Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Structure of photosystem II and substrate binding at room temperature

Nature volume 540, pages 453–457 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Light-induced oxidation of water by photosystem II (PS II) in plants, algae and cyanobacteria has generated most of the dioxygen in the atmosphere. PS II, a membrane-bound multi-subunit pigment protein complex, couples the one-electron photochemistry at the reaction centre with the four-electron redox chemistry of water oxidation at the Mn4CaO5 cluster in the oxygen-evolving complex (OEC). Under illumination, the OEC cycles through five intermediate S-states (S0 to S4)1, in which S1 is the dark-stable state and S3 is the last semi-stable state before O–O bond formation and O2 evolution2,3. A detailed understanding of the O–O bond formation mechanism remains a challenge, and will require elucidation of both the structures of the OEC in the different S-states and the binding of the two substrate waters to the catalytic site4,5,6. Here we report the use of femtosecond pulses from an X-ray free electron laser (XFEL) to obtain damage-free, room temperature structures of dark-adapted (S1), two-flash illuminated (2F; S3-enriched), and ammonia-bound two-flash illuminated (2F-NH3; S3-enriched) PS II. Although the recent 1.95 Å resolution structure of PS II at cryogenic temperature using an XFEL7 provided a damage-free view of the S1 state, measurements at room temperature are required to study the structural landscape of proteins under functional conditions8,9, and also for in situ advancement of the S-states. To investigate the water-binding site(s), ammonia, a water analogue, has been used as a marker, as it binds to the Mn4CaO5 cluster in the S2 and S3 states10. Since the ammonia-bound OEC is active, the ammonia-binding Mn site is not a substrate water site10,11,12,13. This approach, together with a comparison of the native dark and 2F states, is used to discriminate between proposed O–O bond formation mechanisms.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Crystal structure of PS II in the dark (S1) state collected at room temperature with femtosecond XFEL pulses.
Figure 2: Comparison of the room temperature and cryogenic structures in the dark state.
Figure 3: The oxygen evolving complex.
Figure 4: Ammonia binding sites to the OEC and O–O bond formation mechanisms.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kok, B., Forbush, B. & McGloin, M. Cooperation of charges in photosynthetic O2 evolution-I. A linear four step mechanism. Photochem. Photobiol. 11, 457–475 (1970)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cox, N. & Messinger, J. Reflections on substrate water and dioxygen formation. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1827, 1020–1030 (2013)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Yano, J. & Yachandra, V. Mn4Ca cluster in photosynthesis: where and how water is oxidized to dioxygen. Chem. Rev. 114, 4175–4205 (2014)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Messinger, J., Badger, M. & Wydrzynski, T. Detection of one slowly exchanging substrate water molecule in the S3 state of photosystem II. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 92, 3209–3213 (1995)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Hillier, W. & Wydrzynski, T. 18O-Water exchange in photosystem II: Substrate binding and intermediates of the water splitting cycle. Coord. Chem. Rev. 252, 306–317 (2008)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ugur, I., Rutherford, A. W. & Kaila, V. R. Redox-coupled substrate water reorganization in the active site of photosystem II-The role of calcium in substrate water delivery. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1857, 740–748 (2016)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Suga, M. et al. Native structure of photosystem II at 1.95 Å resolution viewed by femtosecond X-ray pulses. Nature 517, 99–103 (2015)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fraser, J. S. et al. Accessing protein conformational ensembles using room-temperature X-ray crystallography. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 16247–16252 (2011)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Tilton, R. F., Jr, Dewan, J. C. & Petsko, G. A. Effects of temperature on protein structure and dynamics: X-ray crystallographic studies of the protein ribonuclease-A at nine different temperatures from 98 to 320 K. Biochemistry 31, 2469–2481 (1992)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Boussac, A., Rutherford, A. W. & Styring, S. Interaction of ammonia with the water splitting enzyme of photosystem II. Biochemistry 29, 24–32 (1990)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Britt, R. D., Zimmermann, J. L., Sauer, K. & Klein, M. P. The state of manganese in the photosynthetic apparatus. 10. Ammonia binds to the catalytic Mn of the oxygen-evolving complex of photosystem-II - evidence by electron-spin echo envelope modulation spectroscopy. J. Am. Chem. Soc . 111, 3522–3532 (1989)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Pérez Navarro, M. et al. Ammonia binding to the oxygen-evolving complex of photosystem II identifies the solvent-exchangeable oxygen bridge (μ-oxo) of the manganese tetramer. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 15561–15566 (2013)

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Oyala, P. H., Stich, T. A., Debus, R. J. & Britt, R. D. Ammonia binds to the dangler manganese of the photosystem II oxygen-evolving complex. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 137, 8829–8837 (2015)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kupitz, C. et al. Serial time-resolved crystallography of photosystem II using a femtosecond X-ray laser. Nature 513, 261–265 (2014)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Sauter, N. K. et al. No observable conformational changes in PSII. Nature 533, E1–E2 (2016)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Hellmich, J. et al. Native-like photosystem II superstructure at 2.44 Å resolution through detergent extraction from the protein crystal. Structure 22, 1607–1615 (2014)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Moser, C. C., Keske, J. M., Warncke, K., Farid, R. S. & Dutton, P. L. Nature of biological electron transfer. Nature 355, 796–802 (1992)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Förster, T. Zwischenmolekulare Energiewanderung und Fluoreszenz. Ann. Phys. 437, 55–75 (1948)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Umena, Y., Kawakami, K., Shen, J.-R. & Kamiya, N. Crystal structure of oxygen-evolving photosystem II at a resolution of 1.9 Å. Nature 473, 55–60 (2011)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cox, N. et al. Electronic structure of the oxygen-evolving complex in photosystem II prior to O-O bond formation. Science 345, 804–808 (2014)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Siegbahn, P. E. M. Structures and energetics for O2 formation in photosystem II. Acc. Chem. Res. 42, 1871–1880 (2009)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Glöckner, C. et al. Structural changes of the oxygen-evolving complex in photosystem II during the catalytic cycle. J. Biol. Chem. 288, 22607–22620 (2013)

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Li, X. & Siegbahn, P. E. M. Alternative mechanisms for O2 release and O-O bond formation in the oxygen evolving complex of photosystem II. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 17, 12168–12174 (2015)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kern, J. et al. Taking snapshots of photosynthetic water oxidation using femtosecond X-ray diffraction and spectroscopy. Nat. Commun. 5, 4371 (2014)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Beck, W. F., Depaula, J. C. & Brudvig, G. W. Ammonia binds to the manganese site of the O2-evolving complex of photosystem II in the S2 state. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 108, 4018–4022 (1986)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Hou, L. H., Wu, C. M., Huang, H. H. & Chu, H. A. Effects of ammonia on the structure of the oxygen-evolving complex in photosystem II as revealed by light-induced FTIR difference spectroscopy. Biochemistry 50, 9248–9254 (2011)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Askerka, M., Vinyard, D. J., Brudvig, G. W. & Batista, V. S. NH3 binding to the S2 state of the O2-evolving complex of photosystem II: Analogue to H2O binding during the S2 → S3 transition. Biochemistry 54, 5783–5786 (2015)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Retegan, M. et al. A five-coordinate Mn(IV) intermediate in biological water oxidation: spectroscopic signature and a pivot mechanism for water binding. Chem. Sci. (Camb.) 7, 72–84 (2016)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Pecoraro, V. L., Baldwin, M. J., Caudle, M. T., Hsieh, W. Y. & Law, N. A. A proposal for water oxidation in photosystem II. Pure Appl. Chem . 70, 925–929 (1998)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Vrettos, J. S., Limburg, J. & Brudvig, G. W. Mechanism of photosynthetic water oxidation: combining biophysical studies of photosystem II with inorganic model chemistry. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1503, 229–245 (2001)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Yamanaka, S. et al. Possible mechanisms for the O-O bond formation in oxygen evolution reaction at the CaMn4O5(H2O)4 cluster of PSII refined to 1.9 Å X-ray resolution. Chem. Phys. Lett. 511, 138–145 (2011)

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Kern, J. et al. Purification, characterisation and crystallisation of photosystem II from Thermosynechococcus elongatus cultivated in a new type of photobioreactor. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1706, 147–157 (2005)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ibrahim, M. et al. Improvements in serial femtosecond crystallography of photosystem II by optimizing crystal uniformity using microseeding procedures. Struct. Dyn . 2, 041705 (2015)

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Pham, L. V. & Messinger, J. Electrochemically produced hydrogen peroxide affects Joliot-type oxygen-evolution measurements of photosystem II. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1837, 1411–1416 (2014)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Beck, W. F. & Brudvig, G. W. Binding of amines to the O2-evolving center of photosystem II. Biochemistry 25, 6479–6486 (1986)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Geijer, P., Deák, Z. & Styring, S. Proton equilibria in the manganese cluster of photosystem II control the intensities of the S(0) and S(2) state g ≈ 2 electron paramagnetic resonance signals. Biochemistry 39, 6763–6772 (2000)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Yano, J. et al. in Sustaining Life on Planet Earth: Metalloenzymes Mastering Dioxygen and Other Chewy Gases Vol. 15 (eds Sosa Torres, M.E. & Kroneck, P.M.H. ) 13–43 (Springer, 2015)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Beckmann, K., Messinger, J., Badger, M. R., Wydrzynski, T. & Hillier, W. On-line mass spectrometry: membrane inlet sampling. Photosynth. Res. 102, 511–522 (2009)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Sierra, R. G. et al. Nanoflow electrospinning serial femtosecond crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. D 68, 1584–1587 (2012)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Sierra, R. G. et al. Concentric-flow electrokinetic injector enables serial crystallography of ribosome and photosystem II. Nat. Methods 13, 59–62 (2016)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Boutet, S. & Williams, G. J. The Coherent X-ray Imaging (CXI) instrument at the Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS). New J. Phys. 12, 035024 (2010)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  42. Liang, M. et al. The Coherent X-ray Imaging instrument at the Linac Coherent Light Source. J. Synchrotron Radiat. 22, 514–519 (2015)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Kern, J. et al. Simultaneous femtosecond X-ray spectroscopy and diffraction of photosystem II at room temperature. Science 340, 491–495 (2013)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Chollet, M. et al. The X-ray Pump-Probe instrument at the Linac Coherent Light Source. J. Synchrotron Radiat. 22, 503–507 (2015)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Boutet, S., Cohen, A. E. & Wakatsuki, S. The new macromolecular femtosecond crystallography (MFX) instrument at LCLS. Synchrotron Radiat. News 29, 23–28 (2016)

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Herrmann, S. et al. CSPAD upgrades and CSPAD V1.5 at LCLS. J. Phys. 493, 012013 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sauter, N. K., Hattne, J., Grosse-Kunstleve, R. W. & Echols, N. New Python-based methods for data processing. Acta Crystallogr. D 69, 1274–1282 (2013)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Hattne, J. et al. Accurate macromolecular structures using minimal measurements from X-ray free-electron lasers. Nat. Methods 11, 545–548 (2014)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Steller, I., Bolotovsky, R. & Rossmann, M. G. An algorithm for automatic indexing of oscillation images using Fourier analysis. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 30, 1036–1040 (1997)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Rossmann, M. G. & van Beek, C. G. Data processing. Acta Crystallogr. D 55, 1631–1640 (1999)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Sauter, N. K., Grosse-Kunstleve, R. W. & Adams, P. D. Robust indexing for automatic data collection. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 37, 399–409 (2004)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Sauter, N. K. et al. Improved crystal orientation and physical properties from single-shot XFEL stills. Acta Crystallogr. D 70, 3299–3309 (2014)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Sauter, N. K., Grosse-Kunstleve, R. W. & Adams, P. D. Improved statistics for determining the Patterson symmetry from unmerged diffraction intensities. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 39, 158–168 (2006)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Waterman, D. G. et al. Diffraction-geometry refinement in the DIALS framework. Acta Crystallogr. D 72, 558–575 (2016)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Sauter, N. K. XFEL diffraction: developing processing methods to optimize data quality. J. Synchrotron Radiat. 22, 239–248 (2015)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Zhang, Z., Sauter, N. K., van den Bedem, H., Snell, G. & Deacon, A. M. Automated diffraction image analysis and spot searching for high-throughput crystal screening. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 39, 112–119 (2006)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Uervirojnangkoorn, M. et al. Enabling X-ray free electron laser crystallography for challenging biological systems from a limited number of crystals. eLife 4, e05421 (2015)

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. McCoy, A. J. et al. Phaser crystallographic software. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 40, 658–674 (2007)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Afonine, P. V. et al. Towards automated crystallographic structure refinement with phenix.refine. Acta Crystallogr. D 68, 352–367 (2012)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Padilla, J. E. & Yeates, T. O. A statistic for local intensity differences: robustness to anisotropy and pseudo-centering and utility for detecting twinning. Acta Crystallogr. D 59, 1124–1130 (2003)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Adams, P. D. et al. PHENIX: a comprehensive Python-based system for macromolecular structure solution. Acta Crystallogr. D 66, 213–221 (2010)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Emsley, P., Lohkamp, B., Scott, W. G. & Cowtan, K. Features and development of Coot. Acta Crystallogr. D 66, 486–501 (2010)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Afonine, P. V., et al. FEM: feature-enhanced map. Acta Crystallogr. D 71, 646–666 (2015)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Cox, N., Pantazis, D. A., Neese, F. & Lubitz, W. Biological water oxidation. Acc. Chem. Res. 46, 1588–1596 (2013)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Isobe, H. et al. Theoretical illumination of water-inserted structures of the CaMn4O5 cluster in the S2 and S3 states of oxygen-evolving complex of photosystem II: full geometry optimizations by B3LYP hybrid density functional. Dalton Trans. 41, 13727–13740 (2012)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Li, X., Siegbahn, P. E. M. & Ryde, U. Simulation of the isotropic EXAFS spectra for the S2 and S3 structures of the oxygen evolving complex in photosystem II. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 3979–3984 (2015)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Ichino, T. & Yoshioka, Y. Theoretical study on mechanism of dioxygen evolution in photosystem II. II. Molecular and electronic structures at the S3 and S4 states of oxygen-evolving complex. Chem. Phys. Lett . 595, 237–241 (2014)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  68. Hatakeyama, M. et al. Structural changes in the S3 state of the oxygen evolving complex in photosystem II. Chem. Phys. Lett. 651, 243–250 (2016)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Director, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences (OBES), Division of Chemical Sciences, Geosciences, and Biosciences (CSGB) of the Department of Energy (DOE) (J.Y., V.K.Y.) for X-ray methodology and instrumentation; National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants GM055302 (V.K.Y.) for PS II biochemistry, structure and mechanism, GM110501 (J.Y.) for instrumentation development for XFEL experiments, GM102520 and GM117126 (N.K.S.) for development of computational protocols for XFEL data; the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (GM116423-02, F.D.F.); and the Human Frontiers Science Project Award No. RGP0063/2013 310 (J.Y., U.B., P.W., A.Z.). The DFG-Cluster of Excellence “UniCat” coordinated by T.U. Berlin and Sfb1078 (Humboldt Universität Berlin), TP A5 (A.Z., H.D.), the Solar Fuels Strong Research Environment (Umeå University), the Artificial Leaf Project (K&A Wallenberg Foundation 2011.0055) and Energimyndigheten (36648-1) (J.M.) are acknowledged for support. H.L. and C.A.S. acknowledge support from the US DOE, OBES, CSGB Division. W.I.W. and A.T.B. acknowledge support from an HHMI Collaborative Innovation Award. D.G.W. is funded by industrial income received by CCP4. This research used resources of NERSC, a User Facility supported by the Office of Science, DOE, under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. Portions of this work were supported by a BNL/US DOE, LDRD grant (11-008; A.M.O.); and NIH/NCRR grant 2-P41-RR012408, NIH/NIGMS grants 8P41GM103473-16 and P41GM111244 and the US DOE, OBER grant FWP BO-70 (A.M.O., B.A.). A.M.O and P.T.D were supported in part by the Diamond Light Source, and A.M.O acknowledges support from a Strategic Award from the Wellcome Trust and the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (grant 102593). P.B. was supported by a Wellcome Trust DPhil studentship. Testing of crystals and various parts of the setup were carried out at synchrotron facilities that were provided by the Advanced Light Source (ALS) in Berkeley and Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource (SSRL) in Stanford, funded by DOE OBES under contract DE-AC02-05CH11231 (ALS) and DE-AC02-76SF00515 (SSRL). The SSRL Structural Molecular Biology Program is supported by the DOE OBER and by the NIH (P41GM103393). Use of the LCLS and SSRL, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, is supported by the US DOE, Office of Science, OBES under Contract No. DE-AC02-76SF00515. We thank M. Bommer for discussions and help regarding structure refinement, crystallographic model building and validation, J. Hattne for his contributions to the development of XFEL diffraction data processing, A. Boussac for discussions on ammonia binding and his contributions to the substrate water exchange measurements of the S3 state in the presence of ammonia, and the previous CXI beamline scientist, G. Williams, for his support during the initial stages of this project. We thank the support staff at LCLS/SLAC and at SSRL (BL 6-2, 7-3) and ALS (BL 5.01, 5.0.2, 8.2.1).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Tsu-Chien Weng

    Present address: † Present address: Center for High Pressure Science & Technology Advanced Research, Pudong, Shanghai 201203, China.,

  2. Iris D. Young, Mohamed Ibrahim and Ruchira Chatterjee: These authors contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Molecular Biophysics and Integrated Bioimaging Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, 94720, California, USA

    Iris D. Young, Ruchira Chatterjee, Sheraz Gul, Franklin D. Fuller, Aaron S. Brewster, Rosalie Tran, Tara Michels-Clark, Lacey Douthit, Claudio Saracini, Mackenzie A. Bean, Ernest Pastor, Louise Lassalle, Nigel W. Moriarty, Dorothee Liebschner, Pavel V. Afonine, Petrus H. Zwart, Paul D. Adams, Nicholas K. Sauter, Jan Kern, Vittal K. Yachandra & Junko Yano

  2. Institut für Biologie, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, D-10099, Germany

    Mohamed Ibrahim, Rana Hussein, Miao Zhang, Ina Seuffert, Holger Dobbek & Athina Zouni

  3. Institutionen för Kemi, Kemiskt Biologiskt Centrum, Umeå Universitet, Umeå, SE 90187, Sweden

    Sergey Koroidov, Casper de Lichtenberg, Long Vo Pham, Håkan Nilsson, Mun Hon Cheah, Dmitriy Shevela & Johannes Messinger

  4. LCLS, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Menlo Park, 94025, California, USA

    Roberto Alonso-Mori, Raymond G. Sierra, James M. Glownia, Silke Nelson, Marcin Sikorski, Diling Zhu, Mark S. Hunter, Thomas J. Lane, Andy Aquila, Jason E. Koglin, Joseph Robinson, Mengning Liang, Sébastien Boutet & Jan Kern

  5. Stanford PULSE Institute, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Menlo Park, 94025, California, USA

    Thomas Kroll, Hartawan Laksmono, Raymond G. Sierra, Claudiu A. Stan, Clemens Weninger, Thomas Fransson & Uwe Bergmann

  6. SSRL, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Menlo Park, 94025, California, USA

    Thomas Kroll, Dimosthenis Sokaras & Tsu-Chien Weng

  7. Institute for Methods and Instrumentation on Synchrotron Radiation Research, Helmholtz Zentrum, 14109, Berlin, Germany

    Markus Kubin & Philippe Wernet

  8. Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3QU, UK

    Philipp Bräuer

  9. Diamond Light Source Ltd, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, OX11 0DE, Oxfordshire, UK

    Philipp Bräuer, Pierre Aller, Peter T. Docker, Allen M. Orville & Gwyndaf Evans

  10. National Synchrotron Light Source II, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, 11973, New York, USA

    Babak Andi

  11. Department of Molecular and Cellular Physiology, Stanford University, Stanford, 94305, California, USA

    Artem Y. Lyubimov, Monarin Uervirojnangkoorn, William I. Weis & Axel T. Brunger

  12. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Stanford University, 94305, California, USA

    Artem Y. Lyubimov, Monarin Uervirojnangkoorn & Axel T. Brunger

  13. STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, OX11 0QX, Oxfordshire, UK

    David G. Waterman

  14. CCP4, Research Complex at Harwell, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, OX11 0FA, Oxfordshire, UK

    David G. Waterman

  15. Department of Photon Science, Stanford University, Stanford, 94305, California, USA

    William I. Weis & Axel T. Brunger

  16. Department of Structural Biology, Stanford University, 94305, California, Stanford, USA

    William I. Weis & Axel T. Brunger

  17. Department of Bioengineering, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, 94720, California, USA

    Paul D. Adams

  18. Department of Chemistry, Molecular Biomimetics, Ångström Laboratory, Uppsala University, Uppsala, SE 75237, Sweden

    Johannes Messinger

Authors
  1. Iris D. Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohamed Ibrahim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ruchira Chatterjee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sheraz Gul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Franklin D. Fuller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sergey Koroidov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Aaron S. Brewster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Rosalie Tran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Roberto Alonso-Mori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Thomas Kroll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Tara Michels-Clark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Hartawan Laksmono
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Raymond G. Sierra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Claudiu A. Stan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Rana Hussein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Miao Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Lacey Douthit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Markus Kubin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Casper de Lichtenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Long Vo Pham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Håkan Nilsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Mun Hon Cheah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Dmitriy Shevela
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  24. Claudio Saracini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  25. Mackenzie A. Bean
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  26. Ina Seuffert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  27. Dimosthenis Sokaras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  28. Tsu-Chien Weng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  29. Ernest Pastor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  30. Clemens Weninger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  31. Thomas Fransson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  32. Louise Lassalle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  33. Philipp Bräuer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  34. Pierre Aller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  35. Peter T. Docker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  36. Babak Andi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  37. Allen M. Orville
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  38. James M. Glownia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  39. Silke Nelson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  40. Marcin Sikorski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  41. Diling Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  42. Mark S. Hunter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  43. Thomas J. Lane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  44. Andy Aquila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  45. Jason E. Koglin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  46. Joseph Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  47. Mengning Liang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  48. Sébastien Boutet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  49. Artem Y. Lyubimov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  50. Monarin Uervirojnangkoorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  51. Nigel W. Moriarty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  52. Dorothee Liebschner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  53. Pavel V. Afonine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  54. David G. Waterman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  55. Gwyndaf Evans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  56. Philippe Wernet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  57. Holger Dobbek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  58. William I. Weis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  59. Axel T. Brunger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  60. Petrus H. Zwart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  61. Paul D. Adams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  62. Athina Zouni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  63. Johannes Messinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  64. Uwe Bergmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  65. Nicholas K. Sauter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  66. Jan Kern
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  67. Vittal K. Yachandra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  68. Junko Yano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

U.B., V.K.Y. and J.Y. conceived the experiment; R.A.-M., S.B., A.Z., J.M., U.B., N.K.S., J.K., V.K.Y. and J.Y. designed the experiment; I.D.Y., M.I., R.C., R.T., M.A.B., R.H., M.Z., L.D., I.S., A.Z. and J.K. prepared samples; M.S.H., A.A., J.E.K., J.R., M.L. and S.B. operated the CXI instrument; R.A.-M., T.J.L., J.E.K., J.R., M.L. and S.B. operated the MFX instrument; R.A.-M., J.M.G., S.N., M.S. and D.Z. operated the XPP instrument; S.G., S.K., F.D.F., H.L., E.P., B.A., A.M.O., R.G.S., C.A.S., C.S., J.M. and J.K. developed, tested and ran the sample delivery system; R.C., S.K., C.d.L., L.V.P., H.N., M.H.C., D.Sh., J.M. and J.Y. performed and analysed O2 evolution and EPR measurements; I.D.Y., M.I., R.C., S.G., S.K., A.S.B., R.A.-M., F.D.F., T.K., T.M.-C., H.L., R.G.S., C.A.S., R.H., M.Z., L.D., M.K., C.d.L., C.S., D.So., T.-C.W., E.P., C.W., T.F., P.A., P.B., B.A., P.T.D., A.M.O., J.M.G., S.N., M.S., D.Z., M.S.H., T.J.L., A.A., J.E.K., J.R., M.L., S.B., P.W., A.Z., J.M., U.B., N.K.S., J.K., V.K.Y. and J.Y. performed the LCLS experiment; I.D.Y., A.S.B, T.M.-C., A.Y.L., M.U., N.W.M., D.L., P.V.A., D.G.W., G.E., W.I.W., A.T.B., P.H.Z., P.D.A. and N.K.S. developed new software for data processing; I.D.Y., A.S.B., F.D.F., C.W., T.F., L.L, P.A., P.B., T.K., T.M.-C., H.D., N.K.S. and J.K. processed and analysed XFEL data; I.D.Y., R.C., J.M., J.K., J.Y. and V.K.Y. wrote the manuscript with input from all authors.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Athina Zouni, Johannes Messinger, Vittal K. Yachandra or Junko Yano.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Additional information

Reviewer Information Nature thanks J. Murray, C. Yocum and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Figure 1 Schematic of the reaction centre and OEC in PS II and packing of the dimeric complex in the crystal lattice.

a, The reaction centre is shown with cofactors labelled as Pheo (pheophytin), Chl (chlorophyll), PQ (plastoquinone), QA, QB (primary and secondary acceptor plastoquinones bound to PS II, respectively). The numbering of Mn (purple spheres), oxygen (red/grey spheres) atoms and metal-bound waters in the OEC follows the convention of ref. 21. Upon illumination of PS II, an electron is transferred ~35 Å across the membrane from the excited primary electron donor P680 to the final electron acceptor QB via ChlD1, PheoD1, QA, and a non-haem FeII. After accepting two electrons and undergoing protonation, plastoquinol QBH2 is released from PS II into the membrane matrix. The photo-generated radical cation P680•+ is reduced by a tyrosine residue (TyrZ) to generate a neutral tyrosine radical TyrZ•, which acts as an oxidizing agent for water at the OEC. b, c, d, Packing of the dimeric complex observed in the room temperature data for three different view directions. The unit cell is indicated by a wire frame and axes are labelled. Dimers related by translation are coloured identically. e–g, Packing observed in the cryogenic structure in ref. 16 (PDB: 4PJ0) in the same orientations as in b–d. h–j, Packing observed in the cryogenic XFEL structure in ref. 7 (PDB: 4UB6). The space group is the same in all three cases, but the unit cell dimensions and packing are different. Whereas the a and b dimensions are very similar between 4PJ0 and the current room temperature data, the c axis is elongated. This results in a very similar arrangement of dimers in rows along the a axis (compare d and g), whereas there is a larger spacing between two dimer rows at the cytoplasmic side of the complex (compare black ellipse in b and e) owing to the elongation of the c axis in the room temperature packing. The structure in ref. 7 has a very different arrangement of the dimers and no closely packed rows of dimers are visible (see c and f compared with i, and d and g compared with j).

Extended Data Figure 2 Electron density omit maps of the lumenal CD helix and part of the loop region of subunit D1.

a–h, Obtained from the room tempearture dark (a, b), 2F (c, d), and 2F-NH3 (e–h) datasets. For all maps residues 165–190 of subunit D1 (shown as grey sticks) were omitted followed by three rounds of coordinate and real space refinement of the model with (g, h) or without (a–f) simulated annealing in phenix.refine. a, 2mFo − DFc map (blue, 1.5σ contour) of the dark dataset. b, Polder mFo − DFc map (green, 4σ contour) of the dark dataset. c, 2mFo − DFc map (blue, 1.5σ contour) of the 2F dataset. d, Polder mFo−DFc map (green, 4σ contour) of the 2F dataset. e, 2mFo−DFc map (blue, 1.5σ contour) of the 2F-NH3 dataset. f, Polder mFo−DFc map (green, 4σ contour) of the 2F-NH3 dataset. g, Standard mFo−DFc omit map (green, 3σ contour) of the 2F-NH3 dataset after simulated annealing. h, Polder mFo−DFc map (green, 4σ contour) of the 2F-NH3 dataset after simulated annealing.

Extended Data Figure 3 Comparison of dark room temperature structure with cryogenic structures from refs

7 and 16 . Our room temperature dark state structure is shown in grey, the Suga XFEL7 in cyan and the Hellmich16 cryogenic structure in purple. a, Overlay of the room temperature and Suga7 structures. b, Overlay of the room temperature and Hellmich16 structures. A large-scale rigid body motion of the two monomers with respect to each other and an in-plane expansion of each PS II monomer in the room temperature structure are visible. c–e, Comparison of TMH 2 of subunit CP47 between the dark state and the cryogenic XFEL structure7 (c), the dark state and the Hellmich16 cryogenic structure (d) and between the two cryogenic structures (e). The two cryogenic datasets reflect crystals with different packing. View is from the cytoplasmic side (top) or along the membrane plane (bottom). Despite the different packing, only a small shift of 0.1–0.2 Å is observed between the two cryogenic structures. In contrast, the room temperature structure exhibits a larger shift of 0.5–0.6 Å in the positions of TMH 2 with respect to the cryogenic structures in both crystal forms, well above the error margin in our data. The cryogenic structures were superposed onto our dark structure model in PyMol (Schrödinger, LLC) using monomer 1 for alignment.

Extended Data Figure 4 Comparisons of the cofactor–cofactor distances in the crystal structures collected at cryogenic temperature and room temperature.

a, Distances for central cofactors; the histogram shows the deviation of the cofactor–cofactor distances in the Hellmich cryogenic SR dark state structure (4PJ016, highlighted in blue) and in our dark and 2F room temperature structures (highlighted in yellow) from those of the cryogenic XFEL structure reported by Suga et al.7 (4UB6). Changes are indicated by bars for monomers 1 and 2 (m1, m2), and colour coding of bars matches the colouring of the associated pair of cofactors in the diagram. Among the differences, there is a consistent elongation in the distances involving ChlZ as well as in the QB–Cyt b-559 and OEC–Cyt c-550 distances of both monomers in the room temperature data. In other cases, expansion of individual cofactor distances is observed in both room temperature structures and 4PJ0 relative to 4UB6 (for example, PD2–ChlD2, QB–PheoD2), and in the case of PD1–PD2 on average the elongation is more pronounced at room temperature than in the cryogenic structures. Changes in Chl positions between the room temperature dark structure and 4UB6 (b), between the room temperature dark structure and 4PJ0, which have the same dimer–dimer packing (c), and between 4PJ0 and 4UB6 (d). The distances of the Chl ring centres from the membrane normal passing through the centre between PheoD1 and PheoD2 are computed and relative changes with respect to the values obtained from 4UB6 or 4PJ0 are shown as colour coding on a rainbow scale from green (0.2 Å contraction) to red (1.0 Å expansion). For selected Chl–Chl pairs, distances are given with the absolute change in parentheses.

Extended Data Figure 5 Location of water molecules observed in the room temperature structure.

a, Water positions refined in the dark room temperature structure of the PS II dimer are indicated by blue and yellow spheres. View is along the membrane plane with the cytoplasm on top and lumen on the bottom. Waters whose positions coincide with waters located in the cryogenic XFEL structure7 (4UB6) are coloured in yellow and waters in other positions are coloured in dark blue. b, Enlarged view of the lumenal region showing the OEC of one monomer (magenta, red and green spheres for Mn, O and Ca) as well as the two Cl− (pink spheres) located close to the OEC. c, Waters located at the lumenal side of one monomer. View is from the lumenal side onto the membrane plane, with colour coding as in a and b. d, Polder omit maps (2.5σ contour, green mesh) for waters in the direct vicinity of the OEC in the dark state. Waters included in the refined model are indicated as red spheres, additional waters placed based on polder maps as orange spheres, and waters from 4UB6 are shown in light cyan. e, Possible water networks next to the OEC. Waters included in the refined model of the 2F state are indicated as red spheres and waters from 4UB6 are shown in light cyan. Polder omit maps (2.0σ contour, green mesh, carved at 2 Å around water positions from 4UB6) confirm the positions of the refined waters and indicate the presence of additional waters (for example, A571, A588), but no omit map density was observed at the position of water C665. The starting points of three water/proton channels postulated in ref. 21 are indicated by dashed red, yellow, and blue lines.

Extended Data Figure 6 Room temperature electron density of the Mn4CaO5 cluster.

a, The 2mFo−DFc electron density (top) contoured at 4.0σ (green) and 8.0σ (blue mesh) and the polder mFo−DFc electron density (middle) of the dark dataset after omitting the OEC and real space refinement contoured at 8.0σ (green) and 14.0σ (blue mesh). At the bottom, the mFo−DFc electron density after omitting individual metal atoms and refining with simulated annealing is shown contoured at 4.0σ (Ca), 7.0σ (Mn1, Mn2), 8.0σ (Mn3) and 4.0σ (Mn4). The model of the OEC is shown with Mn as magenta, Ca as green and oxygen as red spheres overlaid with yellow spheres indicating the centres of the obtained omit densities. b, The 2mFo−DFc electron density (top) contoured at 3.0σ (green) and 6.0σ (blue mesh) and the polder mFo−DFc electron density (middle) of the 2F dataset after omitting the OEC and real space refinement contoured at 8σ (green) and 14σ (blue mesh). At the bottom, the mFo−DFc electron density after omitting individual metal atoms and refining with simulated annealing is shown contoured at 12.0σ (Ca, Mn1, Mn3), 13.0σ (Mn2) and 10.0σ (Mn4), with colour coding as in a. c, The 2mFo−DFc electron density (top) contoured at 5.0σ (green) and 8.0σ (blue mesh) and the polder mFo−DFc electron density (middle) of the 2F-NH3 dataset after omitting the OEC and real space refinement contoured at 11σ (green) and 16σ (blue mesh). At the bottom, the mFo − DFc electron density after omitting individual metal atoms and refining with simulated annealing is shown contoured at 5.0σ (Ca), 10.0σ (Mn1), 8.0σ (Mn2, Mn4) and 11.0σ (Mn3), with colour coding as in a.

Extended Data Figure 7 Characterization of PS II samples and substrate water exchange rates in the S3 state.

a, Flash-induced O2 evolution pattern (FIOP) of a suspension of the native PS II core complexes (PSIIcc) at pH 6.5. Fit parameter: 100% S1 in the dark, miss 20%, double hit 4%, damping 2%, fit done on first five flashes. In the 2F sample, if double hits are excluded, ~60% of the S3 population was calculated, with ~30% of S2 and ~4% of S1. b, FIOP of a suspension of the PS IIcc (TRIS, pH 7.5, 100 mM (NH4)2SO4) with and without PPBQ measured with 12 s between flashes using the thin layer MIMS setup (see Methods) and 532 nm laser flash illumination: an increase in O2 yield by 15% was observed if PPBQ was added. c, Light saturation in the thin layer MIMS set up resembling the illumination conditions of the DOT approach. The ratio of the oxygen yield of the third flash over that of the fourth flash is plotted as a qualitative measure for the miss parameter, which is minimal when the ratio is large. d, EPR spectra of native (pH 6.0 and 7.5) and ammonia-treated (pH 7.5) PS II solutions after continuous illumination at 195 K for 1 min followed by annealing to 260 K for 30 s. Spectrometer condition: microwave frequency, 9.23 GHz; field modulation amplitude, 32 G at 100 KHz; microwave power, 20 mW. The spectra were collected at 7 K. e, EPR spectra of ammonia-treated (pH 7.5) PS II solution after applying one (red) or two (black) flashes. Spectrometer conditions are as in a. f, O2-flash pattern of PS II crystals at pH 7.5 (TRIS, (NH4)2SO4) measured by MIMS with the replica set up for jet illumination described above. g, FIOP (Joliot-type electrode) of PSIIcc at pH 7.5 and 20 °C in TRIS buffer with either 100 mM (NH4)2SO4 or 100 mM Na2SO4 addition. The O2 yields for each sample were normalized to the O2 yields induced by flashes 3–6 (Y3–6). No artificial electron acceptors were added. The flash frequency of the Xe-flash lamp was 2 Hz, and the Chl concentration 0.4 mM. Data are the average of three technical replicates. From the data, a miss parameter of 23–25% and an S3 state population of 50–53% can be extracted for both sample types. Double hits, caused by the Xe flash lamp, are 3–6%, and are absent under laser flash illumination used during the XFEL experiments. The total O2 yield of the ammonia-containing sample was 66% of the Na2SO4 control, and 52% of the FIOP at pH 6.5 (a). h, FIOP of PS II core sample incubated in TRIS and 100 mM (NH4)2SO4 for 5 min at pH 7.6 versus one that was incubated for 4 h at room temperature. No degradation of the sample was observed over time (O2 yields of both FIOPs normalized to Y3–6 of 4-min trace). i, FIOP of PS II core sample containing TRIS and 100 mM (NH4)2SO4 versus one containing MOPS and 100 mM (NH4)2SO4. Both FIOPs normalized to Y3–6 of TRIS containing sample. j, k, Substrate water exchange was measured for the S3 state of PS II core complexes at pH 7.6/20 °C as described2,4,12 in HEPES buffer containing 100 mM NH4Cl (j) or 100 mM NaCl (k). The left panels show the biphasic rise of the mass 34 peak (16O18O), while the right side shows the simultaneously recorded monophasic rise of the 36 peak of the double exchanged 18O18O. Red symbols represent the individually measured data points, while the blue lines are the kinetic simulations. Nearly identical rates for the exchange of the fast (kfast) and slow (kslow) substrates were found with and without ammonia.

Extended Data Figure 8 Possible Mn4CaO5 complex models for the S3-state proposed in the literature.

The models are grouped into four classes (a–d, see below). Mn are numbered (1–4) as in the main text. a, Models with an inserted water (highlighted in yellow) on the left side (closed cubane proposed as a transient S3-state in ref. 64 in teal; ref. 65 in light orange) shift Mn4 the furthest out. b, Models with an inserted water (highlighted in yellow) on the right side (model in ref. 64 in yellow; ref. 66 in pink; ref. 67 in dark blue) closely resemble models with an open cubane, and were proposed initially by Li and Siegbahn23. c, Other models with no inserted water: from ref. 67 in marine blue; 4UB67 in green; from ref. 67 in lavender; from ref. 65 in dark orange). d, Only one proposed model featured a closed cubane with no inserted water (ref. 68 in yellow-green). Note that, except for the type a structure (a complete cubane plus mono-μ-oxo bridged Mn4) and the type d structure (a closed cubane with no water inserted), the Mn atomic positions are very similar in all models within 0.26 Å. Even between the type a and other models, the Mn4 positions differ only by 0.73 Å. On the other hand, the O5 position is expected to differ among the models by at most 1.52 Å.

Extended Data Figure 9 The electron density of the Cl− binding sites and environment of the W1 and W2 sites at the OEC in the 2F-NH3 samples in the 2F dataset.

a, The Cl− binding site 1 with Cl− (green sphere) at its refined position. The 2mFo − DFc map (blue mesh) is shown at 1.5σ, and the mFo − DFc map (green/red) is shown at ± 3σ. b, Cl− binding site 1 with ammonia (blue sphere) instead of Cl− included in the model. The lack of difference density at the Cl− position in the refined model and the positive difference density observed when ammonia is substituted for Cl− indicate that ammonia does not account for the electron density and that Cl− is a good model for the observed density. c, d, Comparison of the positions of W1 and W2 among the 2F-NH3 (red), 2F (light pink) and cryogenic S1-XFEL7 (light cyan) structures in two different orientations. The outcome of two different alignment procedures (to optimize overlap of either OEC Mn atoms or the surrounding protein ligands) are shown, illustrating the error in these alignments. A small shift of both W1 and W2 upon transition from the cryogenic S1-XFEL to the 2F structure is visible. In the 2F-NH3 model, W1 is shifted slightly further along the same direction as the dark–2F difference. In contrast, the displacement of W2 in the 2F-NH3 model is significantly larger than that between the S1-XFEL and 2F structures. e, 2mFo − DFc electron density (blue, 1.0σ) of the 2F-NH3 dataset around Mn4, and polder omit maps at 3.5σ (green). Red spheres, water refined in the current model; orange spheres, water placed in the polder maps but not included in the refined model; cyan spheres, water positions from the cryogenic XFEL structure. f, When calculating the mFo − DFc electron density using the refined positions of W1 and W2 (light orange spheres) from the 2F-NH3 data, only a negative peak is observed (orange mesh, −3σ contour) while using W1 and W2 positions (purple spheres) from the S1-XFEL structure yields clear positive and negative peaks (green and purple mesh, ± 3σ contour, colouring of other waters as in e). This indicates that the W2 position from the S1-XFEL structure does not provide a good fit to the observed electron density. However, at the present resolution the observed difference densities may be influenced by other effects, for example, Fourier series truncations and the strong density of H2OA close to W2.

Extended Data Table 1 Data collection and refinement statistics for the room temperature dark (S1), 2F and 2F-NH3 data
Full size table

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains Supplementary Text, Supplementary Tables 1-7 and Supplementary References. (PDF 828 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Young, I., Ibrahim, M., Chatterjee, R. et al. Structure of photosystem II and substrate binding at room temperature. Nature 540, 453–457 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature20161

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature20161

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing