The structural basis for catalytic function of GMD and RMD, two closely related enzymes from the GDP‐<scp>d</scp>‐rhamnose biosynthesis pathway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rare 6-deoxysugar D-rhamnose is a component of bacterial cell surface glycans, including the D-rhamnose homopolymer produced by Pseudomonas aeruginosa, called A-band O polysaccharide. GDP-D-rhamnose synthesis from GDP-D-mannose is catalyzed by two enzymes. The first is a GDP-D-mannose-4,6-dehydratase (GMD). The second enzyme, RMD, reduces the GMD product (GDP-6-deoxy-D-lyxo-hexos-4-ulose) to GDP-d-rhamnose. Genes encoding GMD and RMD are present in P. aeruginosa, and genetic evidence indicates they act in A-band O-polysaccharide biosynthesis. Details of their enzyme functions have not, however, been previously elucidated. We aimed to characterize these enzymes biochemically, and to determine the structure of RMD to better understand what determines substrate specificity and catalytic activity in these enzymes. We used capillary electrophoresis and NMR analysis of reaction products to precisely define P. aeruginosa GMD and RMD functions. P. aeruginosa GMD is bifunctional, and can catalyze both GDP-d-mannose 4,6-dehydration and the subsequent reduction reaction to produce GDP-D-rhamnose. RMD catalyzes the stereospecific reduction of GDP-6-deoxy-D-lyxo-hexos-4-ulose, as predicted. Reconstitution of GDP-D-rhamnose biosynthesis in vitro revealed that the P. aeruginosa pathway may be regulated by feedback inhibition in the cell. We determined the structure of RMD from Aneurinibacillus thermoaerophilus at 1.8 A resolution. The structure of A. thermoaerophilus RMD is remarkably similar to that of P. aeruginosa GMD, which explains why P. aeruginosa GMD is also able to catalyze the RMD reaction. Comparison of the active sites and amino acid sequences suggests that a conserved amino acid side chain (Arg185 in P. aeruginosa GMD) may be crucial for orienting substrate and cofactor in GMD enzymes.
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".