The Substrate-Bound Crystal Structure of a Baeyer–Villiger Monooxygenase Exhibits a Criegee-like Conformation

The Baeyer\u2013Villiger monooxygenases (BVMOs) are a family of bacterial flavoproteins that catalyze the synthetically useful Baeyer\u2013Villiger oxidation reaction. This involves the conversion of ketones into esters or cyclic ketones into lactones by introducing an oxygen atom adjacent to the carbonyl group. The BVMOs offer exquisite regio- and enantiospecificity while acting on a wide range of substrates. They use only NADPH and oxygen as cosubstrates, and produce only NADP+ and water as byproducts, making them environmentally attractive for industrial purposes. Here, we report the first crystal structure of a BVMO, cyclohexanone monooxygenase (CHMO) from Rhodococcus sp. HI-31 in complex with its substrate, cyclohexanone, as well as NADP+ and FAD, to 2.4 \uc5 resolution. This structure shows a drastic rotation of the NADP+ cofactor in comparison to previously reported NADP+-bound structures, as the nicotinamide moiety is no longer positioned above the flavin ring. Instead, the substrate, cyclohexanone, is found at this location, in an appropriate position for the formation of the Criegee intermediate. The rotation of NADP+ permits the substrate to gain access to the reactive flavin peroxyanion intermediate while preventing it from diffusing out of the active site. The structure thus reveals the conformation of the enzyme during the key catalytic step. CHMO is proposed to undergo a series of conformational changes to gradually move the substrate from the solvent, via binding in a solvent excluded pocket that dictates the enzyme\u2019s chemospecificity, to a location above the flavin\u2013peroxide adduct where catalysis occurs.Peer reviewed: YesNRC publication: Ye

Role of lipid apheresis in changing times

During the last decades, LDL-apheresis was established as an extracorporeal treatment option for patients with severe heterozygous or homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) that is resistant to conventional treatment strategies such as diet, drugs, and changes in lifestyle. Nearly half a century ago, the first LDL-apheresis treatment was performed by plasma exchange in a child with homozygous FH

What Is Stochastic Resonance? Definitions, Misconceptions, Debates, and Its Relevance to Biology

Stochastic resonance is said to be observed when increases in levels of unpredictable fluctuations—e.g., random noise—cause an increase in a metric of the quality of signal transmission or detection performance, rather than a decrease. This counterintuitive effect relies on system nonlinearities and on some parameter ranges being “suboptimal”. Stochastic resonance has been observed, quantified, and described in a plethora of physical and biological systems, including neurons. Being a topic of widespread multidisciplinary interest, the definition of stochastic resonance has evolved significantly over the last decade or so, leading to a number of debates, misunderstandings, and controversies. Perhaps the most important debate is whether the brain has evolved to utilize random noise in vivo, as part of the “neural code”. Surprisingly, this debate has been for the most part ignored by neuroscientists, despite much indirect evidence of a positive role for noise in the brain. We explore some of the reasons for this and argue why it would be more surprising if the brain did not exploit randomness provided by noise—via stochastic resonance or otherwise—than if it did. We also challenge neuroscientists and biologists, both computational and experimental, to embrace a very broad definition of stochastic resonance in terms of signal-processing “noise benefits”, and to devise experiments aimed at verifying that random variability can play a functional role in the brain, nervous system, or other areas of biology