Jci_page_head_homepage_01 Jci_page_head_homepage_02
Tadayuki Yago, Jizhong Lou, Tao Wu, Jun Yang, Jonathan J. Miner, Leslie Coburn, José A. López, Miguel A. Cruz, Jing-Fei Dong, Larry V. McIntire, Rodger P. McEver, Cheng Zhu
Published in Volume 118, Issue 9
J Clin Invest. 2008; 118(9):3195–3207 doi:10.1172/JCI35754
Abstract | Full text | PDF | Supplemental material
Options: View larger image (or click on image)
Jci0835754
Figure 8
Structural models for elimination of catch bonds by A1 mutations (see Results for details).

(A) Comparison of the mutant structure of GPIbαN (gray) liganded with A1 (pink) with the structure of the WT complex (cyan). The mutant structure includes substitutions in both GPIbαN (M239V) and A1 (R1306Q). The conformational changes observed in the 1308–1314 loop of A1 are highlighted in blue in the WT and red in the mutant structure (boxed region). The A1 residue R1334 in the WT structure (blue sticks) is tilted leftward in the mutant structure (red sticks), which reduces its distance to the GPIbα residue E14 in the mutant structure (orange sticks), but not in the WT structure (blue sticks). (B) After energy minimization, a salt bridge formed between A1 R1334 and GPIbα E14 in the mutant structure, which was held during most of the 20-ns equilibration simulations. This salt bridge did not form in the WT structure (see Figure 7). (C) Model for the R1306Q mutation to eliminate catch bonds. (D) Alternative model for the R1450E mutation to eliminate catch bonds.