High Resolution Structures of the Human ABO(H) Blood Group Enzymes in Complex with Donor Analogs Reveal That the Enzymes Utilize Multiple Donor Conformations to Bind Substrates in a Stepwise Manner
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Homologous glycosyltransferases α-(1→3)-N-acetylgalactosaminyltransferase (GTA) and α-(1→3)-galactosyltransferase (GTB) catalyze the final step in ABO(H) blood group A and B antigen synthesis through sugar transfer from activated donor to the H antigen acceptor. These enzymes have a GT-A fold type with characteristic mobile polypeptide loops that cover the active site upon substrate binding and, despite intense investigation, many aspects of substrate specificity and catalysis remain unclear. The structures of GTA, GTB, and their chimeras have been determined to between 1.55 and 1.39 Å resolution in complex with natural donors UDP-Gal, UDP-Glc and, in an attempt to overcome one of the common problems associated with three-dimensional studies, the non-hydrolyzable donor analog UDP-phosphono-galactose (UDP-C-Gal). Whereas the uracil moieties of the donors are observed to maintain a constant location, the sugar moieties lie in four distinct conformations, varying from extended to the "tucked under" conformation associated with catalysis, each stabilized by different hydrogen bonding partners with the enzyme. Further, several structures show clear evidence that the donor sugar is disordered over two of the observed conformations and so provide evidence for stepwise insertion into the active site. Although the natural donors can both assume the tucked under conformation in complex with enzyme, UDP-C-Gal cannot. Whereas UDP-C-Gal was designed to be "isosteric" with natural donor, the small differences in structure imposed by changing the epimeric oxygen atom to carbon appear to render the enzyme incapable of binding the analog in the active conformation and so preclude its use as a substrate mimic in GTA and GTB.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".