TagA is a secreted protease of Vibrio cholerae that specifically cleaves mucin glycoproteins.

Vibrio cholerae is a human diarrhoeal pathogen that is a major cause of gastrointestinal disease and death worldwide. Pathogenic V. cholerae strains are characterized by the presence of a Vibrio pathogenicity island (VPI) that encodes virulence factors, including the toxin co-regulated pilus (TCP). TagA is encoded within the VPI and is positively co-regulated with cholera toxin and TCP. TagA is a sequelogue of the StcE mucinase of Escherichia coli O157 : H7. We investigated whether this sequence homology reflected a conserved enzymic substrate profile. TagA exhibited metalloprotease activity toward crude purified mucins, salivary mucin and LS174T goblet cell surface mucin. Like StcE, TagA did not cleave general protease substrates, but unlike StcE, TagA did not cleave the mucin-like serpin C1 esterase inhibitor. Both proteins cleaved the immune cell surface mucin CD43, but TagA demonstrated reduced enzymic efficiency relative to StcE. TagA was expressed and secreted by V. cholerae under ToxR-dependent conditions. A tagA-deficient V. cholerae strain showed no defect in a model of in vitro attachment to the HEp-2 cell line; however, overexpression of a proteolytically inactive mutant, TagA(E433D), caused a significant increase in attachment. The increased attachment was reduced by pretreatment of epithelial monolayers with active TagA. Our results indicate that TagA is a mucinase and suggest that TagA may directly modify host cell surface molecules during V. cholerae infection.

Formation of a DNA mismatch repair complex mediated by ATP.

The mismatch repair proteins, MutS and MutL, interact in a DNA mismatch and ATP-dependent manner to activate downstream events in repair. Here, we assess the role of ATP binding and hydrolysis in mismatch recognition by MutS and the formation of a ternary complex involving MutS and MutL bound to a mismatched DNA. We show that ATP reduces the affinity of MutS for mismatched DNA and that the modulation of DNA binding affinity by nucleotide is even more pronounced for MutS E694A, a protein that binds ATP but is defective for ATP hydrolysis. Despite the ATP hydrolysis defect, E694A, like WT MutS, undergoes rapid, ATP-dependent dissociation from a DNA mismatch. Furthermore, MutS E694A retains the ability to interact with MutL on mismatched DNA. The recruitment of MutL to a mismatched DNA by MutS is also observed for two mutant MutL proteins, E29A, defective for ATP hydrolysis, and R266A, defective for DNA binding. These results suggest that ATP binding in the absence of hydrolysis is sufficient to trigger formation of a MutS sliding clamp. However, recruitment of MutL results in the formation of a dynamic ternary complex that we propose is the intermediate that signals subsequent repair steps requiring ATP hydrolysis.

DNA mismatch repair: molecular mechanisms and biological function.

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) guards the integrity of the genome in virtually all cells. It contributes about 1000-fold to the overall fidelity of replication and targets mispaired bases that arise through replication errors, during homologous recombination, and as a result of DNA damage. Cells deficient in MMR have a mutator phenotype in which the rate of spontaneous mutation is greatly elevated, and they frequently exhibit microsatellite instability at mono- and dinucleotide repeats. The importance of MMR in mutation avoidance is highlighted by the finding that defects in MMR predispose individuals to hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. In addition to its role in postreplication repair, the MMR machinery serves to police homologous recombination events and acts as a barrier to genetic exchange between species.

Crystal structure and biochemical analysis of the MutS.ADP.beryllium fluoride complex suggests a conserved mechanism for ATP interactions in mismatch repair.

During mismatch repair ATP binding and hydrolysis activities by the MutS family proteins are important for both mismatch recognition and for transducing mismatch recognition signals to downstream repair factors. Despite intensive efforts, a MutS.ATP.DNA complex has eluded crystallographic analysis. Searching for ATP analogs that strongly bound to Thermus aquaticus (Taq) MutS, we found that ADP.beryllium fluoride (ABF), acted as a strong inhibitor of several MutS family ATPases. Furthermore, ABF promoted the formation of a ternary complex containing the Saccharomyces cerevisiae MSH2.MSH6 and MLH1.PMS1 proteins bound to mismatch DNA but did not promote dissociation of MSH2.MSH6 from mismatch DNA. Crystallographic analysis of the Taq MutS.DNA.ABF complex indicated that although this complex was very similar to that of MutS.DNA.ADP, both ADP.Mg(2+) moieties in the MutS. DNA.ADP structure were replaced by ABF. Furthermore, a disordered region near the ATP-binding pocket in the MutS B subunit became traceable, whereas the equivalent region in the A subunit that interacts with the mismatched nucleotide remained disordered. Finally, the DNA binding domains of MutS together with the mismatched DNA were shifted upon binding of ABF. We hypothesize that the presence of ABF is communicated between the two MutS subunits through the contact between the ordered loop and Domain III in addition to the intra-subunit helical lever arm that links the ATPase and DNA binding domains.

DNA bending and unbending by MutS govern mismatch recognition and specificity.

DNA mismatch repair is central to the maintenance of genomic stability. It is initiated by the recognition of base-base mismatches and insertion/deletion loops by the family of MutS proteins. Subsequently, ATP induces a unique conformational change in the MutS-mismatch complex but not in the MutS-homoduplex complex that sets off the cascade of events that leads to repair. To gain insight into the mechanism by which MutS discriminates between mismatch and homoduplex DNA, we have examined the conformations of specific and nonspecific MutS-DNA complexes by using atomic force microscopy. Interestingly, MutS-DNA complexes exhibit a single population of conformations, in which the DNA is bent at homoduplex sites, but two populations of conformations, bent and unbent, at mismatch sites. These results suggest that the specific recognition complex is one in which the DNA is unbent. Combining our results with existing biochemical and crystallographic data leads us to propose that MutS: (i) binds to DNA nonspecifically and bends it in search of a mismatch; (ii) on specific recognition of a mismatch, undergoes a conformational change to an initial recognition complex in which the DNA is kinked, with interactions similar to those in the published crystal structures; and (iii) finally undergoes a further conformational change to the ultimate recognition complex in which the DNA is unbent. Our results provide a structural explanation for the long-standing question of how MutS achieves mismatch repair specificity.