Plugging into the pump: Photosynthetic organisms use light to fix carbon dioxide in a process that requires both chemical reducing equivalents and adenosine triphosphate (ATP). Balancing the ratio of these inputs is accomplished by a short circuit in electron flow through photosynthetic complex I, a proton pump that contributes to ATP production but does not increase net reducing equivalents in the cell. Schuller et al. solved a cryo–electron microscopy structure of photosynthetic complex I (see the Perspective by Brandt) and went on to reconstitute electron transfer using the electron carrier protein ferredoxin. Science , this issue p. 257 ; see also p. 230

Tungsten-containing formate dehydrogenase from Methylorubrum extroquens AM1 (FoDH1)—a promising biocatalyst for the interconversion of carbon dioxide/formate and nicotine adenine dinucleotide (NAD⁺)/NADH redox couples—was investigated using structural biology and bioelectrochemistry. FoDH1 is reported to be an enzyme that can realize “direct electron transfer (DET)-type bioelectrocatalysis.” However, its 3-D structure, electrode-active sites, and electron transfer (ET) pathways remain unclear. The ET pathways were investigated using structural information, electrostatic interactions between the electrode and the enzyme, and the differences in the substrates. Two electrode-active sites and multiple ET pathways in FoDH1 were discovered.

Axonemal dynein is a microtubule-based molecular motor that drives ciliary/flagellar beating in eukaryotes. In axonemal dynein, the outer-arm dynein (OAD) complex, which comprises three heavy chains (α, β, and γ), produces the main driving force for ciliary/flagellar motility. It has recently been shown that axonemal dynein light chain-1 (LC1) binds to the microtubule-binding domain (MTBD) of OADγ, leading to a decrease in its microtubule-binding affinity. However, it remains unclear how LC1 interacts with the MTBD and controls the microtubule-binding affinity of OADγ. Here, we have used X-ray crystallography and pulldown assays to examine the interaction between LC1 and the MTBD, identifying two important sites of interaction in the MTBD. Solving the LC1-MTBD complex from Chlamydomonas reinhardtii at 1.7 Å resolution, we observed that one site is located in the H5 helix and that the other is located in the flap region that is unique to some axonemal dynein MTBDs. Mutational analysis of key residues in these sites indicated that the H5 helix is the main LC1-binding site. We modeled the ternary structure of the LC1-MTBD complex bound to microtubules based on the known dynein-microtubule complex. This enabled us to propose a structural basis for both formations of the ternary LC1-MTBD-microtubule complex and LC1-mediated tuning of MTBD binding to the microtubule, suggesting a molecular model for how axonemal dynein senses the curvature of the axoneme and tunes ciliary/flagellar beating.

IMP-type metallo-β-lactamases confer resistance to carbapenems and a broad spectrum of β-lactam antibiotics. IMP-6 and IMP-1 differ by only a point mutation: Ser262 in IMP-1 and Gly262 in IMP-6. The k_cat/K_m values of IMP-1 for imipenem and meropenem are nearly identical; however, for IMP-6, the k_cat/K_m for meropenem is 7-fold that for imipenem. In clinical practice, this may result in an ineffective therapeutic regimen and, consequently, in treatment failure. Here, we report the crystal structures of IMP-6 and IMP-1 with the same space group and similar cell constants at resolutions of 1.70 and 1.94 Å, respectively. The overall structures of IMP-6 and IMP-1 are similar. However, the loop region (residues 60–66), which participates in substrate binding, is more flexible in IMP-6 than in IMP-1. This difference in flexibility determines the substrate specificity of IMP-type metallo-β-lactamases for imipenem and meropenem. The amino acid at position 262 alters the mobility of His263; this affects the flexibility of the loop via a hydrogen bond with Pro68, which plays the role of a hinge in IMP-type metallo-β-lactamases. The substitution of Pro68 with a glycine elicited an increase in the K_m of IMP-6 for imipenem, whereas the affinity for meropenem remained unchanged.