Composite active site of chondroitin lyase ABC accepting both epimers of uronic acid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Enzymes have evolved as catalysts with high degrees of stereospecificity. When both enantiomers are biologically important, enzymes with two different folds usually catalyze reactions with the individual enantiomers. In rare cases a single enzyme can process both enantiomers efficiently, but no molecular basis for such catalysis has been established. The family of bacterial chondroitin lyases ABC comprises such enzymes. They can degrade both chondroitin sulfate (CS) and dermatan sulfate (DS) glycosaminoglycans at the nonreducing end of either glucuronic acid (CS) or its epimer iduronic acid (DS) by a beta-elimination mechanism, which commences with the removal of the C-5 proton from the uronic acid. Two other structural folds evolved to perform these reactions in an epimer-specific fashion: (alpha/alpha)(5) for CS (chondroitin lyases AC) and beta-helix for DS (chondroitin lyases B); their catalytic mechanisms have been established at the molecular level. The structure of chondroitinase ABC from Proteus vulgaris showed surprising similarity to chondroitinase AC, including the presence of a Tyr-His-Glu-Arg catalytic tetrad, which provided a possible mechanism for CS degradation but not for DS degradation. We determined the structure of a distantly related Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron chondroitinase ABC to identify additional structurally conserved residues potentially involved in catalysis. We found a conserved cluster located approximately 12 A from the catalytic tetrad. We demonstrate that a histidine in this cluster is essential for catalysis of DS but not CS. The enzyme utilizes a single substrate-binding site while having two partially overlapping active sites catalyzing the respective reactions. The spatial separation of the two sets of residues suggests a substrate-induced conformational change that brings all catalytically essential residues close together.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".