The retaining β-Kdo glycosyltransferase WbbB uses a double-displacement mechanism with an intermediate adduct rearrangement step
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract WbbB, a lipopolysaccharide O-antigen synthesis enzyme from Raoultella terrigena, contains an N-terminal glycosyltransferase domain with a highly modified architecture that adds a terminal β-Kdo (3-deoxy-d-manno-oct-2-ulosonic acid) residue to the O-antigen saccharide, with retention of stereochemistry. We show, using mass spectrometry, that WbbB forms a covalent adduct between the catalytic nucleophile, Asp232, and Kdo. We also determine X-ray structures for the CMP-β-Kdo donor complex, for Kdo-adducts with D232N and D232C WbbB variants, for a synthetic disaccharide acceptor complex, and for a ternary complex with both a Kdo-adduct and the acceptor. Together, these structures show that the enzyme-linked Asp232-Kdo adduct rotates to reposition the Kdo into a second sub-site, which then transfers Kdo to the acceptor. Retaining glycosyltransferases were thought to use only the front-side SNi substitution mechanism; here we show that retaining glycosyltransferases can also potentially use double-displacement mechanisms, but incorporating an additional catalytic subsite requires rearrangement of the protein’s architecture.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".