Role of the gamma-phosphate of ATP in triggering protein folding by GroEL-GroES: function, structure and energetics.
ABSTRACT: Productive cis folding by the chaperonin GroEL is triggered by the binding of ATP but not ADP, along with cochaperonin GroES, to the same ring as non-native polypeptide, ejecting polypeptide into an encapsulated hydrophilic chamber. We examined the specific contribution of the gamma-phosphate of ATP to this activation process using complexes of ADP and aluminium or beryllium fluoride. These ATP analogues supported productive cis folding of the substrate protein, rhodanese, even when added to already-formed, folding-inactive cis ADP ternary complexes, essentially introducing the gamma-phosphate of ATP in an independent step. Aluminium fluoride was observed to stabilize the association of GroES with GroEL, with a substantial release of free energy (-46 kcal/mol). To understand the basis of such activation and stabilization, a crystal structure of GroEL-GroES-ADP.AlF3 was determined at 2.8 A. A trigonal AlF3 metal complex was observed in the gamma-phosphate position of the nucleotide pocket of the cis ring. Surprisingly, when this structure was compared with that of the previously determined GroEL-GroES-ADP complex, no other differences were observed. We discuss the likely basis of the ability of gamma-phosphate binding to convert preformed GroEL-GroES-ADP-polypeptide complexes into the folding-active state.
Project description:A conundrum has arisen in the study of the structural states of the GroEL-GroES chaperonin machine: When either ATP or ADP is added along with GroES to GroEL, the same asymmetric complex, with one ring in a GroES-domed state, is observed by either x-ray crystallographic study or cryoelectron microscopy. Yet only ATP/GroES can trigger productive folding inside the GroES-encapsulated cis cavity by ejecting bound polypeptide from hydrophobic apical binding sites during attendant rigid body elevation and twisting of these domains. Here, we show that this difference occurs because polypeptide substrate in fact presents a load on the apical domains, and, although ATP can counter this load effectively, ADP cannot. We monitored apical domain movement in real time by fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) between a fixed equatorial fluorophore and one attached to the mobile apical domain. In the absence of bound polypeptide, addition of either ATP/GroES or ADP/GroES to GroEL produced the same rapid rate and extent of decrease of FRET (t(1/2) < 1 sec), reflecting similarly rapid apical movement to the same end-state and explaining the results of the structural studies, which were all carried out in the absence of substrate polypeptide. But in the presence of bound malate dehydrogenase or rhodanese, whereas similar rapid and extensive FRET changes were observed with ATP/GroES, the rate of FRET change with ADP/GroES was slowed by >100-fold and the extent of change was reduced, indicating that the apical domains opened in a slow and partial fashion. These results indicate that the free energy of gamma-phosphate binding, measured earlier as 43 kcal per mol (1 cal = 4.184 J) of rings, is required for driving the forceful excursion or "power stroke" of the apical domains needed to trigger release of the polypeptide load into the central cavity.
Project description:GroEL is an Escherichia coli chaperonin that is composed of two heptameric rings stacked back-to-back. GroEL assists protein folding with its cochaperonin GroES in an ATP-dependent manner in vitro and in vivo. However, it is still unclear whether GroES binds to both rings of GroEL simultaneously under physiological conditions. In this study, we monitored the GroEL-GroES interaction in the reaction cycle using fluorescence resonance energy transfer. We found that nearly equivalent amounts of symmetric GroEL-(GroES)(2) (football-shaped) complex and asymmetric GroEL-GroES (bullet-shaped) complex coexist during the functional reaction cycle. We also found that D398A, an ATP hydrolysis defective mutant of GroEL, forms a football-shaped complex with ATP bound to the two rings. Furthermore, we showed that ADP prevents the association of ATP to the trans-ring of GroEL, and as a consequence, the second GroES cannot bind to GroEL. Considering the concentrations of ADP and ATP in E. coli, ADP is expected to have a small effect on the inhibition of GroES binding to the trans-ring of GroEL in vivo. These results suggest that we should reconsider the chaperonin-mediated protein-folding mechanism that involves the football-shaped complex.
Project description:The GroEL/GroES reaction cycle involves steps of ATP and polypeptide binding to an open GroEL ring before the GroES encapsulation step that triggers productive folding in a sequestered chamber. The physiological order of addition of ATP and nonnative polypeptide, typically to the open trans ring of an asymmetrical GroEL/GroES/ADP complex, has been unknown, although there have been assumptions that polypeptide binds first, allowing subsequent ATP-mediated movement of the GroEL apical domains to exert an action of forceful unfolding on the nonnative polypeptide. Here, using fluorescence measurements, we show that the physiological order of addition is the opposite, involving rapid binding of ATP, accompanied by nearly as rapid apical domain movements, followed by slower binding of nonnative polypeptide. In order-of-addition experiments, approximately twice as much Rubisco activity was recovered when nonnative substrate protein was added after ATP compared with it being added before ATP, associated with twice as much Rubisco protein recovered with the chaperonin. Furthermore, the rate of Rubisco binding to an ATP-exposed ring was twice that observed in the absence of nucleotide. Finally, when both ATP and Rubisco were added simultaneously to a GroEL ring, simulating the physiological situation, the rate of Rubisco binding corresponded to that observed when ATP had been added first. We conclude that the physiological order, ATP binding before polypeptide, enables more efficient capture of nonnative substrate proteins, and thus allows greater recovery of the native state for any given round of the chaperonin cycle.
Project description:The GroEL/GroES protein folding chamber is formed and dissociated by ATP binding and hydrolysis. ATP hydrolysis in the GroES-bound (cis) ring gates entry of ATP into the opposite unoccupied trans ring, which allosterically ejects cis ligands. While earlier studies suggested that hydrolysis of cis ATP is the rate-limiting step of the cycle (t1/2 approximately 10 s), a recent study suggested that ADP release from the cis ring may be rate-limiting (t1/2 approximately 15-20 s). Here we have measured ADP release using a coupled enzyme assay and observed a t1/2 for release of <or=4-5 s, indicating that this is not the rate-limiting step of the reaction cycle.
Project description:The chaperonin GroEL binds non-native polypeptides in an open ring via hydrophobic contacts and then, after ATP and GroES binding to the same ring as polypeptide, mediates productive folding in the now hydrophilic, encapsulated cis chamber. The nature of the folding reaction in the cis cavity remains poorly understood. In particular, it is unclear whether polypeptides take the same route to the native state in this cavity as they do when folding spontaneously free in solution. Here, we have addressed this question by using NMR measurements of the time course of acquisition of amide proton exchange protection of human dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) during folding in the presence of methotrexate and ATP either free in solution or inside the stable cavity formed between a single ring variant of GroEL, SR1, and GroES. Recovery of DHFR refolded by the SR1/GroES-mediated reaction is 2-fold higher than in the spontaneous reaction. Nevertheless, DHFR folding was found to proceed by the same trajectories inside the cis folding chamber and free in solution. These observations are consistent with the description of the chaperonin chamber as an "Anfinsen cage" where polypeptide folding is determined solely by the amino acid sequence, as it is in solution. However, if misfolding occurs in the confinement of the chaperonin cavity, the polypeptide chain cannot undergo aggregation but rather finds its way back to a productive pathway in a manner that cannot be accomplished in solution, resulting in the observed high overall recovery.
Project description:The folding of many proteins depends on the assistance of chaperonins like GroEL and GroES and involves the enclosure of substrate proteins inside an internal cavity that is formed when GroES binds to GroEL in the presence of ATP. Precisely how assembly of the GroEL-GroES complex leads to substrate protein encapsulation and folding remains poorly understood. Here we use a chemically modified mutant of GroEL (EL43Py) to uncouple substrate protein encapsulation from release and folding. Although EL43Py correctly initiates a substrate protein encapsulation reaction, this mutant stalls in an intermediate allosteric state of the GroEL ring, which is essential for both GroES binding and the forced unfolding of the substrate protein. This intermediate conformation of the GroEL ring possesses simultaneously high affinity for both GroES and non-native substrate protein, thus preventing escape of the substrate protein while GroES binding and substrate protein compaction takes place. Strikingly, assembly of the folding-active GroEL-GroES complex appears to involve a strategic delay in ATP hydrolysis that is coupled to disassembly of the old, ADP-bound GroEL-GroES complex on the opposite ring.
Project description:A key constraint on the growth of most organisms is the slow and inefficient folding of many essential proteins. To deal with this problem, several diverse families of protein folding machines, known collectively as molecular chaperones, developed early in evolutionary history. The functional role and operational steps of these remarkably complex nanomachines remain subjects of active debate. Here we present evidence that, for the GroEL-GroES chaperonin system, the non-native substrate protein enters the folding cycle on the trans ring of the double-ring GroEL-ATP-GroES complex rather than the ADP-bound complex. The properties of this ATP complex are designed to ensure that non-native substrate protein binds first, followed by ATP and finally GroES. This binding order ensures efficient occupancy of the open GroEL ring and allows for disruption of misfolded structures through two phases of multiaxis unfolding. In this model, repeated cycles of partial unfolding, followed by confinement within the GroEL-GroES chamber, provide the most effective overall mechanism for facilitating the folding of the most stringently dependent GroEL substrate proteins.
Project description:The Escherichia coli chaperonin GroEL is a double-ring chaperone that assists in protein folding with the aid of GroES and ATP. It is believed that GroEL alternates the folding-active rings and that the substrate protein (and GroES) can bind to the open trans-ring only after ATP in the cis-ring is hydrolyzed. However, we found that a substrate protein prebound to the trans-ring remained bound during the first ATP cycle, and this substrate was assisted by GroEL-GroES when the second cycle began. Moreover, a slow ATP-hydrolyzing GroEL mutant (D398A) in the ATP-bound form bound a substrate protein and GroES to the trans-ring. The apparent discrepancy with the results from an earlier study (Rye, H. S., Roseman, A. M., Chen, S., Furtak, K., Fenton, W. A., Saibil, H. R., and Horwich, A. L. (1999) Cell 97, 325-338) can be explained by the previously unnoticed fact that the ATP-bound form of the D398A mutant exists as a symmetric 1:2 GroEL-GroES complex (the "football"-shaped complex) and that the substrate protein (and GroES) in the medium is incorporated into the complex only after the slow turnover. In light of these results, the current model of the GroEL-GroES reaction cycle via the asymmetric 1:1 GroEL-GroES complex deserves reexamination.
Project description:The molecular chaperones are a diverse set of protein families required for the correct folding, transport and degradation of other proteins in vivo. There has been great progress in understanding the structure and mechanism of action of the chaperonin family, exemplified by Escherichia coli GroEL. The chaperonins are large, double-ring oligomeric proteins that act as containers for the folding of other protein subunits. Together with its co-protein GroES, GroEL binds non-native polypeptides and facilitates their refolding in an ATP-dependent manner. The action of the ATPase cycle causes the substrate-binding surface of GroEL to alternate in character between hydrophobic (binding/unfolding) and hydrophilic (release/folding). ATP binding initiates a series of dramatic conformational changes that bury the substrate-binding sites, lowering the affinity for non-native polypeptide. In the presence of ATP, GroES binds to GroEL, forming a large chamber that encapsulates substrate proteins for folding. For proteins whose folding is absolutely dependent on the full GroE system, ATP binding (but not hydrolysis) in the encapsulating ring is needed to initiate protein folding. Similarly, ATP binding, but not hydrolysis, in the opposite GroEL ring is needed to release GroES, thus opening the chamber. If the released substrate protein is still not correctly folded, it will go through another round of interaction with GroEL.
Project description:In mediating protein folding, chaperonin GroEL and cochaperonin GroES form an enclosed chamber for substrate proteins in an ATP-dependent manner. The essential role of the double ring assembly of GroEL is demonstrated by the functional deficiency of the single ring GroEL(SR). The GroEL(SR)-GroES is highly stable with minimal ATPase activity. To restore the ATP cycle and the turnover of the folding chamber, we sought to weaken the GroEL(SR)-GroES interaction systematically by concatenating seven copies of groES to generate groES(7). GroES Ile-25, Val-26, and Leu-27, residues on the GroEL-GroES interface, were substituted with Asp on different groES modules of groES(7). GroES(7) variants activate ATP activity of GroEL(SR), but only some restore the substrate folding function of GroEL(SR), indicating a direct role of GroES in facilitating substrate folding through its dynamics with GroEL. Active GroEL(SR)-GroES(7) systems may resemble mammalian mitochondrial chaperonin systems.