Abstract
In biology, a heme-Cu center in heme-copper oxidases (HCOs) is used to catalyze the four-electron reduction of oxygen to water, while a heme-nonheme diiron center in nitric oxide reductases (NORs) is employed to catalyze the two-electron reduction of nitric oxide to nitrous oxide. Although much progress has been made in biochemical and biophysical studies of HCOs and NORs, structural features responsible for similarities and differences within the two enzymatic systems remain to be understood. Here, we discuss the progress made in the design and characterization of myoglobin-based enzyme models of HCOs and NORs. In particular, we focus on use of these models to understand the structure-function relations between HCOs and NORs, including the role of nonheme metals, conserved amino acids in the active site, heme types and hydrogen-bonding network in tuning enzymatic activities and total turnovers. Insights gained from these studies are summarized and future directions are proposed.
1. Introduction
It is estimated that approximately 90% of oxygen reduction in atmosphere is catalyzed by heme-copper oxidases (HCOs).[1] HCOs are large membrane proteins found both in bacteria and in the mitochondria of eukaryotes. They are terminal enzymes in the respiratory electron transport chain, and use a heme-copper center to catalyze the four-electron reduction of oxygen to water efficiently (Figure 1a–b).[2] Interestingly, the HCOs exhibit high sequence and structure homology with nitric oxide reductases (NORs), which utilize a heme-nonheme diiron center to perform two-electron reduction of NO to N2O (Figure 1c–d).[3] NORs constitute an integral part of denitrification processes – conversion of nitrates/nitrites to nitrogen.[4] The similarities between the two classes of enzyme are not only in sequence and structure, but in their function as well. Cross-reactivity has been observed, where some NORs are able to perform oxygen reduction to water – albeit at significantly lower rates as compared to HCOs (less than 10%) – and vice-versa.[5] At the same time, the two enzyme classes possess notable differences, such as (1) the identity of nonheme metals: HCOs use copper while NORs use iron as the nonheme metal ion;[6] (2) coordination of the nonheme metals: copper in HCOs is coordinated by three histidines, while the nonheme iron in NORs is coordinated by a glutamate in addition to three histidines;[7, 3a] (3) conserved secondary coordination sphere (SCS) residues: HCOs contain a conserved tyrosine crosslinked to a copper coordinating histidine, while NORs contain several conserved glutamates;[8] (4) the heme types: NORs use exclusively heme b at their catalytic center while HCOs utilize a variety of heme types, such as heme a, o and b.[9] These subtle differences in the structure and function of these otherwise homologous proteins raise a fundamental question of how these and other structural features are responsible for fine-tuning their specificities and cross-reactivities (Fig. 1).
Figure 1.
The complete structure of HCO P. stutzeri cbb3 oxidase (a) and its catalytic heme-copper center (b) PDB: 5DJQ. The complete structure of cNOR (c) and its catalytic heme-nonheme diiron center (d) PDB: 3O0R. The structure of heme-copper center in CuBMb (e) and heme nonheme diiron center in FeBMb (f).
Elucidating the structural features responsible for HCO and NOR functions will not only provide deeper insights into their roles in biological respiration and nitrogen metabolic processes, but also molecular bases for designing efficient catalysts for the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) in fuel cells and nitrogen cycles. For example, a recent DFT study compared the best platinum-based oxygen reduction catalysts with HCO, and concluded that HCO is a better catalyst for fuel-cell based energy applications, as it exhibits much lower overpotential than current platinum-based catalysts.[10] Additionally, HCOs use earth-abundant metal ions (iron and copper) for catalysis. Thus, understanding the principles employed by HCOs to catalyze fast ORR (k ~ 1000/s) at low overpotentials under physiological conditions, will help us design low-cost and energy-efficient fuel cell catalysts. At the same time, NOR is one of the key enzymes in the nitrogen cycle, responsible for the return of fixed nitrogen back to the atmosphere.[4a] NORs are suggested to be involved in pathogenesis of organisms such as P. aeruginosa,[11] especially in cystic fibrosis patients, and the NOR reaction can be used as a model for mammalian enzymes utilizing NO as an essential signaling molecule.[12] Probing HCO and NOR functions will shed light upon these and various other human health, energy, and environmental processes.
An elegant way to evaluate and understand the structure-function relations between HCOs and NORs would be to reproduce the structural features of one enzyme within the other. For example, by replacing copper in HCOs with nonheme iron and probing how it impacts the activity, one may be able to determine the role of nonheme metal ion in the two enzymatic functions. However, it is difficult, if not impossible, to perform such metal ion substitution without significantly perturbing the structure and function of the enzyme, because HCOs and NORs are large (MW ~ 100–200 KDa) membrane-bound proteins, and incorporation of copper into HCO and nonheme iron into NOR often requires specific chaperone proteins. Furthermore, HCOs and NORs contain multiple metal centers, such as CuA and heme a centers in bovine CcO, that deliver electrons into the heme-copper center, making it difficult to focus on and specifically study the catalytic metal center. To overcome these limitations with studying the native HCOs and NORs, a number of small-molecule based model systems have been synthesized and studied, and the results obtained have contributed immensely to the understanding of the mechanism of oxygen and NO activation in the two protein systems.[13] As an alternative approach, we have designed biosynthetic models of HCOs and NORs in a small (MW ~ 17.4 KDa), easy-to-purify, soluble protein, myoglobin (Mb), called CuBMb[14] and FeBMb,[15] respectively (Fig. 1e–f). Table 1 shows some limitations in studying native HCOs/NORs, and how their small-molecular models and biosynthetic models can help overcome these limitations. As can be discerned from the table, Mb-based biosynthetic models have key advantages over both native proteins and synthetic models, and are excellent systems to elucidate the structure-function relations of HCOs and NORs.
Table 1.
Limitations in studying native HCOs/NORs and how synthetic and biosynthetic models can help overcome the limitations
| Native HCOs/NORs | Synthetic models | Biosynthetic models |
|---|---|---|
| Difficult to obtain homogeneous sample in large quantities | Multiple steps for synthesis of heteronuclear centers | Easy to obtain large quantities in short times |
| SCS interactions differ in same enzymes from different sources | Very difficult to incorporate SCS interactions into model | Role of SCS interactions can be studied through mutagenesis |
| Residing in different protein environments hampers the comparison between similar enzymes | Different active centers can be designed within the same overall scaffold | Different active centers can be designed within the same overall scaffold |
| Difficult to crystallize | Much easier to crystalize than native enzymes | Highly amenable to crystallization |
| Overlapping features of other metal cofactors | Focus only on the active center | Focus only on the active center |
| Difficult to remove cofactors such as heme or nonheme metal ions without loss of function and/or structure | Can use different cofactors | Easy to replace heme, nonheme metal ion, or other cofactors |
| Difficult to trap intermediates using site-specific labeling | Intermediates can be trapped | Site-specific labeling is easily achievable via techniques such as heme (57Fe) incorporation |
| Difficult to perform systematic studies of specific features such as heme E°’, pKa of residues, and ET rates | Amenable to systematic studies using different ligands or reaction conditions | Amenable to systematic studies using cofactor replacement or unnatural amino acid incorporation |
In this review, we discuss the design and comprehensive characterization of Mb-based biosynthetic models of HCO and NORs that mimic the native enzymes, not only structurally but also functionally, some with activity similar to that of native enzymes. In the process, we have shown that these models not only help elucidate structural features responsible for different reactivities of these two classes of enzymes, but also offer deeper insight into the fundamental mechanisms of the two reactions, including key intermediate states. The major contribution from the studies of biosynthetic models is a clear demonstration of the importance of the non-covalent secondary sphere interactions, such as H-bonding interactions involving water, in fine-tuning the electron transfer (ET) rates, enzyme reactivity, product selectivity, and turnover numbers.
2. Developing a structural and functional HCO mimic in myoglobin
2.1. Design of a CuB site in Mb and its spectroscopic and structural characterizations
Mb serves as an excellent scaffold to design the catalytic heme-copper center, as in HCOs, because Mb already contains a high-spin heme iron coordinated by a histidine and binds oxygen with high affinity.[16] The heme-copper center in HCOs utilizes three histidines to coordinate a copper, called CuB, in the distal heme pocket (Fig. 1b). The wild type myoglobin (WTMb) contains a single H64 in the distal heme pocket. Based on visual inspection and comparison with the heme-copper center in bovine CcO, L29 and F43 residues were identified to be in corresponding positions to accommodate two additional His residues in the distal pocket. The resulting mutant, F43HL29HMb, possessing three histidine residues capable of coordinating copper in the distal heme pocket, similar to the CuB center in HCOs, was named CuBMb (Fig. 2a).[14] It is important to note that CuBMb is purified without any metal in the CuB site, but with heme b as in native Mb. The binding of copper to the CuB center in Mb was observed through UV-Vis titrations that revealed that CuBMb binds Cu(II) with changes in heme Soret and visible band, and a KD of 9 μM (Fig. 2c). Finally, a crystal structure of copper-bound CuBMb mutant showed that the copper binds to three histidines and a water molecule ~ 5Å away from heme iron (Fig. 2b).[17] Thus, the CuBMb is a good structural model of HCO that binds copper at the CuB center, similar to HCOs.
Figure 2.
X-ray crystal structure of CuBMb (a) and Cu(II)-added F33Y-CuBMb variant (b). c) UV-Vis difference spectra for Cu(II) titration in CuBMb and double reciprocal, hill plots used to determine the binding affinity for copper. d) X-band EPR spectra of CuBMb-CN before (dotted line) and after the addition of Cu(II) (solid line) and Zn(II) (dashed line). Redox-dependent structural changes of the CuB center in the absence of chloride (e) and in the presence of excess chloride (f). Figures have been adapted from ref [14] and [22].
2.2. The effects of cyanide and chloride on HCO structure and function
Further investigation of the heme-copper center was performed using CN−, a high affinity ligand to several heme proteins including Mb and HCOs.[13d] The presence of Cu(II) at the CuB center increased affinity for negatively charged CN− by ~ 20-fold. Furthermore, addition of ~ 1.4 eq. of Cu(II) to cyanide bound CuBMb resulted in attenuation of low-spin heme signals at g = 2.06, suggesting spin-coupling of heme-copper center similar to HCOs (Fig. 2d). Control EPR experiments performed with Cu(II)-added WTMb or Zn(II)-CuBMb showed no decrease in heme signal.
In addition to CN−, spectroscopic studies on HCOs suggest that chloride binds to the heme-copper center in cases where the HCO purification processes are not rendered rigorously chloride-free.[18] This binding of chloride to the heme-copper center induces spectroscopic and chemical changes such as lowering its redox potential[19] and preventing fast reactions with CN− and NO.[20] Based on these studies, the possible role of chloride as a mimic of hydroxide ligand to the CuB center has been suggested.[21] To test this hypothesis, the spectroelectrochemical titration of Cu(II)-CuBMb was performed in the presence of 500 molar equivalents of chloride.[22] Upon the first electron transfer to the CuB center, one of the His ligands of CuB center dissociated and coordinated to the heme iron, forming a six-coordinate low-spin ferric heme center and reduced CuB center (Fig. 2f). The second electron transfer reduced the ferric heme and caused the release of the coordinated His ligand. Therefore, the fully reduced state of the heme-copper center contained a five-coordinate ferrous heme and a reduced CuB center, ready for O2 binding. In the absence of chloride, formation of the low-spin heme species was not observed (Fig. 2e). These results showed that binding of chloride to the CuB center can induce redox-dependent structural changes. Additionally, chloride and hydroxide in the heme-copper center may play different roles in the redox-linked enzymatic reactions, probably because of their different binding affinity to the CuB center and relatively high concentration of chloride under physiological conditions.
2.3. The roles of CuB center in O2 binding and reduction
The design of a CuB site in the Mb scaffold helped us probe its roles in O2 binding and reduction, with and without nonheme metal ions such as Cu(II) and Cu(I), and their redox-inactive controls, Zn(II) and Ag(I), respectively.[23] First, the O2-binding affinity of heme-containing CuBMb in which the CuB site is empty (more simply called E-CuBMb) was compared with Ag(I)-CuBMb, i.e., with Ag(I) occupying the CuB site. While the deoxy E-CuBMb formed only partial heme-oxy form (with ~50% protein in O2-free deoxy-form) upon exposure to O2, the Ag(I)-CuBMb formed heme-oxy completely (Fig. 3a), suggesting that the presence of a metal ion, such as Ag(I), in the CuB center increased the O2-binding affinity. Next, the reaction of Cu(II)-CuBMb with O2 was investigated in the presence of a reductant, ascorbate, and a redox mediator, N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyl-p-phenylenediamine (TMPD), and kinetics monitored by electronic absorption spectroscopy in the ultraviolet and visible region (UV-vis). These measurements showed a gradual decrease in the Soret band of CuBMb (at ~408 nm) and concomitant increase in absorption at 680 nm. A spectral analysis of the product along with mass spectrometry confirmed a gradual (k= 0.028 s−1) degradation of heme to form verdoheme, similar to what occurs naturally in heme oxygenase (HO) (Fig. 3b–c). Similar experiments performed with Ag(I)-CuBMb and Zn(II)-CuBMb showed no evidence of verdoheme formation, suggesting that the redox active copper ion was required for the heme degradation reaction. These results suggest a pathway wherein the heme-copper center activates oxygen to form a peroxy form (2e− reduced oxygen). While the heme-peroxy species can be protonated and undergo heterolytic O-O bond cleavage to form a ferryl species, as observed in HCOs and cytochrome P450s, the heme-peroxy in CuBMb evidently attacked the heme and followed the HO pathway to produce verdoheme (Fig. 3d). The reason for this difference was proposed to be that the first-generation HCO model (CuBMb) did not possess the elaborate H-bonding network found in HCOs or P450s to deliver the extra proton to activated forms of oxygen. To support this proposal, a reaction of H2O2 with met-CuBMb was carried out, because 2e− reduction of O2 produces a species equivalent in oxidation state to H2O2. This so-called “peroxide-shunt” reaction is known in HO, P450, and HCO. When H2O2 was reacted with ferric CuBMb, a ferryl-heme was observed instead of verdoheme. These results suggest that the extra protons brought into the CuBMb active site by the H2O2 may allow the CuBMb to switch from the HO reaction pathway into the P450 and HCO pathway. These studies with CuBMb demonstrate that the presence of a metal ion in the CuB site increases oxygen binding affinity. While O2 reduction has been observed, the lack of proton delivery through a hydrogen-bonding network in the distal heme pocket of the HCO model makes it go through the HO pathway to produce verdoheme, instead of ferryl species important for HCO reaction to produce water.
Figure 3.
a) UV-vis spectra of reduced CuBMb in air (solid line), reduced CuBMb in air after the addition of AgNO3 (dashed line), and reduced WTMb in air (dotted line). b) UV-vis spectra of reaction of CuBMb (6μM) with oxygen in the presence of 1,000 equivalents of ascorbate and 100 equivalents of TMPD in 20 mM Tris buffer (pH 8) at 25°C with copper. c) Time-dependent absorbance changes at 418 and 678 nm with copper (solid line), without copper (dotted line), Ag(I) (short dashed line), and Zn(II) (dotted and dashed line). d) Proposed reaction mechanism of CuBMb with oxygen. Figures adapted from ref. [23]
2.4. Introducing a hydrogen-bonding network with a different heme type and its effect in HCO activity
Given the changes in O2 reactivity imparted by the above design of the primary CuB site into myoglobin, and the observation that the reaction may be limited by protonation of intermediates, we sought to model the active site of native HCOs more closely by modeling the secondary coordination sphere (SCS) residues of HCOs. One interesting difference is that HCOs use a variety of heme types at their catalytic center. In particular, A- and B-type HCOs contain heme o and heme a, which incorporate a hydroxyethylfarnesyl moiety onto the heme b structure.[24] The HCOs remained mostly active when heme substitution occurred between a- and o-type hemes, however, when either a- or o-type heme was replaced by heme b at the catalytic center, the enzyme lost its activity.[25] The hydroxyl group of the farnesyl side chain is suggested to be an essential part of the active site hydrogen-bonding network, with internal water molecules bridging the gap between the hydroxyl group of cross-linked tyrosine and the bound oxygen at the heme-copper site.[26] To probe the importance of the heme o hydroxyl group in tuning the oxygen chemistry, the heme b in CuBMb was replaced with the heme o mimic Fe-hydroxyethylvinyldeuteroporphyrin (Fe-HVD) – heme b possessing a hydroxyethyl group similar to heme o (Fig. 4a). This substitution resulted in a ~4 nm blue shift in the heme Soret band and ~20 mV decrease in the heme E°’, suggesting that the addition of a hydroxyethyl group only mildly impacts the electronic properties of heme iron. In contrast, such replacement caused a significant difference in oxygen reactivity: the heme degradation reaction of Cu(II)-CuBMb was slowed by ~19-fold in the heme o mimic-substituted CuBMb (from 0.028/s to 0.0015/s for heme b, Fig. 4b). These results strongly suggest the critical role of the hydroxyl group of heme o in modulating HCO activity through participation in a hydrogen-bonding network.
Figure 4.
a) Heme o and b found in HCOs. Heme o mimics used in the study. b) Rates of heme degradation for different heme types. The changes of Soret band absorbance plotted against the reaction time at 418 nm for CuBMb(heme b) (solid line), at 410 nm for CuBMb(heme o) (dashed line), and at 404 nm for CuBMb(meso-heme) (dashed-dotted line). Figures adapted from ref. [27]
2.5 Incorporating the conserved tyrosine into CuBMb and its effect on enzyme activity and robustness
Another key and novel structural feature of HCOs is a conserved tyrosine residue near the CuB site, which forms a covalent bond with one of the CuB coordinating His ligands (Fig. 1b).[28, 2b] To incorporate a tyrosine into the CuBMb models, structural overlays with different types of HCOs were performed. In type A- and B-type HCOs, the tyrosine is located on a helix, four residues downstream from one of the His ligands to which it is covalently attached.[28a, 2b] In C-type HCOs, the conserved tyrosine is located on an adjacent helix.[28c] Therefore, two different models were designed to incorporate tyrosine into the active site of CuBMb: (1) F33Y-CuBMb, in which the tyrosine is four residues downstream from His 29, on the same helix, and (2) G65Y-CuBMb, in which the tyrosine is on a helix adjacent to the one containing H29 and the position of the Y65 hydroxyl group is predicted to be in approximately the same position with respect to the heme as seen in C-type HCOs.[17] The structure of F33Y-CuBMb and structural model of G65Y-CuBMb shown in Fig. 5a–b closely resemble the active sites of native HCOs.[17] The functional properties of F33Y-CuBMb and G65Y-CuBMb were evaluated by kinetic assays of oxygen reduction using an oxygen electrode (Figure 5c).[17] These assays were carried out using previously reported ascorbate/TMPD as the reductant system. Formation of water was additionally confirmed by detecting isotopically labeled H217O in the presence of 17O2 (Figure 5d). The results of these assays showed that presence and positioning of tyrosine in the active site of CuBMb plays a significant role in improving oxygen reduction to water.[17] Moreover, F33Y-CuBMb and G65Y-CuBMb were able to achieve over 500 and 1000 turnovers of oxygen reduction, respectively.[17]
Figure 5.
Structural overlays of F33Y-CuBMb (crystal structure, 4FWX) and G65Y-CuBMb (molecular model), with their inspirational native HCO structures. c) Oxygen consumption rates of indicated proteins leading to formation of water or reactive oxygen species (ROS), as indicated. d) NMR detection of H217O produced by reaction of proteins with 17O2 under reductive conditions. Figures adapted from ref. [17]
The observed importance of Tyr in promoting ORR in the CuBMb models makes it an ideal choice for investigating what structural features are responsible for the activity. It is proposed that in native HCOs, the conserved tyrosine participates by donating an H radical during turnover.[29a, 1c, 29b–d] Additionally, the conserved tyrosine in the CuB site constitutes the end of the K-proton channel, which is responsible for delivering two of the catalytic protons for complete oxygen reduction.[28a, 2b] EPR of F33Y-CuBMb under reductive conditions in the presence of O2 was performed, and revealed the formation of tyrosyl radical (Fig. 6d).[30] This observation provides strong support for the direct involvement of Tyr in the redox process of O2 reduction in F33Y-CuBMb. Further investigations into the role of tyrosine were carried out by incorporating unnatural tyrosine analogues with a range of pKa’s and reduction potentials,[31] and observing the effects on activity (Figure 6a–c). The investigation revealed (1) that the overall rate of reductive oxygen consumption increases with increasing reduction potential, and (2) that the ratio of water produced increases with decreasing pKa. Together, these results suggest that tyrosine plays an important role in both electron and proton transfer to oxygen.
Figure 6.
a) pKa and redox potential of Tyr and its analogs affects HCO activity. Correlation of activity of Phe33Tyr-CuBMb, Phe33ClY-CuBMb, Phe33F2Y-CuBMb, and Phe33F3Y-CuBMb vs pKa of phenols on the Tyr and its analogs. b) Correlation of water produced in oxygen reduction reaction performed by these proteins vs the pKa of phenols on the Tyr and its analogs. c) Correlation of oxidase activity of Phe33Tyr-CuBMb, Phe33ClY-CuBMb, Phe33F2Y-CuBMb, and Phe33F3Y-CuBMb vs peak potential at pH 13 (Ep) of the corresponding Tyr and Tyr analogs. d) EPR spectra of ferric F33Y-CuBMb reacted with 1 equiv. of H2O2 (red) and ferrous F33Y-CuBMb with oxygen (black). e) Structure model overlay of imiTyrCuBMb (cyan) and F33YCuBMb (yellow). Figures adapted from ref. [32, 30–31]
Finally, the structural interactions that promote oxygen activation in F33Y-CuBMb were investigated using EPR of cryoreduced oxy-F33Y-CuBMb (Fig. 7a).[33] This technique gives information about the electronic structure of the heme-bound oxygen and its interactions with the active site.[34] The results showed that oxygen bound to F33Y-CuBMb can be more polarized than in WTMb, withdrawing electron density from the Fe onto the O2, likely due to strong hydrogen bond donation, as confirmed by ENDOR. A significant hydrogen-bonding network consisting of waters and connecting the tyrosine and histidine residues with the oxygen was confirmed in oxy-F33Y-CuBMb by X-ray crystallography (Fig. 7b). This study further supports that a key role of tyrosine in CuBMb activity is the activation and protonation of oxygen by hydrogen-bonding.
Figure 7.
(A) EPR spectra of oxy-wtMb and oxy-F33Y-CuBMb after radiolytic reduction and subsequent stepwise annealing for one minute at indicated temperatures (sharp signal marked by asterisk is due to radiolytically generated hydrogen atoms at 77K in quartz EPR tube). (B) Crystal structure of oxy-F33Y-CuBMb determined at 1.27 Å resolution (PDB: 5HAV), compared with that of oxy-WTMb (PDB: 1A6M). Figures adapted from ref. [38]
2.6. The role of His-Tyr crosslink in HCO activity and turnovers
The His-Tyr crosslink is a unique post-translational structural feature found naturally in all HCOs. This feature was first identified using X-ray crystallography[35] and was confirmed via mass spectrometry and Edman degradation.[36] The proposed function of the crosslink ranges from merely structural to donation of a proton[24a] and/or an electron for complete catalytic oxygen reduction.[37] An elegant method of understanding the role of His-Tyr crosslink in modulating O2 reduction activity will be by comparing function of His and Tyr residues at the same positions in the same protein with and without cross-linking. We attempted to do this comparison by incorporating an unnatural amino acid, imidazolyl-tyrosine (imiTyr), that mimics a crosslink between H43 and Y33 residues in the CuBMb model (Fig. 6e).[32] The resulting mutant, imiTyrCuBMb, could bind Cu(II) at the CuB center with ~5-fold higher binding affinity as compared to F33Y-CuBMb (with no His-Tyr crosslink). Additionally, the F33imiTyr-CuBMb could perform much faster and cleaner oxidase activity, and exhibited almost twice as number of turnovers as F33Y-CuBMb. These results suggest that the His-Tyr crosslink plays an important role in tuning the oxygen reduction activity and turnovers of HCOs.
2.7. Importance of heme redox potential and electron transfer rates in tuning HCO reactivity
The catalytic heme centers in various HCOs exhibit a wide (~400 mV) range of heme E°’ values, with the highest reported heme E°’ of +365 mV for bovine CcO[39] and lowest heme E°’ of −59 mV for cbb3 oxidase.[40] The reasons for such variation of heme E°’ in HCOs and its impact on oxidase activity (if any) is not yet understood. This is because of the difficulty of systematically tuning the E°’ of catalytic heme iron in HCOs without impacting the E°’ of other metal ions (e.g. the CuB center). To investigate the role of heme E°’ in controlling HCO activity and turnovers, the heme E°’ in F33Y-CuBMb were tuned using two approaches:
Tuning the H-bonding environment of heme iron in the proximal side: Previous reports on Mb and other metalloproteins have shown that modulating the H-bonding environment of the metal ion is an efficient method to tune its E°’.[41] For the Mb-based HCO model specifically, the CuB site and Tyr residues were in the distal side of the heme, and in order to avoid perturbing the O2 and CuB binding properties, we concentrated on the proximal side of heme. Based on crystal structure and NMR studies on Mb, the proton in H93 forms a H-bond with the lone pair on the OH group of S92 (Fig. 8a). Mutation of this S92 to A in principle should increase the positive charge of this proton, in turn decreasing the electron donating capabilities of H93. Indeed, the resulting mutant S92A-F33Y-CuBMb displayed ~27 mV (E°’ = 123 mV) higher heme E°’ than F33Y-CuBMb (E°’ = 95 mV)[42]
Using different heme types with higher heme E°’: Certain A- and B-type HCOs exhibiting high heme E° possess a heme a at their active site. The heme a contains formyl group, which due to its electron-withdrawing nature, should increase the heme E°’. Thus, heme a mimics such as diacetyl heme (DA-heme), monoformyl-heme (MF-heme) and diformyl-heme (DF-heme) were incorporated in the HCO mimics (Fig. 8b). The resulting F33Y-CuBMb variants exhibited heme E°’ values of 175 mV, 210 mV and 320 mV respectively.
Figure 8.
a) Overlay of the X-ray crystal structures of F33Y-CuBMb (4FWX, cyan) and S92A-F33Y-CuBMb (4TYX, orange). b) (A) Protein scaffold of F33Y-CuBMb, heme b cofactor present in F33Y-CuBMb, heme a present in the catalytic site of bovine CcO, diacetyl heme, monofomyl heme and diformyl heme incorporated in F33Y-CuBMb apo-protein. c) Variation of oxygen reduction activity with heme E°’ for F33YCuBMb variants. d) Structures of G65Y-CuBMb(+6), showing the engineered lysines in blue, and cyt b5 (PDB IDs 1CYO for cyt b5 and 4FWY for F33Y-CuBMb. e) Oxidase activity of G65Y-CuBMb(+6) in comparison with those of native cbb3 oxidase and G65Y-CuBMb at the same concentration. f) GC/MS chromatogram of NO reduction by CuBMb and Cu(I). The GC peaks have been normalized. Figures adapted from ref.[44a, 42, 44b]
The above set of HCO models with systematically tuned heme E°’ provided an ideal system to probe the importance of E°’ on oxidase activity. Interestingly, the increase in heme E° resulted in ~6-fold increase in oxygen reduction rates with a direct correlation between heme E°’ and oxygen reduction rates (Fig. 8c). The HCO mimic with highest heme E°, F33Y-CuBMb (DF-heme) exhibited more than 1200 turnovers.
The concurrent increase in oxygen reduction rates with increase in heme E°’ suggest that electron transfer (ET) to the heme center is a rate-limiting step in the designed HCO mimics. To increase the ET – and concomitantly the oxygen reduction rate – further, we followed a report by Hoffman and coworkers, which showed that replacing three negatively charged amino acids (D44, D60, and E85) on the surface of Mb with positively charged lysines improved electrostatic interaction between Mb and its negatively charged redox partner, cyt b5,[43] and resulted in 200-fold increase in ET rates between Mb and cyt b5. Based on these studies, a triple-lysine variant of the HCO model G65Y-CuBMb, called G65Y-CuBMb(+6), was produced (Fig. 8d), which exhibited a 400-fold enhancement in ET rate and an oxygen reduction rate of 52 s−1.[43] Remarkably, the engineered HCO mimic exhibits oxygen reduction rates comparable to that of native cytochrome cbb3 oxidase (50 s−1) under the same conditions (Fig. 8e).
2.8. Using Mb-based HCO mimics to perform electrocatalytic oxygen reduction reaction
The performance of G65Y-CuBMb as an electrocatalyst was tested by immobilizing a single layer of protein on a gold electrode surface using modified porphyrin groups.[45] The rate of oxygen reduction and product selectivity of G65Y-CuBMb immobilized on the electrode (k= 1.98 × 107 M−1 s−1, 6% ROS) was far superior to a HCO synthetic model tested under same conditions (k=1.2 × 105 M−1 s−1, 10% ROS). Moreover, the first-order oxygen reduction rate of G65Y-CuBMb (~5000 s−1) is at least 10-fold higher than that of native HCO on electrode. In situ resonance Raman analysis of these reactions suggest that electron transfer shunt from the electrode circumvents the slow dissociation of a ferric hydroxide species, which slows down native HCOs in comparison to its Mb-based mimic. The efficient electrocatalytic reduction of oxygen to water by Mb-based HCO models suggests that they can potentially be employed as fuel cell catalysts. However, low protein stability remains to be an issue with enzyme-based fuel cell electrodes which can be addressed via protein design and engineering of more robust and thermophilic proteins. While these protein-based catalysts may never replace fuel cell catalysts in car batteries, they are ideal for biomedical applications, such as powering diagnostic and imaging devices in vivo, where biocompatibility is essential and power requirement is less.
2.9. NO reduction cross-reactivity of Mb-based HCO mimic
It has been observed that certain HCOs, such as ba3/caa3 oxidases from Thermus thermophilus and cytochrome cbb3 oxidase from Pseudomonas stutzeri, display NOR reactivity.[46] Likewise, many NORs display HCO activity. On the other hand, CcO from bovine heart shows no NOR activity and instead is inhibited by nanomolar concentrations of NO.[47] To understand such differences in NO reduction cross-reactivity of HCOs, the NO reduction activity of CuBMb was investigated by GC-MS. In the presence of Cu(I), CuBMb catalyzed the selective reduction of NO to N2O, as shown by the appearance of a second peak at a longer retention time in the GC, which corresponds to a 44 MW peak (N2O) in the MS (Figure 8f).[44a] The relative GC peak intensity of N2O:NO increased as a function of time, indicating further reduction of NO to N2O as the reaction proceeds. The turnover number for NO reduction was calculated to be ~2 mol NO/mol CuBMb/min, close to the 3 mol NO/mol enzyme/min reported for the ba3 oxidases from T. thermophilus.[9c] Control experiments performed with CuBMb alone or with WTswMb in the presence of Cu(I) showed no reduction of NO. These results demonstrated that Cu(I) plays a critical role in the reduction of NO to N2O in CuBMb.
3. Developing a structural and functional NOR mimic in myoglobin
3.1. Design of a nonheme iron binding FeB center in Mb
The NORs contain a heme-nonheme diiron catalytic center that catalyzes the two-electron reduction of NO to N2O, an important step in the biological denitrification process. At the time the Mb model of NOR was designed, the crystal structure of NOR was not available. Nevertheless, the structural and sequence homology of NORs with HCOs predicted that all three His ligands in HCOs (coordinating to CuB) were conserved in the same position in NORs.[48] Additionally, the NORs contained several conserved glutamates (not found in HCOs) that were required for the nonheme iron binding and/or catalysis.[8a] Based on this information, and knowledge that nonheme iron typically prefers an octahedral geometry where one of the ligands is a carboxylate (amino acids D/E), we embarked to design the putative nonheme iron binding site (FeB) in Mb, consisting of three histidines and one glutamate. The histidine residues were introduced first, as crystal structures of HCOs containing three conserved histidines were readily available (e.g., bovine CcO). Based on overlays of the minimized structure of swMb and CcO, the distal His64 in swMb was chosen as one of the histidines, while L29 and F43 were mutated to histidines, to produce a nonheme metal binding site as in CuBMb. Next, V68E mutation to swMb was chosen based on its proximity and angle to the heme and the three His. The minimized computer model of the resultant triple mutant was named FeBMb, is shown in Fig. 9a–b. The FeB metal (modeled as Zn(II)) was found within bonding distance to Nε of all three His residues and both O atoms of E68, indicating that the proposed mutations would support iron binding in myoglobin, forming an FeB site.
Figure 9.
a) Minimized computer model of FeBMb with Zn(II) in the FeB site. b) Crystal structure of Fe(II)-FeBMb. UV-vis spectra of deoxy FeBMb (c) and deoxy WTMb (d) with 1 eq. Fe(II)-added. (e) Time dependent GC/MS measurements of N2O formation by Fe(II)-FeBMb. (f) FTIR difference spectra (dark minus illuminated) of E-FeBMb(NO) and Fe(II)-FeBMb(NO) at 10 K: NO (black),15NO (red), and NO minus 15NO difference spectra (blue). Figures adapted from ref. [15, 49]
Following the computational design, FeBMb was tested for nonheme iron binding via UV-Vis and EPR spectroscopy. The modulation of heme Soret and visible bands in the UV-Vis spectra (Fig. 9c–d) of FeBMb, along with the attenuation of g=6 EPR signals, suggested the binding of nonheme iron in the designed FeB center. Further evidence of Fe2+ binding to the designed FeB site comes from a high resolution crystal structure (1.72 Å) of Fe(II)-FeBMb (Fig. 9b). The nonheme iron in the FeBMb was five coordinate, with bonds to all three histidines and E68. The crystal structure was found to be consistent with the proposal that a glutamate in the active site of NOR helps stabilize iron binding to the FeB site. To test the NO reactivity of FeBMb, GC-MS assays were conducted. The FeBMb performed selective two-electron reduction of NO to N2O in the presence of nonheme iron (Fig. 9e), while similar experiments performed with only nonheme iron or E-FeBMb produced negligible N2O. Overall, FeBMb was the first designed protein that modeled both the structure and function of NOR, offering the insight that the active site glutamate is required for both iron binding and activity. These results also showed that structural and functional metalloproteins can be rationally designed in silico based on sequence and structural homologies, even before the crystal structure of native enzymes are available.
To understand the implications of nonheme metal in modulating NO reactivity, the reaction of one molar equivalent NO with E-, Zn-, Cu- and Fe-FeBMb was investigated by UV-Vis, EPR, resonance Raman and FTIR spectroscopies. These experiments revealed the binding of first NO molecule to the ferrous heme in all cases, but while the E-, Cu- or Zn-loaded proteins showed characteristic EPR signatures of S = 1/2 six-coordinate heme {FeNO}7 species, the nonheme Fe-loaded proteins were EPR silent. Vibrational modes from the heme [Fe-N-O] unit were identified in resonance Raman (rR) and FTIR spectra using 15NO and 15N18O. The E- and Cu(I)-bound proteins exhibit ν(FeNO) and ν(NO) that were only marginally distinct from those reported for native myoglobin. However, binding of nonheme Fe at the FeB site shifts the heme ν(FeNO) by 17 cm−1 and the ν(NO) by ~50 cm−1 to 1549 cm−1. This low ν(NO) was without precedent for a six-coordinate heme {FeNO}7 species and suggested that the NO group adopts a strong nitroxyl character stabilized by electrostatic interaction with the nearby nonheme Fe (Fig. 9f). A similarly low ν(NO) was detected in the Zn(II)-loaded protein that supported this interpretation.[49]
3.2. Role of secondary coordination sphere (glutamates) towards NOR activities
Further structural investigations and mutagenesis studies of native NORs revealed that the presence of additional glutamates near the FeB site are important for NOR activity.[8a, 50, 13j] Based on these observations, a second generation model of FeBMb was engineered, in which Glu was introduced near the heme at position 107. The resulting mutant called I107E-FeBMb retained binding of metal ions, including Fe2+ to the FeB site, as was confirmed crystallographically (Fig. 10a).[51] Moreover, the new mutant retains the position of Fe(II) and it’s coordination, as compared to FeBMb. EPR of fully oxidized Fe(II)-I107E-FeBMb revealed a decrease in the heme signals relative to E-I107E-FeBMb, suggestive of spin coupling between the metals, as observed in native NORs. Titration of Cu2+ resulted in similar apparent coupling, while titration of Zn2+ resulted in an increase in the heme signals, suggestive of weakening of the heme-Fe coordination. Binding of these metals and their interactions were again confirmed crystallographically. Cu retained similar geometry, while Zn showed absence of metal-coordinating water molecule and weakening of the Fe-glutamate coordination, consistent with EPR results. The heme E°’ of I107E-FeBMb was measured as −134 mV, ~20 mV higher than the −158 mV measured for FeBMb itself. The heme E°’ with Fe(II), Cu(II), and Zn(II) bound were measured to be −64 mV, −137 mV, and −105 mV respectively.
Figure 10.
a) Overlay of Fe(II)-I107E FeBMb (cyan) (PDB ID code 3M39) with Fe(II)-FeBMb (orange) (PDB ID code 3K9Z). b)Time-dependent N2O production by Fe(II)-I107E FeBMb (▲) and Fe(II)-FeBMb (●) with ~50 eq. NO under single turnover conditions. The yield was determined by a comparison of the ratio of NO:N2O peaks from the GC/MS chromatograms. c) Reaction steps leading to the production of N2O in I107E-FeBMb. Figures adapted from ref. [51–52]
I107E-FeBMb showed a ~100% increase in NOR activity compared to FeBMb (Fig. 10b). This increase is attributable to the presence of a 2.32Å hydrogen bond between the mutated I107E and a FeB water ligand, which was observed crystallographically.[51] Such a hydrogen- bonding network might be expected to activate NO by hydrogen bonding to the oxygen atom and facilitating protonation. NOR activity was also observed in the presence of Cu(I), but not Zn(II). EPR of these proteins upon reaction with NO showed formation of five-coordinate Fe-NO heme, due to His-Fe bond cleavage, unlike the weakening observed in FeBMb, suggesting it may be important for NOR activity.
Subsequent studies using stopped-flow UV-Vis and freeze-quench rR spectroscopies showed that the presence of Glu107 stabilizes the six-coordinate heme-nitrosyl state and prevents dissociation of the proximal histidine, which leads to a dead-end product.[52] In Fe(II)-FeBMb two sets of rR signal were observed after reaction with NO – ν{FeNO}heme and ν{NO}heme at 522 and 1660 cm−1, from five-coordinate heme-NO, and ν(NO)FeB at 1755 cm−1, for nonheme FeB-NO. Transient kinetics studies showed that this 5-coordinate species is a result of His dissociation from the transient 6-coordinate NO-bound state. This dissociation is substantially slowed in I107E-FeBMb, allowing the heme-nitrosyl to combine with the non-heme nitrosyl and decompose to the desired product, N2O, with a rate of 0.7 s−1 at 4 °C (Fig. 10c). These observations support the trans-mechanism of NOR function and at the same time show that the H-bonding network introduced through incorporation of I107E residue is critical for NOR activity. Further insights into the role of H-bonding was obtained by probing the reaction of I107F-FeBMb with excess NO.[53] The I107F-FeBMb variant with its large, hydrophobic distal I107F residue formed the heme-nitrosyl dead-end product at a much faster rate (k= 5.3 mM−1 s−1) as compared to both FeBMb (k = 2.1 mM−1 s−1) and I107E-FeBMb ( k < 1 mM−1 s−1). Overall, these results suggest that production of N2O from the [6cLS heme {FeNO}7/{FeBNO}7] trans iron nitrosyl dimer intermediate requires a proton transfer event facilitated by an outer-sphere residue such as E107 in FeBMb and E280 in P. aeruginosa cNOR.
3.3. Complete characterization of a nonheme iron nitrosyl center in FeBMb
A major barrier to understanding the binding and interaction of NO with the FeB center is the strong spectroscopic signals of heme iron that make it difficult to investigate the FeB center. To overcome this challenge, iron containing protoporphyrin IX (heme) in FeBMb was replaced by Zn protoporphyrin IX (ZnPPIX) to yield ZnPPIXFeBMb (Fig. 11a).[54] The low affinity of ZnPPIX for NO, along with lack of spectroscopic signals of Zn2+, was expected to help focus on the nonheme iron specifically. The binding of nonheme Fe2+ at the FeB center of ZnPPIXFeBMb was confirmed using UV-Vis spectroscopy along with X-ray crystallography (Fig. 11b–c). The NO binding properties of nonheme iron were investigated using EPR and Mössbauer spectroscopy. More specifically, the EPR spectrum of Fe-ZnPPIXFeBMb with 20 molar equivalents of NO added shows two well-resolved doublets at g=4.36, 3.58, and 4.13, 3.73, respectively (Fig. 11d). These two different components were ascribed to different orientations of NO bound to the FeB site, or slight changes in the orientation of FeB ligands upon NO binding. The electronic and spin state of the FeB nitrosyl species was further characterized by field-dependent Mössbauer measurements which revealed 35% unreacted Fe(II) species along with 65% iron-nitrosyl component. The Mossbauer parameters of the iron-nitrosyl component, ΔEQ= (1.70 ± 0.01) mm/s and δFe=(0.69 ± 0.01) mm/s, were indicative of an S=3/2 six-coordinate {FeNO} 7 species found in other proteins as well as small molecule models. To obtain further insight into the electronic structure of the {FeNO} 7 moiety, the Mulliken spin populations were calculated at the Fe and NO centers of the structures obtained from quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM) calculations as well as partially optimized active-site structures. The computational calculations supported the assignment of nonheme iron-nitrosyl species in FeBMb as a HS ferrous center (S=2) antiferromagnetically coupled to an NO radical (S=1/2) [Fe2+-NO•]. Overall, these findings are consistent with a trans-mechanism of NO reduction wherein the radical nature of the NO in FeB-nitrosyl would facilitate the radical coupling of the second heme-bound NO to promote N-N bond formation.
Figure 11.
a) Schematic representation of the replacement of Fe-protoporphyrin IX from FeBMb (green) with Zn-protoporphyrin IX, yielding ZnPPIXFeBMb (magenta). b) UV-vis spectra of FeBMb (green), ZnPPIXFeBMb (magenta), and ZnPPIXFeBMb in the presence of 1.0 equivalent Fe(II) (blue) c) 1.52 Å X-ray structure of Fe(II)-ZnPPIXFeBMb. d) X-band EPR spectrum of ZnPPIXFeBMb in the presence of 1.0 eq. FeCl2 and 20 equivalents of NO (blue trace) and the simulated spectrum (red trace). Figures adapted from ref. [54]
3.4. Influence of FeB coordination on NO reactivity: Design of a 2His, 1Glu FeB center in Mb
A sequence alignment of a unique quinone-oxidizing NOR, gNOR predicted that it may exhibit a novel FeB site, with one of the 3-His ligands replaced by an Asp residue.[55] This finding is quite interesting, as an inspection of the active site of nonheme iron containing enzymes in Nature indicates that the majority use a similar conserved 2-His-1-carboxylate (Asp/Glu) facial triad for iron binding and substrate oxidation. To test whether the unique 2-His-1-Asp/Glu nonheme metal center could be utilized to mimic NOR for NO reduction, a 2-His-1-Glu metal center was designed in swMb by replacing H29 in FeBMb with an E residue while keeping V68 intact (FeBMb H29E, E68V, or swMb L29E, F43H, H64, called FeBMb(-His)). UV-Vis and EPR spectroscopic measurements along with crystallography showed that FeBMb(-His) could bind either iron or copper, with 2-His and 1-Glu coordinating to the nonheme metal (Cu) in a tetrahedral geometry (Fig. 11a–b). The NO reduction function of FeBMb(-His) when probed using GC/MS under single turnover conditions showed that Cu(I)-FeBMb-(-His) when exposed to excess NO produced N2O with increased yield over time as estimated from the ratio of N2O: NO peaks (~32% at 20 h). N2O production was also observed for Fe(II)-FeBMb(-His) (~6% at 20 h). In contrast, no N2O formation was observed for Zn(II)-FeBMb(-His) or WTMb with Cu(I) or with Fe(II). Overall, the study presented a novel structural and functional protein model of NOR and provided insights into the newly discovered member of the NOR family, gNOR.
4. Conclusions and future directions
While studies of native HCOs and NORs have and will continue to provide valuable insight into their function, many questions on the structural features responsible for their functions and reaction mechanisms remain to be answered, despite many years of research. We have shown that these questions can be answered using small protein models of each of their active sites. For instance, our studies reveal that the presence and positioning of tyrosine is critically important for HCO activity and turnovers.[17] Moreover, we have shown the first evidence for the formation of a Tyr radical upon reaction of a functional HCO mimic with oxygen.[30] We have also directly demonstrated the key role of heme E°’ on HCO activity in a system that decouples this from other effects of the protein.[42] In understanding NOR reactivity, FeBMb provided valuable structural insights into a functional NOR before the structure of a native NOR was obtained.[57] This model has proven invaluable for unraveling the mechanism of NO binding and N-N bond formation at heme-nonheme diiron sites.[52, 54] In both designed proteins, the importance of secondary coordination H-bonding effects was elegantly demonstrated using spectroscopic studies and rational engineering.[51, 42]
The success of these system also enables the next generation of studies to address some important questions regarding the structure and activity of these enzymes that remain difficult to answer by studying native HCOs and NORs, including:
Preference of copper and nonheme iron in the active site of HCOs and NORs respectively: The HCOs and NORs are said to have evolved from a common ancestral protein,[4b, 58] yet copper was chosen as the nonheme metal for HCOs and iron for NORs and each metal ion catalyzes its respective reactions much more efficiently than the other. The functional and chemical imperatives for these choices remain to be understood. HCO/NOR models where the nonheme metal can be successfully replaced is an efficient system to address this question and understand how the choice of a particular metal ion impacts the activity, mechanism, and turnovers of these enzymes.
Reasons for high affinity of nonheme metals: The HCOs and NORs bind nonheme metals in their catalytic center with very high affinities, such that even after thousands of turnovers their structure and activity remains unperturbed. In contrast, the Mb-based HCO and NOR models bind copper and nonheme iron with similar geometry and coordination, but exhibit low micromolar affinities.[14–15] This comparison suggests that the SCS residues and the membranous nature of native HCO/NORs are critical for their strong metal ion affinities to the protein. For example, the structure of bovine CcO shows that the Nε of two of the coordinating His is strongly H-bonded to water molecules and backbone carbonyl. Even the coordinating glutamate in cNOR is strongly H-bonded to other conserved glutamates. This H-bonding interaction may modulate the electronic nature of His/Glu making them a strong sigma donor to nonheme metal. An effective method to test this theory would be to systematically tune H-bonding of coordinating His and Glu residues and test how that impacts the metal binding affinity, catalytic activity and turnovers.
Mechanism of His-Tyr crosslinking in HCOs: The His-Tyr crosslink is a unique post-translational modification found naturally in all HCOs. How the His-Tyr crosslink is formed is unknown, but it is believed to be formed during the early turnovers of the enzyme. An efficient method to test this hypothesis will be by reacting a crosslink-free HCO with oxygen and/or activated forms of oxygen to see if any crosslink is formed. However, HCOs lacking His-Tyr crosslink have not been isolated yet unless the crosslinked residues (His/Tyr) were mutated. Protein based HCO models are an ideal system to probe the mechanism of His-Tyr crosslink formation as well as investigate the conditions required for its formation e.g. the pH, oxygen concentration, presence of nonheme metal ions etc.
Reasons for high oxygen affinity of C-type HCOs: The C-type HCOs, specifically cbb3 oxidase, comprise ~20% of known HCOs and are essential respiratory enzymes for many different pathogenic bacterial species, e.g., Helicobacter pylori, Vibrio cholerae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The cbb3 oxidases are characterized by ~6–8 fold higher oxygen affinity (KD ~ 7 nM) as compared to A-type HCOs. A recent crystal structure of cbb3 oxidase[59] has revealed two potential reasons for such high oxygen affinity of C-types HCOs: (a) Distortion of catalytic heme from planarity: The catalytic heme b3 in cbb3 oxidase is highly domed and distorted. By fast binding of oxygen to the heme iron, the protein may be able to relieve itself from this high-energy distortion and approach the more conventional planar form of heme similar to NO signaling H-NOX proteins;[60] and (b) H-bonding pattern in proximal pocket: All cbb3 oxidases contain a conserved His-Glu-Trp triad similar to peroxidases,[61] which may tune the electronics of heme iron and modulate its oxygen binding affinity. Protein models of HCOs are good systems to probe whether this unique H-bonding pattern or distortion of heme from planarity are a cause for high oxygen affinity of C-type oxidases.
Why do HCOs exhibit much higher heme E°’ as compared to NORs?: Most HCOs exhibit high heme E°’ values between +140 to +365 mV while NORs exhibit low heme E°’ values between +60 to −170 mV. [62] The specific reasons for such variation in heme E°’ between two homologous enzymes and its impact on their activity remains unknown. The systematic variation of heme E°’ in HCOs/NOR models may be used to address this question and explain how E°’ values are tuned in metalloproteins to control enzyme activities.
Overall, these experiments will provide broader insights into chemical properties driving evolution of bioenergetics reactions, as well as into structural features that will allow design of more efficient fuel cell catalysts.
Figure 12.
a) UV-vis titration of ferric E-FeBMb(-His) with Cu(II). b) Crystal structure of Cu(II)-CN--FeBMb(-His) at 1.65 Å resolution (3MN0). c) (B) X-band EPR spectra of ferric E-FeBMb(-His) in the presence of 1.0 or 3.0 equiv of Cu(II). Figures adapted from ref. [56]
Acknowledgments
We wish to thank all the former and current Lu group members who have contributed to obtaining results published in papers cited in this review. The Lu group research described in papers cited here has been supported by the US National Institute of Health (R01GM06211).
Biographies

Ambika Bhagi-Damodaran was born in Moradabad, India. She received her BSc (Hons.) from St. Stephen’s College, Delhi in 2009, followed by an MSc in Chemistry from the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi in 2011. Ambika completed her PhD in Chemical Biology at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign in 2016 under guidance of Prof. Yi Lu focusing on the use of myoglobin-based enzyme models to probe structure-function relationships in heme-copper oxidases. Her research interests include enzyme design, spectroscopic and kinetic studies of metalloenzymes, protein-protein interactions and drug-design.

Igor Petrik was born in L’viv, Ukraine and grew up in Philadelphia, PA. From 2006 to 2009, he attended the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, where he investigated the physicochemical properties of ionic liquids by NMR and MD techniques, under the mentorship of Prof. Guillermo Moyna. After graduating with a B.S. in Chemistry and a minor in Forensics, he continued his PhD studies in Chemical Biology in the lab of Prof. Yi Lu at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He performed rational design of metalloenzymes, with a focus on understanding and improving activity of biosynthetic models of terminal oxidases, with the aid of sophisticated spectroscopic and crystallographic techniques.

Yi Lu received his BS degree from Peking University in 1986, and a PhD degree from University of California at Los Angeles in 1992 under Professor Joan S. Valentine. After 2 years of postdoctoral research in Professor Harry B. Gray’s group at the California Institute of Technology, Lu started his own independent career in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign in 1994. He is now a Jay and Ann Schenck Professor of Chemistry and a HHMI Professor in the Departments of Chemistry, Biochemistry, Bioengineering and Materials Science and Engineering. He is also a member of the Center for Biophysics and Computational Biology and Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology. His research interests lie at the interface between chemistry and biology. His group is developing new chemical approaches to provide deeper insight into biological systems. At the same time, they take advantage of recently developed biological tools to advance many areas in chemistry. Lu has received numerous research and teaching awards, including the Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (2007), Early Career Award, Society of Biological Inorganic Chemistry (2007), Howard Hughes Medical Institute Professor Award (2002), Camile Dreyfus Teacher-Scholar Award (1999), Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship (1998), Research Corporation Cottrell Scholars Award (1997), and the Beckman Young Investigators Award (1996).
Footnotes
This review is dedicated to Prof. Harry B. Gray in celebration of his 80th birthday
References
- 1.(a) Babcock GT, Wikström M. Nature. 1992;356:301–309. doi: 10.1038/356301a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Ferguson-Miller S, Babcock GT. Chemical Reviews. 1996;96:2889–2907. doi: 10.1021/cr950051s. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (c) Proshlyakov DA, Pressler MA, Babcock GT. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1998;95:8020–8025. doi: 10.1073/pnas.95.14.8020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.(a) Ivano Bertini HBG, Lippard Stephen J, Valentine Joan S. Bioinorganic Chemistry. University Science Books; 1994. [Google Scholar]; (b) Kaila VRI, Verkhovsky MI, Wikström M. Chemical Reviews. 2010;110:7062–7081. doi: 10.1021/cr1002003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.(a) Shiro Y, Sugimoto H, Tosha T, Nagano S, Hino T. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B. 2012;367:1195–1203. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0310. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Sato N, Ishii S, Sugimoto H, Hino T, Fukumori Y, Sako Y, Shiro Y, Tosha T. Proteins. 2014;82:1258–1271. doi: 10.1002/prot.24492. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.(a) Richardson DJ, Watmough NJ. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 1999;3:207–219. doi: 10.1016/S1367-5931(99)80034-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Sousa FL, Alves RJ, Ribeiro MA, Pereira-Leal JB, Teixeira M, Pereira MM. Biochim Biophys Acta, Bioenerg. 2012;1817:629–637. doi: 10.1016/j.bbabio.2011.09.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (c) Blomberg MRA, Siegbahn PEM. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 2013;1827:826–833. doi: 10.1016/j.bbabio.2013.04.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.(a) Zhao XJ, Sampath V, Caughey WS. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 1995;212:1054–1060. doi: 10.1006/bbrc.1995.2076. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Pilet E, Nitschke W, Liebl U, Vos MH. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 2007;1767:387–392. doi: 10.1016/j.bbabio.2007.03.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.(a) Yoshikawa S, Shinzawa-Itoh K, Tsukihara T. Journal of inorganic biochemistry. 2000;82:1–7. doi: 10.1016/s0162-0134(00)00137-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Tosha T, Shiro Y. Iubmb Life. 2013;65:217–226. doi: 10.1002/iub.1135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Soulimane T, Buse G, Bourenkov GP, Bartunik HD, Huber R, Than ME. EMBO Journal. 2000;19:1766–1776. doi: 10.1093/emboj/19.8.1766. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.(a) Butland G, Spiro S, Watmough NJ, Richardson DJ. J Bacteriol. 2001;183:189–199. doi: 10.1128/JB.183.1.189-199.2001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Rauhamaki V, Baumann M, Soliymani R, Puustinen A, Wikstroem M. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2006;103:16135–16140. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0606254103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.(a) Junemann S. Biochimica Et Biophysica Acta. 1997;1321:107–127. doi: 10.1016/s0005-2728(97)00046-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Watmough NJ, Cheesman MR, Butler CS, Little RH, Greenwood C, Thomson AJ. Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes. 1998;30:55–62. doi: 10.1023/a:1020507511285. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (c) Giuffre A, Stubauer G, Sarti P, Brunori M, Zumft WG, Buse G, Soulimane T. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1999;96:14718–14723. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.26.14718. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Kjaergaard CH, Rossmeisl J, Norskov JK. Inorg Chem. 2010;49:3567–3572. doi: 10.1021/ic900798q. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Kakishima K, Shiratsuchi A, Taoka A, Nakanishi Y, Fukumori Y. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 2007;355:587–591. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2007.02.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Averill BA. Chemical Reviews. 1996;96:2951–2964. doi: 10.1021/cr950056p. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.(a) Collman JP. Inorganic Chemistry. 1997;36:5145–5155. [Google Scholar]; (b) Collman JP, Wang Z. Chemtracts. 1999;12:229–263. [Google Scholar]; (c) Ghiladi RA, Ju TD, Lee DH, Moënne-Loccoz P, Kaderli S, Neuhold YM, Zuberbühler AD, Woods AS, Cotter RJ, Karlin KD. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 1999;121:9885–9886. [Google Scholar]; (d) Collman JP, Boulatov R, Sunderland CJ. In: The porphyrin handbook. Kadish KM, Guilard Smith R, editors. Vol. 11. Academic press; San Diego: 2003. pp. 1–49. [Google Scholar]; (e) Kim E, Chufan EE, Kamaraj K, Karlin KD. Chemical Reviews. 2004;104:1077–1133. doi: 10.1021/cr0206162. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (f) Collman JP, Decreau RA, Zhang C. Journal of Organic Chemistry. 2004;69:3546–3549. doi: 10.1021/jo0499625. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (g) Collman JP, Yang Y, Dey A, Decreau RA, Ghosh S, Ohta T, Solomon EI. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2008;105:15660–15665. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0808606105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (h) Collman JP, Dey A, Yang Y, Ghosh S, Decréau RA. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:10528–10533. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0904634106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (i) Karlin KD, Fox S, Nanthakumar A, Murthy NN, Wei N, Obias HV, Martens CF. Pure and Applied Chemistry. 2009;67:289–296. [Google Scholar]; (j) Van Wonderen JH, Oganesyan VS, Watmough NJ, Richardson DJ, Thomson AJ, Cheesman MR. Biochemical Journal. 2013;451:389–394. doi: 10.1042/BJ20121406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Sigman JA, Kwok BC, Lu Y. J Am Chem Soc. 2000;122:8192. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Yeung N, Lin Y-W, Gao Y-G, Zhao X, Russell BS, Lei L, Miner KD, Robinson H, Lu Y. Nature (London, U K) 2009;462:1079–1082. doi: 10.1038/nature08620. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.(a) Krzywda S, Murshudov GN, Brzozowski AM, Jaskolski M, Scott EE, Klizas SA, Gibson QH, Olson JS, Wilkinson AJ. Biochemistry. 1998;37:15896–15907. doi: 10.1021/bi9812470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Yeung N, Lu Y. Chemistry & Biodiversity. 2008;5:1437–1454. doi: 10.1002/cbdv.200890134. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Miner KD, Mukherjee A, Gao Y-G, Null EL, Petrik ID, Zhao X, Yeung N, Robinson H, Lu Y. Angewandte Chemie International Edition. 2012;51:5589–5592. doi: 10.1002/anie.201201981. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Fabian M, Skultety L, Jancura D, Palmer G. Biochim Biophys Acta, Bioenerg. 2004;1655:298–305. doi: 10.1016/j.bbabio.2003.07.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Moody AJ, Butler CS, Watmough NJ, Thomson AJ, Rich PR. Biochem J. 1998;331:459–464. doi: 10.1042/bj3310459. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Giuffre A, Stubauer G, Brunori M, Sarti P, Torres J, Wilson MT. J Biol Chem. 1998;273:32475–32478. doi: 10.1074/jbc.273.49.32475. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Forte E, Barone MC, Brunori M, Sarti P, Giuffre A. Biochemistry. 2002;41:13046–13052. doi: 10.1021/bi025917k. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Zhao X, Nilges MJ, Lu Y. Biochemistry. 2005;44:6559–6564. doi: 10.1021/bi047465c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Sigman JA, Kim HK, Zhao X, Carey JR, Lu Y. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:3629–3634. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0737308100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.(a) Hosler JP, Fergusonmiller S, Calhoun MW, Thomas JW, Hill J, Lemieux L, Ma JX, Georgiou C, Fetter J, Shapleigh J, Tecklenburg MMJ, Babcock GT, Gennis RB. Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes. 1993;25:121–136. doi: 10.1007/BF00762854. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Tsubaki M, Matsushita K, Adachi O, Hirota S, Kitagawa T, Hon H. Biochemistry. 1997;36:13034–13042. doi: 10.1021/bi971106i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Contreras-Zentella M, Mendoza G, Membrillo-Hernandez J, Escamilla JE. J Biol Chem. 2003;278:31473–31478. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M302583200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Das TK, Pecoraro C, Tomson FL, Gennis RB, Rousseau DL. Biochemistry. 1998;37:14471–14476. doi: 10.1021/bi981500w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Wang NY, Zhao X, Lu Y. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2005;127:16541–16547. doi: 10.1021/ja052659g. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.(a) Namslauer A, Brzezinski P. FEBS letters. 2004;567:103–110. doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2004.04.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Hemp J, Christian C, Barquera B, Gennis RB, Martinez TJ. Biochemistry. 2005;44:10766–10775. doi: 10.1021/bi050464f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (c) Hemp J, Robinson DE, Ganesan KB, Martinez TJ, Kelleher NL, Gennis RB. Biochemistry. 2006;45:15405–15410. doi: 10.1021/bi062026u. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.(a) Ostermeier C, Harrenga A, Ermler U, Michel H. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1997;94:10547–10553. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.20.10547. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Hemp J, Gennis RB. In: Bioenergetics: Energy Conservation and Conversion. Schäfer G, Penefsky HS, editors. Springer Berlin Heidelberg; Berlin, Heidelberg: 2008. pp. 1–31. [Google Scholar]; (c) Brzezinski P, Gennis RB. Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes. 2008;40:521–531. doi: 10.1007/s10863-008-9181-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (d) Rauhamaki V, Bloch DA, Wikström M. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2012;109:7286–7291. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1202151109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Yu Y, Mukherjee A, Nilges MJ, Hosseinzadeh P, Miner KD, Lu Y. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2014;138:3869–3875. doi: 10.1021/ja4091885. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Yu Y, Lv X, Li J, Zhou Q, Cui C, Hosseinzadeh P, Mukherjee A, Nilges MJ, Wang J, Lu Y. J Am Chem Soc. 2015;137:4594–4597. doi: 10.1021/ja5109936. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Liu X, Yu Y, Hu C, Zhang W, Lu Y, Wang J. Angewandte Chemie, International edition. 2012;51:4312–4316. doi: 10.1002/anie.201108756. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Petrik ID, Davydov R, Ross M, Zhao X, Hoffman B, Lu Y. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2016;138:1134–1137. doi: 10.1021/jacs.5b12004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.(a) Symons MCR, Petersen RL. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological sciences. 1978;201:285–300. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1978.0046. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Davydov RM. Biofizika. 1980;25:203–207. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (c) Kappl R, Höhn-Berlage M, Hüttermann J, Bartlett N, Symons MCR. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Protein Structure and Molecular Enzymology. 1985;827:327–343. [Google Scholar]; (d) Davydov R, Makris TM, Kofman V, Werst DE, Sligar SG, Hoffman BM. J Am Chem Soc. 2001;123:1403–1415. doi: 10.1021/ja003583l. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (e) Davydov R, Kofman V, Fujii H, Yoshida T, Ikeda-Saito M, Hoffman BM. J Am Chem Soc. 2002;124:1798–1808. doi: 10.1021/ja0122391. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (f) Davydov R, Kofman V, Nocek JM, Noble RW, Hui H, Hoffman BM. Biochemistry. 2004;43:6330–6338. doi: 10.1021/bi036273z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (g) Davydov R, Sudhamsu J, Lees NS, Crane BR, Hoffman BM. J Am Chem Soc. 2009;131:14493–14507. doi: 10.1021/ja906133h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (h) Denisov IG. In: Physical inorganic chemistry: Principles, methods, and models. Bakac A, editor. John Wiley & Sons, Inc; Hoboken, NJ, USA: 2010. pp. 109–142. [Google Scholar]; (i) Davydov R, Hoffman BM. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics. 2011;507:36–43. doi: 10.1016/j.abb.2010.09.013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (j) Davydov R, Laryukhin M, Ledbetter-Rogers A, Sono M, Dawson JH, Hoffman BM. Biochemistry. 2014;53:4894–4903. doi: 10.1021/bi500296d. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Yoshikawa S, Shinzawa-itoh K, Nakashima R, Yaono R, Yamashita E, Inoue N, Yao M, Fei MJ, Libeu CP, Mizushima T, Yamaguchi H, Tomizaki T, Tsukihara T. Science. 1998;280:1723–1729. doi: 10.1126/science.280.5370.1723. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Buse G, Soulimane T, Dewor M, Meyer HE, Bluggel M. Protein Science. 1999;8:985–990. doi: 10.1110/ps.8.5.985. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Gorbikova EA, Belevich I, Wikström M, Verkhovsky MI. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2008;105:10733–10737. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0802512105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Petrik ID, Davydov R, Ross M, Zhao X, Hoffman B, Lu Y. J Am Chem Soc. 2016;138:1134–1137. doi: 10.1021/jacs.5b12004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Ellis WR, Wang H, Blair DF, Gray HB, Chan SI. Biochemistry. 1986;25:161–167. doi: 10.1021/bi00349a023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Rauhamaki V, Bloch DA, Verkhovsky MI, Wikström M. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2009;284:11301–11308. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M808839200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.(a) Varadarajan R, Zewert TE, Gray HB, Boxer SG. Science. 1989;243:69–72. doi: 10.1126/science.2563171. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Marshall NM, Garner DK, Wilson TD, Gao YG, Robinson H, Nilges MJ, Lu Y. Nature. 2009;462:113–U127. doi: 10.1038/nature08551. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Bhagi-Damodaran A, Petrik ID, Marshall NM, Robinson H, Lu Y. J Am Chem Soc. 2014;136:11882–11885. doi: 10.1021/ja5054863. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Xiong P, Nocek JM, Vura-Weis J, Lockard JV, Wasielewski MR, Hoffman BM. Science. 2010;330:1075–1078. doi: 10.1126/science.1197054. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.(a) Zhao X, Yeung N, Russell BS, Garner DK, Lu Y. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2006;128:6766–6767. doi: 10.1021/ja058822p. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Yu Y, Cui C, Liu X, Petrik ID, Wang J, Lu Y. J Am Chem Soc. 2015;137:11570–11573. doi: 10.1021/jacs.5b07119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Mukherjee S, Mukherjee A, Bhagi-Damodaran A, Mukherjee M, Lu Y, Dey A. Nat Commun. 2015;6:8467. doi: 10.1038/ncomms9467. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.(a) Forte E, Urbani A, Saraste M, Sarti P, Brunori M, Giuffre A. European journal of biochemistry. 2001;268:6486–6491. doi: 10.1046/j.0014-2956.2001.02597.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Pinakoulaki E, Ohta T, Soulimane T, Kitagawa T, Varotsis C. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2005;127:15161–15167. doi: 10.1021/ja0539490. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Brown GC. Biochim Biophys Acta, Bioenerg. 2001;1504:46–57. doi: 10.1016/s0005-2728(00)00238-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Girsch P, de Vries S. Biochimica et biophysica acta. 1997;1318:202–216. doi: 10.1016/s0005-2728(96)00138-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Hayashi T, Miner KD, Yeung N, Lin Y-W, Lu Y, Moënne-Loccoz P. Biochemistry. 2011;50:5939–5947. doi: 10.1021/bi200409a. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.(a) Thorndycroft FH, Butland G, Richardson DJ, Watmough NJ. Biochemical Journal. 2007;401:111–119. doi: 10.1042/BJ20060856. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (b) Flock U, Lachmann P, Reimann J, Watmough NJ, Ädelroth P. Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry. 2009;103:845–850. doi: 10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2009.02.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Lin Y-W, Yeung N, Gao Y-G, Miner KD, Tian S, Robinson H, Lu Y. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107:8581–8586. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1000526107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Matsumura H, Hayashi T, Chakraborty S, Lu Y, Moënne-Loccoz P. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2014;136:2420–2431. doi: 10.1021/ja410542z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Matsumura H, Chakraborty S, Reed J, Lu Y, Moënne-Loccoz P. Biochemistry. 2016;55:2091–2099. doi: 10.1021/acs.biochem.5b01109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Chakraborty S, Reed J, Ross M, Nilges MJ, Petrik ID, Ghosh S, Hammes-Schiffer S, Sage JT, Zhang Y, Schulz CE, Lu Y. Angewandte Chemie International Edition. 2014;126:2449–2453. doi: 10.1002/anie.201308431. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Sievert SM, Scott KM, Klotz MG, Chain PSG, Hauser LJ, Hemp J, Hugler M, Land M, Lapidus A, Larimer FW, Lucas S, Malfatti SA, Meyer F, Paulsen IT, Ren Q, Simon J, Bailey K, Diaz E, Fitzpatrick KA, Glover B, Gwatney N, Korajkic A, Long A, Mobberley JM, Pantry SN, Pazder G, Peterson S, Quintanilla JD, Sprinkle R, Stephens J, Thomas P, Vaughn R, Weber MJ, Wooten LL. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2008;74:1145–1156. doi: 10.1128/AEM.01844-07. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Lin Y-W, Yeung N, Gao Y-G, Miner KD, Lei L, Robinson H, Lu Y. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2010;132:9970–9972. doi: 10.1021/ja103516n. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Yeung N, Lin Y-W, Gao Y-G, Zhao X, Russell BS, Lei L, Miner KD, Robinson H, Lu Y. Nature. 2009;462:1079–1082. doi: 10.1038/nature08620. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Sousa FL, Thiergart T, Landan G, Nelson-Sathi S, Pereira IAC, Allen JF, Lane N, Martin WF. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B. 2013;368:1–30. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0088. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Buschmann S, Warkentin E, Xie H, Langer JD, Ermler U, Michel H. Science. 2010;329:327–330. doi: 10.1126/science.1187303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Olea C, Jr, Kuriyan J, Marletta MA. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2010;132:12794–12795. doi: 10.1021/ja106252b. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Bandyopadhyay U, Adak S, Banerjee RK. Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy Part B Biological Sciences. 1999;65:315–330. [Google Scholar]
- 62.Gronberg KLC, Roldan MD, Prior L, Butland G, Cheesman MR, Richardson DJ, Spiro S, Thomson AJ, Watmough NJ. Biochemistry. 1999;38:13780–13786. doi: 10.1021/bi9916426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]












