RNA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online before print November 12, 2007, 10.1261/rna.717908
RNA (2008), 14:43-54. Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. Copyright © 2008 RNA Society.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
rna.717908v1
14/1/43    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nelson, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Uhlenbeck, O. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nelson, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Uhlenbeck, O. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Minimal and extended hammerheads utilize a similar dynamic reaction mechanism for catalysis

Jennifer A. Nelson and Olke C. Uhlenbeck

Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology and Cell Biology, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA

Analysis of the catalytic activity of identical mutations in the catalytic cores of nHH8, a very active "extended" hammerhead, and HH16, a less active "minimal" hammerhead, reveal that the tertiary Watson–Crick base pair between C3 and G8 seen in the recent structure of the Schistosoma mansoni extended hammerhead can be replaced by other base pairs in both backgrounds. This supports the model that both hammerheads utilize a similar catalytic mechanism but HH16 is slower because it infrequently samples the active conformation. The relative effect of different mutations at positions 3 and 8 also depends on the identity of residue 17 in both nHH8 and HH16. This synergistic effect can best be explained by transient pairing between residues 3 and 17 and 8 and 13, which stabilize an inactive conformation. Thus, mutants of nHH8 and possibly nHH8 itself are also in dynamic equilibrium with an inactive conformation that may resemble the X-ray structure of a minimal hammerhead. Therefore, both minimal and extended hammerhead structures must be considered to fully understand hammerhead catalysis.

Keywords: ribozyme; catalytic RNA; conformational change


Received July 3, 2007 ; accepted September 21, 2007.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RNAHome page
J. A. Nelson and O. C. Uhlenbeck
Hammerhead redux: Does the new structure fit the old biochemical data?
RNA, April 1, 2008; 14(4): 605 - 615.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the RNA Society.