Structural adaptations in the specialized bacteriophage T4 co-chaperonin Gp31 expand the size of the Anfinsen cage

Chloroplasts have a novel Cpn10 in addition to Cpn20 as co-chaperonins in Arabidopsis thaliana

Previously, we characterized a mitochondrial co-chaperonin (Cpn10) and a chloroplast co-chaperonin (Cpn20) from Arabidopsis thaliana (Koumoto, Y., Tsugeki, R., Shimada, T., Mori, H., Kondo, M., Hara-Nishimura, I., and Nishimura, M. (1996) Plant J. 10, 1119-1125; Koumoto, Y., Shimada, T., Kondo, M., Takao, T., Shimonishi, Y., Hara-Nishimura, I., and Nishimura, M. (1999) Plant J. 17, 467-477). Here, we report a third co-chaperonin. The cDNA was 603 base pairs long, encoding a protein of 139 amino acids. From a sequence analysis, the protein was predicted to have one Cpn10 domain with an amino-terminal extension that might work as a chloroplast transit peptide. This novel Cpn10 was confirmed to be localized in chloroplasts, and we refer to it as chloroplast Cpn10 (chl-Cpn10). The phylogenic tree that was generated with amino acid sequences of other co-chaperonins indicates that chl-Cpn10 is highly divergent from the others. In the GroEL-assisted protein folding assay, about 30% of the substrates were refolded with chl-Cpn10, indicating that chl-Cpn10 works as a co-chaperonin. A Northern blot analysis revealed that mRNA for chl-Cpn10 is accumulated in the leaves and stems, but not in the roots. In germinating cotyledons, the accumulation of chl-Cpn10 was similar to that of chloroplastic proteins and accelerated by light. It was proposed that two kinds of co-chaperonins, Cpn20 and chl-Cpn10, work independently in the chloroplast.

Identification of important amino acid residues that modulate binding of Escherichia coli GroEL to its various cochaperones

Genetic experiments have shown that the GroEL/GroES chaperone machine of Escherichia coli is absolutely essential, not only for bacterial growth but also for the propagation of many bacteriophages including lambda. The virulent bacteriophages T4 and RB49 are independent of the host GroES function, because they encode their own cochaperone proteins, Gp31 and CocO, respectively. E. coli groEL44 mutant bacteria do not form colonies above 42 degrees nor do they propagate bacteriophages lambda, T4, or RB49. We found that the vast majority (40/46) of spontaneous groEL44 temperature-resistant colonies at 43 degrees were due to the presence of an intragenic suppressor mutation. These suppressors define 21 different amino acid substitutions in GroEL, each affecting one of 13 different amino acid residues. All of these amino acid residues are located at or near the hinge, which regulates the large en bloc movements of the GroEL apical domain. All of these intragenic suppressors support bacteriophages lambda, T4, and RB49 growth to various extents in the presence of the groEL44 allele. Since it is known that the GroEL44 mutant protein does not interact effectively with Gp31, the suppressor mutations should enhance cochaperone binding. Analogous intragenic suppressor studies were conducted with the groEL673 temperature-sensitive allele.

Pseudo-T-even bacteriophage RB49 encodes CocO, a cochaperonin for GroEL, which can substitute for Escherichia coli's GroES and bacteriophage T4's Gp31

Bacteriophage T4-encoded Gp31 is a functional ortholog of the Escherichia coli GroES cochaperonin protein. Both of these proteins form transient, productive complexes with the GroEL chaperonin, required for protein folding and other related functions in the cell. However, Gp31 is specifically required, in conjunction with GroEL, for the correct folding of Gp23, the major capsid protein of T4. To better understand the interaction between GroEL and its cochaperonin cognates, we determined whether the so-called "pseudo-T-even bacteriophages" are dependent on host GroEL function and whether they also encode their own cochaperonin. Here, we report the isolation of an allele-specific mutation of bacteriophage RB49, called epsilon22, which permits growth on the E. coli groEL44 mutant but not on the isogenic wild type host. RB49 epsilon22 was used in marker rescue experiments to identify the corresponding wild type gene, which we have named cocO (cochaperonin cognate). CocO has extremely limited identity to GroES but is 34% identical and 55% similar at the protein sequence level to T4 Gp31, sharing all of the structural features of Gp31 that distinguish it from GroES. CocO can substitute for Gp31 in T4 growth and also suppresses the temperature-sensitive phenotype of the E. coli groES42 mutant. CocO's predicted mobile loop is one residue longer than that of Gp31, with the epsilon22 mutation resulting in a Q36R substitution in this extra residue. Both the CocO wild type and epsilon22 proteins have been purified and shown in vitro to assist GroEL in the refolding of denatured citrate synthase.

Genetic analysis of bacteriophage-encoded cochaperonins

Early genetic studies identified the Escherichia coli groES and groEL genes because mutations in them blocked the growth of bacteriophages lambda and T4. Subsequent genetic and biochemical analyses have shown that GroES and GroEL constitute a chaperonin machine, absolutely essential for E. coli growth, because it is needed for the correct folding of many of its proteins. In spite of very little sequence identity to GroES, the bacteriophage T4-encoded Gp31 protein and the bacteriophage RB49-encoded CocO protein are bona fide GroEL cochaperonins, even capable of substituting for GroES in E. coli growth. A major functional distinction is that only Gp31 and CocO can assist GroEL in the correct folding of Gp23, the major bacteriophage capsid protein. Conserved structural features between CocO and Gp31, which are absent from GroES, highlight their potential importance in specific cochaperonin function.

From minichaperone to GroEL 2: importance of avidity of the multisite ring structure

Structural studies on minichaperones and GroEL imply a continuous ring of binding sites around the neck of GroEL. To investigate the importance of this ring, we constructed an artificial heptameric assembly of minichaperones to mimic their arrangement in GroEL. The heptameric Gp31 co-chaperonin from bacteriophage T4, an analogue of GroES, was used as a scaffold to display the GroEL minichaperones. A fusion protein, MC(7), was generated by replacing a part of the highly mobile loop of Gp31 (residues 23-44) with the sequence of the minichaperone (residues 191-376 of GroEL). The purified recombinant protein assembled into a heptameric ring composed of seven 30.6 kDa subunits. Although single minichaperones (residues 193-335 to 191-376 of GroEL) have certain chaperone activities in vitro and in vivo, they cannot refold heat and dithiothreitol-denatured mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase (mtMDH), a reaction that normally requires GroEL, its co-chaperonin GroES and ATP. But, MC(7) refolded MDH in vitro. The expression of MC(7) complements in vivo two temperature-sensitive Escherichia coli alleles, groEL44 and groEL673, at 43 degrees C. Although MC(7) could not compensate for the complete absence of GroEL in vivo, it enhanced the colony-forming ability of cells containing limiting amounts of wild-type GroEL at 37 degrees C. MC(7 )also reduces aggregate formation and cell death in mammalian cell models of Huntington's disease. The assembly of seven minichaperone subunits on a heptameric ring significantly improves their activity, demonstrating the importance of avidity in GroEL function.

Characterization of novel proteins based on known protein structures

The genome sciences face the challenge to characterize structure and function of a vast number of novel genes. Sequence search techniques are used to infer functional and structural information from similarities to experimentally characterized genes or proteins. The persistent goal is to refine these techniques and to develop alternative and complementary methods to increase the range of reliable inference.Here, we focus on the structural and functional assignments that can be inferred from the known three-dimensional structures of proteins. The study uses all structures in the Protein Data Bank that were known by the end of 1997. The protein structures released in 1998 were then characterized in terms of functional and structural similarity to the previously known structures, yielding an estimate of the maximum amount of information on novel protein sequences that can be obtained from inference techniques. The 147 globular proteins corresponding to 196 domains released in 1998 have no clear sequence similarity to previously known structures. However, 75 % of the domains have extensive structure similarity to previously known folds, and most importantly, in two out of three cases similarity in structure coincides with related function. In view of this analysis, full utilization of existing structure data bases would provide information for many new targets even if the relationship is not accessible from sequence information alone. Currently, the most sophisticated techniques detect of the order of one-third of these relationships.

GroEL is involved in activation of Escherichia coli RNA polymerase devoid of the omega subunit in vivo

Highly purified Escherichia coli RNA polymerase contains a small subunit termed omega that has a molecular mass of 10 105 Da and is comprised of 91 amino acids. E. coli strains lacking omega (omega-less) are viable, but exhibit a slow-growth phenotype. Renaturation of RNA polymerase isolated from an omega-less mutant, in the presence of omega, resulted in maximum recovery of activity. The omega-less RNA polymerase from omega-less strains recruits the chaperonin, GroEL (unlike the wild-type enzyme), suggesting a structural deformity of the mutant enzyme. The GroEL-containing core RNA polymerase interacts efficiently with sigma70 to generate the fully functional holoenzyme. However, when GroEL was removed, the enzyme was irreversibly nonfunctional and was unable to bind to sigma70. The damaged enzyme regained activity after going through a cycle of denaturation and reconstitution in the presence of omega or GroEL. GroES was found to have an inhibitory effect on the core-sigma70 association unlike the omega subunit. The omega subunit may therefore be needed for stabilization of the structure of RNA polymerase.

Conserved structural features and sequence patterns in the GroES fold family

An irregular, all beta-class of proteins, comprising members of the chaperonin-10, quinone oxidoreductase, glucose dehydrogenase and alcohol dehydrogenase families has earlier been classified as the GroES fold. In this communication, we present an extensive analysis of sequences and three dimensional structures of proteins belonging to this family. The individual protein structures can be superposed within 1.6 A for more than 60 structurally equivalent residues. The comparisons show a highly conserved hydrophobic core and conservation of a few key residues. A glycyl-aspartate dipeptide is suggested as being critical for the maintenance of the GroES fold. One of the surprising findings of the study is the non-conservative nature of Ile to Leu mutations in the protein core, although Ile to Val mutations are found to occur frequently.

GroEL recognises sequential and non-sequential linear structural motifs compatible with extended beta-strands and alpha-helices

The chaperonin GroEL binds a variety of polypeptides that share no obvious sequence similarity. The precise structural, chemical and dynamic features that are recognised remain largely unknown. Structural models of the complex between GroEL and its co-chaperonin GroES, and of the isolated apical domain of GroEL (minichaperone; residues 191-376) with a 17 residue N-terminal tag show that a linear sequential sequence (extended beta-strand) can be bound. We have analysed characteristics of the motifs that bind to GroEL by using affinity panning of immobilised GroEL minichaperones for a library of bacteriophages that display the fungal cellulose-binding domain of the enzyme cellobiohydrolase I. This protein has seven non-sequential residues in its binding site that form a linear binding motif with similar dimensions and characteristics to the peptide tag that was bound to the minichaperone GroEL(191-376). The seven residues thus form a constrained scaffold. We find that GroEL does bind suitable mutants of these seven residues. The side-chains recognised do not have to be totally hydrophobic, but polar and positively charged chains can be accommodated. Further, the spatial distribution of the side-chains is also compatible with those in an alpha-helix. This implies that GroEL can bind a wide range of structures, from extended beta-strands and alpha-helices to folded states, with exposed side-chains. The binding site can accommodate substrates of approximately 18 residues when in a helical or seven when in an extended conformation. The data support two activities of GroEL: the ability to act as a temporary parking spot for sticky intermediates by binding many motifs; and an unfolding activity of GroEL by binding an extended sequential conformation of the substrate.

Genetic analysis of the bacteriophage T4-encoded cochaperonin Gp31

Previous genetic and biochemical analyses have established that the bacteriophage T4-encoded Gp31 is a cochaperonin that interacts with Escherichia coli's GroEL to ensure the timely and accurate folding of Gp23, the bacteriophage-encoded major capsid protein. The heptameric Gp31 cochaperonin, like the E. coli GroES cochaperonin, interacts with GroEL primarily through its unstructured mobile loop segment. Upon binding to GroEL, the mobile loop adopts a structured, beta-hairpin turn. In this article, we present extensive genetic data that strongly substantiate and extend these biochemical studies. These studies begin with the isolation of mutations in gene 31 based on the ability to plaque on groEL44 mutant bacteria, whose mutant product interacts weakly with Gp31. Our genetic system is unique because it also allows for the direct selection of revertants of such gene 31 mutations, based on their ability to plaque on groEL515 mutant bacteria. Interestingly, all of these revertants are pseudorevertants because the original 31 mutation is maintained. In addition, we show that the classical tsA70 mutation in gene 31 changes a conserved hydrophobic residue in the mobile loop to a hydrophilic one. Pseudorevertants of tsA70, which enable growth at the restrictive temperatures, acquire the same mutation previously shown to allow plaque formation on groEL44 mutant bacteria. Our genetic analyses highlight the crucial importance of all three highly conserved hydrophobic residues of the mobile loop of Gp31 in the productive interaction with GroEL.

On the maximum size of proteins to stay and fold in the cavity of GroEL underneath GroES

GroEL encapsulates non-native protein in a folding cage underneath GroES (cis-cavity). Here we report the maximum size of the non-native protein to stay and fold in the cis-cavity. Using total soluble proteins of Escherichia coli in denatured state as binding substrates and protease resistance as the measure of polypeptide held in the cis-cavity, it was estimated that the cis-cavity can accommodate up to approximately 57-kDa non-native proteins. To know if a protein with nearly the maximum size can complete folding in the cis-cavity, we made a 54-kDa protein in which green fluorescent protein (GFP) and its blue fluorescent variant were fused tandem. This fusion protein was captured in the cis-cavity, and folding occurred there. Fluorescence resonance energy transfer proved that both GFP and blue fluorescent protein moieties of the same fused protein were able to fold into native structures in the cis-cavity. Consistently, simulated packing of crystal structures shows that two native GFPs just fit in the cis-cavity. A fusion protein of three GFPs (82 kDa) was also attempted, but, as expected, it was not captured in the cis-cavity.

Virus assembly

Virus assembly is a term describing several areas of current research: protein-RNA recognition; the control of the formation of large complexes; and mechanisms of particle maturation. Our understanding of these processes is increasing as a result of the efforts of numerous studies. Crystal structures have recently been solved for relatively complex assembly intermediates.

Compensatory changes in GroEL/Gp31 affinity as a mechanism for allele-specific genetic interaction

Previous work has shown that the GroEL-GroES interaction is primarily mediated by the GroES mobile loop. In bacteriophage T4 infection, GroES is substituted by the gene 31-encoded cochaperonin, Gp31. Using a genetic selection scheme, we have identified a new set of mutations in gene 31 that affect interaction with GroEL; all mutations result in changes in the mobile loop of Gp31. Biochemical analyses reveal that the mobile loop mutations alter the affinity between Gp31 and GroEL, most likely by modulating the stability of the GroEL-bound hairpin conformation of the mobile loop. Surprisingly, mutations in groEL that display allele-specific interactions with mutations in gene 31 alter residues in the GroEL intermediate domain, distantly located from the mobile loop binding site. The observed patterns of genetic and biochemical interaction between GroES or Gp31 and GroEL point to a mechanism of genetic allele specificity based on compensatory changes in affinity of the protein-protein interaction. Mutations studied in this work indirectly alter affinity by modulating a folding transition in the Gp31 mobile loop or by modulating a hinged conformational change in GroEL.

Substrate mutations that bypass a specific Cpn10 chaperonin requirement for protein folding

The bacteriophage T4 GroES homologue, gp31, in conjunction with the Escherichia coli chaperonin GroEL, is both necessary and sufficient to fold the T4 major capsid protein, gp23, to a state competent for capsid assembly as shown by in vivo expression studies. GroES is unable to function in this role as a productive co-chaperonin. The sequencing and characterization of mutations within gp23 that confer GroEL and gp31 chaperonin-independent folding of the mutant protein suggest that the chaperonin requirements are due to specific sequence determinants or structures in critical regions of gp23 that behave in an additive fashion to confer a chaperonin bypass phenotype. Conservative amino acid substitutions in these critical regions enable gp23 to fold in a GroEL-gp31 chaperonin-independent mode, albeit less efficiently than wild type, both in vivo and in vitro. Although the presence of functional GroEL-gp31 enhances folding of the mutated gp23 in vivo, GroEL-GroES has no such effect. Site-directed mutagenesis experiments suggest that a translational pausing mechanism is not responsible for the bypass mutant phenotype. Polyhead reassembly experiments are also consistent with direct, post-translational effects of the bypass mutations on polypeptide folding. Given our finding that gp31 is not required for the binding of the major capsid protein to GroEL and that active GroES is incapable of folding the gp23 polypeptide chain to native conformation, our results suggest co-chaperonin specificity in the folding of certain substrates.

Identification of in vivo substrates of the yeast mitochondrial chaperonins reveals overlapping but non-identical requirement for hsp60 and hsp10

The mechanism of chaperonin-assisted protein folding has been mostly analyzed in vitro using non-homologous substrate proteins. In order to understand the relative importance of hsp60 and hsp10 in the living cell, homologous substrate proteins need to be identified and analyzed. We have devised a novel screen to test the folding of a large variety of homologous substrates in the mitochondrial matrix in the absence or presence of functional hsp60 or hsp10. The identified substrates have an Mr of 15-90 kDa and fall into three groups: (i) proteins that require both hsp60 and hsp10 for correct folding; (ii) proteins that completely fail to fold after inactivation of hsp60 but are unaffected by the inactivation of hsp10; and (iii) newly imported hsp60 itself, which is more severely affected by inactivation of hsp10 than by inactivation of pre-existing hsp60. The majority of the identified substrates are group I proteins. For these, the lack of hsp60 function has a more pronounced effect than inactivation of hsp10. We suggest that homologous substrate proteins have differential chaperonin requirements, indicating that hsp60 and hsp10 do not always act as a single functional unit in vivo.

Structure and function in GroEL-mediated protein folding

Recent structural and biochemical investigations have come together to allow a better understanding of the mechanism of chaperonin (GroEL, Hsp60)-mediated protein folding, the final step in the accurate expression of genetic information. Major, asymmetric conformational changes in the GroEL double toroid accompany binding of ATP and the cochaperonin GroES. When a nonnative polypeptide, bound to one of the GroEL rings, is encapsulated by GroES to form a cis ternary complex, these changes drive the polypeptide into the sequestered cavity and initiate its folding. ATP hydrolysis in the cis ring primes release of the products, and ATP binding in the trans ring then disrupts the cis complex. This process allows the polypeptide to achieve its final native state, if folding was completed, or to recycle to another chaperonin molecule, if the folding process did not result in a form committed to the native state.

Chaperonins

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.

The ins and outs of a molecular chaperone machine

Genetic and biochemical work has highlighted the biological importance of the GroEL/GroES (Hsp60/Hsp10; cpn60/cpn10) chaperone machine in protein folding. GroEL's donut-shaped structure has attracted the attention of structural biologists because of its elegance as well as the secrets (substrates) it can hide. The recent determination of the GroES and GroEL/GroES structures provides a glimpse of their plasticity, revealing dramatic conformational changes that point to an elaborate mechanism, coupling ATP hydrolysis to substrate release by GroEL.

Proteolysis and chaperones: the destruction/reconstruction dilemma

Cytoplasmic proteases, although necessary for proper cell functioning, must be strictly regulated. In fact, they resemble chaperones, ancient protein folding devices. These molecules recognise exposed hydrophobic regions of unfolded or denatured proteins. For most substances it is not known how the cell chooses between the refolding and proteolytic pathways. In Escherichia coli, however, a carboxy-terminal proteolysis tag and binding site for the chaperone DnaK have recently been identified.

Protein folding in the cytosol: chaperonin-dependent and -independent mechanisms

Recent findings suggest that a combination of chaperonin-assisted and unassisted mechanisms operate in protein folding in the cytosol. While nascent chain-binding chaperones, such as Hsp70, could have a general role in maintaining the folding competence of translating polypeptide chains, the contribution of the cylindrical chaperonin complexes to overall folding is limited to a subset of aggregation-sensitive polypeptides. The majority of bacterial proteins are relatively small and they are synthesized rapidly and folded independently of the chaperonin GroEL in a posttranslational manner. Eukaryotes have a proportionally larger number of multi-domain proteins than bacteria. The individual domains of these proteins can be folded cotranslationally and sequentially. The use of this mechanism explains how large proteins fold independently of a chaperonin and could have been crucial in the evolution of a wide array of modular polypeptides in eukaryotes.

Structural aspects of GroEL function

The chaperonin GroEL and its cofactor GroES facilitate protein folding in an ATP-regulated manner. The recently solved crystal structure of the GroEL.GroES.(ADP)7 complex shows that the lining of the cavity in the polypeptide acceptor state is hydrophobic, whereas in the protein-release state it becomes hydrophilic. Other highlights of the past year include the visualization of the allosteric states of GroEL with respect to ATP using cryo-electron microscopy, and an X-ray crystallographic analysis of the interaction between the apical domain of GroEL and a peptide.