MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034182536 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m114.618199

The β-Lactamase Gene Regulator AmpR Is a Tetramer That Recognizes and Binds the d-Ala-d-Ala Motif of Its Repressor UDP-N-acetylmuramic Acid (MurNAc)-pentapeptide

2014· article· en· W2034182536 on OpenAlexafffund
Grishma Vadlamani, Misty D. Thomas, Trushar R. Patel, Lynda J. Donald, Thomas M. Reeve, Jörg Stetefeld, Kenneth G. Standing, David J. Vocadlo, Brian L. Mark

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRepressorBiologyPentapeptide repeatHomotetramerCitrobacter freundiiBiochemistryPeptidoglycanTranscription (linguistics)Activator (genetics)Electrophoretic mobility shift assayRegulonGenePromoterDNA-binding domainTranscription factorGene expressionEnterobacteriaceaeEscherichia coli

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inducible expression of chromosomal AmpC β-lactamase is a major cause of β-lactam antibiotic resistance in the Gram-negative bacteria Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterobacteriaceae. AmpC expression is induced by the LysR-type transcriptional regulator (LTTR) AmpR, which activates ampC expression in response to changes in peptidoglycan (PG) metabolite levels that occur during exposure to β-lactams. Under normal conditions, AmpR represses ampC transcription by binding the PG precursor UDP- N -acetylmuramic acid (MurNAc)-pentapeptide. When exposed to β-lactams, however, PG catabolites (1,6-anhydroMurNAc-peptides) accumulate in the cytosol, which have been proposed to competitively displace UDP-MurNAc-pentapeptide from AmpR and convert it into an activator of ampC transcription. Here we describe the molecular interactions between AmpR (from Citrobacter freundii ), its DNA operator, and repressor UDP-MurNAc-pentapeptide. Non-denaturing mass spectrometry revealed AmpR to be a homotetramer that is stabilized by DNA containing the T-N 11 -A LTTR binding motif and revealed that it can bind four repressor molecules in an apparently stepwise manner. A crystal structure of the AmpR effector-binding domain bound to UDP-MurNAc-pentapeptide revealed that the terminal d-Ala-d-Ala motif of the repressor forms the primary contacts with the protein. This observation suggests that 1,6-anhydroMurNAc-pentapeptide may convert AmpR into an activator of ampC transcription more effectively than 1,6-anhydroMurNAc-tripeptide (which lacks the d-Ala-d-Ala motif). Finally, small angle x-ray scattering demonstrates that the AmpR·DNA complex adopts a flat conformation similar to the LTTR protein AphB and undergoes only a slight conformational change when binding UDP-MurNAc-pentapeptide. Modeling the AmpR·DNA tetramer bound to UDP-MurNAc-pentapeptide predicts that the UDP-MurNAc moiety of the repressor participates in modulating AmpR function. Background: Peptidoglycan metabolites regulate AmpR-mediated control of ampC β-lactamase expression. Results: AmpR binds DNA as a tetramer and interacts with up to four copies of its repressor UDP-MurNAc-pentapeptide via its d-Ala-d-Ala motif. Conclusion: d-Ala-d-Ala recognition supports 1,6-anhydroMurNAc-pentapeptide as an AmpR activator, probably through competitive binding with UDP-MurNAc-pentapeptide. Significance: Understanding how peptidoglycan metabolites modulate AmpR provides insight into how β-lactam classes differentially induce ampC expression.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations88
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicAntibiotic Resistance in BacteriaFrench-language works237,207