with the lower pH of the compost (6.6), but also to the increasing adsorption (K(d) = 746 mL g(-1)) and reduced bioavailability of CP in the biomixtures compared with soil (K(d) = 17 mL g(-1)), as verified by the adsorption studies. CONCLUSIONS: Compost had a dual but contrasting effect on degradation that depended on the chemical nature of the pesticide studied: a positive effect towards TA owing to increasing biodegradation and a negative effect towards CP owing to increasing adsorption. Overall, composted cotton crop residues could be potentially used in local biobed systems in Greece, as they promoted the degradation of hydrophilic pesticides and the adsorption of hydrophobic pesticides.