***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature
***DOCUMENTATION*** 
***EXAMPLES*** 
Input:
Output:

***EXAMPLES***
Input: Functionally analogous enzymes are those that catalyze similar reactions on similar substrates but do not share common ancestry, providing a window on the different structural strategies nature has used to evolve required catalysts. Identification and use of this information to improve reaction classification and computational annotation of enzymes newly discovered in the genome projects would benefit from systematic determination of reaction similarities. Here, we quantified similarity in bond changes for overall reactions and catalytic mechanisms for 95 pairs of functionally analogous enzymes (non-homologous enzymes with identical first three numbers of their EC codes) from the MACiE database. Similarity of overall reactions was computed by comparing the sets of bond changes in the transformations from substrates to products. For similarity of mechanisms, sets of bond changes occurring in each mechanistic step were compared; these similarities were then used to guide global and local alignments of mechanistic steps. Using this metric, only 44% of pairs of functionally analogous enzymes in the dataset had significantly similar overall reactions. For these enzymes, convergence to the same mechanism occurred in 33% of cases, with most pairs having at least one identical mechanistic step. Using our metric, overall reaction similarity serves as an upper bound for mechanistic similarity in functional analogs. For example, the four carbon-oxygen lyases acting on phosphates (EC 4.2.3) show neither significant overall reaction similarity nor significant mechanistic similarity. By contrast, the three carboxylic-ester hydrolases (EC 3.1.1) catalyze overall reactions with identical bond changes and have converged to almost identical mechanisms. The large proportion of enzyme pairs that do not show significant overall reaction similarity (56%) suggests that at least for the functionally analogous enzymes studied here, more stringent criteria could be used to refine definitions of EC sub-subclasses for improved discrimination in their classification of enzyme reactions. The results also indicate that mechanistic convergence of reaction steps is widespread, suggesting that quantitative measurement of mechanistic similarity can inform approaches for functional annotation.
Output:  When species evolve, their genes duplicate and diverge to allow for adaptation of their functional repertoires to the changing environment. In this scenario, unrelated genes can convergently evolve to produce proteins with the same molecular function, termed “functionally analogous.” A quantitative determination of the reaction similarities among functionally analogous enzymes could provide insight about the different structural solutions nature has used to evolve similar catalysts. Bond changes between substrates and products, and between successive reaction intermediates, were used to compare the reactions catalyzed and the mechanisms of catalysis for 95 pairs of functionally analogous enzymes. Less than half of the reactions catalyzed by unrelated enzymes, but defined as similar by the Enzyme Commission (EC) classification, are similar in terms of bond changes, suggesting that this classification often fails to capture quantitative differences between many enzyme reactions. Furthermore, we addressed for the first time whether the chemical mechanisms by which similar overall reactions are achieved in functional analogs are also similar. We conclude that convergence of reaction is often accompanied by convergence of chemical mechanism. These results will be useful for classifying enzymes, guiding functional annotation of newly determined enzyme sequences and structures and for informing the engineering of enzymes with new functions.

Input:  Leukotriene B4 (LTB4) is secreted by chemotactic neutrophils, forming a secondary gradient that amplifies the reach of primary chemoattractants. This strategy increases the recruitment range for neutrophils and is important during inflammation. Here, we show that LTB4 and its synthesizing enzymes localize to intracellular multivesicular bodies that, upon stimulation, release their content as exosomes. Purified exosomes can activate resting neutrophils and elicit chemotactic activity in a LTB4 receptor-dependent manner. Inhibition of exosome release leads to loss of directional motility with concomitant loss of LTB4 release. Our findings establish that the exosomal pool of LTB4 acts in an autocrine fashion to sensitize neutrophils towards the primary chemoattractant, and in a paracrine fashion to mediate the recruitment of neighboring neutrophils in trans. We envision that this mechanism is used by other signals to foster communication between cells in harsh extracellular environments.


Output:

Neutrophils represent the first line of attack against infections and inflammatory insults. The ability of neutrophils to reach these sites, a key feature in the resolution of infections, is mediated by their capacity to sense and migrate directionally to the core of the inflammation site. Chemicals released at the site of inflammation are known as primary attractants. The binding of these attractants to receptors on the surface of neutrophils leads to the secretion of secondary attractants that amplify the reach of primary attractants. We studied the mechanism by which secondary attractants are released from neutrophils. We found that the secretion of a key secondary attractant is mediated in the form of small vesicles called exosomes. These exosomes originate inside the cells, encapsulated in larger vesicles called multivesicular bodies. We purified exosomes from activated neutrophils and show that they contain the machinery to synthesize this secondary attractant and act specifically to elicit neutrophil motility. The inhibition of exosome release leads to a loss of secretion of the secondary attractant as well as a loss in directional motility. Together, our findings provide insight into the mechanisms cells use to protect labile attractants from harsh extracellular environments and communicate directional cues during inflammatory responses.
