Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Jul 13;287(29):24807-13.
doi: 10.1074/jbc.M112.365510. Epub 2012 May 30.

Product binding varies dramatically between processive and nonprocessive cellulase enzymes

Affiliations

Product binding varies dramatically between processive and nonprocessive cellulase enzymes

Lintao Bu et al. J Biol Chem. .

Abstract

Cellulases hydrolyze β-1,4 glycosidic linkages in cellulose, which are among the most prevalent and stable bonds in Nature. Cellulases comprise many glycoside hydrolase families and exist as processive or nonprocessive enzymes. Product inhibition negatively impacts cellulase action, but experimental measurements of product-binding constants vary significantly, and there is little consensus on the importance of this phenomenon. To provide molecular level insights into cellulase product inhibition, we examine the impact of product binding on processive and nonprocessive cellulases by calculating the binding free energy of cellobiose to the product sites of catalytic domains of processive and nonprocessive enzymes from glycoside hydrolase families 6 and 7. The results suggest that cellobiose binds to processive cellulases much more strongly than nonprocessive cellulases. We also predict that the presence of a cellodextrin bound in the reactant site of the catalytic domain, which is present during enzymatic catalysis, has no effect on product binding in nonprocessive cellulases, whereas it significantly increases product binding to processive cellulases. This difference in product binding correlates with hydrogen bonding between the substrate-side ligand and the cellobiose product in processive cellulase tunnels and the additional stabilization from the longer tunnel-forming loops. The hydrogen bonds between the substrate- and product-side ligands are disrupted by water in nonprocessive cellulase clefts, and the lack of long tunnel-forming loops results in lower affinity of the product ligand. These findings provide new insights into the large discrepancies reported for binding constants for cellulases and suggest that product inhibition will vary significantly based on the amount of productive binding for processive cellulases on cellulose.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1.
FIGURE 1.
Structure of the CD of Cel7A (A), Cel7B (B), Cel6A (C), and Cel6B (D) with a cellodextrin chain (shown in blue stick model) at the reactant site and a cellobiose (shown in red stick model) at the product site of the CD. The cellodextrin is celloheptaose in Cel7A and Cel7B and cellotetraose in Cel6A and Cel6B. Construction of the N-linked glycans, which are shown below the glycosylated enzymes, is described in the supplemental text. The black line connecting the green and yellow spheres represents the pulling coordinate.
FIGURE 2.
FIGURE 2.
PMF profiles of cellobiose expulsion from the CD of the four cellulases. PMF for Cel7A with cellodextrin is adopted from Ref. . Errors are computed by bootstrap sampling.
FIGURE 3.
FIGURE 3.
A typical snapshot at 10 ns shows water molecules surrounding the carbohydrate ligand in the four cellulases examined in this study: Cel7A (A), Cel7B (B), Cel6A (C), and Cel6B (D). All water molecules within 3.5 Å of the carbohydrate substrate are shown in pink.
FIGURE 4.
FIGURE 4.
Cel7A inhibition by cellobiose (modified from Ref. 9). The cellodextrin chain is shown in blue, and the cellobiose is shown in red. E, free Cel7A; ES′, precatalytic Cel7A-cellodextrin complex; ES, catalytically active Cel7A-cellodextrin complex; EI, Cel7A-inhibitor complex; ESI, Cel7A-cellodextrin-inhibitor complex.

References

    1. Himmel M. E., Ding S. Y., Johnson D. K., Adney W. S., Nimlos M. R., Brady J. W., Foust T. D. (2007) Biomass recalcitrance: engineering plants and enzymes for biofuels production. Science 315, 804–807 - PubMed
    1. Lynd L. R., Weimer P. J., van Zyl W. H., Pretorius I. S. (2002) Microbial cellulose utilization: fundamentals and biotechnology. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 66, 506–577 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Andrić P., Meyer A. S., Jensen P. A., Dam-Johansen K. (2010) Reactor design for minimizing product inhibition during enzymatic lignocellulose hydrolysis. I. Significance and mechanism of cellobiose and glucose inhibition on cellulolytic enzymes. Biotechnol. Adv. 28, 308–324 - PubMed
    1. Bansal P., Hall M., Realff M. J., Lee J. H., Bommarius A. S. (2009) Modeling cellulase kinetics on lignocellulosic substrates. Biotechnol. Adv. 27, 833–848 - PubMed
    1. Gan Q., Allen S. J., Taylor G. (2003) Kinetic dynamics in heterogeneous enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose: an overview, an experimental study and mathematical modelling. Process Biochemistry 38, 1003–1018

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources