This invention will now be described in more detail in the following non-limiting Examples with reference to the drawings in which:
FIG. 1 shows scanning electron micrographs of β-chitin particles. The figure shows representative pictures of structures observed in the absence or presence of CBP21. Control particles (no CBP21 added) are shown in panels A and B (400× magnification) with close ups (5000× magnification) of the respective particles shown in panel E and F, respectively. Particles incubated with CBP21 are shown in panels C and D, with close ups (5000× magnification) shown in panels G and H, respectively. The black frame drawn on the 400× magnified images indicate the area targeted for the picture taken at 5000× magnification. The scale bars in panels A-D and E-H represent 50 and 5 μm, respectively.
FIG. 2 shows degradation of β-chitin in the absence or presence of CBP21. Reaction mixtures contained 0.1 mg/ml β-chitin, 0.2 μM enzyme and 5 μM CBP21, illustration purposes only. (A) ChiA (squares), ChiA+CBP21 (closed diamonds) or ChiA+CBP21 aded at t=48 h (open diamonds). (B) ChiB (squares), ChiB+CBP21 (closed diamonds), ChiB+CBP21 added at t=48 h (open diamonds) or ChiB+CBP21 added at t=216 h (squares connected by a dashed line; see text for details). C) ChiC (squares), ChiC+CBP21 (closed diamonds) or ChiC+CBP21 added at t=48 h (open diamonds) and D) 0.3 μM ChiG (squares) or 0.3 μM ChiG+5 μM CBP21 (diamonds).
FIG. 3 shows dose response effects for ChiC. Reaction mixtures contained 0.1 mg/ml β-chitin, 50 nM (A) or 5 nM (B) Chic and 500 (diamons), 50 (squares), 5 (triangles), 0.5 (crosses), 0.05 (hollow squares), 0.005 (hollow triangles) or 0 nM CBP21 (dotted line).
FIG. 4 shows synergistic effects in the degradation of β-chitin. The curves shows progress in degradation of β-chitin with various combinations of chitinases (as indicated by combinations of the letters A, B and C) and CBP21. The total enzyme concentration was always 50 nM, meaning that the reactions mixtures with one, two or three chitinases contained 50, 25 or 16.7 nM of each enzyme, respectively. The CBP21 concentration was 50 nM. For illustration purposes, the points are connected by dotted lines (single enzyme reactions), dashed lines (two-enzyme reactions) or solid lines (three-enzyme reactions). The effect of CBP21 may be evaluated by comparing curves with solid symbols (with CBP21) with curves with corresponding hollows symbols (same enzyme combination, no CBP21).
FIG. 5 shows the structure of CBP21. The side chains of all mutated residues are shown as sticks. Note that Ala152 and Gin161 were not expected to be involved in chitin binding.
FIG. 6 shows the degradation of β-chitin by ChiC in the presence of CBP21 mutants. Degradation of 0.1 mg/ml β-chitin with 50 nM ChiC in the presence of 50 nM CBP21 wild-type, Y54A, E55A, E60A, H114A, D182A, N185A, A152R or no CBP21 (indicated by a hyphen). Total product release is shown as black bars (24 h), grey bars (48 h) and light grey bars (120 h).
FIG. 7 shows multiple alignment of bacterial CBPs (Q8GBD4, Yersinia eneterocolitica; Q8ES33, Oceanobacillus iheyensis; Q8EHY2, Shewanella oneidensis; Q87FT0, Vibrio parahaemolyticus; Q7N4I5, Photorhabdus luminescens (subsp. laumondii); Q9CE94, Lactococcus lactis (subsp. lactis); Q9F9Q5*, Bacllus amyloliquefaciens; Q8Y4H4, Listeria monocytogenes; Q54501*, Streptomyces olivaceoviridis (CHB1); O83009*, Serratia marcescens (CBP21). CBPs marked with asterisks have been shown to bind chitin. The secondary structure elements of CBP21 are also shown and labelled. Arrows with residue numbers indicate residues mutated in Vaaje-Kolstad et al. (2005) JBC 280(12), 11313-11319. The multiple alignment was created with ClustalX and edited with T-COFFEE.