Abstract

The processing of secretory preproteins by signal peptidases (SPases) is essential for cell viability. As previously shown for Bacillus subtilis, only certain SPases of organisms containing multiple paralogous SPases are essential. This allows a distinction between SPases that are of major and minor importance for cell viability. Notably, the functional difference between major and minor SPases is not reflected clearly in sequence alignments. Here, we have successfully used molecular phylogeny to predict major and minor SPases. The results were verified with SPases from various bacilli. As predicted, the latter enzymes behaved as major or minor SPases when expressed in B. subtilis. Strikingly, molecular modeling indicated that the active site geometry is not a critical parameter for the classification of major and minor Bacillus SPases. Even though the substrate binding site of the minor SPase SipV is smaller than that of other known SPases, SipV could be converted into a major SPase without changing this site. Instead, replacement of amino-terminal residues of SipV with corresponding residues of the major SPase SipS was sufficient for conversion of SipV into a major SPase. This suggests that differences between major and minor SPases are based on activities other than substrate cleavage site selection.

Highlights

  • Signal peptidases (SPases)1 play a key role in the transport of proteins across membranes in all living organisms

  • SipV (2) SipT B. subtilis (Bsu) ϩ SipT Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (Bam) (3) SipS Bsu ϩ SipS Bam (4) SipP (5) (3) ϩ (4) ϩ (5) ϩ Sip Bli (3) ϩ (4) ϩ (5) ϩ Sip Bli ϩ SipU (1) ϩ SipU (1) ϩ SipX Bacillus anthracis (Ban) (2) ϩ SipC Bacillus caldolyticus (Bca) (3) ϩ SipX Ban minor SPases of the Bacillus species, phylogenetic analyses were performed by applying the maximum likelihood and maximum parsimony (MP) methods

  • Consistent with the fact that only few ␣-helices are present in type I SPases (11), the maximum likelihood analysis that was based on ␣-helices resulted in a tree with a poorly resolved topology, and the equivalent MP analysis in 108 “most parsimonious trees” (112 steps long, CI excluding uninformative characters ϭ 0.8077, RI ϭ 0.7101, RC ϭ 0.5833)

Read more

Summary

17 This paper

This paper This paper minor Bacillus SPases and the identification of domains in these enzymes that are critical for their specificity. The results show that major and minor Bacillus SPases can be distinguished by phylogenetic analyses and that critical information for their role in cell viability is provided by residues that are located amino-terminally of the catalytic Ser residue. Molecular modeling of the active site of major and minor P-type SPases of B. subtilis suggests that the active site cleft of the minor SPase SipV is significantly smaller than those of the other known Bacillus P-type SPases. This difference can not explain why SipV is a minor SPase

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call