Genomics & Informatics

Korea Genome Organization (한국유전체학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

In-silico characterization and structure-based functional annotation of a hypothetical protein from Campylobacter jejuni involved in propionate catabolism

  • Received : 2021.08.05
  • Accepted : 2021.12.09
  • Published : 2021.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Campylobacter jejuni is one of the most prevalent organisms associated with foodborne illness across the globe causing campylobacteriosis and gastritis. Many proteins of C. jejuni are still unidentified. The purpose of this study was to determine the structure and function of a non-annotated hypothetical protein (HP) from C. jejuni. A number of properties like physiochemical characteristics, 3D structure, and functional annotation of the HP (accession No. CAG2129885.1) were predicted using various bioinformatics tools followed by further validation and quality assessment. Moreover, the protein-protein interactions and active site were obtained from the STRING and CASTp server, respectively. The hypothesized protein possesses various characteristics including an acidic pH, thermal stability, water solubility, and cytoplasmic distribution. While alpha-helix and random coil structures are the most prominent structural components of this protein, most of it is formed of helices and coils. Along with expected quality, the 3D model has been found to be novel. This study has identified the potential role of the HP in 2-methylcitric acid cycle and propionate catabolism. Furthermore, protein-protein interactions revealed several significant functional partners. The in-silico characterization of this protein will assist to understand its molecular mechanism of action better. The methodology of this study would also serve as the basis for additional research into proteomic and genomic data for functional potential identification.

Keywords

References

  1. Altekruse SF, Stern NJ, Fields PI, Swerdlow DL. Campylobacter jejuni: an emerging foodborne pathogen. Emerg Infect Dis 1999;5:28-35. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid0501.990104
  2. Balaban M, Hendrixson DR. Polar flagellar biosynthesis and a regulator of flagellar number influence spatial parameters of cell division in Campylobacter jejuni. PLoS Pathog 2011;7:e1002420. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1002420
  3. Young KT, Davis LM, Dirita VJ. Campylobacter jejuni: molecular biology and pathogenesis. Nat Rev Microbiol 2007;5:665-679. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro1718
  4. Allos BM. Campylobacter jejuni infections: update on emerging issues and trends. Clin Infect Dis 2001;32:1201-1206. https://doi.org/10.1086/319760
  5. Snelling WJ, Matsuda M, Moore JE, Dooley JS. Campylobacter jejuni. Lett Appl Microbiol 2005;41:297-302. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-765X.2005.01788.x
  6. Parkhill J, Wren BW, Mungall K, Ketley JM, Churcher C, Basham D, et al. The genome sequence of the food-borne pathogen Campylobacter jejuni reveals hypervariable sequences. Nature 2000;403:665-668. https://doi.org/10.1038/35001088
  7. Jaroszewski L, Li Z, Krishna SS, Bakolitsa C, Wooley J, Deacon AM, et al. Exploration of uncharted regions of the protein universe. PLoS Biol 2009;7:e1000205. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000205
  8. Nimrod G, Schushan M, Steinberg DM, Ben-Tal N. Detection of functionally important regions in "hypothetical proteins" of known structure. Structure 2008;16:1755-1763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2008.10.017
  9. Ferdous N, Reza MN, Emon MT, Islam MS, Mohiuddin AKM, Hossain MU. Molecular characterization and functional annotation of a hypothetical protein (SCO0618) of Streptomyces coelicolor A3(2). Genomics Inform 2020;18:e28. https://doi.org/10.5808/GI.2020.18.3.e28
  10. Szklarczyk D, Gable AL, Lyon D, Junge A, Wyder S, Huerta-Cepas J, et al. STRING v11: protein-protein association networks with increased coverage, supporting functional discovery in genome-wide experimental datasets. Nucleic Acids Res 2019;47:D607-D613. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky1131
  11. Jez JM. Revisiting protein structure, function, and evolution in the genomic era. J Invertebr Pathol 2017;142:11-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jip.2016.07.013
  12. Stahl M, Butcher J, Stintzi A. Nutrient acquisition and metabolism by Campylobacter jejuni. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2012;2:5.
  13. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schaffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, et al. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 1997;25:3389-3402. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/25.17.3389
  14. Edgar RC. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res 2004;32:1792-1797. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkh340
  15. Kumar S, Stecher G, Li M, Knyaz C, Tamura K. MEGA X: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Mol Biol Evol 2018;35:1547-1549. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msy096
  16. Gasteiger E, Gattiker A, Hoogland C, Ivanyi I, Appel RD, Bairoch A. ExPASy: the proteomics server for in-depth protein knowledge and analysis. Nucleic Acids Res 2003;31:3784-3788. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkg563
  17. Yu CS, Lin CJ, Hwang JK. Predicting subcellular localization of proteins for Gram-negative bacteria by support vector machines based on n-peptide compositions. Protein Sci 2004;13:1402-1406. https://doi.org/10.1110/ps.03479604
  18. Bhasin M, Garg A, Raghava GP. PSLpred: prediction of subcellular localization of bacterial proteins. Bioinformatics 2005;21:2522-2524. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bti309
  19. Yu NY, Wagner JR, Laird MR, Melli G, Rey S, Lo R, et al. PSORTb 3.0: improved protein subcellular localization prediction with refined localization subcategories and predictive capabilities for all prokaryotes. Bioinformatics 2010;26:1608-1615. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btq249
  20. Secondary structure analysis of a protein using SOPMA. Ettimadai: Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham Virtual Lab, 2012. Accessed 2021 Nov 30. Available from: https://vlab.amrita.edu/?sub-=3&brch=275&sim=1454&cnt=1.
  21. Jones DT. Protein secondary structure prediction based on position-specific scoring matrices. J Mol Biol 1999;292:195-202. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.1999.3091
  22. Zimmermann L, Stephens A, Nam SZ, Rau D, Kubler J, Lozajic M, et al. A completely reimplemented MPI bioinformatics toolkit with a new HHpred server at its core. J Mol Biol 2018;430:2237-2243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2017.12.007
  23. Krieger E, Joo K, Lee J, Lee J, Raman S, Thompson J, et al. Improving physical realism, stereochemistry, and side-chain accuracy in homology modeling: four approaches that performed well in CASP8. Proteins 2009;77 Suppl 9:114-122. https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.22570
  24. Likova E, Petkov P, Ilieva N, Litov L. The PyMOL Molecular Graphics System, version 2.0. New York: Schrodinger, LLC, 2015.
  25. Laskowski RA, MacArthur MW, Moss DS, Thornton JM. PRO-CHECK: a program to check the stereochemical quality of protein structures. J Appl Crystallogr 1993;26:283-291. https://doi.org/10.1107/s0021889892009944
  26. Eisenberg D, Luthy R, Bowie JU. VERIFY3D: assessment of protein models with three-dimensional profiles. Methods Enzymol 1997;277:396-404. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0076-6879(97)77022-8
  27. Colovos C, Yeates TO. Verification of protein structures: patterns of nonbonded atomic interactions. Protein Sci 1993;2:1511-1519. https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.5560020916
  28. Marchler-Bauer A, Lu S, Anderson JB, Chitsaz F, Derbyshire MK, DeWeese-Scott C, et al. CDD: a conserved domain database for the functional annotation of proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 2011;39:D225-D229. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkq1189
  29. Jones P, Binns D, Chang HY, Fraser M, Li W, McAnulla C, et al. InterProScan 5: genome-scale protein function classification. Bioinformatics 2014;30:1236-1240. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu031
  30. Tian W, Chen C, Lei X, Zhao J, Liang J. CASTp 3.0: computed atlas of surface topography of proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 2018;46:W363-W367. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky473
  31. Eng J. ROC analysis: web-based calculator for ROC curves. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 2014. Accessed 2021 Nov 30. Available from: http://www.jrocfit.org.
  32. Halarnkar PP, Blomquist GJ. Comparative aspects of propionate metabolism. Comp Biochem Physiol B 1989;92:227-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0491(89)90270-8
  33. Suvorova IA, Ravcheev DA, Gelfand MS. Regulation and evolution of malonate and propionate catabolism in proteobacteria. J Bacteriol 2012;194:3234-3240. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.00163-12
  34. Horswill AR, Escalante-Semerena JC. In vitro conversion of propionate to pyruvate by Salmonella enterica enzymes: 2-methylcitrate dehydratase (PrpD) and aconitase enzymes catalyze the conversion of 2-methylcitrate to 2-methylisocitrate. Biochemistry 2001;40:4703-4713. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi015503b
  35. Blank L, Green J, Guest JR. AcnC of Escherichia coli is a 2-methylcitrate dehydratase (PrpD) that can use citrate and isocitrate as substrates. Microbiology (Reading) 2002;148:133-146. https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-148-1-133
  36. Lohkamp B, Bauerle B, Rieger PG, Schneider G. Three-dimensional structure of iminodisuccinate epimerase defines the fold of the MmgE/PrpD protein family. J Mol Biol 2006;362:555-566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2006.07.051
  37. Kanamasa S, Dwiarti L, Okabe M, Park EY. Cloning and functional characterization of the cis-aconitic acid decarboxylase (CAD) gene from Aspergillus terreus. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2008;80:223-229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-008-1523-1
  38. Reddick JJ, Sirkisoon S, Dahal RA, Hardesty G, Hage NE, Booth WT, et al. First biochemical characterization of a methylcitric acid cycle from Bacillus subtilis strain 168. Biochemistry 2017;56:5698-5711. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biochem.7b00778