![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright : © 2008 Min et al. This is an
open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original author and source are credited. An Enzymatic Atavist Revealed in Dual Pathways for Water Activation 1 School of Computational Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, United States of America 2 Department of Biochemistry, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts, United States of America 3 Department of Biological Sciences, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, United States of America 4 Department of Chemistry, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts, United States of America 5 Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, United States of America 6 Institute of Molecular Biophysics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, United States of America 7 College of Life Science, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China Daniel Herschlag, Academic Editor Stanford University, United States of America * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail:hedstrom/at/brandeis.edu (LH);Email: yang/at/sb.fsu.edu (WY) Received October 30, 2007; Accepted July 15, 2008. See "An Enzymatic Palimpsest" , e217.Abstract Inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase (IMPDH) catalyzes an essential step in the
biosynthesis of guanine nucleotides. This reaction involves two different
chemical transformations, an NAD-linked redox reaction and a hydrolase reaction,
that utilize mutually exclusive protein conformations with distinct catalytic
residues. How did Nature construct such a complicated catalyst? Here we employ a
“Wang-Landau” metadynamics algorithm in hybrid quantum
mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM) simulations to investigate the mechanism
of the hydrolase reaction. These simulations show that the lowest energy pathway
utilizes Arg418 as the base that activates water, in remarkable agreement with
previous experiments. Surprisingly, the simulations also reveal a second pathway
for water activation involving a proton relay from Thr321 to Glu431. The energy
barrier for the Thr321 pathway is similar to the barrier observed experimentally
when Arg418 is removed by mutation. The Thr321 pathway dominates at low pH when
Arg418 is protonated, which predicts that the substitution of Glu431 with Gln
will shift the pH-rate profile to the right. This prediction is confirmed in
subsequent experiments. Phylogenetic analysis suggests that the Thr321 pathway
was present in the ancestral enzyme, but was lost when the eukaryotic lineage
diverged. We propose that the primordial IMPDH utilized the Thr321 pathway
exclusively, and that this mechanism became obsolete when the more sophisticated
catalytic machinery of the Arg418 pathway was installed. Thus, our simulations
provide an unanticipated window into the evolution of a complex enzyme. Author Summary Many enzymes have the remarkable ability to catalyze several different
chemical transformations. For example, IMP dehydrogenase catalyzes both an
NAD-linked redox reaction and a hydrolase reaction. These reactions utilize
distinct catalytic residues and protein conformations. How did Nature
construct such a complicated catalyst? While using computational methods to
investigate the mechanism of the hydrolase reaction, we have discovered that
IMP dehydrogenase contains two sets of catalytic residues to activate water.
Importantly, the simulations are in good agreement with previous
experimental observations and are further validated by subsequent
experiments. Phylogenetic analysis suggests that the simpler, less efficient
catalytic machinery was present in the ancestral enzyme, but was lost when
the eukaryotic lineage diverged. We propose that the primordial IMP
dehydrogenase utilized the less efficient machinery exclusively, and that
this mechanism became obsolete when the more sophisticated catalytic
machinery evolved. The presence of the less efficient machinery could
facilitate adaptation, making the evolutionary challenge of the IMPDH
reaction much less formidable. Thus our simulations provide an unanticipated
window into the evolution of a complex enzyme. Introduction Textbooks extol the extraordinary catalytic power and specificity of enzymes, yet the
ability of many enzymes to promote several different chemical transformations is
even more remarkable. In examples such as the polyketide synthases, the substrate is
tethered to a flexible linker and swings gymnastically between separate active sites
[1]. The evolutionary path to the assembly of such enzymes seems
reasonably straightforward: gene duplication and recombination, followed by
optimization of a promiscuous activity [2–6]. In contrast, enzymes such as IMP
dehydrogenase (IMPDH) move around a stationary substrate, restructuring the active
site to accommodate different transition states [7]. Such enzymes pose an evolutionary
conundrum: it seems unlikely that Nature could simultaneously install multiple sets
of catalytic machinery into the ancestral protein. IMPDH controls the entry of
purines into the guanine nucleotide pool, which suggests that the origins of IMPDH
are primordial, so the ancestral IMPDH probably utilized a simpler catalytic
strategy. IMPDH catalyzes two very different chemical transformations: (1) a dehydrogenase
reaction between IMP and NAD+ that produces a Cys319-linked
intermediate E-XMP* and NADH, and (2) a hydrolysis reaction that
releases XMP (Figure 1
All enzymes that catalyze hydrolysis reactions have some strategy to activate water.
This strategy has been difficult to recognize in IMPDH because the hydrolytic water
interacts with three residues that are usually protonated at physiological pH:
Thr321, Arg418, and Tyr419 (Figure
1 We performed a series of hybrid quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM)
simulations to further investigate the mechanism of the hydrolysis reaction of
IMPDH. Surprisingly, these simulations find that IMPDH possesses two mechanisms to
activate water: the Arg418 pathway as previously proposed, and a second pathway
utilizing Thr321. Phylogenetic analysis indicates that the Thr321 pathway was
present in the ancestral enzyme. These observations suggest that the primordial
IMPDH used the Thr321 pathway exclusively, and elimination of the Arg418 pathway by
mutation of modern IMPDH creates an enzymatic atavist. Results and Discussion We have applied computational methods to further investigate the mechanism of water
activation in IMPDH, employing a “Wang-Landau” metadynamics
algorithm [13] in hybrid quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM)
simulations [14–21]. The Wang-Landau recursion procedure adaptively updates the
height of the basis Gaussian, which allows the metadynamics algorithm to be realized
in a more robust and efficient fashion. The simulation models were derived from the
crystal structure of Tritrichomonas
foetus IMPDH in complex with mizoribine monophosphate (MZP)
(Protein Data Bank [PDB] accession code 1PVN), which
describes the closed conformation of the hydrolysis reaction [9].
E-XMP* was modeled based on the guanine residue topology and parameters
in CHARMM 22 [22]. The atoms in the reaction centers (colored in red in Figures 2
Simulation of the Hydrolysis Reaction When Arg418 Is Neutral When Arg418 is deprotonated in the starting condition, the lowest energy pathway
for the hydrolysis reaction involves the transfer of a proton to the neutral
Arg418 (the Arg418 pathway, Figure
2 Tyr419 May Be a Surrogate General Base in the Absence of Arg418 The pKa of a Tyr residue is usually two units lower than an Arg, which
suggests that a deprotonated Tyr419 might activate water while Arg418 remains
protonated. Further simulations argue against such a mechanism; instead, the
deprotonated, negatively charged Tyr419 interacts strongly with positively
charged Arg418 and cannot interact with water. Therefore, Tyr419 is unlikely to
play the role of general base in the wild-type enzyme. However, the situation
changes when Arg418 is substituted with Gln: now the Tyr419 phenolate can accept
a proton from water. The barrier is approximately 17 kcal/mol (Figure 3
Similar surrogate residues have been invoked to explain residual activity in
other enzyme systems [26]. In RNase T1, His40 residue assumes the role the
general base when Glu58 is substituted with Ala [27]. Similarly,
in ketosteroid isomerase, Asp99 may catalyze proton transfers in the Asp38Ala
variant [28]. Water or buffer molecules can also replace the function
of missing catalytic residues [29,30]. These examples illustrate
the resilience and plasticity of enzyme catalysis. Simulation of the Hydrolysis Reaction When Arg418 Is Protonated Surprisingly, the simulations suggest a second pathway for water activation when
the starting condition is protonated Arg418: Thr321 abstracts a proton from
water while simultaneously transferring its own proton to Glu431 (Figure 4 Experimental Verification of the Thr321 Pathway The simulations suggest that the Thr321 pathway is favored at low pH, whereas the
Arg418 pathway becomes dominant at high pH, which predicts that the pH-rate
profile will shift to the right when the Thr321 pathway is disrupted by the
Glu431Gln mutation. This prediction was confirmed experimentally (Figure 5
When Arg418 is substituted with Gln, the barrier for the Thr321 pathway is
approximately 21 kcal/mol, which is similar to the barrier observed
experimentally in the Arg418Ala and Arg418Gln variants [10,11]. Therefore, both the Thr321
pathway and the Tyr419 pathway can account for the residual activity of the
Arg418Ala and Arg418Gln variants. However, since the Thr321 pathway involves the
simultaneous transfer of two protons, this pathway can account for the large
solvent isotope effects observed in the Arg418 variants (SIE =
3–5 [10,11]). Therefore, we constructed the Arg418Gln/Glu431Gln
variant, which should disrupt the Thr321 pathway but leave the Tyr419 pathway
intact. The simulations predict that the activity of this variant should be
approximately the same as the Arg418Gln, but that the solvent isotope effect
should be reduced. These predictions were confirmed in subsequent experiments:
(1) the value of kcat for Arg418Gln/Glu431Gln is
decreased by 50% relative to that of Arg418Gln, as expected if the
Thr321 pathway was lost (0.0020 ± 0.0002 s−1
and 0.0040 ± 0.0004 s−1, respectively); and
(2) though the errors on the SIE are larger than ideal, nonetheless, a smaller
SIE is observed in the reaction of Arg418Gln/Glu431Gln, consistent with the loss
of the Thr321 pathway (SIE = 2.1 ± 0.3 and 2.3
± 0.4 for Arg418Gln/Glu431Gln in two independent determinations
versus 2.9 ± 0.5 for Arg418Gln and 5 ± 2 for Arg418Ala
[10,11]). These
experiments confirm the operation of the Thr321 pathway in IMPDH. GMP Reductase and the Evolutionary Origins of the Thr321 and Arg418 Pathways To the best of our knowledge, the presence of dual mechanisms for water
activation in an enzyme active site is unprecedented. Why would an enzyme have
two pathways to accomplish the same task? We believe the Thr321 pathway may be
vestige of evolution, and phylogenetic analysis is consistent with this
hypothesis (Figure 6
To confirm that GMPR activity depends on the presence of Cys186, Thr188, and
Glu289, we tested the effect of mutations of these residues on the activity of
Escherichia coli
GMPR in a complementation assay (Figure 7
Although the mechanism of the GMPR reaction has not been characterized, some
clear parallels can be drawn with the IMPDH reaction, and E-XMP* may
well be an intermediate. Importantly, if E-XMP* forms as proposed,
the active site must be constructed to prevent the hydrolysis reaction. Kinetic
and structural experiments clearly indicate that the reaction only proceeds when
NADPH is bound in the active site and can block the access of water
[33,36,37]. Moreover, GMPR does not
contain the Arg418-Tyr419 dyad, and the flap is truncated relative to the
corresponding region of IMPDH, as expected, given that the hydrolysis of
E-XMP* must be avoided during the GMPR reaction. Therefore, the
Arg418-Tyr419 dyad could have been installed as IMPDH optimized. Alternatively,
the dyad may have been present in the ancestral IMPDH/GMPR, but was subsequently
remodeled in the GMPR lineage; since the flap binds in the same site as
NAD+, this scenario suggests that the ancestral
IMPDH/GMPR was a hydrolase. While we cannot rule out the latter scenario, we
note that IMPDH is a member of the FMN oxidoreductase superfamily of
(β/α)8 barrel proteins (unfortunately,
none of these proteins is sufficiently similar to permit rooting of the tree)
[38–40]. Therefore, it seems more likely that the ancestral
enzyme was a promiscuous dehydrogenase, and the flap carrying the hydrolase
activity was the later addition. In contrast, the Thr321 pathway was likely present in the ancestral IMPDH/GMPR.
All IMPDHs and GMPRs contain Thr321 (Figures 6 Why then is Glu431 conserved in the majority of prokaryotic IMPDHs? The presence
of the Thr pathway increases turnover, which may be important in maintaining the
high concentration of guanine nucleotides required to support the rapid
proliferation of prokaryotes. More intriguingly, Glu431 provides
5–10-fold resistance to mycophenolic acid, a natural product that
specifically inhibits IMPDH [32]. Approximately 5%
of microorganisms contain some mechanism to modify mycophenolic acid, which
suggests that this compound is reasonably prevalent in the environment
[42]. Indeed, the extraordinary divergence of the adenosine
subsite of IMPDH may be a response to the assault of natural product inhibitors
such as mycophenolic acid and mizoribine [43]. This divergence occurs
despite the multiple functional constraints imposed by interactions with both
NAD+/NADH and the flap. The presence of the Thr
pathway could facilitate this adaptation, making the evolutionary challenge of
the IMPDH reaction much less formidable. Materials and Methods Materials. Plasmid pGS682, a pUC plasmid carrying the 1.4-kb guaC insert
from pGS89 [35], was a generous gift from Simon Andrews (University of
Sheffield). E. coli
strain H1173 was obtained from the E. coli Genetic Stock Center (Yale University). Computational methods. Atoms within a radius of 22 Å around the reaction center were treated
as the dynamic region; this region was propagated with regular Newtonian
dynamics by applying leapfrog integrator and 1-fs time step. The atoms in the
layer between the radii of 22 Å and 25 Å were treated as
the buffer region; the heavy atoms in this region were harmonically restrained
with the force constants scaled linearly with the distance from the sphere
center. The force constants around the boundary of the 25 Å sphere
were set as implied by the B factors of the crystal structure. In the buffer
region, Langevin dynamics were applied with the friction coefficients also
linearly scaled with the distance from the sphere center. The friction
coefficients around the boundary 25 Å sphere were set as 60. CHARMM
22 force fields [22] were utilized as the molecular mechanical potentials in
these simulations (colored in blue in Figures 2 Enzyme assays. IMP, acetylpyridine adenine dinucleotide (APAD+), Tris,
and MES were purchased from Sigma. DTT was purchased from Research Organics.
Wild-type and Glu431Gln IMPDH from T. foetus were expressed in E. coli and purified as
described previously [10,32]. All assays were performed at 25 °C. The
release of NADH is partially rate limiting [11,31]. Therefore, to ensure that
hydrolysis is completely rate limiting, these experiments used
APAD+ [31]. Pre-steady-state experiments
were performed to demonstrate that hydride transfer and APADH are rapid over the
entire pH range ([11] and unpublished data). Standard IMPDH assays contained
saturating concentrations of IMP (2 mM) and varying concentrations of
APAD+ in 100 mM KCl, 1 mM DTT, and 50 mM of the
appropriate buffer (MES for pH 5.0–7.0, and Tris-HCl for pH
7.3–9.3). Activity was measured by monitoring the absorbance of
APADH at 363 nm on a Hitachi U-2000 UV-visible spectrophotometer. Steady-state
parameters with respect to APAD+ were derived at
saturating IMP concentrations by plotting the initial velocity against
APAD+ concentration and fitting to an equation
describing uncompetitive substrate inhibition using SigmaPlot (SPSS):
Phylogenetic analysis. IMPDH/GMPR amino acid sequences (IMPDH IPR005990, GMPR1 IPR005993, and GMPR2
IPR005994) were retrieved from the InterPro database (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/interpro/). Additionally, BLAST
[44] searches with the T. foetus IMPDH (P50097) and
human GMPR1 (P36959) amino acid sequences were performed. Sequences from the
BLAST search that were already part of the InterPro dataset were removed, and an
initial multiple sequence alignment was performed with MUSCLE [45]. A neighbor
joining tree (unpublished data) was constructed in PAUP* 4.0b10
[46], and 95 sequences were selected for a Bayesian
phylogenetic analysis. The sequences of this subset were realigned with Espresso
[47,48]. A Bayesian
phylogenetic analysis was performed with the parallel version of MrBayes 3.1.2
[49,50]. Amino acid
substitution rates and state frequencies were fixed to the WAG parameters
[51]. A uniform (0.0, 200.0) prior was assumed for the shape
parameter of the gamma distribution of substitution rates [52], an
unconstrained exponential prior with rate 10.0 for branch lengths, and all
labeled topologies were a priori equally probable. Two independent MCMC analyses
were run, each with one cold chain and three heated chains, with the incremental
heating schema implemented in MrBayes (λ=0.2).
Convergence was assumed after the topology samples from the two cold chains had
reached an average standard deviation of split frequencies of less than 0.01
(after 1,610,000 generations). Accession numbers, detailed results, and the full
tree are found in Text S1. Complementation assay for GMPR activity. E. coli strain H1173
(F-, guaC23, tonA2,
proA35, lacY1, tsx-70,
supE44?, gal-6, l-,
trp-45, tyrA2, rpsL125,
malA1 (lR), xyl-7, mtl-2,
thi-1, purH57) contains mutations in
purH and guaC, and therefore requires both
adenosine and guanosine for growth. Bacteria were transformed with pGS682
carrying either the wild-type guaC gene or variants containing
C186A, T188A, and E289Q mutations. Cultures were grown overnight in LB or
LB/ampicillin and 5 μl of 1/20 serial dilutions were plated on M9
minimal media containing 0.5% casamino acids, 100 μg/ml
l-tryptophan, 0.1% thiamin, 50 μg/ml
guanosine, and/or 50 μg/ml adenosine. Figure S1: Optimization of the Wang-Landau Metadynamics Conditions
In order to optimize the Wang-Landau metadynamics conditions, three setups
with the final Gaussian heights 1.0 kcal/mol, 0.06 kcal/mol, and 0.01
kcal/mol were executed. The 1.0 kcal/mol simulation yielded a result with
large uncertainties and gave the free energy barrier of 14 kcal/mol at the
end of a 1-ns simulation. The 0.01 kcal/mol simulation yielded a nicely
converged free energy diagram with a barrier of 8 kcal/mol, but required
more than 20 ns. The 0.06 kcal/mol also yielded a free energy barrier of 8
kcal/mol with acceptable fluctuations, but required only 5 ns. Based on
these benchmark results, 0.06 kcal/mol was utilized as the final Gaussian
height throughout all the simulations.
(3.5 MB TIF)
Click here for additional data file.(3.4M, tif)
Figure S2: Simulations of the Thr Pathway with Glu431 Treated MM.
Methods as described in Figure S1
(1.75 MB TIF)
Click here for additional data file.(1.7M, tif)
Figure S3: Experimental Estimation of the Contribution of the Thr Pathway
Assuming that E431Q mutation disables the Thr pathway, but has no effect on
the pH dependence of the Arg pathway, then the pH-rate profile of the
wild-type enzyme is described by:
(2.05 MB TIF)
Click here for additional data file.(2.0M, tif)
Figure S4: Phylogenetic Tree of IMPDH and GMPR
The unrooted tree was inferred with MrBayes (including posterior
probabilities) [49]. Organism names are followed by their sequence
accession codes. IMPDH, GMPR1, and GMPR2 refer to members of InterPro
accession codes IPR005990, IPR005993, and IPR005994, respectively.
(4.39 MB TIF)
Click here for additional data file.(4.2M, tif)
Text S1: Phylogenetic Analysis
Detailed description of the derivation of Figure
S4.
(101 KB PDF)
Click here for additional data file.(101K, pdf)
Acknowledgments We thank Karen Allen, Margaret Phillips, and Gregory Petsko for comments on the
manuscript. Jeffrey Boucher constructed the GMPR mutants.
Abbreviations
Footnotes
Author contributions. DM and HL performed the simulations. HRJ
performed and analyzed the pH dependence of the wild-type and mutant IMPDH
reactions. ISM performed the complementation experiments. CL, GJPN, and DS
performed and analyzed the phylogenetic analysis. LH and WY designed the study
and wrote the paper. All authors discussed the results and commented on the
paper.
Funding. This work was supported by the National Institutes of
Health GM54403 (LH).
Competing interests. The authors have declared that no competing
interests exist. References
|
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Naturwissenschaften. 2001 Mar; 88(3):93-101.
[Naturwissenschaften. 2001]Chem Rev. 1997 Nov 10; 97(7):2465-2498.
[Chem Rev. 1997]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Oct 23; 104(43):17004-9.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007]Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2006 Oct; 10(5):520-5.
[Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2006]Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2006 Oct; 10(5):520-5.
[Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2006]Curr Med Chem. 1999 Jul; 6(7):545-60.
[Curr Med Chem. 1999]Biochemistry. 2003 Feb 4; 42(4):857-63.
[Biochemistry. 2003]Biochemistry. 2003 Feb 4; 42(4):857-63.
[Biochemistry. 2003]Biochemistry. 2004 Apr 20; 43(15):4511-21.
[Biochemistry. 2004]Biochemistry. 2005 Sep 6; 44(35):11700-7.
[Biochemistry. 2005]Biochemistry. 2005 Dec 20; 44(50):16695-700.
[Biochemistry. 2005]J Chem Phys. 2007 May 21; 126(19):194104.
[J Chem Phys. 2007]J Mol Biol. 1976 May 15; 103(2):227-49.
[J Mol Biol. 1976]Acc Chem Res. 2006 Feb; 39(2):73-81.
[Acc Chem Res. 2006]Biochemistry. 2003 Feb 4; 42(4):857-63.
[Biochemistry. 2003]Biochemistry. 2005 Sep 6; 44(35):11700-7.
[Biochemistry. 2005]Biochemistry. 2005 Dec 20; 44(50):16695-700.
[Biochemistry. 2005]Biochemistry. 2004 Apr 20; 43(15):4511-21.
[Biochemistry. 2004]Biochemistry. 2004 Apr 20; 43(15):4511-21.
[Biochemistry. 2004]Biochemistry. 2005 Sep 6; 44(35):11700-7.
[Biochemistry. 2005]Biochemistry. 2005 Dec 20; 44(50):16695-700.
[Biochemistry. 2005]Trends Biochem Sci. 2001 Aug; 26(8):497-503.
[Trends Biochem Sci. 2001]Biochemistry. 1990 Sep 25; 29(38):9064-72.
[Biochemistry. 1990]Biochemistry. 2000 Mar 28; 39(12):3351-9.
[Biochemistry. 2000]Nature. 1988 Apr 7; 332(6164):564-8.
[Nature. 1988]Biochemistry. 2002 Mar 5; 41(9):3235-42.
[Biochemistry. 2002]Biochemistry. 1999 Feb 23; 38(8):2295-306.
[Biochemistry. 1999]Biochemistry. 1999 Nov 16; 38(46):15388-97.
[Biochemistry. 1999]Biochemistry. 1999 Feb 23; 38(8):2295-306.
[Biochemistry. 1999]Biochemistry. 2004 Apr 20; 43(15):4511-21.
[Biochemistry. 2004]Biochemistry. 2005 Sep 6; 44(35):11700-7.
[Biochemistry. 2005]J Mol Biol. 2006 Feb 3; 355(5):980-8.
[J Mol Biol. 2006]Biochemistry. 2003 Feb 4; 42(4):857-63.
[Biochemistry. 2003]J Comput Chem. 2004 Oct; 25(13):1605-12.
[J Comput Chem. 2004]Mutat Res. 1969 Nov-Dec; 8(3):505-12.
[Mutat Res. 1969]Biochem J. 1988 Oct 1; 255(1):35-43.
[Biochem J. 1988]J Mol Biol. 2006 Feb 3; 355(5):980-8.
[J Mol Biol. 2006]J Biol Chem. 1979 Apr 10; 254(7):2308-15.
[J Biol Chem. 1979]Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2002 Sep; 34(9):1035-50.
[Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2002]Protein Sci. 1995 Feb; 4(2):268-74.
[Protein Sci. 1995]J Mol Biol. 2000 Nov 3; 303(4):627-41.
[J Mol Biol. 2000]Biochemistry. 2005 Sep 6; 44(35):11700-7.
[Biochemistry. 2005]Bioinformatics. 2002 Aug; 18(8):1116-23.
[Bioinformatics. 2002]Biochemistry. 1999 Nov 16; 38(46):15388-97.
[Biochemistry. 1999]J Biol Chem. 2005 Mar 25; 280(12):11295-302.
[J Biol Chem. 2005]Biochem J. 1988 Oct 1; 255(1):35-43.
[Biochem J. 1988]Biochemistry. 2004 Apr 20; 43(15):4511-21.
[Biochemistry. 2004]Biochemistry. 1999 Nov 16; 38(46):15388-97.
[Biochemistry. 1999]Biochemistry. 2005 Sep 6; 44(35):11700-7.
[Biochemistry. 2005]Biochemistry. 1999 Feb 23; 38(8):2295-306.
[Biochemistry. 1999]J Mol Biol. 1990 Oct 5; 215(3):403-10.
[J Mol Biol. 1990]Nucleic Acids Res. 2004; 32(5):1792-7.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2004]J Mol Biol. 2000 Sep 8; 302(1):205-17.
[J Mol Biol. 2000]Nucleic Acids Res. 2006 Jul 1; 34(Web Server issue):W604-8.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2006]Bioinformatics. 2003 Aug 12; 19(12):1572-4.
[Bioinformatics. 2003]Bioinformatics. 2003 Aug 12; 19(12):1572-4.
[Bioinformatics. 2003]