GroEL-Mediated Protein Folding: Making the Impossible,Possible

ABSTRACT

Protein folding is a spontaneous process that is essential for life, yet the concentrated and complex interior of a cell is an inherently hostile environment for the efficient folding of many proteins. Some proteins—constrained by sequence, topology, size, and function—simply cannot fold by themselves and are instead prone to misfolding and aggregation. This problem is so deeply entrenched that a specialized family of proteins, known as molecular chaperones, evolved to assist in protein folding. Here we examine one essential class of molecular chaperones, the large, oligomeric, and energy utilizing chaperonins or Hsp60s. The bacterial chaperonin GroEL, along with its co-chaperonin GroES, is probably the best-studied example of this family of protein-folding machine. In this review, we examine some of the general properties of proteins that do not fold well in the absence of GroEL and then consider how folding of these proteins is enhanced by GroEL and GroES. Recent experimental and theoretical studies suggest that chaperonins like GroEL and GroES employ a combination of protein isolation, unfolding, and conformational restriction to drive protein folding under conditions where it is otherwise not possible.     

GroEL-mediated protein folding: making the impossible, possible

Protein folding is a spontaneous process that is essential for life, yet the concentrated and complex interior of a cell is an inherently hostile environment for the efficient folding of many proteins. Some proteins-constrained by sequence, topology, size, and function-simply cannot fold by themselves and are instead prone to misfolding and aggregation. This problem is so deeply entrenched that a specialized family of proteins, known as molecular chaperones, evolved to assist in protein folding. Here we examine one essential class of molecular chaperones, the large, oligomeric, and energy utilizing chaperonins or Hsp60s. The bacterial chaperonin GroEL, along with its co-chaperonin GroES, is probably the best-studied example of this family of protein-folding machine. In this review, we examine some of the general properties of proteins that do not fold well in the absence of GroEL and then consider how folding of these proteins is enhanced by GroEL and GroES. Recent experimental and theoretical studies suggest that chaperonins like GroEL and GroES employ a combination of protein isolation, unfolding, and conformational restriction to drive protein folding under conditions where it is otherwise not possible.     

5S rRNA-assisted DnaK refolding

Although accumulating evidence has revealed that most proteins can fold without the assistance of molecular chaperones, little attention has been paid to other types of chaperoning macromolecules. A variety of proteins interact with diverse RNA molecules in vivo, suggesting a potential role of RNAs for folding of their interacting proteins. Here we show that the in vitro refolding of a representative molecular chaperone, DnaK, an Escherichia coli homolog of Hsp70, could be assisted by its interacting 5S rRNA. The folding enhancement occurred in RNA concentration and its size dependent manner whereas neither the RNA with the reverse sequence of 5S rRNA nor the RNase pretreated 5S rRNA stimulated the folding in vitro. Based on our results, we propose that 5S rRNA could exert the chaperoning activity on DnaK during the folding process. The results suggest an interesting possibility that the folding of RNA-interacting proteins could be assisted by their cognate RNA ligands.     

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.     

Monitoring protein conformation along the pathway of chaperonin-assisted folding

The GroEL/GroES chaperonin system mediates protein folding in the bacterial cytosol. Newly synthesized proteins reach GroEL via transfer from upstream chaperones such as DnaK/DnaJ (Hsp70). Here we employed single molecule and ensemble FRET to monitor the conformational transitions of a model substrate as it proceeds along this chaperone pathway. We find that DnaK/DnaJ stabilizes the protein in collapsed states that fold exceedingly slowly. Transfer to GroEL results in unfolding, with a fraction of molecules reaching locally highly expanded conformations. ATP-induced domain movements in GroEL cause transient further unfolding and rapid mobilization of protein segments with moderate hydrophobicity, allowing partial compaction on the GroEL surface. The more hydrophobic regions are released upon subsequent protein encapsulation in the central GroEL cavity by GroES, completing compaction and allowing rapid folding. Segmental chain release and compaction may be important in avoiding misfolding by proteins that fail to fold efficiently through spontaneous hydrophobic collapse.     

Characterisation of a GroEL Single-Ring Mutant that Supports Growth of Escherichia coli and Has GroES-Dependent ATPase Activity

Binding and folding of substrate proteins by the molecular chaperone GroEL alternates between its two seven-membered rings in an ATP-regulated manner. The association of ATP and GroES to a polypeptide-bound ring of GroEL encapsulates the folding proteins in the central cavity of that ring (cis ring) and allows it to fold in a protected environment where the risk of aggregation is reduced. ATP hydrolysis in the cis ring changes the potentials within the system such that ATP binding to the opposite (trans) ring triggers the release of all ligands from the cis ring of GroEL through a complex network of allosteric communication between the rings. Inter-ring allosteric communication thus appears indispensable for the function of GroEL, and an engineered single-ring version (SR1) cannot substitute for GroEL in vivo. We describe here the isolation and characterisation of an active single-ring form of the GroEL protein (SR-A92T), which has an exceptionally low ATPase activity that is strongly stimulated by the addition of GroES. Dissection of the kinetic pathway of the ATP-induced structural changes in this active single ring can be explained by the fact that the mutation effectively blocks progression through the full allosteric pathway of the GroEL reaction cycle, thus trapping an early allosteric intermediate. Addition of GroES is able to overcome this block by binding this intermediate and pulling the allosteric pathway to completion via mass action, explaining how bacterial cells expressing this protein as their only chaperonin are viable.     

Folding and assembly of the Escherichia coli succinyl-CoA synthetase heterotetramer without participation of molecular chaperones.

Succinyl-CoA synthetase of Escherichia coli (alpha 2B2 subunit structure) has been shown to fold and assemble without participation by molecular chaperones. Renaturation experiments showed that purified bacterial chaperone GroEL has no effect on the folding and assembly of the active tetrameric enzyme. When isolated 35S-labeled alpha or beta subunits were incubated with GroEL in the absence of ATP, there was no complex formation between the subunits and GroEL. These in vitro results were confirmed by in vivo analysis of the folding and assembly of newly synthesized succinyl-CoA synthetase subunits. When expression of the subunits was induced in E. coli strains that bear GroEL or GroES temperature-sensitive mutations, the assembly of active succinyl-CoA synthetase was not affected as the temperature was raised to 43 degrees C. These and other observations are discussed that indicate that folding and assembly of succinyl-CoA synthetase may be independent of assistance by any chaperone.     

Iterative annealing mechanism explains the functions of the GroEL and RNA chaperones

Molecular chaperones are ATP‐consuming machines, which facilitate the folding of proteins and RNA molecules that are kinetically trapped in misfolded states. Unassisted folding occurs by the kinetic partitioning mechanism according to which folding to the native state, with low probability as well as misfolding to one of the many metastable states, with high probability, occur rapidly. GroEL is an all‐purpose stochastic machine that assists misfolded substrate proteins to fold. The RNA chaperones such as CYT‐19, which are ATP‐consuming enzymes, help the folding of ribozymes that get trapped in metastable states for long times. GroEL does not interact with the folded proteins but CYT‐19 disrupts both the folded and misfolded ribozymes. The structures of GroEL and RNA chaperones are strikingly different. Despite these differences, the iterative annealing mechanism (IAM) quantitatively explains all the available experimental data for assisted folding of proteins and ribozymes. Driven by ATP binding and hydrolysis and GroES binding, GroEL undergoes a catalytic cycle during which it samples three allosteric states, T (apo), R (ATP bound), and R^″ (ADP bound). Analyses of the experimental data show that the efficiency of the GroEL–GroES machinery and mutants is determined by the resetting rate k _{R ″ → T} , which is largest for the wild‐type (WT) GroEL. Generalized IAM accurately predicts the folding kinetics of Tetrahymena ribozyme and its variants. Chaperones maximize the product of the folding rate and the steady‐state native state fold by driving the substrates out of equilibrium. Neither the absolute yield nor the folding rate is optimized.     

Bacteriophage-encoded cochaperonins can substitute for Escherichia coli's essential GroES protein

The Escherichia coli chaperonin machine is composed of two members, GroEL and GroES. The GroEL chaperonin can bind 10–15% of E. coli’s unfolded proteins in one of its central cavities and help them fold in cooperation with the GroES cochaperonin. Both proteins are absolutely essential for bacterial growth. Several large, lytic bacteriophages, such as T4 and RB49, use the host-encoded GroEL in conjunction with their own bacteriophage-encoded cochaperonin for the correct assembly of their major capsid protein, suggesting a cochaperonin specificity for the in vivo folding of certain substrates. Here, we demonstrate that, when the cochaperonin of either bacteriophage T4 (Gp31) or RB49 (CocO) is expressed in E. coli, the otherwise essential groES gene can be deleted. Thus, it appears that, despite very little sequence identity with groES, the bacteriophage-encoded Gp31 and CocO proteins are capable of replacing GroES in the folding of E. coli’s essential, housekeeping proteins.     

Co-translational binding of GroEL to nascent polypeptides is followed by post-translational encapsulation by GroES to mediate protein folding

The eubacterial chaperonins GroEL and GroES are essential chaperones and primarily assist protein folding in the cell. Although the molecular mechanism of the GroEL system has been examined previously, the mechanism by which GroEL and GroES assist folding of nascent polypeptides during translation is still poorly understood. We previously demonstrated a co-translational involvement of the Escherichia coli GroEL in folding of newly synthesized polypeptides using a reconstituted cell-free translation system (Ying, B. W., Taguchi, H., Kondo, M., and Ueda, T. (2005) J. Biol. Chem. 280, 12035-12040). Employing the same system here, we further characterized the mechanism by which GroEL assists folding of translated proteins via encapsulation into the GroEL-GroES cavity. The stable co-translational association between GroEL and the newly synthesized polypeptide is dependent on the length of the nascent chain. Furthermore, GroES is capable of interacting with the GroEL-nascent peptide-ribosome complex, and experiments using a single-ring variant of GroEL clearly indicate that GroES association occurs only at the trans-ring, not the cis-ring, of GroEL. GroEL holds the nascent chain on the ribosome in a polypeptide length-dependent manner and post-translationally encapsulates the polypeptide using the GroES cap to accomplish the chaperonin-mediated folding process.     

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.     

Proteome-wide analysis of chaperonin-dependent protein folding in Escherichia coli

The E. coli chaperonin GroEL and its cofactor GroES promote protein folding by sequestering nonnative polypeptides in a cage-like structure. Here we define the contribution of this system to protein folding across the entire E. coli proteome. Approximately 250 different proteins interact with GroEL, but most of these can utilize either GroEL or the upstream chaperones trigger factor (TF) and DnaK for folding. Obligate GroEL-dependence is limited to only approximately 85 substrates, including 13 essential proteins, and occupying more than 75% of GroEL capacity. These proteins appear to populate kinetically trapped intermediates during folding; they are stabilized by TF/DnaK against aggregation but reach native state only upon transfer to GroEL/GroES. Interestingly, substantially enriched among the GroEL substrates are proteins with (betaalpha)8 TIM-barrel domains. We suggest that the chaperonin system may have facilitated the evolution of this fold into a versatile platform for the implementation of numerous enzymatic functions.     

The chaperonin cycle and protein folding

The process of protein folding in the cell is now known to depend on the action of other proteins. These proteins include molecular chaperones, Which interact non-covalently with proteins as they fold and improve the final yields of active protein in the cell. The precise mechanism by which molecular chaperones act is obscure. Experiments reported recently⁽¹⁾ show that for one molecular chaperone (Cpn60, typified by the E. coli protein GroEL), the folding reaction is driven by cycles of binding and release of the co-chaperone Cpn10 (known as GroES in E. coli). These alternate with binding and release of the unfolded protein substrate. These cycles come about because of the opposite effects of Cpn10 and unfolded protein on the Cpn60 complex: the former stabilises the ADP-bound state of Cpn60, whereas the latter stimulates ADP-ATP exchange. This model proposes that the substrate protein goes through multiple cycles of binding and release, and is released into the cavity of the Cpn60 complex where it can undergo folding without interacting with other nearby folding intermediates. This is consistent with the ability of Cpn60 proteins to enhance folding by blocking pathways to aggregation.     

Function in protein folding of TRiC, a cytosolic ring complex containing TCP-1 and structurally related subunits.

T-complex polypeptide 1 (TCP-1) was analyzed as a potential chaperonin (GroEL/Hsp60) equivalent of the eukaryotic cytosol. We found TCP-1 to be part of a hetero-oligomeric 970 kDa complex containing several structurally related subunits of 52-65 kDa. These members of a new protein family are assembled into a TCP-1 ring complex (TRiC) which resembles the GroEL double ring. The main function of TRiC appears to be in chaperoning monomeric protein folding: TRiC binds unfolded polypeptides, thereby preventing their aggregation, and mediates the ATP-dependent renaturation of unfolded firefly luciferase and tubulin. At least in vitro, TRiC appears to function independently of a small co-chaperonin protein such as GroES. Folding of luciferase is mediated by TRiC but not by GroEL/ES. This suggests that the range of substrate proteins interacting productively with TRiC may differ from that of GroEL. We propose that TRiC mediates the folding of cytosolic proteins by a mechanism distinct from that of the chaperonins in specific aspects.     

GroEL的耗能分子伴侣机制

双环结构Gro EL及其辅分子伴侣Gro ES是目前研究得最深入的分子伴侣.然而,Gro EL/Gro ES帮助蛋白质折叠的一些关键理化机制,尤其是水解ATP,Gro EL发生构象改变,能否主动调节蛋白质错误折叠中间体的构象,以促进错误折叠中间体的复性,仍然存在争议.结合本研究组近年的工作,作者着力介绍Gro EL促进蛋白质折叠的主动解折叠机制.     

GroEL–GroES assisted folding of multiple recombinant proteins simultaneously over-expressed in Escherichia coli

Folding of aggregation prone recombinant proteins through co-expression of chaperonin GroEL and GroES has been a popular practice in the effort to optimize preparation of functional protein in Escherichia coli. Considering the demand for functional recombinant protein products, it is desirable to apply the chaperone assisted protein folding strategy for enhancing the yield of properly folded protein. Toward the same direction, it is also worth attempting folding of multiple recombinant proteins simultaneously over-expressed in E. coli through the assistance of co-expressed GroEL–ES. The genesis of this thinking was originated from the fact that cellular GroEL and GroES assist in the folding of several endogenous proteins expressed in the bacterial cell. Here we present the experimental findings from our study on co-expressed GroEL–GroES assisted folding of simultaneously over-expressed proteins maltodextrin glucosidase (MalZ) and yeast mitochondrial aconitase (mAco). Both proteins mentioned here are relatively larger and aggregation prone, mostly form inclusion bodies, and undergo GroEL–ES assisted folding in E. coli cells during over-expression. It has been reported that the relative yield of properly folded functional forms of MalZ and mAco with the exogenous GroEL–ES assistance were comparable with the results when these proteins were overexpressed alone. This observation is quite promising and highlights the fact that GroEL and GroES can assist in the folding of multiple substrate proteins simultaneously when over-expressed in E. coli. This method might be a potential tool for enhanced production of multiple functional recombinant proteins simultaneously in E. coli.     

A dynamic model of long-range conformational adaptations triggered by nucleotide binding in GroEL-GroES

The molecular chaperone, GroEL, essential for correct protein folding in E. coli, is composed of 14 identical subunits organized in two interacting rings, each providing a folding chamber for non‐native substrate proteins. The oligomeric assembly shows positive cooperativity within each ring and negative cooperativity between the rings. Although it is well known that ATP and long‐range allosteric interactions drive the functional cycle of GroEL, an atomic resolution view of how ligand binding modulates conformational adaptations over long distances remains a major challenge. Moreover, little is known on the relation between equilibrium dynamics at physiological temperatures and the allosteric transitions in GroEL. Here we present multiple all‐atom molecular dynamics simulations of the GroEL‐GroES assemblies at different stages of the functional cycle. Combined with an extensive analysis of the complete set of experimentally available structures, principal component analysis and conformer plots, we provide an explicit evaluation of the accessible conformational space of unliganded GroEL. Our results suggest the presence of pre‐existing conformers at the equatorial domain level, and a shift of the conformational ensemble upon ATP‐binding. At the inter‐ring interface the simulations capture a remarkable offset motion of helix D triggered by ATP‐binding to the folding active ring. The reorientation of helix D, previously only observed upon GroES association, correlates with a change of the internal dynamics in the opposite ring. This work contributes to the understanding of the molecular mechanisms in GroEL and highlights the ability of all‐atom MD simulations to model long‐range structural changes and allosteric events in large systems. Proteins 2012;. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Determination of the number of active GroES subunits in the fused heptamer GroES required for interactions with GroEL

A double-heptamer ring chaperonin GroEL binds denatured substrate protein, ATP, and GroES to the same heptamer ring and encapsulates substrate into the central cavity underneath GroES where productive folding occurs. GroES is a disk-shaped heptamer, and each subunit has a GroEL-binding loop. The residues of the GroEL subunit responsible for GroES binding largely overlap those involved in substrate binding, and the mechanism by which GroES can replace the substrate when GroES binds to GroEL/substrate complex remains to be clarified. To address this question, we generated single polypeptide GroES by fusing seven subunits with various combinations of active and GroEL binding-defective subunits. Functional tests of the fused GroES variants indicated that four active GroES subunits were required for efficient formation of the stable GroEL/GroES complex and five subunits were required for the productive GroEL/substrate/GroES complex. An increase in the number of defective GroES subunits resulted in a slowing of encapsulation and folding. These results indicate the presence of an intermediate GroEL/substrate/GroES complex in which the substrate and GroES bind to GroEL by sharing seven common binding sites.     

GroEL assisted folding of large polypeptide substrates in Escherichia coli: Present scenario and assignments for the future

Escherichia coli chaperonins GroEL and GroES are indispensable for survival and growth of the cell since they provide essential assistance to the folding of many newly translated proteins in the cell. Recent studies indicate that a substantial portion of the proteins involved in the host pathways are completely dependent on GroEL–GroES for their folding and hence providing some explanation for why GroEL is essential for cell growth. Many proteins either small-single domain or large multidomains require assistance from GroEL–ES during their lifetime. Proteins of size up to 70 kDa can fold via the cis mechanism during GroEL–ES assisted pathway, but other proteins (>70 kDa) that cannot be pushed inside the cavity of GroEL–ATP complex upon binding of GroES fold by an evolved mechanism called trans. In recent years, much work has been done on revealing facts about the cis mechanism involving the GroEL assisted folding of small proteins whereas the trans mechanism with larger polypeptide substrates still remains under cover. In order to disentangle the role of chaperonin GroEL–GroES in the folding of large E. coli proteins, this review discusses a number of issues like the range of large polypeptide substrates acted on by GroEL. Do all these substrates need the complete chaperonin system along with ATP for their folding? Does GroEL act as foldase or holdase during the process? We conclude with a discussion of the various queries that need to be resolved in the future for an extensive understanding of the mechanism of GroEL mediated folding of large substrate proteins in E. coli cytosol.     

Designing a High Throughput Refolding Array Using a Combination of the GroEL Chaperonin and Osmolytes

Although GroE chaperonins and osmolytes had been used separately as protein folding aids, combining these two methods provides a considerable advantage for folding proteins that cannot fold with either osmolytes or chaperonins alone. This technique rapidly identifies superior folding solution conditions for a broad array of proteins that are difficult or impossible to fold by other methods. While testing the broad applicability of this technique, we have discovered that osmolytes greatly simplify the chaperonin reaction by eliminating the requirement for the co-chaperonin GroES which is normally involved in encapsulating folding proteins within the GroEL–GroES cavity. Therefore, combinations of soluble or immobilized GroEL, osmolytes and ATP or even ADP are sufficient to refold the test proteins. The first step in the chaperonin/osmolyte process is to form a stable long-lived chaperonin–substrate protein complex in the absence of nucleotide. In the second step, different osmolyte solutions are added along with nucleotides, thus forming a ‘folding array’ to identify superior folding conditions. The stable chaperonin–substrate protein complex can be concentrated or immobilized prior to osmolyte addition. This procedure prevents-off pathway aggregation during folding/refolding reactions and more importantly allows one to refold proteins at concentrations (~mg/ml) that are substantially higher than the critical aggregation concentration for given protein. This technique can be used for successful refolding of proteins from purified inclusion bodies. Recently, other investigators have used our chaperonin/osmolyte method to demonstrate that a mutant protein that misfolds in human disease can be rescued by GroEL/osmolyte system. Soluble or immobilized GroEL can be easily removed from the released folded protein using simple separation techniques. The method allows for isolation of folded monomeric or oligomeric proteins in quantities sufficient for X-ray crystallography or NMR structural determinations.