Full Schedule

Shantikumar Nair, Ph.D.
Professor & Director, Amrita Center for Nanosciences & Molecular Medicine, Amrita University, India

Spatially Distributed and Hierarchical Nanomaterials in Biotechnology 

Although nano materials are well investigated in biotechnology in their zero-, one- and two-dimensional forms, three-dimensional nanomaterials are relatively less investigated for their biological applications.  Three dimensional nano materials are much more complex with several structural and hierarchical variables controlling their mechanical, chemical and biological functionality.  In this talk examples are given of some complex three dimensional systems including,  scaffolds, aggregates, fabrics and membranes. Essentially three types of hierarchies are considered: one-dimensional hierarchy, two-dimensional hierarchy and three-dimensional hierarchy each giving rise to unique behaviors.

Satheesh Babu T. G., Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Department of Sciences, School of Engineering, Amrita University, Coimbatore, India

Nanomaterials for ‘enzyme-free’ biosensing

Enzyme based sensors have many draw backs such as poor storage stability, easily affected by the change in pH and temperature and involves complicated enzyme immobilization procedures.  To address this limitation, an alternative approach without the use of enzyme, “non-enzymatic” has been tried recently. Choosing the right catalyst for direct electrochemical oxidation / reduction of a target molecule is the key step in the fabrication of non-enzymatic sensors.

Non-enzymatic sensors for glucose, creatinine, vitamins and cholesterol are fabricated using different nanomaterials, such as nanotubes, nanowires and nanoparticles of copper oxide, titanium dioxide, tantalum oxide, platinum, gold and graphenes. These sensors selectively catalyse the targeted analyte with very high sensitivity. These nanomaterials based sensors combat the drawbacks of enzymatic sensors.

Rajasekhar Chekkara, Venkata Reddy Gorla and Sobha Rani Tenkayala

Pharmacophore modeling, atom-based 3D-QSAR and molecular docking studies on Pyrimido[5,4-e][1,2,4]triazine derivatives as PLK 1 inhibitors

Polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1) is a significant enzyme with diverse biological actions in cell cycle progression, specifically mitosis. Suppression of PLK1 activity by small molecule inhibitors has been shown to inhibit cancer, being BI 2536 one of the most potent active inhibitor of PLK1 mechanism. Pharmacophore modeling, atom-based 3D-QSAR and molecular docking studies were carried out for a set of 54 compounds belonging to Pyrimido[5,4-e][1,2,4]triazine derivatives as PLK1 inhibitors. A six-point pharmacophoremodel AAADDR, with three hydrogen bond acceptors (A), two hydrogen bond donors (D) and one aromatic ring (R) was developed by Phase module of Schrdinger suite Maestro 9. The generated pharmacophore model was used to derive a predictive atom-based 3D quantitative structure-activity relationship analysis (3D-QSAR) model for the training set (r2 = 0.88, SD = 0.21, F = 57.7, N = 44) and for test set (Q2 = 0.51, RMSE = 0.41, PearsonR = 0.79, N = 10). The original set of compounds were docked into the binding site of PLK1 using Glide and the active residues of the binding site were analyzed. The most active compound H18 interacted with active residues Leu 59, Cys133 (glide score = −10.07) and in comparison of BI 2536, which interacted with active residues Leu 59, Cys133 (glide score = −10.02). The 3D-QSAR model suggests that hydrophobic and electron-withdrawing groups are essential for PLK1 inhibitory activity. The docking results describes the hydrogen bond interactions with active residues of these compounds. These results which may support in the design and development of novel PLK1 inhibitors.

DOWNLOAD THE ABSTRACT 

Jeff Perry, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, University of California, Riverside

Combined Crystallography and SAXS Methods for Studying Macromolecular Complexes

Recent developments in small angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) are rapidly providing new insights into protein interactions, complexes and conformational states in solution, allowing for detailed biophysical quantification of samples of interest1. Initial analyses provide a judgment of sample quality, revealing the potential presence of aggregation, the overall extent of folding or disorder, the radius of gyration, maximum particle dimensions and oligomerization state. Structural characterizations may include ab initio approaches from SAXS data alone, or enhance structural solutions when combined with previously determined crystal/NMR domains. This combination can provide definitions of architectures, spatial organizations of the protein domains within a complex, including those not yet determined by crystallography or NMR, as well as defining key conformational states. Advantageously, SAXS is not generally constrained by macromolecule size, and rapid collection of data in a 96-well plate format provides methods to screen sample conditions. Such screens include co-factors, substrates, differing protein or nucleotide partners or small molecule inhibitors, to more fully characterize the variations within assembly states and key conformational changes. These analyses are also useful for screening constructs and conditions that are most likely to promote crystal growth. Moreover, these high throughput structural determinations can be leveraged to define how polymorphisms affect assembly formations and activities. Also, SAXS-based technologies may be potentially used for novel structure-based screening, for compounds inducing shape changes or associations/diassociations. This is addition to defining architectural characterizations of complexes and interactions for systems biology-based research, and distinctions in assemblies and interactions in comparative genomics. Thus, SAXS combined with crystallography/NMR and computation provides a unique set of tools that should be considered as being part of one’s repertoire of biophysical analyses, when conducting characterizations of protein and other macromolecular interactions.

1 Perry JJ & Tainer JA. Developing advanced X-ray scattering methods combined with crystallography and computation. Methods. 2013 Mar;59(3):363-71.