***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:  Fighting antibiotic resistance requires a deeper understanding of the genetic factors that determine the antibiotic susceptibility of bacteria. Here we describe a chemical-genomic screen in Escherichia coli K-12 that was designed to discover new aspects of antibiotic resistance by focusing on a set of 26 antibiotics and other stresses with poorly characterized mode-of-action and determinants of resistance. We show that the screen identifies new resistance determinants for these antibiotics including a common signature from two antimicrobials, kasugamycin and blasticidin S, used to treat crop diseases like rice blast and fire blight. Following this signature, we further investigated the mechanistic basis for susceptibility to kasugamycin and blasticidin S in E. coli using both genetic and biochemical approaches. We provide evidence that these compounds hijack an overlapping set of peptide ABC-importers to enter the bacterial cell. Loss of uptake may be an underappreciated mechanism for the development of kasugamycin resistance in bacterial plant pathogens.


Output:

Bacterial species differ in their susceptibility to antibiotics but the reason for these differences remains an open question. Understanding the genetic basis of antibiotic susceptibility will be critical for predicting the efficacy of new antibiotics and possibly finding new antibiotic targets. Here we report a large-scale study that connects bacterial genes to antibiotics, using a set of antibiotics that were chosen to include poorly characterized compounds. We discovered genes that confer resistance to a number of neglected antibiotics, expanding our knowledge of gene function and antibiotic resistance in Escherichia coli K-12. Starting from this large-scale screen, we then investigated how two antibiotics with a common history, kasugamycin and blasticidin S, enter bacterial cells. Both mimic naturally occurring nutrients to trick E. coli into actively bringing them inside. Kasugamycin is used to control microbes that cause agricultural diseases and mutations that reduce uptake like those we describe here may be an underappreciated factor in the development of resistance to kasugamycin.
