Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study investigates how class 1 phytoglobins interact with GAPDH and DNA, suggesting regulatory roles. Strong binding interactions were noted, indicated by specific dissociation constants.
Class 1 phytoglobins (Pgbs) are known for their multifunctional roles in plant stress responses, with recent studies suggesting broader interactions involving metabolic and transcriptional regulation. Interestingly, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) moonlights in many roles in colocalized spaces during cellular stress that are strikingly suitable for supporting Pgb function. This study investigates the molecular interactions of class 1 Pgb from sugar beet (Beta vulgaris), BvPgb 1.2, and an alanine-substituted mutant (C86A), focusing on their ability to bind GAPDH and DNA. Using dual-emission isothermal spectral shift (SpS) analysis, we report strong binding interactions with GAPDH, with dissociation constants (KD) of 260 ± 50 nM for the recombinant wild-type protein (rWT) and a significantly stronger affinity for C86A (120 ± 40 nM), suggesting that the cysteine residue limits the interaction. Remarkably strong DNA-binding affinities were also observed for both variants, displaying biphasic binding. This behavior is characteristic of hexacoordinated globins and reflects the presence of two distinct species: a fast-reacting open pentacoordinated form and a slow-reacting closed hexacoordinated form with high apparent affinity. Here, the KD in the open configuration was 120 ± 50 nm and 50 ± 20 nM for rWT and C86A, respectively. In the closed configuration, however, the cysteine appears to support the interaction, as the KD was measured at 100 ± 10 pM and 230 ± 60 pM for rWT and C86A, respectively. Protein–protein docking studies reinforced these findings, revealing electrostatically driven interactions between BvPgb 1.2 and GAPDH, characterized by a substantial buried surface area indicative of a stable, biologically relevant complex. Protein–DNA docking similarly confirmed energetically favorable binding near the heme pocket without obstructing ligand accessibility. Together, these findings indicate a potential regulatory role for BvPgb 1.2 through its interaction with GAPDH and DNA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Groth et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: