"Half of the sites" binding of D-glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase folding intermediate with GroEL

Two D-glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) folding intermediate subunits bind with chaperonin 60 (GroEL) to form a stable complex, which can no longer bind with additional GAPDH intermediate subunits, but does bind with one more lysozyme folding intermediate or one chaperonin 10 (GroES) molecule, suggesting that the two GAPDH subunits bind at one end of the GroEL molecule displaying a "half of the sites" binding profile. For lysozyme, GroEL binds with either one or two folding intermediates to form a stable 1:1 or 1:2 complex with one substrate on each end of the GroEL double ring for the latter. The 1:1 complex of GroEL.GroES binds with one lysozyme or one dimeric GAPDH folding intermediate to form a stable ternary complex. Both complexes of GroEL.lysozyme1 and GroEL.GAPDH2 bind with one GroES molecule only at the other end of the GroEL molecule forming a trans ternary complex. According to the stoichiometry of GroEL binding with the GAPDH folding intermediate and the formation of ternary complexes containing GroEL.GAPDH2, it is suggested that the folding intermediate of GAPDH binds, very likely in the dimeric form, with GroEL at one end only.     

Flexibility of GroES Mobile Loop Is Required for Efficient Chaperonin Function

Chaperonin GroEL and its partner GroES assist the folding of nascent and stress-damaged proteins in an ATP-dependent manner. Free GroES has a flexible "mobile loop" and binds to GroEL through the residues at the tip of the loop, capping the central cavity of GroEL to provide the substrate polypeptide a cage for secure in-cage folding. Here, we show that restriction of the flexibility of the loop by a disulfide cross-linking between cysteines within the loop results in the inefficient formation of a stable GroEL-polypeptide-GroES ternary complex and inefficient folding. Then, we generated substrate proteins with enhanced binding affinity to GroEL by fusion of one or two SBP (strongly binding peptide for GroEL) sequences and examined the effect of disulfide cross-linking on the assisted folding. The results indicate that the higher the binding affinity of the substrate polypeptide to GroEL, the greater the contribution of the mobile loop flexibility to efficient in-cage folding. It is likely that the flexibility helps GroES capture GroEL's binding sites that are already occupied by the substrate polypeptide with various binding modes.     

Triggering protein folding within the GroEL-GroES complex

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.     

Folding of malate dehydrogenase inside the GroEL-GroES cavity

The chaperonin GroEL binds nonnative substrate protein in the hydrophobic central cavity of an open ring. ATP and GroES binding to the same ring converts this cavity into an encapsulated, hydrophilic chamber that mediates productive folding. A 'rack' mechanism of initial protein unfolding proposes that, upon GroES and ATP binding, the polypeptide is stretched between the binding sites on the twisting apical domains of GroEL before complete release into the chamber. Here, the structure of malate dehydrogenase (MDH) subunit during folding is monitored by deuterium exchange, peptic fragment production and mass spectrometry. When bound to GroEL, MDH exhibits a core of partially protected secondary structure that is only modestly deprotected upon ATP and GroES binding. Moreover, deprotection is broadly distributed throughout MDH, suggesting that it results from breaking hydrogen bonds between MDH and the cavity wall or global destabilization, as opposed to forced mechanical unfolding.     

Multivalent binding of nonnative substrate proteins by the chaperonin GroEL

The chaperonin GroEL binds nonnative substrate protein in the central cavity of an open ring through exposed hydrophobic residues at the inside aspect of the apical domains and then mediates productive folding upon binding ATP and the cochaperonin GroES. Whether nonnative proteins bind to more than one of the seven apical domains of a GroEL ring is unknown. We have addressed this using rings with various combinations of wild-type and binding-defective mutant apical domains, enabled by their production as single polypeptides. A wild-type extent of binary complex formation with two stringent substrate proteins, malate dehydrogenase or Rubisco, required a minimum of three consecutive binding-proficient apical domains. Rhodanese, a less-stringent substrate, required only two wild-type domains and was insensitive to their arrangement. As a physical correlate, multivalent binding of Rubisco was directly observed in an oxidative cross-linking experiment.     

Stimulating the substrate folding activity of a single ring GroEL variant by modulating the cochaperonin GroES

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.     

Mechanism of chaperonin action: GroES binding and release can drive GroEL-mediated protein folding in the absence of ATP hydrolysis.

As a basic principle, assisted protein folding by GroEL has been proposed to involve the disruption of misfolded protein structures through ATP hydrolysis and interaction with the cofactor GroES. Here, we describe chaperonin subreactions that prompt a re-examination of this view. We find that GroEL-bound substrate polypeptide can induce GroES cycling on and off GroEL in the presence of ADP. This mechanism promotes efficient folding of the model protein rhodanese, although at a slower rate than in the presence of ATP. Folding occurs when GroES displaces the bound protein into the sequestered volume of the GroEL cavity. Resulting native protein leaves GroEL upon GroES release. A single-ring variant of GroEL is also fully functional in supporting this reaction cycle. We conclude that neither the energy of ATP hydrolysis nor the allosteric coupling of the two GroEL rings is directly required for GroEL/GroES-mediated protein folding. The minimal mechanism of the reaction is the binding and release of GroES to a polypeptide-containing ring of GroEL, thereby closing and opening the GroEL folding cage. The role of ATP hydrolysis is mainly to induce conformational changes in GroEL that result in GroES cycling at a physiologically relevant rate.     

Chaperone activity of a chimeric GroEL protein that can exist in a single or double ring form.

The molecular chaperone GroEL is a protein complex consisting of two rings each of seven identical subunits. It is thought to act by providing a cavity in which a protein substrate can fold into a form that has no propensity to aggregate. Substrate proteins are sequestered in the cavity while they fold, and prevented from diffusion out of the cavity by the action of the GroES complex, that caps the open end of the cavity. A key step in the mechanism of action of GroEL is the transmission of a conformational change between the two rings, induced by the binding of nucleotides to the GroEL ring opposite to the one containing the polypeptide substrate. This conformational change then leads to the discharge of GroES from GroEL, enabling polypeptide release. Single ring forms of GroEL are thus predicted to be unable to chaperone the folding of GroES-dependent substrates efficiently, since they are unable to discharge the bound GroES and unable to release folded protein. We describe here a detailed functional analysis of a chimeric GroEL protein, which we show to exist in solution in equilibrium between single and double ring forms. We demonstrate that whereas the double ring form of the GroEL chimera functions effectively in refolding of a GroES-dependent substrate, the single ring form does not. The single ring form of the chimera, however, is able to chaperone the folding of a substrate that does not require GroES for its efficient folding. We further demonstrate that the double ring structure of GroEL is likely to be required for its activity in vivo.     

The affinity of the GroEL/GroES complex for peptides under conditions of protein folding

The affinity of four short peptides for the Escherichia coli molecular chaperone GroEL was studied in the presence of the co-chaperone GroES and nucleotides. Our data show that binding of GroES to one ring enhances the interaction of the peptides with the opposite GroEL ring, a finding that was related to the structural readjustments in GroEL following GroES binding. We further report that the GroEL/GroES complex has a high affinity for peptides during ATP hydrolysis when protein substrates would undergo repeated cycles of assisted folding. Although we could not determine at which step(s) during the cycle our peptides interacted with GroEL, we propose that successive state changes in GroEL during ATP hydrolysis may create high affinity complexes and ensure maximum efficiency of the chaperone machinery under conditions of protein folding.     

GroEL/GroES-mediated folding of a protein too large to be encapsulated.

The chaperonin GroEL binds nonnative proteins too large to fit inside the productive GroEL-GroES cis cavity, but whether and how it assists their folding has remained unanswered. We have examined yeast mitochondrial aconitase, an 82 kDa monomeric Fe(4)S(4) cluster-containing enzyme, observed to aggregate in chaperonin-deficient mitochondria. We observed that aconitase folding both in vivo and in vitro requires both GroEL and GroES, and proceeds via multiple rounds of binding and release. Unlike the folding of smaller substrates, however, this mechanism does not involve cis encapsulation but, rather, requires GroES binding to the trans ring to release nonnative substrate, which likely folds in solution. Following the phase of ATP/GroES-dependent refolding, GroEL stably bound apoaconitase, releasing active holoenzyme upon Fe(4)S(4) cofactor formation, independent of ATP and GroES.     

Chaperones GroEL/GroES Accelerate the Refolding of a Multidomain Protein through Modulating On-pathway Intermediates

Despite a vast amount information on the interplay of GroEL, GroES, and ATP in chaperone-assisted folding, the molecular details on the conformational dynamics of folding polypeptide during its GroEL/GroES-assisted folding cycle is quite limited. Practically no such studies have been reported to date on large proteins, which often have difficulty folding in vitro. The effect of the GroEL/GroES chaperonin system on the folding pathway of an 82-kDa slow folding protein, malate synthase G (MSG), was investigated. GroEL bound to the burst phase intermediate of MSG and accelerated the slowest kinetic phase associated with the formation of native topology in the spontaneous folding pathway. GroEL slowly induced conformational changes on the bound burst phase intermediate, which was then transformed into a more folding-compatible form. Subsequent addition of ATP or GroES/ATP to the GroEL-MSG complex led to the formation of the native state via a compact intermediate with the rate several times faster than that of spontaneous refolding. The presence of GroES doubled the ATP-dependent reactivation rate of bound MSG by preventing multiple cycles of its GroEL binding and release. Because GroES bound to the trans side of GroEL-MSG complex, it may be anticipated that confinement of the substrate underneath the co-chaperone is not required for accelerating the rate in the assisted folding pathway. The potential role of GroEL/GroES in assisted folding is most likely to modulate the conformation of MSG intermediates that can fold faster and thereby eliminate the possibility of partial aggregation caused by the slow folding intermediates during its spontaneous refolding pathway.     

Interactions of GroEL/GroES with a heterodimeric intermediate during alpha 2beta 2 assembly of mitochondrial branched-chain alpha-ketoacid dehydrogenase. cis capping of the native-like 86-kDa intermediate by GroES

We showed previously that the interaction of an alphabeta heterodimeric intermediate with GroEL/GroES is essential for efficient alpha(2)beta(2) assembly of human mitochondrial branched-chain alpha-ketoacid dehydrogenase. In the present study, we further characterized the mode of interaction between the chaperonins and the native-like alphabeta heterodimer. The alphabeta heterodimer, as an intact entity, was found to bind to GroEL at a 1:1 stoichiometry with a K(D) of 1.1 x 10(-)(7) m. The 1:1 molar ratio of the GroEL-alphabeta complex was confirmed by the ability of the complex to bind a stoichiometric amount of denatured lysozyme in the trans cavity. Surprisingly, in the presence of Mg-ADP, GroES was able to cap the GroEL-alphabeta complex in cis, despite the size of 86 kDa of the heterodimer (with a His(6) tag and a linker). Incubation of the GroEL-alphabeta complex with Mg-ATP, but not AMP-PNP, resulted in the release of alpha monomers. In the presence of Mg-ATP, the beta subunit was also released but was unable to assemble with the alpha subunit, and rebound to GroEL. The apparent differential subunit release from GroEL is explained, in part, by the significantly higher binding affinity of the beta subunit (K(D) < 4.15 x 10(-9)m) than the alpha (K(D) = 1.6 x 10(-8)m) for GroEL. Incubation of the GroEL-alphabeta complex with Mg-ATP and GroES resulted in dissociation and discharge of both the alpha and beta subunits from GroEL. The beta subunit upon binding to GroEL underwent further folding in the cis cavity sequestered by GroES. This step rendered the beta subunit competent for reassociation with the soluble alpha subunit to produce a new heterodimer. We propose that this mechanism is responsible for the iterative annealing of the kinetically trapped heterodimeric intermediate, leading to an efficient alpha(2)beta(2) assembly of human branched-chain alpha-ketoacid dehydrogenase.     

Chaperonin-mediated protein folding: GroES binds to one end of the GroEL cylinder, which accommodates the protein substrate within its central cavity.

The mechanism of GroEL (chaperonin)-mediated protein folding is only partially understood. We have analysed structural and functional properties of the interaction between GroEL and the co-chaperonin GroES. The stoichiometry of the GroEL 14mer and the GroES 7mer in the functional holo-chaperonin is 1:1. GroES protects half of the GroEL subunits from proteolytic truncation of the approximately 50 C-terminal residues. Removal of this region results in an inhibition of the GroEL ATPase, mimicking the effect of GroES on full-length GroEL. Image analysis of electron micrographs revealed that GroES binding triggers conspicuous conformational changes both in the GroES adjacent end and at the opposite end of the GroEL cylinder. This apparently prohibits the association of a second GroES oligomer. Addition of denatured polypeptide leads to the appearance of irregularly shaped, stain-excluding masses within the GroEL double-ring, which are larger with bound alcohol oxidase (75 kDa) than with rhodanese (35 kDa). We conclude that the functional complex of GroEL and GroES is characterized by asymmetrical binding of GroES to one end of the GroEL cylinder and suggest that binding of the substrate protein occurs within the central cavity of GroEL.     

GroEL/GroES: structure and function of a two-stroke folding machine

Recent structural and functional studies have greatly advanced our understanding of the mechanism by which chaperonins (Cpn60) mediate protein folding, the final step in the accurate expression of genetic information. Escherichia coli GroEL has a symmetric double-toroid architecture, which binds nonnative polypeptide substrates on the hydrophobic walls of its central cavity. The asymmetric binding of ATP and cochaperonin GroES to GroEL triggers a major conformational change in the cis ring, creating an enlarged chamber into which the bound nonnative polypeptide is released. The structural changes that create the cis assembly also change the lining of the cavity wall from hydrophobic to hydrophilic, conducive to folding into the native state. ATP hydrolysis in the cis ring weakens it and primes the release of products. When ATP and GroES bind to the trans ring, it forms a stronger assembly, which disassembles the cis complex through negative cooperativity between rings. The opposing function of the two rings operates as if the system had two cylinders, one expelling the products of the reaction as the other loads up the reactants. One cycle of the reaction gives the polypeptide about 15 s to fold at the cost of seven ATP molecules. For some proteins, several cycles of GroEL assistance may be needed in order to achieve their native states.     

On the role of symmetrical and asymmetrical chaperonin complexes in assisted protein folding.

The cylindrical chaperonin GroEL of E. coli and its ring-shaped cofactor GroES cooperate in mediating the ATP-dependent folding of a wide range of polypeptides in vivo and in vitro. By binding to the ends of the GroEL cylinder, GroES displaces GroEL-bound polypeptide into an enclosed folding cage, thereby preventing protein aggregation during folding. The dynamic interaction of GroEL and GroES is regulated by the GroEL ATPase and involves the formation of asymmetrical GroEL:GroES1 and symmetrical GroEL: GroES2 complexes. The proposed role of the symmetrical complex as a catalytic intermediate of the chaperonin mechanism has been controversial. It has also been suggested that the formation of GroEL:GroES2 complexes allows the folding of two polypeptide molecules per GroEL reaction cycle, one in each ring of GroEL. By making use of a procedure to stabilize chaperonin complexes by rapid crosslinking for subsequent analysis by native PAGE, we have quantified the occurrence of GroEL:GroES1 and GroEL:GroES2 complexes in active refolding reactions under a variety of conditions using mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase (mMDH) as a substrate. Our results show that the symmetrical complexes are neither required for chaperonin function nor does their presence significantly increase the rate of mMDH refolding. In contrast, chaperonin-assisted folding is strictly dependent on the formation of asymmetrical GroEL:GroES1 complexes. These findings support the view that GroEL:GroES2 complexes have no essential role in the chaperonin mechanism.     

From minichaperone to GroEL 3: properties of an active single-ring mutant of GroEL

The next step in our reductional analysis of GroEL was to study the activity of an isolated single seven-membered ring of the 14-mer. A known single-ring mutant, GroEL(SR1), contains four point mutations that prevent the formation of double-rings. That heptameric complex is functionally inactive because it is unable to release GroES. We found that the mutation E191G, which is responsible for the temperature sensitive (ts) Escherichia coli allele groEL44 and is located in the hinge region between the intermediate and apical domains of GroEL, appears to function by weakening the binding of GroES, without destabilizing the overall structure of GroEL44 mutant. We introduced, therefore, the mutation E191G into GroEL(SR1) in order to generate a single-ring mutant that may have weaker binding of GroES and hence be active. The new single-ring mutant, GroEL(SR44), was indeed effective in refolding both heat and dithiothreitol-denatured mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase with great efficiency. Further, unlike all smaller constructs of GroEL, the expression of GroEL(SR44) in E. coli that contained no endogenous GroEL restored biological viability, but not as efficiently as does wild-type GroEL. We envisage the notional evolution of the structure and properties of GroEL. The minichaperone core acts as a primitive chaperone by providing a binding surface for denatured states that prevents their self-aggregation. The assembly of seven minichaperones into a ring then enhances substrate binding by introducing avidity. The acquisition of binding sites for ATP then allows the modulation of substrate binding by introducing the allosteric mechanism that causes cycling between strong and weak binding sites. This is accompanied by the acquisition by the heptamer of the binding of GroES, which functions as a lid to the central cavity and competes for peptide binding sites. Finally, dimerization of the heptamer enhances its biological activity.     

Chaperonins GroEL and GroES: views from atomic force microscopy.

The Escherichia coli chaperonins, GroEL and GroES, as well as their complexes in the presence of a nonhydrolyzable nucleotide AMP-PNP, have been imaged with the atomic force microscope (AFM). We demonstrate that both GroEL and GroES that have been adsorbed to a mica surface can be resolved directly by the AFM in aqueous solution at room temperature. However, with glutaraldehyde fixation of already adsorbed molecules, the resolution of both GroEL and GroES was further improved, as all seven subunits were well resolved without any image processing. We also found that chemical fixation was necessary for the contact mode AFM to image GroEL/ES complexes, and in the AFM images. GroEL with GroES bound can be clearly distinguished from those without. The GroEL/ES complex was about 5 nm higher than GroEL alone, indicating a 2 nm upward movement of the apical domains of GroEL. Using a slightly larger probe force, unfixed GroEL could be dissected: the upper heptamer was removed to expose the contact surface of the two heptamers. These results clearly demonstrate the usefulness of cross-linking agents for the determination of molecular structures with the AFM. They also pave the way for using the AFM to study the structural basis for the function of GroE system and other molecular chaperones.     

Single-molecule Observation of Protein Folding in Symmetric GroEL-(GroES)2 Complexes

The chaperonin, GroEL, is an essential molecular chaperone that mediates protein folding together with its cofactor, GroES, in Escherichia coli. It is widely believed that the two rings of GroEL alternate between the folding active state coupled to GroES binding during the reaction cycle. In other words, an asymmetric GroEL-GroES complex (the bullet-shaped complex) is formed throughout the cycle, whereas a symmetric GroEL-(GroES)₂ complex (the football-shaped complex) is not formed. We have recently shown that the football-shaped complex coexists with the bullet-shaped complex during the reaction cycle. However, how protein folding proceeds in the football-shaped complex remains poorly understood. Here, we used GFP as a substrate to visualize protein folding in the football-shaped complex by single-molecule fluorescence techniques. We directly showed that GFP folding occurs in both rings of the football-shaped complex. Remarkably, the folding was a sequential two-step reaction, and the kinetics were in excellent agreement with those in the bullet-shaped complex. These results demonstrate that the same reactions take place independently in both rings of the football-shaped complex to facilitate protein folding.     

Probing Open Conformation of GroEL Rings by Cross-linking Reveals Single and Double Open Ring Structures of GroEL in ADP and ATP

Two heptamer rings of chaperonin GroEL undergo opening-closing conformational transition in the reaction cycle with the aid of GroES and ATP. We introduced Cys into the GroEL subunit at Ala-384 and Ser-509, which are very close between adjacent GroEL subunits in the open heptamer ring but far apart in the closed heptamer ring. The open ring-specific inter-subunit cross-linking between these Cys indicated that the number of rings in open conformation in GroEL was two in ATP (GroEL_OO), one in ADP (GroEL_O), and none in the absence of nucleotide. ADP showed an inhibitory effect on ATP-induced generation of GroEL_OO. The isolated GroEL_O and GroEL_OO, which lost any bound nucleotide, could bind GroES to form a bullet-shaped 1:1 GroEL-GroES complex and a football-shaped 1:2 GroEL-GroES complex, respectively, even without the addition of any nucleotide. Substrate protein was unable to form a stable complex with GroEL_OO and did not stimulate ATPase activity of GroEL. These results favor a model of the GroEL reaction cycle that includes a football complex as a critical intermediate.Chaperonin facilitates the folding of other proteins using the energy of ATP hydrolysis (1–4). GroEL, an Escherichia coli chaperonin, consists of 14 identical 57-kDa subunits arranged in two heptamer rings. Each ring contains a central open cavity, and the two rings are stacked back-to-back (5). Denatured protein binds to the apical end of the central cavity of the heptamer ring of GroEL (6–10). In the presence of ATP, a disk-shaped GroES binds to the same apical end as a lid to seal the cavity and generates a chamber. The denatured protein is discharged into the chamber, making this heptamer ring folding-active, where productive folding proceeds (11, 12). After several seconds, the GroES lid is detached from GroEL, and the substrate protein is free to escape into solution.Two heptamer rings of GroEL undergo opening-closing conformational transition, coupled with attachment and detachment of GroES, in the functional cycle (13). In the transition from “closed” to “open” conformation, apical domain of each GroEL subunit in the ring is shifted upward and outward, and the cleft between apical and equatorial domains opens. GroES is associated with the open ring, and two kinds of GroEL-GroES complexes are formed. An asymmetric “bullet”-shaped complex is a 1:1 GroEL-GroES complex in which GroES attached to one of two heptamer rings in GroEL (14–16). A symmetric “football”-shaped complex is a 1:2 GroEL-GroES complex in which GroES attached to both heptamer rings of GroEL (17–22). The football complex contains two open rings; the bullet complex contains one closed and one open ring, and free GroEL is made up of two closed rings.Previously, we generated the GroEL in which two rings in GroEL were locked in a closed conformation by disulfide cross-link between apical and equatorial domains in the same GroEL subunits (23). This GroEL can bind ATP and denatured protein but fails to process further reaction steps such as ATP hydrolysis, GroES binding, and release of substrate protein. We report here the opposite version; open conformation-specific inter-subunit cross-links were introduced into the GroEL ring. Using this cross-linking as a probe of open conformation, we found that one ring was open in ADP (GroEL_O), although two rings were open in ATP (GroEL_OO). The isolated GroEL_O and GroEL_OO, which were nucleotide-free, formed a stable bullet and football complex with GroES even in the absence of any nucleotide. These results support a GroEL mechanism that includes a football complex as a critical intermediate.