Cited by 6Plant Reproductive BiologyProtein Structure and DynamicsPlant Ecology and Taxonomy Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comprehensive computational analysis of the SRK–SP11 molecular interaction underlying self-incompatibility in Brassicaceae using improved structure prediction for cysteine-rich proteins

Open access
Sawa, Tomoki, Moriwaki, Yoshitaka, Jiang, Hanting, Murase, Kohji, Takayama, Seiji, Shimizu, Kentaro, Terada, Tohru·2023·Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

ABSTRACT Plants employ self-incompatibility (SI) to promote cross-fertilization. In Brassicaceae, this process is regulated by the formation of a complex between the pistil determinant S receptor kinase (SRK) and the pollen determinant S -locus protein 11 (SP11, also known as S -locus cysteine-rich protein, SCR). In our previous study, we used the crystal structures of two eSRK–SP11 complexes in Brassica rapa S 8 and S 9 haplotypes and nine computationally predicted complex models to demonstrate that only the SRK ectodomain (eSRK) and SP11 pairs derived from the same S haplotype exhibit high binding free energy. However, predicting the eSRK–SP11 complex structures for the other 100+ S haplotypes and genera remains difficult because of SP11 polymorphism in sequence and structure. Although protein structure prediction using AlphaFold2 exhibits considerably high accuracy for most protein monomers and complexes, 46% of the predicted SP11 structures that we tested showed < 75 mean per-residue confidence score (pLDDT). Here, we demonstrate that the use of curated multiple sequence alignment (MSA) for cysteine-rich proteins significantly improved model accuracy for SP11 and eSRK–SP11 complexes. Additionally, we calculated the binding free energies of the predicted eSRK–SP11 complexes using molecular dynamics (MD) simulations and observed that some Arabidopsis haplotypes formed a binding mode that was critically different from that of B. rapa S 8 and S 9 . Thus, our computational results provide insights into the haplotype-specific eSRK–SP11 binding modes in Brassicaceae at the residue level. The predicted models are freely available at Zenodo, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8047768 .

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.csbj.2023.10.026

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 90

  1. de Nettancourt D.: Incompatibility and Incongruity in Wild and Cultivated Plants. Berlin: Springer 2001. · DOI
  2. 10.1146/annurev.arplant.56.032604.144249 · DOI
  3. Bateman A.J.: Self-incompatibility systems in angiosperms: III. Cruciferae. Heredity 1955; 9: 53. · DOI
  4. Nou S., Watanabe M., Isogai A. and Hinata K.: Comparison of S-alleles and S-glyeoproteins between two wild populations of Brassica campestris in Turkey and Japan. Sex Plant Reprod 1993; 6: 79. · DOI
  5. Ruffio-Chable V. and Gaude T.: S-haplotype polymorphism in Brassica oleracea. Acta Hortic 2001; : 257. · DOI
  6. Kao T.H. and McCubbin A.G.: How flowering plants discriminate between self and non-self pollen to prevent inbreeding. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1996; 93: 12059. · DOI
  7. Kao T.H. and Tsukamoto T.: The molecular and genetic bases of S-RNase-based self-incompatibility. Plant Cell 2004; 16: S72. · DOI
  8. McClure B.A., Haring V., Ebert P.R., Anderson M.A., Simpson R.J., Sakiyama F. et al: Style self-incompatibility gene products of Nicotiana alata are ribonucleases. Nature 1989; 342: 955. · DOI
  9. Franklin-Tong N. and Franklin F.C.H.: Gametophytic self-incompatibility inhibits pollen tube growth using different mechanisms. Trends Plant Sci 2003; 8: 598. · DOI
  10. Foote H.C.C., Ride J.P., Franklintong V.E., Walker E.A., Lawrence M.J. and Franklin F.C.H.: Cloning and expression of a distinctive class of self-incompatibility (S) gene from Papaver rhoeas L. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1994; 91: 2265. · DOI
  11. Lane M.D. and Lawrence M.J.: The population genetics of the self-incompatibility polymorphism in Papaver rhoeas. VII. Number S-alleles Species, Hered 1993; 71: 596.
  12. Hearn M.J., Franklin F.C.H. and Ride J.P.: Identification of a membrane glycoprotein in pollen of Papaver rhoeas which binds stigmatic self-incompatibility (S-) proteins. Plant J 1996; 9: 467. · DOI
  13. Jordan N.D., Kakeda K., Conner A., Ride J.P., Franklin-Tong V.E. and Franklin F.C.H.: S-protein mutants indicate a functional role for SBP in the self-incompatibility reaction of Papaver rhoeas. Plant J 1999; 20: 119. · DOI
  14. Nasrallah M.E. and Wallace D.H.: Immunogenetics of self-incompatibility in Brassica oleracea L. Heredity 1967; 22: 519. · DOI
  15. Nishio T. and Hinata K.: Analysis of S-specific proteins in stigma of Brassica oleracea L. by isoelectric focusing. Heredity 1977; 38: 391. · DOI
  16. 10.1038/35002628 · DOI
  17. Stein J.C., Howlett B., Boyes D.C., Nasrallah M.E. and Nasrallah J.B.: Molecular cloning of a putative receptor protein kinase gene encoded at the self-incompatibility locus of Brassica oleracea. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1991; 88: 8816. · DOI
  18. 10.1073/pnas.040556397 · DOI
  19. 10.1126/science.286.5445.1697 · DOI
  20. 10.1104/pp.125.4.2095 · DOI
  21. 10.1093/genetics/153.1.391 · DOI
  22. 10.1038/35097104 · DOI
  23. 10.1126/science.1062509 · DOI
  24. Shimosato H., Yokota N., Shiba H., Iwano M., Entani T., Che F.S. et al: Characterization of the SP11/SCR high-affinity binding site involved in self/nonself recognition in Brassica self-incompatibility. Plant Cell 2007; 19: 107. · DOI
  25. 10.1038/35065626 · DOI
  26. Nasrallah J.B.: Stop and go signals at the stigma–pollen interface of the Brassicaceae. kiad301 Plant Physiol 2023; . kiad301. · DOI
  27. Boyes D.C. and Nasrallah J.B.: Physical linkage of the SLG and SRK genes at the self-incompatibility locus of Brassica oleracea. Mol Gen Genet 1993; 236: 369. · DOI
  28. 10.1073/pnas.0705186104 · DOI
  29. 10.1073/pnas.94.14.7673 · DOI
  30. Sato K., Nishio T., Kimura R., Kusaba M., Suzuki T., Hatakeyama K. et al: Coevolution of the S-locus genes SRK, SLG and SP11/SCR in Brassica oleracea and B. rapa. Genetics 2002; 162: 931. · DOI
  31. 10.1016/S0014-5793(00)01514-3 · DOI
  32. Shiba H., Iwano M., Entani T., Ishimoto K., Shimosato H., Che F.S. et al: The dominance of alleles controlling self-incompatibility in Brassica pollen is regulated at the RNA level. Plant Cell 2002; 14: 491. · DOI
  33. 10.1038/nature09308 · DOI
  34. Yasuda S., Wada Y., Kakizaki T., Tarutani Y., Miura-Uno E., Murase K. et al: A complex dominance hierarchy is controlled by polymorphism of small RNAs and their targets. Nat Plants 2017; 3: 16206. · DOI
  35. 10.1038/cr.2016.129 · DOI
  36. Murase K., Moriwaki Y., Mori T., Liu X., Masaka C., Takada Y. et al: Mechanism of self/nonself-discrimination in Brassica self-incompatibility. Nat Commun 2020; 11: 4916. · DOI
  37. Ockendon D.J.: The S-allele collection of Brassica oleracea. Acta Hortic 2000; 539: 25. · DOI
  38. Evans R., O’Neill M., Pritzel A., Antropova N., Senior A., Green T. et al: Protein complex prediction with AlphaFold-Multimer. 2004.463034 bioRxiv 2022; 2021. 2004.463034.
  39. Johnson L.S., Eddy S.R. and Portugaly E.: Hidden Markov model speed heuristic and iterative HMM search procedure. BMC Bioinforma 2010; 11: 431. · DOI
  40. 10.1038/nmeth.1818 · DOI · Paper page
  41. Steinegger M., Meier M., Mirdita M., Vohringer H., Haunsberger S.J. and Soding J.: HH-suite3 for fast remote homology detection and deep protein annotation. BMC Bioinforma 2019; 20: 473. · DOI · Paper page
  42. 10.1038/s41592-022-01488-1 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1038/nbt.3988 · DOI · Paper page
  44. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty1057 · DOI · Paper page
  45. 10.1093/nar/gkab1061 · DOI · Paper page
  46. 10.1007/BF00282753 · DOI
  47. 10.1007/s00438-003-0844-0 · DOI
  48. 10.1023/A:1010664704926 · DOI
  49. 10.1534/genetics.109.102442 · DOI
  50. Delorme V., Giranton J.L., Hatzfeld Y., Friry A., Heizmann P., Ariza M.J. et al: Characterization of the S locus genes, SLG and SRK, of the Brassica S3 haplotype: identification of a membrane-localized protein encoded by the S locus receptor kinase gene. Plant J 1995; 7: 429. · DOI
  51. 10.1016/S0014-5793(00)02048-2 · DOI
  52. Kusaba M., Dwyer K., Hendershot J., Vrebalov J., Nasrallah J.B. and Nasrallah M.E.: Self-incompatibility in the genus Arabidopsis: Characterization of the S locus in the outcrossing A. lyrata and its autogamous relative A. thaliana. Plant Cell 2001; 13: 627. · DOI
  53. 10.1007/s00122-009-1240-x · DOI
  54. 10.1093/genetics/154.1.413 · DOI
  55. Yamakawa S., Watanabe M., Hinata K., Suzuki A. and Isogai A.: The Sequences of S-Receptor Kinases (SRK) Involved in Self-incompatibility and Their Homologies to S-Locus Glycoproteins of Brassica campestris. Biosci, Biotechnol, Biochem 1995; 59: 161. · DOI
  56. Kumar V. and Trick M.: Expression of the S-locus receptor kinase multigene family in Brassica oleracea. Plant J 1994; 6: 807. · DOI
  57. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002495 · DOI
  58. 10.1266/ggs.81.63 · DOI
  59. Cabrillac D., Delorme V., Garin J., Ruffio-Chable V., Giranton J.L., Dumas C. et al: The S15 self-Incompatibility haplotype in Brassica oleracea includes three S gene family members expressed in stigmas. Plant Cell 1999; 11: 971.
  60. 10.1093/molbev/msl042 · DOI
  61. 10.1534/genetics.104.037267 · DOI
  62. Dwyer K.G., Berger M.T., Ahmed R., Hritzo M.K., McCulloch A.A., Price M.J. et al: Molecular characterization and evolution of self-Incompatibility genes in Arabidopsis thaliana: The case of the Sc haplotype. Genetics 2013; 193: 985. · DOI
  63. 10.1046/j.1365-313X.1999.00355.x · DOI
  64. Hatakeyama K., Takasaki T., Watanabe M. and Hinata K.: Molecular characterization of S locus genes, SLG and SRK, in a pollen-recessive self-incompatibility haplotype of Brassica rapa L. Genetics 1998; 149: 1587. · DOI
  65. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2007.03058.x · DOI
  66. Suzuki G., Watanabe M., Isogai A. and Hinata K.: Highly conserved 5'-flanking regions of two self-incompatibility genes, SLG9 and SRK9. Gene 1997; 191: 123. · DOI
  67. 10.1023/A:1024819129785 · DOI
  68. 10.1534/genetics.107.073825 · DOI
  69. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000426 · DOI
  70. 10.1093/nar/gkw1081 · DOI
  71. Shafee T.M.A., Robinson A.J., van der Weerden N. and Anderson M.A.: Structural homology guided alignment of cysteine rich proteins. Springerplus 2016; 5: 27. · DOI
  72. 10.1093/nar/gkac387 · DOI
  73. 10.1093/nar/gkq366 · DOI · Paper page
  74. 10.1038/msb.2011.75 · DOI
  75. 10.1002/pro.3290 · DOI · Paper page
  76. Konagurthu A.S., Whisstock J.C., Stuckey P.J. and Lesk A.M.: MUSTANG: A multiple structural alignment algorithm. Protein: Struct Funct Bioinform 2006; 64: 559. · DOI
  77. 10.1038/s41467-022-28865-w · DOI · Paper page
  78. 10.1021/ar000033j · DOI · Paper page
  79. 10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00591 · DOI
  80. 10.1021/jz501780a · DOI
  81. 10.1021/jp066831u · DOI
  82. Shafee T.M.A., Lay F.T., Hulett M.D. and Anderson M.A.: The defensins consist of two independent, convergent protein superfamilies. Mol Biol Evol 2016; 33: 2345. · DOI
  83. Chantreau M., Poux C., Lensink M.F., Brysbaert G., Vekemans X. and Castric V.: Asymmetrical diversification of the receptor-ligand interaction controlling self-incompatibility in Arabidopsis. eLife 2019; 8: e50253. · DOI
  84. 10.1073/pnas.0805923106 · DOI · Paper page
  85. 10.1002/prot.22934 · DOI · Paper page
  86. Ekeberg M., Lovkvist C., Lan Y.H., Weigt M. and Aurell E.: Improved contact prediction in proteins: Using pseudolikelihoods to infer Potts models. Phys Rev E: Stat Phys, Plasmas, Fluids 2013; 87: 012707. · DOI · Paper page
  87. Kamisetty H., Ovchinnikov S. and Baker D.: Assessing the utility of coevolution-based residue-residue contact predictions in a sequence- and structure-rich era. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013; 110: 15674. · DOI
  88. 10.1046/j.1365-313x.2002.01208.x · DOI
  89. 10.1093/molbev/msi153 · DOI
  90. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz679 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Sawa, T., Moriwaki, Y., Jiang, H., Murase, K., Takayama, S., Shimizu, K., & Terada, T.
Affiliations
  • The University of Tokyo (JP)
  • Collaborative Research Institute for Innovative Microbiology, The University of Tokyo (JP)
Corresponding author
Moriwaki, Yoshitaka
Venue
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
Published
2023-01
Volume
21
Pages
5228-5239
ISSN
2001-0370 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4387817985
Cited by
6
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3
FWCI
0.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JP21K06110)
  • Fujitsu (FX1000, GX2570)
  • Tokyo Institute of Technology
  • University of Tokyo
  • Nagoya University
  • Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Plant Reproductive Biology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant Ecology and Taxonomy Studies
Keywords
self-incompatibility, S receptor kinase, SCR, cysteine-rich proteins, protein-protein complex structure prediction, multiple sequence alignment, binding free energy, Brassicaceae, Brassica rapa, Arabidopsis, AlphaFold2, molecular dynamics simulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review