-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comparison of the ATP Sites/Structural Similarity Between Murs #56
Comments
That is the analysis I have done. I never looked at murF. Focus has been on the murC and murD pair. |
Replying to: @ZigBu could you please provide your reference for this colculsion please? |
@mattodd @Yuhang-CADD Another research provides a more clear analysis upon this point. It is stated that MurC and MurD share a common Rossmann-type α/β fold and have a very similar structure and topology for N-terminal domain . MurE and MurF on the other hand have α/β fold with different topology and a mixed β- sheet compared with the all-parallel β-sheet in MurC/MurD. So my estimation is that if the compound is targeting the UDP binding site. Then considering the similarity between enzyme structure. MurC/MurD would be a more promising pair with MurE and MurF on the other side. If you could help to explain or point out my misinterpretation! Thank you so much! |
Hi @eyermanncj - I was wondering if you could post the analysis you did of the comparison between the ATP binding sites of the various murs. @ZigBu has been looking at this a little, and I wanted to ensure that there was no duplication and that she could learn from your work.
I think this was the slide you generated, but let me know if not, and let me know if there's more here that might help Zige do the comparison. @chrisdowson1 may also have a view/data here.
Zige was also saying that there appears to be greater similarity in structure between MurC&D and between MurE&F than between other pairs. Is that right? (if yes then that provides some strategy about which murs we ought to be trying to inhibit with single molecules.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: