The solution structure of the periplasmic domain of the TonB system ExbD protein reveals an unexpected structural homology with siderophore‐binding proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transport of iron complexes through outer membrane transporters from Gram-negative bacteria is highly dependent on the TonB system. Together, the three components of the system, TonB, ExbB and ExbD, energize the transport of iron complexes through the outer membrane by utilizing the proton motive force across the cytoplasmic membrane. The three-dimensional (3D) structure of the periplasmic domain of TonB has previously been determined. However, no detailed structural information for the other two components of the TonB system is currently available and their role in the iron-uptake process is not yet clearly understood. ExbD from Escherichia coli contains 141 residues distributed in three domains: a small N-terminal cytoplasmic region, a single transmembrane helix and a C-terminal periplasmic domain. Here we describe the first well-defined solution structure of the periplasmic domain of ExbD (residues 44-141) solved by multidimensional nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. The monomeric structure presents three clearly distinct regions: an N-terminal flexible tail (residues 44-63), a well-defined folded region (residues 64-133) followed by a small C-terminal flexible region (residues 134-141). The folded region is formed by two alpha-helices that are located on one side of a single beta-sheet. The central beta-sheet is composed of five beta-strands, with a mixed parallel and antiparallel arrangement. Unexpectedly, this fold closely resembles that found in the C-terminal lobe of the siderophore-binding proteins FhuD and CeuE. The ExbD periplasmic domain has a strong tendency to aggregate in vitro and 3D-TROSY (transverse relaxation optimized spectroscopy) NMR experiments of the deuterated protein indicate that the multimeric protein has nearly identical secondary structure to that of the monomeric form. Chemical shift perturbation studies suggest that the Glu-Pro region (residues 70-83) of TonB can bind weakly to the surface and the flexible C-terminal region of ExbD. At the same time the Lys-Pro region (residues 84-102) and the folded C-terminal domain (residues 150-239) of TonB do not show significant binding to ExbD, suggesting that the main interactions forming the TonB complex occur in the cytoplasmic membrane.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".