PSI Structural Biology Knowledgebase

PSI | Structural Biology Knowledgebase
Header Icons

Related Articles
Signaling: A Platform for Opposing Functions
May 2015
Protein Folding and Misfolding: It's the Journey, Not the Destination
March 2015
Molecular Portraits of the Cell
February 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: A Flexible Transporter
February 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: Higher Resolution of Macromolecules
February 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: Integrative Approach to Probe Nup133
February 2015
Piecing Together the Nuclear Pore Complex
February 2015
Updating ModBase
January 2015
Transmembrane Spans
December 2014
Mining Protein Dynamics
May 2014
Novel Proteins and Networks: Assigning Function
May 2014
Cancer Networks: Predicting Catalytic Residues from 3D Protein Structures
November 2013
The Immune System: A Brotherhood of Immunoglobulins
June 2013
The Immune System: Super Cytokines
June 2013
Infectious Diseases: Targeting Meningitis
May 2013
PDZ Domains
April 2013
Protein Interaction Networks: Adding Structure to Protein Networks
April 2013
Design and Discovery: Flexible Backbone Protein Redesign
February 2013
Pocket changes
July 2012
Predictive protein origami
July 2012
Refining protein structure prediction
March 2012
Metal mates
February 2012
Devil is in the details
January 2012
Playing while you work
November 2011
Docking and rolling
October 2011
Fit to serve
October 2011
Rosetta hone
July 2011
Structure from sequence
July 2011
An easier solution for symmetry
June 2011
Solutions in the solution
June 2011
Regulating nitrogen assimilation
January 2011
Guard cells pick up the SLAC
December 2010
Alpha/Beta Barrels
October 2010
Modeling RNA structures
May 2010
Deducing function from small structural clues
February 2010
Spot the pore
January 2010
Network coverage
November 2009
GPCR modeling: any good?
August 2009
Protein modeling made easy
July 2009
Model proteins in your lunch break
April 2009
Click for cancer-protein interactions
December 2008
Modeling with SAXS
October 2008
Designing activity
September 2008

Technology Topics Modeling

Designing activity

PSI-SGKB [doi:10.1038/th_psisgkb.2008.6]
Technical Highlight - September 2008
Short description: Science 319, 1387-1391 (2008)

The increasing ease in use of molecular biology techniques in recent years has contributed to the growth of the enzyme design field, where naturally occurring protein catalysts have been optimized to have improved stability and catalytic efficiency, and, for certain industrial processes, altered substrate selectivity. For the most part, enzyme design has taken the shape of directed evolution, in which large-scale random mutagenesis is coupled to selective screening for optimized catalytic activity of a given chemical reaction. While directed evolution requires no knowledge of active site structure and mechanism to be effective, the much-less successful rational design approach makes use of known structural organization of a catalytic site to purposefully tinker with features within the active site. Baker and colleagues have now developed what looks to be a huge leap forward in rational design. The authors use their approach to develop novel retro-aldol enzymes that can break a carbon-carbon bond in a non-natural substrate. They start by examining the active site of two structurally known retro-aldol enzymes. Because they were looking to design an enzyme that catalyzes a multi-step reaction, they first computationally modeled the different reaction intermediates and transition states. To improve the chances of recreating an active site that can stabilize a given transition state but also favorably interact with reaction intermediates and the other steps in the reaction pathway, the authors fine-sampled the degrees of freedom of the relevant functional groups to produce large ensembles of models for each of the key intermediate and transition states. These models were superimposed to produce several composite active site motifs capable of accommodating all reaction steps. The authors then used RosettaMatch to identify potential catalytic pockets from a library of protein scaffolds. After further optimization of the catalytic site and surrounding scaffold, the highest ranking models, based on binding energies and catalytic site geometry, were experimentally characterized. Of the 70 designs ultimately tested, 32 showed weak catalytic activity, with the most active designs having a modeled water molecule presumably involved in a proton shuffling step. The crystal structure of the best enzyme largely confirmed the modeled active site design. While this work showed that it is possible to design novel enzymatic activity, the best designs had activities that were only a fraction of those found in naturally-occurring enzymes, suggesting that additional features must be considered when optimizing the catalytic design.

Michelle Montoya


  1. Lin Jiang, Eric A. Althoff, Fernando R. Clemente, Lindsey Doyle, Daniela Röthlisberger et al. De Novo Computational Design of Retro-Aldol Enzymes.
    Science 319, 1387-1391 (2008). doi:10.1126/science.1152692

Structural Biology Knowledgebase ISSN: 1758-1338
Funded by a grant from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health