TABLE 3.
Observation | Reference | Experimental dataa | MD simulations in the current study |
---|---|---|---|
N370S pH optimum of 6.2 | 25 | + | N370S less flexible, loop 1 stabilized, better loop 1 and 3 interaction, active site geometry more often correct |
Loop 3b destabilized at pH 4.5 | 35 | − | Destabilization |
NB-DNJ stabilizes GCase WT and N370S | 58 | + | Stabilization |
In crystal structure with chaperones, loops 1 and 3 interact less well | 35 | + | Less interaction for bound NB-DNJ+ |
Secondary structural change in loop 3 | 35 | + | For N370S, changes are observed at pH 4.5 |
The activity of N370S at higher pH is similar to the activity of WT at lysosomal pH | 40 | + | Similar trend in the active site configuration and the arrangement of loops 1 and 3 |
Loop 3 interacts less with the N370S helix, which might favor interaction between residues 315 and 366 | 35 | − | Confirmed in MD simulations |
3 orders of magnitude more IFG needed to increase activity of WT compared to N370S | 25 | + | The affinity of unprotonated NB-DNJ at pH 7.4 is lower for the WT than for N370S |
N370S reduces the interaction of GCase and SapC, which can be reversed by IFG | 25, 38 | + | Interaction with SapC is likely to be disrupted but can be restored by binding of NB-DNJ+ |
a The availability of experimental data is indicated by a plus sign, and lack of experimental data by a minus sign; the information is based on analysis of GCase crystal structures.
b In Ref. 35, loop 3 is referred to as loop 1.