GroEL/GroES cycling: ATP binds to an open ring before substrate protein favoring protein binding and production of the native state.
ABSTRACT: 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 chaperonin system is required for the assisted folding of many essential proteins. The precise nature of this assistance remains unclear, however. Here we show that denatured RuBisCO from Rhodospirillum rubrum populates a stable, nonaggregating, and kinetically trapped monomeric state at low temperature. Productive folding of this nonnative intermediate is fully dependent on GroEL, GroES, and ATP. Reactivation of the trapped RuBisCO monomer proceeds through a series of GroEL-induced structural rearrangements, as judged by resonance energy transfer measurements between the amino- and carboxy-terminal domains of RuBisCO. A general mechanism used by GroEL to push large, recalcitrant proteins like RuBisCO toward their native states thus appears to involve two steps: partial unfolding or rearrangement of a nonnative protein upon capture by a GroEL ring, followed by spatial constriction within the GroEL-GroES cavity that favors or enforces compact, folding-competent intermediate states.
Project description: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:The chaperonin GroEL assists protein folding by binding nonnative forms through exposed hydrophobic surfaces in an open ring and mediating productive folding in an encapsulated hydrophilic chamber formed when it binds GroES. Little is known about the topology of nonnative proteins during folding inside the GroEL-GroES cis chamber. Here, we have monitored topology employing disulfide bond formation of a secretory protein, trypsinogen (TG), that behaves in vitro as a stringent, GroEL-GroES-requiring substrate. Inside the long-lived cis chamber formed by SR1, a single-ring version of GroEL, complexed with GroES, we observed an ordered formation of disulfide bonds. First, short-range disulfides relative to the primary structure formed, both native and nonnative. Next, the two long-range native disulfides that "pin" the two beta-barrel domains together formed. Notably, no long-range nonnative bonds were ever observed, suggesting that a native-like long-range topology is favored. At both this time and later, however, the formation of several medium-range nonnative bonds mapping to one of the beta-barrels was observed, reflecting that the population of local nonnative structure can occur even within the cis cavity. Yet both these and the short-range nonnative bonds were ultimately "edited" to native, as evidenced by the nearly complete recovery of native TG. We conclude that folding in the GroEL-GroES cavity can favor the formation of a native-like topology, here involving the proper apposition of the two domains of TG; but it also involves an ATP-independent conformational "editing" of locally incorrect structures produced during the dwell time in the cis 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 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:The double ring-shaped chaperonin GroEL binds a wide range of non-native polypeptides within its central cavity and, together with its cofactor GroES, assists their folding in an ATP-dependent manner. The conformational cycle of GroEL/ES has been studied extensively but little is known about how the environment in the central cavity affects substrate conformation. Here, we use the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein VHL as a model substrate for studying the action of the GroEL/ES system on a bound polypeptide. Fluorescent labeling of pairs of sites on VHL for fluorescence (Förster) resonant energy transfer (FRET) allows VHL to be used to explore how GroEL binding and GroEL/ES/nucleotide binding affect the substrate conformation. On average, upon binding to GroEL, all pairs of labeling sites experience compaction relative to the unfolded protein while single-molecule FRET distributions show significant heterogeneity. Upon addition of GroES and ATP to close the GroEL cavity, on average further FRET increases occur between the two hydrophobic regions of VHL, accompanied by FRET decreases between the N- and C-termini. This suggests that ATP- and GroES-induced confinement within the GroEL cavity remodels bound polypeptides by causing expansion (or racking) of some regions and compaction of others, most notably, the hydrophobic core. However, single-molecule observations of the specific FRET changes for individual proteins at the moment of ATP/GroES addition reveal that a large fraction of the population shows the opposite behavior; that is, FRET decreases between the hydrophobic regions and FRET increases for the N- and C-termini. Our time-resolved single-molecule analysis reveals the underlying heterogeneity of the action of GroES/EL on a bound polypeptide substrate, which might arise from the random nature of the specific binding to the various identical subunits of GroEL, and might help explain why multiple rounds of binding and hydrolysis are required for some chaperonin substrates.
Project description:Production of the folding-active state of a GroEL ring involves initial cooperative binding of ATP, recruiting GroES, followed by large rigid body movements that are associated with ejection of bound substrate protein into the encapsulated hydrophilic chamber where folding commences. Here, we have addressed how many of the 7 subunits of a GroEL ring are required to bind ATP to drive these events, by using mixed rings with different numbers of wild-type and variant subunits, the latter bearing a substitution in the nucleotide pocket that allows specific block of ATP binding and turnover by a pyrazolol pyrimidine inhibitor. We observed that at least 2 wild-type subunits were required to bind GroES. By contrast, the triggering of polypeptide release and folding required a minimum of 4 wild-type subunits, with the greatest extent of refolding observed when all 7 subunits were wild type. This is consistent with the requirement for a "power stroke" of forceful apical movement to eject polypeptide into the chamber.
Project description:Many proteins cannot fold without the assistance of chaperonin machines like GroEL and GroES. The nature of this assistance, however, remains poorly understood. Here we demonstrate that unfolding of a substrate protein by GroEL enhances protein folding. We first show that capture of a protein on the open ring of a GroEL-ADP-GroES complex, GroEL's physiological acceptor state for non-native proteins in vivo, leaves the substrate protein in an unexpectedly compact state. Subsequent binding of ATP to the same GroEL ring causes rapid, forced unfolding of the substrate protein. Notably, the fraction of the substrate protein that commits to the native state following GroES binding and protein release into the GroEL-GroES cavity is proportional to the extent of substrate-protein unfolding. Forced protein unfolding is thus a central component of the multilayered stimulatory mechanism used by GroEL to drive protein folding.
Project description:The GroEL/ES chaperonin system is required for the assisted folding of many proteins. How these substrate proteins are encapsulated within the GroEL-GroES cavity is poorly understood. Using symmetry-free, single-particle cryo-electron microscopy, we have characterized a chemically modified mutant of GroEL (EL43Py) that is trapped at a normally transient stage of substrate protein encapsulation. We show that the symmetric pattern of the GroEL subunits is broken as the GroEL cis-ring apical domains reorient to accommodate the simultaneous binding of GroES and an incompletely folded substrate protein (RuBisCO). The collapsed RuBisCO folding intermediate binds to the lower segment of two apical domains, as well as to the normally unstructured GroEL C-terminal tails. A comparative structural analysis suggests that the allosteric transitions leading to substrate protein release and folding involve concerted shifts of GroES and the GroEL apical domains and C-terminal tails.