The C-Terminal Domain of the MutL Homolog from Neisseria gonorrhoeae Forms an Inverted Homodimer

The mismatch repair (MMR) pathway serves to maintain the integrity of the genome by removing mispaired bases from the newly synthesized strand. In E. coli, MutS, MutL and MutH coordinate to discriminate the daughter strand through a mechanism involving lack of methylation on the new strand. This facilitates the creation of a nick by MutH in the daughter strand to initiate mismatch repair. Many bacteria and eukaryotes, including humans, do not possess a homolog of MutH. Although the exact strategy for strand discrimination in these organisms is yet to be ascertained, the required nicking endonuclease activity is resident in the C-terminal domain of MutL. This activity is dependent on the integrity of a conserved metal binding motif. Unlike their eukaryotic counterparts, MutL in bacteria like Neisseria exist in the form of a homodimer. Even though this homodimer would possess two active sites, it still acts a nicking endonuclease. Here, we present the crystal structure of the C-terminal domain (CTD) of the MutL homolog of Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NgoL) determined to a resolution of 2.4 A. The structure shows that the metal binding motif exists in a helical configuration and that four of the six conserved motifs in the MutL family, including the metal binding site, localize together to form a composite active site. NgoL-CTD exists in the form of an elongated inverted homodimer stabilized by a hydrophobic interface rich in leucines. The inverted arrangement places the two composite active sites in each subunit on opposite lateral sides of the homodimer. Such an arrangement raises the possibility that one of the active sites is occluded due to interaction of NgoL with other protein factors involved in MMR. The presentation of only one active site to substrate DNA will ensure that nicking of only one strand occurs to prevent inadvertent and deleterious double stranded cleavage.

A New Definition of A Priori Knowledge: In Search of a Modal Basis

In this paper I will offer a novel understanding of a priori knowledge. My claim is that the sharp distinction that is usually made between a priori and a posteriori knowledge is groundless. It will be argued that a plausible understanding of a priori and a posteriori knowledge has to acknowledge that they are in a constant bootstrapping relationship. It is also crucial that we distinguish between a priori propositions that hold in the actual world and merely possible, non-actual a priori propositions, as we will see when considering cases like Euclidean geometry. Furthermore, contrary to what Kripke seems to suggest, a priori knowledge is intimately connected with metaphysical modality, indeed, grounded in it. The task of a priori reasoning, according to this account, is to delimit the space of metaphysically possible worlds in order for us to be able to determine what is actual.