Structural comparison of highly similar nucleoside-diphosphate kinases: Molecular explanation of distinct...

NDPK-A, NDPK-B and NDPK-D are three enzymes which belong to the NDPK group I isoforms and are not only involved in metabolism process but also in transcriptional regulation, DNA cleavage, histidine protein kinase activity and metastasis development. Those enzymes were reported to bind to membranes either in mitochondria where NDPK-D influences cardiolipin lateral organization and is thought to be involved in apoptotic pathway or in cytosol where NDPK-A and NDPK-B membrane association was shown to influence several cellular processes like endocytosis, cellular adhesion, ion transport, etc. However, despite numerous studies, the role of NDPK-membrane association and the molecular details of the binding process are still elusive. In the present work, a comparative study of the three NDPK isoforms allowed us to show that although membrane binding is a common feature of these enzymes, mechanisms differ at the molecular scale. NDPK-A was not able to bind to model membranes mimicking the inner leaflet of plasma membrane, suggesting that its in vivo membrane association is mediated by a non-lipidic partner or other partners than the studied phospholipids. On the contrary, NDPK-B and NDPK-D were shown to bind efficiently to liposomes mimicking plasma membrane and mitochondrial inner membrane respectively but details of the binding mechanism differ between the two enzymes as NDPK-B binding necessarily involved an anionic phospholipid partner while NDPK-D can bind either zwitterionic or anionic phospholipids. Although sharing similar secondary structure and homohexameric quaternary arrangement, tryptophan fluorescence revealed fine disparities in NDPK tertiary structures. Interfacial behavior as well as ANS fluorescence showed further dissimilarities between NDPK isoforms, notably the presence of distinct accessible hydrophobic areas as well as different capacity to form Gibbs monolayers related to their surface activity properties. Those distinct features may contribute to explain the differences in the protein behavior towards membrane binding.