Distributions of enzyme residues yielding mutants with improved substrate specificities from two different directed evolution strategies

A previous study of random mutations, mostly introduced by error-prone PCR (EPPCR) or DNA shuffling (DS), demonstrated that those closer to the enzyme active site were more effective than distant ones at improving enzyme activity, substrate specificity or enantioselectivity. Since then, many studies...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Protein engineering, design and selection design and selection, 2009-07, Vol.22 (7), p.401-411
Hauptverfasser: Paramesvaran, Janahan, Hibbert, Edward G., Russell, Andrew J., Dalby, Paul A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 411
container_issue 7
container_start_page 401
container_title Protein engineering, design and selection
container_volume 22
creator Paramesvaran, Janahan
Hibbert, Edward G.
Russell, Andrew J.
Dalby, Paul A.
description A previous study of random mutations, mostly introduced by error-prone PCR (EPPCR) or DNA shuffling (DS), demonstrated that those closer to the enzyme active site were more effective than distant ones at improving enzyme activity, substrate specificity or enantioselectivity. Since then, many studies have taken advantage of this observation by targeting site-directed saturation mutagenesis (SDSM) to residues closer to or within enzyme active sites. Here, we have analysed a set of SDSM studies, in parallel to a similar set from EPPCR/DS, to determine whether the greater range of amino-acid types accessible by SDSM affects the distances at which the most effective sites occur. We have also analysed the relative effectiveness for obtaining beneficial mutants of residues with different degrees of natural sequence variation, as determined by their sequence entropy which is related to sequence conservation. These analyses attempt to answer the question—how well focused have targeted mutagenesis strategies been? We also compared two different sets of active-site atoms from which to measure distances and found that the inclusion of catalytic, substrate and cofactor atoms refined the analysis compared to using a single key catalytic atom. Using this definition, we found that EPPCR/DS is not effective for altering substrate specificity at sites that are within 5 Å of the active-site atoms. In contrast, SDSM is most effective when targeted to residues at
doi_str_mv 10.1093/protein/gzp020
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20229129</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/protein/gzp020</oup_id><sourcerecordid>20229129</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-5b544c2acb0216accdb183e9fc40906668a9d50dffdc95b78aae23eae1b3cfb23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkT1v1TAUhi0EoqWwMiKLAYkhrT_iJB5RgbbqlbqAhFgs2zm-uCRxsJ2W21_Az8aQqyKxdPIZnvc9x3oQeknJMSWSn8wxZPDTyfZuJow8Qoe0rWlFKK8f38-sOUDPUromhDUtpU_RAZWCMC7aQ_TrvU85erNkH6aEg8Mw3e1GwBGS7xdIeOdh6P20xeOS9ZQTvvX5G_Zj2XwDPU6LKQU6A04zWO-89dmXmIthxPk24N47BxGmXKYINpcM3ITh70K8Rrcl8Bw9cXpI8GL_HqHPHz98Oj2vNldnF6fvNpUVpMuVMKKuLdPWEEYbbW1vaMdBOlsTSZqm6bTsBemd660Upu20BsZBAzXcOsP4EXqz9pb7f5T_ZTX6ZGEY9ARhSYoRxiRlsoCv_wOvwxKncptiTNStbLko0PEK2RhSiuDUHP2o405Rov4IUntBahVUAq_2rYsZof-H740U4O0KhGV-uKxa2eIQft7TOn5XTctboc6_fFWbjgpytrlUlP8GzPCxaw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>225479735</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Distributions of enzyme residues yielding mutants with improved substrate specificities from two different directed evolution strategies</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals Current</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Paramesvaran, Janahan ; Hibbert, Edward G. ; Russell, Andrew J. ; Dalby, Paul A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Paramesvaran, Janahan ; Hibbert, Edward G. ; Russell, Andrew J. ; Dalby, Paul A.</creatorcontrib><description>A previous study of random mutations, mostly introduced by error-prone PCR (EPPCR) or DNA shuffling (DS), demonstrated that those closer to the enzyme active site were more effective than distant ones at improving enzyme activity, substrate specificity or enantioselectivity. Since then, many studies have taken advantage of this observation by targeting site-directed saturation mutagenesis (SDSM) to residues closer to or within enzyme active sites. Here, we have analysed a set of SDSM studies, in parallel to a similar set from EPPCR/DS, to determine whether the greater range of amino-acid types accessible by SDSM affects the distances at which the most effective sites occur. We have also analysed the relative effectiveness for obtaining beneficial mutants of residues with different degrees of natural sequence variation, as determined by their sequence entropy which is related to sequence conservation. These analyses attempt to answer the question—how well focused have targeted mutagenesis strategies been? We also compared two different sets of active-site atoms from which to measure distances and found that the inclusion of catalytic, substrate and cofactor atoms refined the analysis compared to using a single key catalytic atom. Using this definition, we found that EPPCR/DS is not effective for altering substrate specificity at sites that are within 5 Å of the active-site atoms. In contrast, SDSM is most effective when targeted to residues at &lt;5–6 Å from the catalytic, substrate or cofactor atom, and also for residues with intermediate sequence entropies. Furthermore, SDSM is capable of altering substrate specificity at highly and completely conserved residues in the active site. The results suggest ways in which directed evolution by SDSM could be improved for greater efficiency in terms of reducing the library sizes required to obtain beneficial mutations that alter substrate specificity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1741-0126</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1741-0134</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/protein/gzp020</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19502357</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Catalytic Domain ; Directed Molecular Evolution - methods ; distance ; Entropy ; Enzymes - genetics ; plasticity ; saturation mutagenesis ; sequence entropy ; strategy ; Substrate Specificity - genetics</subject><ispartof>Protein engineering, design and selection, 2009-07, Vol.22 (7), p.401-411</ispartof><rights>The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org 2009</rights><rights>The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-5b544c2acb0216accdb183e9fc40906668a9d50dffdc95b78aae23eae1b3cfb23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-5b544c2acb0216accdb183e9fc40906668a9d50dffdc95b78aae23eae1b3cfb23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1578,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19502357$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Paramesvaran, Janahan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hibbert, Edward G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russell, Andrew J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dalby, Paul A.</creatorcontrib><title>Distributions of enzyme residues yielding mutants with improved substrate specificities from two different directed evolution strategies</title><title>Protein engineering, design and selection</title><addtitle>Protein Eng Des Sel</addtitle><description>A previous study of random mutations, mostly introduced by error-prone PCR (EPPCR) or DNA shuffling (DS), demonstrated that those closer to the enzyme active site were more effective than distant ones at improving enzyme activity, substrate specificity or enantioselectivity. Since then, many studies have taken advantage of this observation by targeting site-directed saturation mutagenesis (SDSM) to residues closer to or within enzyme active sites. Here, we have analysed a set of SDSM studies, in parallel to a similar set from EPPCR/DS, to determine whether the greater range of amino-acid types accessible by SDSM affects the distances at which the most effective sites occur. We have also analysed the relative effectiveness for obtaining beneficial mutants of residues with different degrees of natural sequence variation, as determined by their sequence entropy which is related to sequence conservation. These analyses attempt to answer the question—how well focused have targeted mutagenesis strategies been? We also compared two different sets of active-site atoms from which to measure distances and found that the inclusion of catalytic, substrate and cofactor atoms refined the analysis compared to using a single key catalytic atom. Using this definition, we found that EPPCR/DS is not effective for altering substrate specificity at sites that are within 5 Å of the active-site atoms. In contrast, SDSM is most effective when targeted to residues at &lt;5–6 Å from the catalytic, substrate or cofactor atom, and also for residues with intermediate sequence entropies. Furthermore, SDSM is capable of altering substrate specificity at highly and completely conserved residues in the active site. The results suggest ways in which directed evolution by SDSM could be improved for greater efficiency in terms of reducing the library sizes required to obtain beneficial mutations that alter substrate specificity.</description><subject>Catalytic Domain</subject><subject>Directed Molecular Evolution - methods</subject><subject>distance</subject><subject>Entropy</subject><subject>Enzymes - genetics</subject><subject>plasticity</subject><subject>saturation mutagenesis</subject><subject>sequence entropy</subject><subject>strategy</subject><subject>Substrate Specificity - genetics</subject><issn>1741-0126</issn><issn>1741-0134</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkT1v1TAUhi0EoqWwMiKLAYkhrT_iJB5RgbbqlbqAhFgs2zm-uCRxsJ2W21_Az8aQqyKxdPIZnvc9x3oQeknJMSWSn8wxZPDTyfZuJow8Qoe0rWlFKK8f38-sOUDPUromhDUtpU_RAZWCMC7aQ_TrvU85erNkH6aEg8Mw3e1GwBGS7xdIeOdh6P20xeOS9ZQTvvX5G_Zj2XwDPU6LKQU6A04zWO-89dmXmIthxPk24N47BxGmXKYINpcM3ITh70K8Rrcl8Bw9cXpI8GL_HqHPHz98Oj2vNldnF6fvNpUVpMuVMKKuLdPWEEYbbW1vaMdBOlsTSZqm6bTsBemd660Upu20BsZBAzXcOsP4EXqz9pb7f5T_ZTX6ZGEY9ARhSYoRxiRlsoCv_wOvwxKncptiTNStbLko0PEK2RhSiuDUHP2o405Rov4IUntBahVUAq_2rYsZof-H740U4O0KhGV-uKxa2eIQft7TOn5XTctboc6_fFWbjgpytrlUlP8GzPCxaw</recordid><startdate>200907</startdate><enddate>200907</enddate><creator>Paramesvaran, Janahan</creator><creator>Hibbert, Edward G.</creator><creator>Russell, Andrew J.</creator><creator>Dalby, Paul A.</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Oxford Publishing Limited (England)</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200907</creationdate><title>Distributions of enzyme residues yielding mutants with improved substrate specificities from two different directed evolution strategies</title><author>Paramesvaran, Janahan ; Hibbert, Edward G. ; Russell, Andrew J. ; Dalby, Paul A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-5b544c2acb0216accdb183e9fc40906668a9d50dffdc95b78aae23eae1b3cfb23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Catalytic Domain</topic><topic>Directed Molecular Evolution - methods</topic><topic>distance</topic><topic>Entropy</topic><topic>Enzymes - genetics</topic><topic>plasticity</topic><topic>saturation mutagenesis</topic><topic>sequence entropy</topic><topic>strategy</topic><topic>Substrate Specificity - genetics</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Paramesvaran, Janahan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hibbert, Edward G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russell, Andrew J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dalby, Paul A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Protein engineering, design and selection</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Paramesvaran, Janahan</au><au>Hibbert, Edward G.</au><au>Russell, Andrew J.</au><au>Dalby, Paul A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Distributions of enzyme residues yielding mutants with improved substrate specificities from two different directed evolution strategies</atitle><jtitle>Protein engineering, design and selection</jtitle><addtitle>Protein Eng Des Sel</addtitle><date>2009-07</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>401</spage><epage>411</epage><pages>401-411</pages><issn>1741-0126</issn><eissn>1741-0134</eissn><abstract>A previous study of random mutations, mostly introduced by error-prone PCR (EPPCR) or DNA shuffling (DS), demonstrated that those closer to the enzyme active site were more effective than distant ones at improving enzyme activity, substrate specificity or enantioselectivity. Since then, many studies have taken advantage of this observation by targeting site-directed saturation mutagenesis (SDSM) to residues closer to or within enzyme active sites. Here, we have analysed a set of SDSM studies, in parallel to a similar set from EPPCR/DS, to determine whether the greater range of amino-acid types accessible by SDSM affects the distances at which the most effective sites occur. We have also analysed the relative effectiveness for obtaining beneficial mutants of residues with different degrees of natural sequence variation, as determined by their sequence entropy which is related to sequence conservation. These analyses attempt to answer the question—how well focused have targeted mutagenesis strategies been? We also compared two different sets of active-site atoms from which to measure distances and found that the inclusion of catalytic, substrate and cofactor atoms refined the analysis compared to using a single key catalytic atom. Using this definition, we found that EPPCR/DS is not effective for altering substrate specificity at sites that are within 5 Å of the active-site atoms. In contrast, SDSM is most effective when targeted to residues at &lt;5–6 Å from the catalytic, substrate or cofactor atom, and also for residues with intermediate sequence entropies. Furthermore, SDSM is capable of altering substrate specificity at highly and completely conserved residues in the active site. The results suggest ways in which directed evolution by SDSM could be improved for greater efficiency in terms of reducing the library sizes required to obtain beneficial mutations that alter substrate specificity.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>19502357</pmid><doi>10.1093/protein/gzp020</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1741-0126
ispartof Protein engineering, design and selection, 2009-07, Vol.22 (7), p.401-411
issn 1741-0126
1741-0134
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20229129
source MEDLINE; Oxford University Press Journals Current; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Catalytic Domain
Directed Molecular Evolution - methods
distance
Entropy
Enzymes - genetics
plasticity
saturation mutagenesis
sequence entropy
strategy
Substrate Specificity - genetics
title Distributions of enzyme residues yielding mutants with improved substrate specificities from two different directed evolution strategies
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T04%3A55%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Distributions%20of%20enzyme%20residues%20yielding%20mutants%20with%20improved%20substrate%20specificities%20from%20two%20different%20directed%20evolution%20strategies&rft.jtitle=Protein%20engineering,%20design%20and%20selection&rft.au=Paramesvaran,%20Janahan&rft.date=2009-07&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=401&rft.epage=411&rft.pages=401-411&rft.issn=1741-0126&rft.eissn=1741-0134&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/protein/gzp020&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E20229129%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=225479735&rft_id=info:pmid/19502357&rft_oup_id=10.1093/protein/gzp020&rfr_iscdi=true