Structural Insight into the Oxidation‐sensing Mechanism of the Antibiotic Resistance of Regulator MexR
Hao Chen,Chengqi Yi,Jin Zhang,Wenru Zhang,Zhiyun Ge,Cai‐Guang Yang,Chuan He
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/embor.2010.129
IF: 9.071
2010-01-01
EMBO Reports
Abstract:Erratum13 August 2010free access Structural insight into the oxidation-sensing mechanism of the antibiotic resistance of regulator MexR Hao Chen Hao Chen Search for more papers by this author Chengqi Yi Chengqi Yi Search for more papers by this author Jin Zhang Jin Zhang Search for more papers by this author Wenru Zhang Wenru Zhang Search for more papers by this author Zhiyun Ge Zhiyun Ge Search for more papers by this author Cai-Guang Yang Cai-Guang Yang Search for more papers by this author Chuan He Chuan He Search for more papers by this author Hao Chen Hao Chen Search for more papers by this author Chengqi Yi Chengqi Yi Search for more papers by this author Jin Zhang Jin Zhang Search for more papers by this author Wenru Zhang Wenru Zhang Search for more papers by this author Zhiyun Ge Zhiyun Ge Search for more papers by this author Cai-Guang Yang Cai-Guang Yang Search for more papers by this author Chuan He Chuan He Search for more papers by this author Author Information Hao Chen, Chengqi Yi, Jin Zhang, Wenru Zhang, Zhiyun Ge, Cai-Guang Yang and Chuan He EMBO Reports (2010)11:717-717https://doi.org/10.1038/embor.2010.129 PDFDownload PDF of article text and main figures. ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyWechatReddit Figures & Info Unfortunately, Fig 4B,D,F was labelled incorrectly; the figures and the corresponding figure legend should have been published as they appear here. We apologize for this mistake and for any confusion it may have caused. Figure 1.Structural differences between ArmR-bound and oxidized MexR dimers. The positions of the DNA minor-groove-binding wing (β1′) and the helices, α1′, α2′, α3′, α4′, α5′ and α6′, in the unaligned protomers are labelled. All superimpositions were performed in PyMOL with one protomer aligned from each dimer. (A) Superimposition of ArmR-bound MexR and dimer CD with a core r.m.s.d. value of 2.8 Å2. The ArmR-bound MexR is shown with one protomer in marine and the other in slate, and the ArmR peptide in orange. The disordered loop between helices α3′ and α4′ in the ArmR-bound MexR is indicated by a dashed line. The distance between helices α4 and α4′ in the ArmR-bound MexR is 16 Å. (B) Stereoview of the unaligned protomer, as in (A), rotated 40° to the right. The conformational change of the DNA minor-groove-binding wing (β1′) and the dimerization helices, α1′, α5′ and α6′, is indicated with arrows. (C) Superimposition of the oxidized MexR and dimer CD to a core r.m.s.d. value of 1.6 Å2. The distance between helices α4 and α4′ in dimer CD is 29 Å. (D) Side view of the unaligned protomer as in (C) in stereo, rotated 40° to the right, revealing the conformational change due to the disulphide bonds formation. The conformational change of the DNA minor-groove-binding wing (β1′) and the dimerization helices, α1′ and α5′, is indicated with arrows. (E) Superimposition of the ArmR-bound and oxidized MexR dimers with a core r.m.s.d. value of 2.4 Å2. (F) Stereoview of the unaligned protomer as in (E), rotated 40° to the right, highlighting their significant conformational differences. The conformational change of the DNA minor-groove-binding wing (β1′) and the dimerization helices, α1′, α5′ and α6′, is indicated with arrows. Download figure Download PowerPoint Next ArticlePrevious Article Volume 11Issue 91 September 2010In this issue FiguresRelatedDetailsLoading ...