The functional impact of the C/N-terminal extensions of the mouse retinal IMPDH1 isoforms: a kinetic evaluation

  • 88 Accesses


Mutations in the retinal inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase1 (IMPDH1) gene is believed to be one cause of retinitis pigmentosa (RP). The main structural difference between the mutation-susceptible retinal isoforms with canonical one resides in the C- and N-terminal extensions. There are limited studies on the structure and function of terminal peptide extensions of the IMPDH1 retinal isoforms. Using recombinant murine IMPDH1 (mH1), we evaluated the kinetics of the retinal isoforms along with inhibition by some of the purine nucleotides. Molecular modeling tools were also applied to study the probable effect(s) of the terminal peptide tails on the function of the retinal isoforms. Molecular dynamic simulations indicated the possible impact of the end-terminal segments on the enzyme function through interactions with the enzyme’s finger domain, affecting its critical pseudo barrel structure. The higher experimentally-determined Km and Ki values of the retinal mIMPDH1 (546) and mIMPDH1 (603) relative to that of the canonical isoform, mIMPDH1 (514), might clearly be due to these interactions. Furthermore and despite of the canonical isoform, the retinal isoforms of mH1 exhibited no NAD+ substrate inhibition. The resent data would certainly provide the ground for future evaluation of the physiological significance of these variations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 199

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8


  1. 1.

    Spellicy CJ, Xu D, Cobb G et al (2010) Investigating the mechanism of disease in the RP10 form of retinitis pigmentosa. Adv Exp Med Boil 664:541–548.

  2. 2.

    Kennan A, Aherne A, Palfi A et al (2002) Identification of an IMPDH1 mutation in autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa (RP10) revealed following comparative microarray analysis of transcripts derived from retinas of wild-type and Rho(/) mice. Hum Mol Genet 11:547–557.

  3. 3.

    Bowne S, Sullivan L, Blanton S et al (2002) Mutations in the inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase 1 gene (IMPDH1) cause the RP10 form of autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa. Hum Mol Genet 11(5):559–568.

  4. 4.

    Bowne S, Sullivan L, Mortimer S et al (2006) Spectrum and frequency of mutations in IMPDH1 associated with autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa and leber congenital amaurosis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47(1):34–42.

  5. 5.

    Hedstrom L (1999) IMP dehydrogenase: mechanism of action and inhibition. Curr Med Chem 6:545–560.

  6. 6.

    Bowne S, Liu Q, Sullivan LS et al (2006) Why do mutations in the ubiquitously expressed housekeeping gene IMPDH1 cause retina-specific photoreceptor degeneration? Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47(9):3754–3765.

  7. 7.

    Spellicy C, Daiger S, Sullivan L et al (2007) Characterization of retinal inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase 1 in several mammalian species. Mol Vis 13:1866–1872

  8. 8.

    Gunter JH, Thomas EC, Lengefeld N et al (2008) Characterization of inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase expression during retinal development: differences between variants and isoforms. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 40(9):1716–1728.

  9. 9.

    Hedstrom L (2009) IMP dehydrogenase: structure, mechanism and inhibition. Chem Rev 109(7):2903–2928.

  10. 10.

    Hedstrom L (2008) IMP dehydrogenase-linked retinitis pigmentosa. Nucleosides, Nucleotides Nucleic Acids 27(6):839–849.

  11. 11.

    Mortimer SE, Xu D, McGrew D et al (2008) IMP dehydrogenase type 1 associates with polyribosomes translating rhodopsin mRNA. J Biol Chem 283(52):36354–36360.

  12. 12.

    Kozhevnikova EN, Van der Knaap JA, Pindyurin AV et al (2012) Metabolic enzyme IMPDH is also a transcription factor regulated by cellular state. Mol Cell 47(1):133–139.

  13. 13.

    Labesse G, Alexandre T, Vaupre L et al (2013) MgATP regulates allostery and fiber formation in IMPDHs. Structure 21(6):975–985.

  14. 14.

    Moynie L, Schnell R, McMahon SA et al (2013) The AEROPATH project targeting Pseudomonas aeruginosa: crystallographic studies for assessment of potential targets in early-stage drug discovery. Acta Crystallogr F 69(Pt 1):25–34.

  15. 15.

    Xu D, Cobb G, Spellicy C et al (2008) Retinal isoforms of inosine 5-monophosphate dehydrogenase type 1 are poor nucleic acid binding proteins. Arch Biochem Biophys 472:100–104.

  16. 16.

    Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Farr AL, Randall RJ (1951) Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem 193(1):265–275

  17. 17.

    Srivastava M, Gupta SK, Abhilash PC, Singh N (2012) Structure prediction and binding sites analysis of curcin protein of Jatropha curcas using computational approaches. J Mol Model 18(7):2971–2979.

  18. 18.

    Yang J, Yan R, Roy A et al (2015) The I-TASSER suite: protein structure and function prediction. Nat Methods 12(1):7–8.

  19. 19.

    Yang J, Zhang Y (2015) I-TASSER server: new development for protein structure and function predictions. Nucleic Acids Res 43(W1):74–181.

  20. 20.

    Xu D, Zhang Y (2011) Improving the physical realism and structural accuracy of protein models by a two-step atomic-level energy minimization. Biophys J 101(10):2525–2534.

  21. 21.

    Lovell SC, Davis IW, Arendall WB et al (2003) Structure validation by Calpha geometry: phi, psi and Cbeta deviation. Proteins Struct Funct Genet 50(3):437–450.

  22. 22.

    Van Der Spoel D, Lindahl E, Hess B et al (2005) GROMACS: fast, flexible, and free. J Comput Chem 26(16):1701–1718.

  23. 23.

    Pettersen EF, Goddard TD, Huang CC et al (2004) UCSF Chimera—a visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. J Comput Chem 25:1605–1612.

  24. 24.

    van Zundert GC, Rodrigues JP, Trellet M et al (2016) The HADDOCK2.2 web server: user-friendly integrative modeling of biomolecular complexes. J Mol Biol 428:720–725.

  25. 25.

    Wassenaar TA, van Dijk M, Loureiro-Ferreira N et al (2012) Structural biology on the grid. J Grid Comput 10:743–767.

  26. 26.

    Risal D, Strickler MD, Goldstein BM (2003) Crystal structure of the human type I inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase and implications for isoform specificity (to be published)

  27. 27.

    Humphrey W, Dalke A, Schulten K (1996) VMD—visual molecular dynamics. J Mol Graph 14:33–38.

  28. 28.

    Porollo AA, Adamczak R, Meller J (2004) POLYVIEW: a flexible visualization tool for structural and functional annotations of proteins. Bioinformatics 20(15):2460–2462.

  29. 29.

    Sintchak MD, Fleming MA, Futer O et al (1996) Structure and mechanism of inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase in complex with the immunosuppressant mycophenolic acid. Cell 85(6):921–930.

  30. 30.

    Buey RM, Ledesma-Amaro R, Campoy A et al (2015) Guanine nucleotide binding to the Bateman domain mediates the allosteric inhibition of eukaryotic IMP dehydrogenases. Nat Commun 6:8923.

  31. 31.

    Carr SF, Papp E, Wu JC, Natsumeda Y (1993) Characterization of human type I and type II IMP dehydrogenases. J Biol Chem 268:27286–27290

  32. 32.

    Hager P, Collart F, Huberman E, Mitchell BS (1995) Recombinant human inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase type I and type II proteins. Purification and characterization of inhibitor binding. Biochem Pharmacol 49(9):1323–1329.

  33. 33.

    Mortimer SE, Hedstrom L (2005) Autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa mutations in inosine 5′-monophosphate dehydrogenase type I disrupt nucleic acid binding. Biochem J 390:41–47.

  34. 34.

    Wang XT, Mion B, Aherne A (1812) Engel PC (2011) Molecular recruitment as a basis for negative dominant inheritance? Propagation of misfolding in oligomers of IMPDH1, the mutated enzyme in the RP10 form of retinitis pigmentosa. Biochim Biophys Acta 11:1472–1476.

Download references


The authors appreciate the joint financial support of this investigation by the Research Council of University of Tehran. We also thank Dr. S. Soheili and Dr. E. Ranaei Pirmardan from the National Institute of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (Karaj, Tehran) for their assistance in retina isolation from the mouse eyes.

Author information

Correspondence to Razieh Yazdanparast.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they do not have competing interests.

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 504 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Andashti, B., Yazdanparast, R., Barzegari, E. et al. The functional impact of the C/N-terminal extensions of the mouse retinal IMPDH1 isoforms: a kinetic evaluation. Mol Cell Biochem 465, 155–164 (2020) doi:10.1007/s11010-019-03675-9

Download citation


  • Finger domain
  • IMPDH1
  • Molecular modeling
  • Retinal isoforms
  • Retinitis pigmentosa
  • Terminal extension