Advertisement

Engineering an efficient mutant of Eupenicillium terrenum fructosyl peptide oxidase for the specific determination of hemoglobin A1c

  • Hamid Shahbazmohammadi
  • Soroush Sardari
  • Arezou Lari
  • Eskandar OmidiniaEmail author
Biotechnologically relevant enzymes and proteins
  • 43 Downloads

Abstract

Fructosyl peptide oxidase (FPOX, EC 1.5.3) belongs to the family of oxidoreductases, which is used as a diagnostic enzyme for diabetes mellitus. FPOX has activities toward Fru-ValHis and Fru-Lys as model compounds for hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and glycated albumin, respectively. However, when the concentration of HbA1c is measured, the activity toward Fru-Lys will cause interference. In this study, we focused on the substrate specificity engineering of FPOX from Eupenicillium terrenum through computational and experimental methods with characteristics more suitable for HbA1c measurement in the blood. Based on structural knowledge of E. terrenum FPOX (PDB ID 4RSL) and molecular modeling results, residues His-377, Arg-62, Lys-380, and Tyr-261 were selected as mutagenesis sites. The best mutant with lower binding energy, stronger hydrophobic interactions, and more hydrogen bonds with Fru-ValHis and higher binding energy toward Fru-Lys was selected for experimental studies. To investigate the conformational changes in FPOX due to the mutation, molecular dynamics simulation was also performed. The genes encoding of native and engineered variants were cloned into pET-22b(+) and produced in Escherichia coli strain BL21 (DE3). The expressed recombinant enzymes were purified and their kinetic properties were studied. Substitution of Tyr261 with Trp resulted in a mutant enzyme with improved specificity for Fru-ValHis, a model compound of HbA1c. The specific activity of mutant FPOX increased by 5.1-fold to 145.2 ± 3.2 U/mg for Fru-ValHis and decreased by 13.7-fold to 1.3 U/mg ± 0.9 for Fru-Lys compared to the native variant. Kinetics analysis indicated that Tyr261Trp FPOX mutant had 11.7-fold increase in Kcat/Km for Fru-ValHis compared to the wild-type enzyme, while the Kcat/Km for Fru-Lys diminished by 22.4-fold. In summary, our computational and experimental results suggested that the engineered FPOX is a good candidate to efficient determination of HbA1c.

Keywords

Diabetes Fructosyl peptide oxidase (FPOX) Eupenicillium terrenum Protein engineering Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) Substrate specificity 

Notes

Funding

This project was a part of a Ph.D. thesis and supported by the Pasteur Institute of Iran. This study was also financially supported by the Iran National Science foundation (Grant No. 91002667) and the Biotechnology Development Council of the Islamic Republic of Iran (Grant No. 950802).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. Bas DC, Rogers DM, Jensen JH (2008) Very fast prediction and rationalization of pKa values for protein–ligand complexes. Proteins Strut Funct Bioinf 73:765–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berendsen HJC, Postma JPM, Vangunsteren WF, Dinola A, Haak JR (1984) Molecular dynamics with coupling to an external bath. J Chem Phys 81:3684–3690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berman HM, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliland G, Bhat TN, Weissig H, Shindyalov IN, Bourne PE (2000) The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res 28:235–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernal C, Rodríguez K, Martínez R (2018) Integrating enzyme immobilization and protein engineering: an alternative path for the development of novel and improved industrial biocatalysts. Biotechnol Adv 36:1470–1480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradford MM (1976) Rapid and sensitive method for the quantification of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principles of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72:248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Collard F, Zhang J, Nemet I, Qanungo KR, Monnier VM, Yee VC (2008) Crystal structure of the deglycating enzyme fructosamine oxidase (amadoriase II). J Biol Chem 283:27007–27016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Delano WL (2006) PyMOL. Delano Scientific LLC, South San Francisco, California, USAGoogle Scholar
  8. Essmann U, Perera L, Berkowitz ML, Darden T, Lee H, Pedersen LG (1995) A smooth particle mesh Ewald method. J Chem Phys 103:8577–8593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ferri S, Kim S, Eng M, Tsugawa W, Sode K (2009) Review of fructosyl amino acid oxidase engineering research: a glimpse into the future of hemoglobin A1c biosensing. J Diabetes Sci Technol 3:585–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ferri S, Miyamoto Y, Sakaguchi-Mikami A, Tsugawa W, Sode K (2013) Engineering fructosyl peptide oxidase to improve activity toward the fructosyl hexapeptide standard for HbA1c measurement. Mol Biotechnol 54:939–943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fujiwara M, Sumitani J, Koga S, Yoshioka I, Kouzuma T, Imamura S, Kawaguchi T (2006) Alteration of substrate specificity of fructosyl-amino acid oxidase from Ulocladium sp. JS-103. J Biosci Bioeng 3:241–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fujiwara M, Sumitani J, Koga S, Yoshioka I, Kouzuma T, Imamura S, Kawaguchi T, Arai M (2007) Alteration of substrate specificity of fructosyl-amino acid oxidase from Fusarium oxysporum. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 74:813–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gan W, Gao F, Xing K, Jia M, Liuc H, Gonga W (2015) Structural basis of the substrate specificity of the FPOD/FAOD family revealed by fructosyl peptide oxidase from Eupenicillium terrenum. Acta Crystallogr 71:381–387Google Scholar
  14. Gasteiger J, Marsili M (1978) A new model for calculating atomic charges in molecules. Tetrahedron Lett 19:3181–3184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldsmith M, Tawfik DS (2017) Enzyme engineering: reaching the maximal catalytic efficiency peak. Curr Opin Struct Biol 47:140–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hirokawa K, Gomi K, Bakke M, Kajiyama N (2003a) Distribution and properties of novel deglycating enzymes for fructosyl peptide in fungi. Arch Microbiol 180:227–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hirokawa K, Gomi K, Bakke M, Kajiyama N (2003b) Molecular cloning and expression of novel fructosyl peptide oxidases and their application for the measurement of glycated protein. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 311:104–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hirokawa K, Ichiyanagi A, Kajiyama N (2008) Enhancement of thermostability of fungal deglycating enzymes by directed evolution. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 78:775–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huang J, Xie DF, Feng Y (2017) Engineering thermostable (R)-selective amine transaminase from Aspergillus terreus through in silico design empolying B-factor and folding free energy calculations. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 483:397–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ichiyanagi A, Hirokawa K, Gomi K, Nakatsu T, Katoc H, Kajiyama N (2013) Crystallization and preliminary crystallographic analysis of two eukaryotic fructosyl peptide oxidases. Acta Crystallogr 69:130–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Karami M, Jalali C, Mirzaie S (2017) Combined virtual screening, MMPBSA, molecular docking and dynamics studies against anthrax: an in silico effort to inhibit Bacillus anthracis nucleoside hydrolase. J Theor Biol 420:180–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Keil P, Mortensen HB, Christophersen C (1985) Fructosylvaline. A simple model of the N-terminal residue of human haemoglobin A1c. Acta Chem Scandinavica B 39:191–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kim S, Miura S, Ferri S, Tsugawa W, Sode K (2009) Cumulative effect of amino acid substitution for the development of fructosyl valine-specific fructosyl amine oxidase. Enzy Microb Technol 44:52–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kim S, Ferri S, Tsugawa W, Mori K, Sode K (2010) Motif-based search for a novel fructosyl peptide oxidase from genome databases. Biotechnol Bioeng 106:358–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Laskowski RA, Swindells MB (2011) LigPlot+: multiple ligand-protein interaction diagrams for drug discovery. J Chem Inf Model 51:2778–2286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Laskowski R, Macarthur M, Moss D, Thornton J (1993) PROCHECK: a program to check the stereochemical quality of protein structures. J Appl Crystallogr 26:283–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lin Z, Zheng J (2010) Occurrence, characteristics, and applications of fructosyl amine oxidases (amadoriases). Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 86:1613–1619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liu L, Hood S, Wang Y, Bezverkov R, Dou V, Datta A, Yuan C (2008) Direct enzymatic assay for %HbA1c in human whole blood samples. Clin Biochem 41:576–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mirzaie S, Monajjemi M, Hakhamaneshi MS, Fathi F, Jamalan M (2013) Combined 3D-QSAR modeling and molecular docking study on multi-acting quinazoline derivatives as HER2 kinase inhibitors. EXCLI J 12:130–143PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Miura S, Ferri S, Tsugawa W, Kim S, Sode K (2006) Active site analysis of fructosyl amine oxidase using homology modeling and site-directed mutagensis. Biotechnol Lett 28:1895–1900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Miura S, Ferri S, Tsugawa W, Kim S, Sode K (2008) Development of fructosyl amine oxidase specific to fructosyl valine by site-directed mutagensis. Protein Eng Des Sel 21:233–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Monera OD, Sereda TJ, Zhou NE, Kay CM, Hodges RS (1995) Relationship of sidechain hydrophobicity and alpha-helical propensity on the stability of the single-stranded amphipathic alpha-helix. J Pept Sci 1:319–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Monnier VM (2006) Bacterial enzymes that can deglycate glucose- and fructose-modified lysine. Biochem J 392:1–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Omidinia E, Shahbaz Mohamadi H, Dinarvand R, Taherkhani HA (2010) Investigation of chromatography and polymer/salt aqueous two-phase processes for downstream processing development of recombinant phenylalanine dehydrogenase. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 33:317–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pastor RW, Brooks BR, Szabo A (1988) An analysis of the accuracy of Langevin and molecular dynamics algorithms. Mol Phys 65:1409–1419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Patil R, Das S, Stanley A, Yadav L, Sudhakar A, Varma AK (2010) Optimized hydrophobic interactions and hydrogen bonding at the target-ligand interface leads the pathways of drug-designing. PLoS One 5:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Razaa M, Khana Z, Ahmad A, Raza S, Khana A, Mohammadzaia IU, Zadad S (2017) In silico 3-D structure prediction and molecular docking studies of inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase from Plasmodium falciparum. Comput Biol Chem 71:10–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ryckaert JP, Ciccotti G, Berendsen HJC (1977) Numerical integration of the Cartesian equations of motion of a system with constraints: molecular dynamics of n-alkanes. J Comput Phys 23:327–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T (1994) Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd edn. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring HarborGoogle Scholar
  40. Sanner MF (1999) Python: a programming language for software integration and development. J Mol Graphics Modell 17:57–61Google Scholar
  41. Shimasaki T, Yoshida H, Kamitori S, Sode K (2017) X-ray structures of fructosyl peptide oxidase revealing residues responsible for gating oxygen access in the oxidative half reaction. Sci Rep 7:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Spoel VD, Lindahl E, Hess B, Groenhof G, Mark AE, Hj B (2005) GROMACS: fast, flexible, and free. J Comput Chem 16:1701–1718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Steiner K, Schwab H (2012) Recent advances in rational approaches for enzyme engineering. Comput Struct Biotech J 2:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Trott O, Olson AG (2010) Autodock Vina: improving the speed and accuracy of docking with anew scoring function, efficient optimization and multithreading. J Comput Chem 31:455–461PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Watanabe B, Ichiyanagi A, Hirokawa K, Gomi K, Nakatsu T, Kato H, Kajiyama N (2015) Synthesis and inhibitory activity of substrate-analog fructosyl peptide oxidase inhibitors. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 25:3910–3913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wijma HJ, Janssen DB (2013) Computational design gains momentum in enzyme catalysis engineering. FEBS J 280:2948–2960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Xing K, Gan W, Jia M, Gaoa F, Gong W (2013) Expression, purification, crystallization and preliminary X-ray diffraction analysis of EtFPOX from Eupenicillium terrenum. Acta Crystallogr 69:666–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yoshida N, Sakai Y, Isogai A, Fukuya H, Yagi M, Tani Y, Kato N (1996) Primary structure of fungal fructosyl amino acid oxidases and their application to the measurement of glycated proteins. Eur J Biochem 242:499–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zheng J, Guan H, Xu L, Yang R, Lin Z (2010) Engineered amadoriase II exhibiting expanded substrate range. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 86:607–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hamid Shahbazmohammadi
    • 1
  • Soroush Sardari
    • 2
  • Arezou Lari
    • 3
  • Eskandar Omidinia
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Enzyme Technology Laboratory, Department of Biochemistry, Genetic and Metabolism Research GroupPasteur Institute of IranTehranIran
  2. 2.Medical Biotechnology Department, Biotechnology Research CenterPasteur Institute of IranTehranIran
  3. 3.Systems BiomedicinePasteur Institute of IranTehranIran

Personalised recommendations