Abstract
LinB and DhaA are well-known haloalkane dehalogenases (HLDs) capable of converting a plethora of halogenated alkanes, also those considered persistent pollutants. The dehalogenation reaction that these two enzymes catalyze has been studied to determine its rate-limiting step (rls) for the last two decades now. As a result, it has been determined that HLDs can show different rate-limiting steps for individual substrates, and at this point we do not have a basis for any generalization in this matter. Therefore, in this work we aimed at gaining insights into the enzymatic dehalogenation of selected dibromo- and bromochloro- ethanes and propanes by LinB and DhaA using computational approach to determine whether defined structural similarities of the substrates result in a unified mechanism and the same rls. By predicting halogen binding isotope effects (BIEs) as well as computing interaction energy for each HLD-ligand complex the nature of the protein-ligand interactions has been characterized. Furthermore, C and Br kinetic isotope effects (KIEs) as well as the minimum free energy paths (MFEPs) were computed to investigate the chemical reaction for the selected systems. Accuracy of the approach and robustness of the computational predictions were validated by measuring KIEs on the selected reactions. Overall results strongly indicate that any generalization with respect to the enzymatic process involving various ligands in the case of DhaA is impossible, even if the considered ligands are structurally similar as those analyzed in the present study. Moreover, even small structural differences such as changing of one of the (non-leaving) halogen substituents may lead to significant changes in the enzymatic process and result in a different rls in the case of LinB. It has also been demonstrated that KIEs themselves cannot be used as rls indicators in the reactions catalyzed by the studied HLDs.
Supplementary materials
Title
Supporting Information
Description
Details on performed theoretical calculations; simulation parameters and additional details for each MFEP; geometries of optimized structures generated along the IRCs; mean and individual values of KIE and selected parameters calculated for TS1; details on performed experimental determination of carbon and bromine isotope effects; distribution of individual values of computed C, Br, and Cl binding isotope effects for analyzed complexes; total interaction energy per residue calculated for LinB and DhaA complexes; components of total interaction energy per residue in the active site of LinB and DhaA; key parameters of the located transition states, carbon and bromine KIEs obtained on the conversion of dbe, 1br2cle and 1,2-dbp by LinB using the ONIOM models.
Actions