1K2N

Solution Structure of the FHA2 domain of Rad53 Complexed with a Phosphothreonyl Peptide Derived from Rad9


Experimental Data Snapshot

  • Method: SOLUTION NMR
  • Conformers Calculated: 100 
  • Conformers Submitted: 20 
  • Selection Criteria: structures with the lowest energy 

wwPDB Validation   3D Report Full Report


This is version 1.4 of the entry. See complete history


Literature

Solution structure of the yeast Rad53 FHA2 complexed with a phosphothreonine peptide pTXXL: comparison with the structures of FHA2-pYXL and FHA1-pTXXD complexes.

Byeon, I.J.Yongkiettrakul, S.Tsai, M.D.

(2001) J Mol Biol 314: 577-588

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.2001.5141
  • Primary Citation of Related Structures:  
    1J4K, 1J4L, 1K2M, 1K2N

  • PubMed Abstract: 

    It was proposed previously that the FHA2 domain of the yeast protein kinase Rad53 has dual specificity toward pY and pT peptides. The consensus sequences of pY peptides for binding to FHA2, as well as the solution structures of free FHA2 and FHA2 complex with a pY peptide derived from Rad9, have been obtained previously. We now report the use of a pT library to screen for binding of pT peptides with the FHA2 domain. The results show that FHA2 binds favorably to pT peptides with Ile at the +3 position. We then searched the Rad9 sequences with a pTXXI/L motif, and tested the binding affinity of FHA2 toward ten pT peptides derived from Rad9. One of the peptides, (599)EVEL(pT)QELP(607), displayed the best binding affinity (K(d)=12.9 microM) and the greatest chemical shift changes. The structure of the FHA2 complex with this peptide was then determined by solution NMR and the structure of the complex between FHA2 and the pY peptide (826)EDI(pY)YLD(832) was further refined. Structural comparison of these two complexes indicates that the Leu residue at the +3 position in the pT peptide and that at the +2 position in the pY peptide occupy a very similar position relative to the binding site residues from FHA2. This can explain why FHA2 is able to bind both pT and pY peptides. This position change from +3 to +2 could be the consequence of the size difference between Thr and Tyr. Further insight into the structural basis of ligand specificity of FHA domains was obtained by comparing the structures of the FHA2-pTXXL complex obtained in this work and the FHA1-pTXXD complex reported in the accompanying paper.


  • Organizational Affiliation

    Department of Chemistry, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. Byeon.2@osu.edu


Macromolecules
Find similar proteins by:  (by identity cutoff)  |  3D Structure
Entity ID: 1
MoleculeChains Sequence LengthOrganismDetailsImage
Protein Kinase SPK1158Saccharomyces cerevisiaeMutation(s): 0 
Gene Names: SPK1 or RAD53
EC: 2.7.1 (PDB Primary Data), 2.7.12.1 (UniProt)
UniProt
Find proteins for P22216 (Saccharomyces cerevisiae (strain ATCC 204508 / S288c))
Explore P22216 
Go to UniProtKB:  P22216
Entity Groups  
Sequence Clusters30% Identity50% Identity70% Identity90% Identity95% Identity100% Identity
UniProt GroupP22216
Sequence Annotations
Expand
  • Reference Sequence

Find similar proteins by:  Sequence   |   3D Structure  

Entity ID: 2
MoleculeChains Sequence LengthOrganismDetailsImage
DNA repair protein Rad9B [auth P]9N/AMutation(s): 1 
UniProt
Find proteins for P14737 (Saccharomyces cerevisiae (strain ATCC 204508 / S288c))
Explore P14737 
Go to UniProtKB:  P14737
Entity Groups  
UniProt GroupP14737
Sequence Annotations
Expand
  • Reference Sequence
Small Molecules
Modified Residues  1 Unique
IDChains TypeFormula2D DiagramParent
TPO
Query on TPO
B [auth P]L-PEPTIDE LINKINGC4 H10 N O6 PTHR
Experimental Data & Validation

Experimental Data

  • Method: SOLUTION NMR
  • Conformers Calculated: 100 
  • Conformers Submitted: 20 
  • Selection Criteria: structures with the lowest energy 

Structure Validation

View Full Validation Report



Entry History 

Deposition Data

Revision History  (Full details and data files)

  • Version 1.0: 2001-12-05
    Type: Initial release
  • Version 1.1: 2008-04-27
    Changes: Version format compliance
  • Version 1.2: 2011-07-13
    Changes: Version format compliance
  • Version 1.3: 2022-02-23
    Changes: Data collection, Database references, Derived calculations
  • Version 1.4: 2024-10-16
    Changes: Data collection, Structure summary