Their mutant showed increased stability relative to our T26N mutant but was completely non-motile under all conditions they assayed. Their Thermus MglA carrying this mutation showed a further decrease in hydrolysis relative to both WT and G21V activating mutation, but also showed a substantial decrease in affinity for mantGTP and the non-hydrolyzable analog mantGPPNHP [19]. A subset of mutations predicted to disrupt surface residues yielded strains with potentially informative phenotypes. The substitution at Leu124, which may be part of a LRR, might alter the interactions with an effector protein. One candidate is AglZ, a protein known to interact with MglA [43], which contains heptad repeats that are characteristic of

buy CB-5083 LRR-domain protein partners. BAY 1895344 price Potential cycling of the MglA, AglZ, and FrzS triumvirate may yield clues to the regulation of A- and S-motility. Mauriello et al.

confirmed the interaction of AglZ and MglA, as well as FrzS and MglA using tandem affinity purification [4]. If the L124K substitution PF-02341066 price altered the affinity of MglA for AglZ, this might perturb the interaction between AglZ and FrzS and might explain why the L124K mutant showed increased frequencies of cell reversal, however further investigation will be necessary to characterize the nature of this perturbation. Two mutations in MglA altered the ability to localize correctly as observed by immunofluorescence. Both of the mutations which appeared to disrupt correct localization were predicted to be located on the surface of the protein, and on one face. One critical residue, D52, is analogous to the D33 residue in Ras, which has been shown to interact with a lysine in the protein NORE1A. NORE1A is a cytoskeletal protein that has been shown to be a suppressor of growth and oncogenic properties of active Ras [44]. It is possible that mutation of D52 in MglA has disrupted a similar protein interaction which would Olopatadine account for its lack of proper localization and function in a complementation background, and also the mutation’s effects on the ability of M. xanthus to control reversal. We posit that the surface containing both D52 and T54 is responsible

for proper recruitment of MglA to the cytoskeleton and that proper localization along the cytoskeleton is required for control of A-motility as well as regulating cell reversal. The failure of class III mutants to make detectable MglA was surprising as similar sets of mutations in other monomeric GTPases have not been reported to affect protein stability. Introduction of polar residues in critical residues of Ha-Ras (N116K/Y) created a protein that was unable to bind GTP correctly, but did not alter stability [45]. Replacement with other large nonpolar or charged groups also altered GTP binding, but mutant proteins were stable in vitro [35]. This suggests that GTP binding itself has the potential to regulate the function of MglA in motility and development.