Structure of the Membrane Domain of Subunit b of the Escherichia coli F0F1 ATP Synthase*

Oleg Dmitriev, Phil C. Jones, Weiping Jiang, and Robert H. FillingameDagger

From the Department of Biomolecular Chemistry, University of Wisconsin Medical School, Madison, Wisconsin 53706

    ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

The structure of the N-terminal transmembrane domain (residues 1-34) of subunit b of the Escherichia coli F0F1-ATP synthase has been solved by two-dimensional 1H NMR in a membrane mimetic solvent mixture of chloroform/methanol/H2O (4:4:1). Residues 4-22 form an alpha -helix, which is likely to span the hydrophobic domain of the lipid bilayer to anchor the largely hydrophilic subunit b in the membrane. The helical structure is interrupted by a rigid bend in the region of residues 23-26 with alpha -helical structure resuming at Pro-27 at an angle offset by 20° from the transmembrane helix. In native subunit b, the hinge region and C-terminal alpha -helical segment would connect the transmembrane helix to the cytoplasmic domain. The transmembrane domains of the two subunit b in F0 were shown to be close to each other by cross-linking experiments in which single Cys were substituted for residues 2-21 of the native subunit and b-b dimer formation tested after oxidation with Cu(II)(phenanthroline)2. Cys residues that formed disulfide cross-links were found with a periodicity indicative of one face of an alpha -helix, over the span of residues 2-18, where Cys at positions 2, 6, and 10 formed dimers in highest yield. A model for the dimer is presented based upon the NMR structure and distance constraints from the cross-linking data. The transmembrane alpha -helices are positioned at a 23° angle to each other with the side chains of Thr-6, Gln-10, Phe-14, and Phe-17 at the interface between subunits. The change in direction of helical packing at the hinge region may be important in the functional interaction of the cytoplasmic domains.

    INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

During oxidative and photo phosphorylation ATP is synthesized by a H+-transporting F0F1-ATP synthase. In mitochondria, chloroplasts, and eubacteria, the enzyme consists of an H+-transporting transmembrane domain, termed F0, and a catalytic domain bound at the membrane surface, termed F1. Each sector is composed of multiple subunits that vary somewhat between species (1). The simplest enzyme is found in E. coli where the composition is alpha 3beta 3gamma 1delta 1epsilon 1 for F1 and a1b2c12 for F0 (2, 3). The structure of much of the alpha 3beta 3gamma segment of F1 from bovine mitochondria has been solved by x-ray crystallography (4) and dramatic progress made in understanding the mechanism of ATP synthesis by a binding change mechanism involving rotary catalysis (5-7). The gamma  subunit has been shown to rotate within a hexameric ring of alpha 3beta 3 subunits to promote changes in substrate and product binding affinities at alternating catalytic sites within the beta  subunits (8-10).

The mechanism by which proton translocation through F0 is coupled to rotary catalysis in F1 remains to be elucidated. Subunit c is believed to play the central role in proton transport via protonation-deprotonation of an essential Asp-61 carboxylate from alternate access channels on either side of the membrane (2). The structure of subunit c, the smallest subunit in F0, has been solved by heteronuclear NMR (11), and a ring-like organization of the c oligomer in F0 was recently elucidated by cross-linking approaches (12, 13). Low resolution electron microscopic and atomic force microscopic images also suggest a ring-like arrangement of the c oligomer with subunits a and b lying at the periphery of the ring (14-16). The placement of subunits a and b at the outside of the ring is supported by cross-linking studies (13, 17). To couple H+ transport to rotary catalysis in F1, H+-flux through F0 is proposed to drive rotation of the c oligomeric ring relative to the stationary subunits a and b at the periphery of the complex (9, 18-20). In such a model, subunit b is proposed to play the role of a stator, holding the alpha 3beta 3 subunits of F1 fixed to the stationary F0 subunits as the c12-gamma epsilon subunits rotate as a unit. The gamma  and epsilon  subunits are known to project below the alpha 3beta 3 complex as a stalk making contact with the surface of the c-oligomer in F0 (21-23). Recent electron micrographs now indicate a second stalk at the periphery of the F1F0 interface, which is presumed to represent a dimer of b2 subunits extending from F0 to F1 (7, 24, 25). Little is known about the structure of subunit b.

Subunit b is an amphipathic protein of 156 residues. The N-terminal 33-residue segment is highly hydrophobic and the presumed membrane anchor (26). Indeed, residues in this N-terminal segment were readily labeled with 3-(trifluoromethyl)-3-(m-[125I]iodophenyl)diazirine, a lipid soluble, photoactivatable carbene precursor (27). The remainder of the protein is quite hydrophilic and thought to extend from the membrane surface to bind F1. The cytoplasmic domain lacking residues 1-24, termed bsol, has been expressed and in purified, soluble form shown to bind to F1 (28). The cytoplasmic domain has an elongated shape with high alpha -helical content and associates to form a homodimer in solution. Dimerization appears to be a necessary prerequisite for F1 binding (29, 30). The soluble domain binds to subunit delta  of F1 in solution (31), and interactions between subunit b and subunits delta  and alpha  at the top of the F1 molecule have been demonstrated in F1F0 (32). To reach the top of the F1 molecule, subunit b is estimated to extend 110 Å from the surface of the membrane (32).

It may be possible to solve the structure of the individual domains of subunit b by NMR methods as a means of circumventing solubility problems inherent in approaches with detergent solubilization of the whole subunit. The aqueous solution structures of subunit epsilon  and portions of subunit delta  are already in hand (33, 34), and the structure of subunit c in chloroform/methanol/H2O solvent agrees well with predictions made from the biochemical and genetic experiments on the protein in situ (2, 11, 13). Further, subunit c retains its function after passage through chloroform/methanol/H2O solvent when reconstituted into liposomes with subunits a and b (35). Based on its hydrophobicity, the membrane anchoring segment of subunit b was expected to be soluble in the chloroform/methanol/H2O mixture used in studies of subunit c. We report here on the structure of the membrane anchoring segment of subunit b in chloroform/methanol/H2O solvent and its possible relevance to the structural organization of the native subunit b dimer in F0.

    EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

Peptide Synthesis-- A 34-residue peptide corresponding to the N-terminal sequence of the E. coli subunit b was synthesized at the University of Wisconsin Biotechnology Center on an Applied Biosystems Synergy 432A instrument using Fmoc (N-(9-fluorenyl)methoxycarbonyl) chemistry. The C-terminal carboxyl was amidinated. The peptide was purified from the crude synthesis mixture by reverse phase high pressure liquid chromatography on a Dynamax C-4 column eluted with a linear 55-72% gradient of acetonitrile in 0.1% aqueous trifluoroacetic acid. The identity of the purified peptide was confirmed by amino acid analysis and electrospray mass spectrometry. The final product was judged to be >= 99% pure based on analytical high pressure liquid chromatography.

NMR Spectroscopy-- Samples for NMR were 2 mM peptide in either CDCl3:CD3OH:H2O (4:4:1 by volume) or CDCl3:CD3OD:D2O (4:4:1 by volume) containing 50 mM NaCl and 1 mM dithiothreitol. The pH of the solution was measured with a glass electrode and adjusted to pH 6.0 without correction for the deuterium isotope effect. DQF-COSY,1 TOCSY, and NOESY experiments were performed on a DMX-600 spectrometer (Brueker) with a triple axis gradient capability. Double pulse field gradient echo solvent suppression (36) was used for recording TOCSY and NOESY in protic solvent. Magic angle gradients (37) were used for coherence pathway selection and water suppression in DQF-COSY experiments. TOCSY used the DIPSI-2 spin-lock sequence (38) and a mixing time of 75 ms. A mixing time of 160 or 80 ms was used in NOESY experiments. Data was collected using 640 (NOESY, TOCSY) or 800 (DQF-COSY) increments in t1. Time domain data was also extended in t1 by linear prediction. Squared sine apodization and zero filling to 2,048 points was applied in each dimension before Fourier transformation. Spectra were processed and analyzed using Felix 95.0 software (Molecular Simulations Inc., Palo Alto, CA) on a Silicon Graphics O2 computer. Coupling constants (3JHalpha , HN) were calculated from DQF-COSY and NOESY spectra essentially as described (39). The structure was calculated from 275 NOE-derived inter- and intra-residue distance constraints and 20 angle constraints derived from coupling constants. Distance calibration and structure calculation was performed with the DYANA software package (40) by simulated annealing. The MOLMOL program (41) was used for visual analysis of the structure and for preparing molecular graphics figures.

Mutagenesis, Expression, and Cross-link Analysis-- A two stage PCR-based mutagenesis procedure was used with plasmid pNOC for the introduction of single cysteine residues between residues 2 and 20 of subunit b (12). Mutagenic primers corresponding to 21-25 base sequence of the sense strand were designed with a single codon changed to Cys. These were combined with the antisense primer (bases 2523-2548)2 to generate the first PCR product or mega-primer. The purified mega-primer was then combined with a second primer, coding bases 1844-1860 of the sense strand, in a second PCR reaction. The product was then digested with SnaB1 and AvaI and subcloned into these restriction sites of plasmid pNOC, and the product was verified by DNA sequencing. A chromosomal Delta uncBEFH deleted strain, JWP109 (17), was transformed with pNOC and its mutant derivatives. Plasmid complementation of the Delta uncBEFH deletion was tested by growth of transformant cells on succinate minimal medium (17). Membrane vesicles were prepared, and cross-linking analysis was carried out as described previously (17) using polyvinylidene fluoride membrane for Western blotting. Rabbit antiserum to subunit b was a generous gift of D. S. Perlin and A. E. Senior (42).

    RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

NMR Spectra of Peptide b1-34 in Chloroform/Methanol/H2O Solvent-- Peptide b1-34 is quite hydrophobic and it proved to be very soluble in a mixture of chloroform/methanol/H2O (4:4:1 by volume). The DQF-COSY spectrum of b1-34 in this solvent mixture demonstrated a good dispersion of HN and Halpha chemical shifts (Fig. 1). The distribution of chemical shifts of the HN and Halpha protons is typical for a protein containing alpha -helical and coiled segments (43). Proton chemical shifts were assigned by standard procedures (44). Main chain chemical shifts assignments for all residues were complete with the exception of Asn-2, where HN was not observed. Most of the side chains protons have been assigned except for a few aliphatic side chains where complete assignment was not possible due to spectral overlap and chemical shift degeneracy. A table of chemical shift assignments has been deposited in the BMRB data bank (http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu). NOE analysis revealed a pattern of sequential and medium range NOEs, which is characteristic of an alpha -helix (Fig. 2A). No long range NOEs were observed (Table I), indicating that the peptide does not form tertiary folds. The Halpha -HN cross-peaks of the residues 12-21 and 25 were still readily observable by DQF-COSY in completely deuterated solvent in an experiment where data was collected from 6 to 14 h after dissolving the peptide. These regions of the peptide must therefore have a particularly stable hydrogen bonded secondary structure.


View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1.   The fingerprint region of the DQF-COSY spectrum of the b1-34 peptide. Positions of the Halpha -HN cross-peaks of individual residues are indicated.


View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2.   Summary of NOEs observed in the NOESY spectrum of the b1-34 peptide. A, sequential and medium range NOEs and slowly exchanging amide protons; B, number of NOE constraints per residue. Segments of the bars correspond to interresidue (white), sequential (light shading) and other (dark shading) NOEs, respectively.

                              
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table I
Statistics for 10 final structural models from DYANA calculations

General Features of the b1-34 Solution Structure-- The three-dimensional structure of b1-34 was calculated by simulated annealing with the DYANA package of NMR software (40). Of the initial collection of 200 calculated structures, 180 had a similar overall folding pattern. In the 20 remaining structures there was no apparent clustering of structures into an alternative fold. The 10 lowest energy structures were energy minimized using AMBER forcefield as implemented in DISCOVER (Molecular Simulations Inc.). The atomic coordinates of the 10 final structures have been deposited as entry 1b9U at the Protein Data Bank, Rutgers, New Jersey. The best fit superposition of the 10 final structures is shown in Fig. 3. Mean pairwise root mean square deviation between individual structures for residues 3-33 was 0.4 ± 0.1 Å and 0.9 ± 0.1 Å for the backbone and all heavy atoms, respectively. There were no distance constraint violations exceeding 0.2 Å. The distribution of angles in a Ramachandran plot were 74% in the "most favored" region, with 23% in the "additionally allowed" and 3% in "generously allowed" regions. The definitions of the Ramachandran plot regions are those used in DYANA. Statistics on the structure calculation are presented in Table I and Fig. 2B.


View larger version (71K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3.   Stereoview of the best-fit superposition of the 10 lowest energy structures of the b1-34 peptide. The trace of backbone bonds is shown in blue and other bonds in yellow. The position of residues discussed in the text are indicated.

The b1-34 peptide forms a well defined alpha -helix from residues 4-22, which is interrupted by a bend region from residues 23-26 with resumption of the alpha -helix from residue 27 to the C terminus. A large stretch of the initial alpha -helical segment is unusually stable as judged by the very slow HN exchange in deuterated solvent. The uninterrupted stretch of hydrophobic side chains from residues 11 to 20 may stabilize the hydrogen bonded secondary structure in either a lipid bilayer or a membrane-mimetic solvent by forming a nonpolar sheath around the protein backbone. Sequential proline residues at positions 27 and 28, which would break the (i,i + 4) pattern of hydrogen bonding in an alpha -helix, correlate with the position of the bend in the structure. This region is well ordered in solution despite the absence of hydrogen bonds. Such a rigid conformation probably results from the combination of restricted torsional mobility of the backbone of the two proline residues and spatial constraints imposed by the bulky side chains of residues 22-26. The alpha -helical structure resumes at residue 27 with both Pro-27 and Pro-28 in the alpha -helical conformation with psi  angles of about -35°. As Richardson and Richardson (45) have indicated, a proline in this conformation is actually favored as the first residue of an alpha -helix and is not uncommon in the second position as well. The alpha -helix from residues 27 to 33 may be part of a more extended alpha -helical segment of the cytoplasmic domain.

Dimerization of the Transmembrane Domain of Subunit b in Situ-- The cytoplasmic domains of subunit b forms a functionally important homodimer in F0, which suggests a possible proximity of transmembrane segments as well. Single Cys residues were introduced from position 2-20 of a cysteine-free subunit b (bC21S) to test this possibility by cross-linking. The bC21S mutant was shown to be functionally equivalent to wild type (12). Each of the single Cys mutants grew on a succinate carbon source, indicating a functional oxidative phosphorylation system. Most mutants grew similarly to wild type (1.5-2-mm colony diameter after 3 days at 37 °C) with the exception of bI7C (0.5 mm), bG9C (0.8 mm), and bI12C (1 mm). Membrane vesicles from each mutant were analyzed for b-b homodimer formation by disulfide bridge formation following treatment with Cu(II)-(1,10-phenanthroline)2 (Fig. 4). Relatively intense high yield b-b dimers were observed for the bN2C, bT6C and bQ10C substitutions. Less intense dimer formation was observed with Cys substitutions at residues 3, 4, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 17, and 18. The periodicity of high yield cross-linking seen in Fig. 4 mimics that expected for one face of an alpha -helix. The less intense cross-linking seen over consecutive stretches of residues suggest that the helices may be relatively mobile in the membrane.


View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4.   Subunit b dimer formation in Cys-substituted mutants. This figure shows an immunoblot of an SDS-gel comparing native membranes (-), prepared in the absence of dithiothreitol, to the same membranes after treatment with 1.5 mM Cu(II)(phenanthroline)2 for 1 h at 22 °C (+). The immunoblot was probed with antiserum to subunit b and stained with an ECL system (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). The position of the Cys substitution in each mutant is indicated. WT, wild type.

Possible Arrangement of the Transmembrane Domains of Two Subunits b in F0-- Intersubunit distance restraints derived from the cross-linking pattern were used to envision the orientation of the membrane domains of the two b subunits in the native F0 complex. Two minimized mean b1-34 structures were docked to each other using distance constraints from the cross-linking data. The distances between the alpha -carbons of residues 2, 6, and 10 of two different b subunits were constrained to 4-8 Å, the distance usually found for natural disulfide bridges in proteins (45). The distances between alpha carbons of residues forming lower yield cross-links were constrained to 4-11 Å. Backbone angles of residues 3 to 33 were restrained to the values in the mean structure, and side chain angles left unrestrained. A dimer structure was calculated using molecular dynamics and energy minimization with DISCOVER (Molecular Simulations Inc.). The fit of the cross-linking distance constraints to the model are shown in Table II. The modeling indicates that the membrane anchoring segments of the two b subunits are positioned at a 23° angle to each other with interacting helical faces making Van der Waals contact at the side chains of residues 6 and 10 (Fig. 5).

                              
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table II
Cross-linking distance constraints used in modeling the b1-34 dimer


View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5.   Model for possible interaction of transmembrane domains of subunit b based on the cross-linking constraints and NMR model. Side chains of residues discussed in text are shown in bold color, i.e. Asn-2, Thr-6, and Gln-10 (magenta), Phe-14 and Phe-17 (green), and Trp-26 (yellow). Van der Waals contacts are made been the pairs of Thr-6 and Gln-10 side chains. The rings of Phe-14, Phe-17', and Phe-17 interact in an aromatic cluster. The aromatic rings of Trp-26 and Trp-26' project toward the front and back of the structure, respectively.


    DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

Before this work, Girvin et al. (11) used solution NMR to solve the structure of F0 subunit c dissolved in chloroform/methanol/H2O (4:4:1) solvent. Importantly, subunit c folds in a helical hairpin, as it is predicted to fold in the membrane, with a number of side chains interacting in accord with the predictions of genetic and biochemical studies of F0 in situ. The solvent mixture used may be a good membrane mimetic, because it can organize heterogeneously around polar and apolar surfaces of amphipathic proteins. We have shown previously that purified subunit c, prepared in chloroform/methanol/H2O solvent, can be reconstituted with subunits a and b to form an F0 with normal proton translocating function (35). The experiment indicated that the protein was not denatured by the solvent treatment. We have attempted similar experiments here in reconstituting peptide b1-34 with purified subunits a and c and were unable to reconstitute proton-translocating activity. This negative result is in agreement with earlier observations that partial removal of small segments of the C-terminal domain of the subunit b disrupted the assembly of an active F0 complex (46, 47).

The structure of the transmembrane region of subunit b derived here by NMR analysis of the protein in chloroform/methanol/H2O solvent fits well with features of the protein expected in a native lipid bilayer. The N-terminal alpha -helical segment (residues 4-22) is followed by hinge region from residues 23-26 before resumption of the alpha -helix. Because an alpha -helix of 20 amino acids is required to traverse the fatty acyl hydrocarbon interior of a phospholipid bilayer, we expect the initial N-terminal helix to be the hydrocarbon spanning region of the protein. This would place Asn-2 at the periplasmic hydrocarbon/polar interface and the hinge region (residues 23-26) at the cytoplasmic hydrocarbon/polar interface of the phospholipid bilayer. The distance between alpha -carbons of Asn-2 and Trp-26 is 34 Å in the structure, which is close to the distance of 32 Å predicted between fatty acyl carbonyls in opposing leaflets of a palmitoyloleoylphosphatidylcholine bilayer determined by x-ray and neutron diffraction (48, 49). The positioning of these residues near the glycerol moiety of the phospholipid was previously indicated by labeling studies with a photoactivatable phospholipid analog (50).

Trp and Tyr residues are preferentially found at the hydrocarbon/polar interface of the lipid bilayer in transmembrane proteins of known structure (49, 51-53). The Tyr-24 and Trp-26 residues in the b1-34 structure would also be predicted to organize in the interfacial region. In the case of the Trp-26 side chain, the aromatic rings lie parallel to the predicted surface of the lipid bilayer but in a region of the protein devoid of other protein contacts (Fig. 3). Trp-26 can be replaced with either an acidic or a basic residue without impairing function (54), indicating that it may lie in a region with a few protein-protein contacts. The orientation of the indole ring might be expected to reorient in a phospholipid bilayer in a more perpendicular manner to optimize hydrogen bonding between the indole NH and fatty acyl carbonyl groups (55).3

The two copies of subunit b present in the F0 are now thought to be adjacent to each other and the interactions between cytoplasmic domains believed critical in F1 binding function (28-32). The cross-linking experiments presented here indicate that the transmembrane domains are also close enough in the membrane to dimerize. A possible model for helical-helical interaction within the membrane is presented based upon the NMR model and distance constraints from the cross-linking results (Fig. 5). The model is of interest in that the transmembrane helices cross at an angle that is typical for helix-helix packing in polytopic membrane proteins of known structure (56). If this model represents the packing in F0, then the role of the hinge region may be to redirect the C-terminal helix at an angle more perpendicular to the membrane as it emerges into the cytoplasmic. Proper positioning may be critical in facilitating dimerization of the cytoplasmic domain. The model is also of interest in that it suggests a possible aromatic cluster that may be important in fostering helix-helix interactions between subunits. The aromatic ring interactions of Phe-14-Phe-17', where 17' designates the second subunit, and Phe-17'-Phe-17 is in accord with the stabilizing geometries and distances described by Burley and Petsko (57) with centroid distances of 5.0 and 5.8 Å, respectively.

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are grateful to Dr. Gary Case for synthesizing the peptide used in this study and to Dr. Mark Girvin for introducing O. Dmitriev to NMR. We thank Drs. David Perlin (Public Health Institute of New York) and Alan Senior (University of Rochester) for the gift of antiserum to subunit b.

    FOOTNOTES

* This work was supported by United States Public Health Service Grant GM23105. The National Magnetic Resonance Facility at Madison, supported by National Institutes of Health Grant R02301, was used in this study. Equipment in the facility was purchased with funds from the University of Wisconsin, the National Science Foundation Biological Instrumentation Program (Grant DMB8415048), the NIH Biomedical Research Technology Program (RR02301), the NIH Shared Instrumentation Program (Grant RR02781) and the United States Department of Agriculture.The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

Dagger To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 608-262-1439; Fax: 608-262-5253; E-mail: filingam{at}macc.wisc.edu.

2 The nucleotide numbering system is from the sequence given by Walker et al. (26).

3 Such a reorientation does occur in the molecular dynamics calculation illustrated in Fig. 5, where side chain angles were left unrestrained.

    ABBREVIATIONS

The abbreviations used are: DQF-COSY, double-quantum filtered correlation spectroscopy; NOE, nuclear Overhauser enhancement; NOESY, NOE spectroscopy; TOCSY, total correlation spectroscopy; PCR, polymerase chain reaction.

    REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
  1. Senior, A. E. (1988) Physiol. Rev. 68, 177-231[Free Full Text]
  2. Fillingame, R. H. (1997) J. Exp. Biol. 200, 217-224[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Jones, P. C., and Fillingame, R. H. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 29701-29705[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Abrahams, J. P., Leslie, A. G. W., Lutter, R., and Walker, J. E. (1994) Nature 370, 621-628[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  5. Boyer, P. D. (1997) Annu. Rev. Biochem. 66, 717-749[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Boyer, P. D. (1998) Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 37, 2296-2307[CrossRef]
  7. Walker, J. E. (1998) Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 37, 2308-2319[CrossRef]
  8. Noji, H., Yasuda, R., Yoshida, M., and Kiniosita, K., Jr. (1997) Nature 386, 299-302[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Duncan, T. M., Bulygin, V. V., Zhou, Y., Hutcheon, M. L., and Cross, R. L. (1995) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 92, 10964-10968[Abstract]
  10. Sabbert, D., Engelbrecht, S., and Junge, W. (1996) Nature 381, 623-625[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  11. Girvin, M. E., Rastogi, V. K., Abildgaard, F., Markley, J. L., and Fillingame, R. H. (1998) Biochemistry 37, 8817-8824[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  12. Jones, P. C., Jiang, W., and Fillingame, R. H. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 17178-17185[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Fillingame, R. H., Jones, P. C., Jiang, W., Valiyaveetil, F. I., and Dmitriev, O. Y. (1998) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1365, 135-142[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  14. Birkenhäger, R., Hoppert, M., Deckers-Hebestreit, G., Mayer, F., and Altendorf, K. (1995) Eur. J. Biochem. 230, 58-67[Abstract]
  15. Takeyasu, K., Omote, H., Nettikadan, S., Tokumasu, F., Iwamoto-Kihara, A., and Futai, M. (1996) FEBS Lett. 392, 110-113[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  16. Singh, S., Turina, P., Bustamante, C. J., Keller, D. J., and Capaldi, R. A. (1996) FEBS Lett. 397, 30-34[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  17. Jiang, W., and Fillingame, R. H. (1998) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 95, 6607-6612[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Vik, S. B., and Antonio, B. J. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 30364-30369[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Engelbrecht, S., and Junge, W. (1997) FEBS Lett. 414, 485-491[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  20. Elston, T., Wang, H., and Oster, G. (1998) Nature 391, 510-513[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  21. Zhang, Y., and Fillingame, R. H. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 24609-24614[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Watts, S. D., Zhang, Y., Fillingame, R. H., and Capaldi, R. A. (1995) FEBS Lett. 368, 235-238[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  23. Watts, S. D., Teng, C., and Capaldi, R. A. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 28341-28347[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Wilkens, S., and Capaldi, R. A. (1998) Nature 393, 29[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  25. Böttcher, B., Schwarz, L., and Gräber, P. (1998) J. Mol. Biol. 281, 757-762[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  26. Walker, J. E., Saraste, M., and Gay, J. E. (1984) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 768, 164-200[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  27. Hoppe, J., Brunner, J., and Jørgensen, B. B. (1984) Biochemistry 23, 5610-5616[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  28. Dunn, S. D. (1992) J. Biol. Chem. 267, 7630-7636[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Rodgers, A. J. W., Wilkens, S., Aggeler, R., Morris, M. B., Howitt, S. M., and Capaldi, R. A. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 31058-31064[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Sorgen, P. L., Bubb, M. R., McCormick, K. A., Edison, A. S., and Cain, B. D. (1998) Biochemistry 37, 923-932[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  31. Dunn, S. D., and Chandler, J. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 8646-8651[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Rodgers, A. J. W., and Capaldi, R. A. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 29406-29410[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Wilkens, S., Dahlquist, F. W., McIntosh, L. P., Donaldson, L. W., and Capaldi, R. A. (1995) Nat. Struct. Biol. 2, 961-967[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Wilkens, S., Dunn, S. D., Chandler, J., Dahlquist, F. W., and Capaldi, R. A. (1995) Nat. Struct. Biol. 4, 198-201
  35. Dmitriev, O. Y., Altendorf, K., and Fillingame, R. H. (1995) Eur. J. Biochem. 223, 478-483
  36. Hwang, T. L., and Shaka, A. J. (1995) J. Magn. Reson. (A) 112, 275-279[CrossRef]
  37. Warren, W. S., Richter, W., Andreotti, A. H., and Farmer, B. T. (1993) Science 262, 2005-2009[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  38. Shaka, A. J., Lee, C. J., and Pines, A. (1988) J. Magn. Reson. 77, 274-293
  39. Titman, J. J., and Keeler, J. (1990) J. Magn. Reson. 89, 640-646
  40. Güntert, P., Mumenthaler, C., and Wüthrich, K (1997) J. Mol. Biol. 273, 283-298[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  41. Koradi, R., Billeter, M., and Wüthrich, K. (1996) J. Mol. Graphics 14, 51-55[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  42. Perlin, D. S., and Senior, A. E. (1985) Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 236, 603-611[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  43. Wishart, D. S., and Sykes, B. D. (1994) Methods Enzymol. 239, 363-391[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  44. Wüthrich, K. (1986) NMR of Proteins and Nucleic Acids, John Wiley & Sons, New York
  45. Richardson, J. S., and Richardson, D. C. (1989) in Prediction of Protein Structure and the Principles of Protein Conformation (Fasman, G., ed), pp. 1-98, Plenum Press, NY
  46. Steffens, K., Schneider, E., Deckers-Hebestreit, G., and Altendorf, K. (1986) J. Biol. Chem. 262, 5866-5869[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  47. Takeyama, M., Noumi, T., Maeda, M., and Futai, M. (1988) J. Biol. Chem. 263, 16106-16112[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  48. Wiener, M. C., and White, S. (1992) Biophys. J. 61, 434-447
  49. Yau, W.-M., Wimley, W. C., Gawrisch, K., and White, S. H. (1998) Biochemistry 37, 14713-14718[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  50. Hoppe, J., Montecucco, C., and Friedl, P. (1983) J. Biol. Chem. 258, 2882-2885[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  51. von Heijne, G. (1994) Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 23, 167-192[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  52. Reithmeier, R. A. F. (1995) Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 5, 491-500[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  53. Wallin, E., Tsukihara, T., Yoshikawa, S., von Heijne, G., and Elofsson, A. (1995) Protein Sci. 6, 808-815[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  54. Jans, D. A., Fimmel, A. L., Hatch, L., Gibson, F., and Cox, G. B. (1984) J. Bacteriol. 160, 764-770[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  55. Schiffer, M., Chang, C.-H., and Stevens, F. J. (1992) Protein Eng. 5, 213-214[Abstract]
  56. Bowie, J. U. (1997) J. Mol. Biol. 272, 780-789[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  57. Burley, S. K., and Petsko, G. A. (1985) Science 229, 23-28[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]


Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.