The Conserved Glutamate Residue Adjacent to the Walker-B Motif Is the Catalytic Base for ATP Hydrolysis in the ATP-binding Cassette Transporter BmrA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ATP-binding cassette (ABC) proteins constitute one of the widest families in all organisms, whose P-glycoprotein involved in resistance of cancer cells to chemotherapy is an archetype member. Although three-dimensional structures of several nucleotide-binding domains of ABC proteins are now available, the catalytic mechanism triggering the functioning of these proteins still remains elusive. In particular, it has been postulated that ATP hydrolysis proceeds via an acid-base mechanism catalyzed by the Glu residue adjacent to the Walker-B motif (Geourjon, C., Orelle, C., Steinfels, E., Blanchet, C., Deléage, G., Di Pietro, A., and Jault, J. M. (2001) Trends Biochem. Sci. 26, 539-544), but the involvement of such residue as the catalytic base in ABC transporters was recently questioned (Sauna, Z. E., Muller, M., Peng, X. H., and Ambudkar, S. V. (2002) Biochemistry, 41, 13989-14000). The equivalent glutamate residue (Glu504) of a half-ABC transporter involved in multidrug resistance in Bacillus subtilis, BmrA (formerly known as YvcC), was therefore mutated to Asp, Ala, Gln, Ser, and Cys residues. All these mutants were fully devoid of ATPase activity, yet they showed a high level of vanadate-independent trapping of 8-N3-alpha-32P-labeled nucleotide(s), following preincubation with 8-N3-[alpha-32P]ATP. However, and in contrast to the wild-type enzyme, the use of 8-N3-[gamma-32P]ATP unequivocally showed that all the mutants trapped exclusively the triphosphate form of the analogue, suggesting that they were not able to perform even a single hydrolytic turnover. These results demonstrate that Glu504 is the catalytic base for ATP hydrolysis in BmrA, and it is proposed that equivalent glutamate residues in other ABC transporters play the same role.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".