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.     

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.     

Refolding of target proteins from a "rigid" mutant chaperonin demonstrates a minimal mechanism of chaperonin binding and release

One of the most interesting facets of GroEL-facilitated protein folding lies in the fact that the requirement for a successful folding reaction of a given protein target depends upon the refolding conditions used. In this report, we utilize a mutant of GroEL (GroEL T89W) whose domain movements have been drastically restricted, producing a chaperonin that is incapable of utilizing the conventional cyclic mechanism of chaperonin action. This mutant was, however, still capable of improving the refolding yield of lactate dehydrogenase in the absence of both GroES and ATP hydrolysis. A very rapid interconversion of conformations was detected in the mutant immediately after ATP binding, and this interconversion was inferred to form part of the target release mechanism in this mutant. The possibility exists that some target proteins, although dependent on GroEL for improved refolding yields, are capable of refolding successfully by utilizing only portions of the entire mechanism provided by the chaperonins.     

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.     

GroEL-GroES cycling: ATP and nonnative polypeptide direct alternation of folding-active rings.

The double-ring chaperonin GroEL mediates protein folding in the central cavity of a ring bound by ATP and GroES, but it is unclear how GroEL cycles from one folding-active complex to the next. We observe that hydrolysis of ATP within the cis ring must occur before either nonnative polypeptide or GroES can bind to the trans ring, and this is associated with reorientation of the trans ring apical domains. Subsequently, formation of a new cis-ternary complex proceeds on the open trans ring with polypeptide binding first, which stimulates the ATP-dependent dissociation of the cis complex (by 20- to 50-fold), followed by GroES binding. These results indicate that, in the presence of nonnative protein, GroEL alternates its rings as folding-active cis complexes, expending only one round of seven ATPs per folding cycle.     

Requirement for GroEL/GroES-dependent protein folding under nonpermissive conditions of macromolecular crowding

Macromolecular crowding is a critical parameter affecting the efficiency of cellular protein folding. Here we show that the proteins dihydrofolate reductase, enolase, and green fluorescent protein, which can fold spontaneously in diluted buffer, lose this ability in a crowded environment. Instead, they accumulate as soluble, protease-sensitive non-native species. Their folding becomes dependent on the complete GroEL/GroES chaperonin system and is not affected by trap-GroEL, indicating that folding has to occur in the chaperonin cavity with release of nativelike proteins into the bulk solution. In addition, we demonstrate that efficient folding in the chaperonin cavity requires ATP hydrolysis, as formation of ternary GroEL/GroES complexes with substrate proteins in the presence of ADP results only in very inefficient reactivation. However, protein refolding reactions using ADP-fluoroaluminate complexes, or single-ring GroEL and GroES under conditions where only a single round of ATP hydrolysis occurs, yield large amounts of refolded enzymes. Thus, the mode of initial ternary complex formation appears to be critical for subsequent productive release of substrate into the cavity under certain crowding conditions, and is only efficient when triggered by ATP hydrolysis. Our data indicate that stringent conditions of crowding can impart a stronger dependence of folding proteins on the assistance by chaperonins.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

The intermediate domain defines broad nucleotide selectivity for protein folding in Chlamydophila GroEL1

The chaperonin GroEL assists protein folding in the presence of ATP and magnesium through substrate protein capsulation in combination with the cofactor GroES. Recent studies have revealed the details of folding cycles of GroEL from Escherichia coli, yet little is known about the GroEL-assisted protein folding mechanisms in other bacterial species. Using three model enzyme assays, we have found that GroEL1 from Chlamydophila pneumoniae, an obligate human pathogen, has a broader selectivity for nucleotides in the refolding reaction. To elucidate structural factors involved in such nucleotide selectivity, GroEL chimeras were constructed by exchanging apical, intermediate, and equatorial domains between E. coli GroEL and C. pneumoniae GroEL1. In vitro folding assays using chimeras revealed that the intermediate domain is the major contributor to the nucleotide selectivity of C. pneumoniae GroEL1. Additional site-directed mutation experiments led to the identification of Gln(400) and Ile(404) in the intermediate domain of C. pneumoniae GroEL1 as residues that play a key role in defining the nucleotide selectivity of the protein refolding reaction.     

GroEL mediates protein folding with a two successive timer mechanism

GroEL encapsulates nonnative substrate proteins in a central cavity capped by GroES, providing a safe folding cage. Conventional models assume that a single timer lasting approximately 8 s governs the ATP hydrolysis-driven GroEL chaperonin cycle. We examine single molecule imaging of GFP folding within the cavity, binding release dynamics of GroEL-GroES, ensemble measurements of GroEL/substrate FRET, and the initial kinetics of GroEL ATPase activity. We conclude that the cycle consists of two successive timers of approximately 3 s and approximately 5 s duration. During the first timer, GroEL is bound to ATP, substrate protein, and GroES. When the first timer ends, the substrate protein is released into the central cavity and folding begins. ATP hydrolysis and phosphate release immediately follow this transition. ADP, GroES, and substrate depart GroEL after the second timer is complete. This mechanism explains how GroES binding to a GroEL-substrate complex encapsulates the substrate rather than allowing it to escape into solution.     

BeF(x) stops the chaperonin cycle of GroEL-GroES and generates a complex with double folding chambers

Coupling with ATP hydrolysis and cooperating with GroES, the double ring chaperonin GroEL assists the folding of other proteins. Here we report novel GroEL-GroES complexes formed in fluoroberyllate (BeF(x)) that can mimic the phosphate part of the enzyme-bound nucleotides. In ATP, BeF(x) stops the functional turnover of GroEL by preventing GroES release and produces a symmetric 1:2 GroEL-GroES complex in which both GroEL rings contain ADP.BeF(x) and an encapsulated substrate protein. In ADP, the substrate protein-loaded GroEL cannot bind GroES. In ADP plus BeF(x), however, it can bind GroES to form a stable 1:1 GroEL-GroES complex in which one of GroEL rings contains ADP.BeF(x) and an encapsulated substrate protein. This 1:1 GroEL-GroES complex is converted into the symmetric 1:2 GroEL-GroES complex when GroES is supplied in ATP plus BeF(x). Thus, BeF(x) stabilizes two GroEL-GroES complexes; one with a single folding chamber and the other with double folding chambers. These results shed light on the intermediate ADP.P(i) nucleotide states in the functional cycle of GroEL.     

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.     

The lower hydrolysis of ATP by the stress protein GroEL is a major factor responsible for the diminished chaperonin activity at low temperature

The chaperonins GroEL and GroES were shown to facilitate the refolding of urea-unfolded rhodanese in an ATP-dependent process at 25 or 37 degrees C. A diminished chaperonin activity was observed at 10 degrees C, however. At low temperature, GroEL retains its ability to form a complex with urea-unfolded rhodanese or with GroES. GroEL is also able to bind ATP at 10 degrees C. Interestingly, the ATPase activity of GroEL was highly decreased at low temperatures. Hydrolysis of ATP by GroEL was 60% less at 10 degrees C than at 25 degrees C. We conclude that the reduced hydrolysis of ATP by GroEL is a major but perhaps not the only factor responsible for the diminished chaperonin activity at 10 degrees C. GroEL may function primarily at higher temperatures in which the ability of GroEL to hydrolyze ATP is not compromised.     

Effects of the chaperonin GroE on the refolding of tryptophanase from Escherichia coli. Refolding is enhanced in the presence of ADP.

The refolding of the tetrameric enzyme tryptophanase was facilitated by the chaperonin GroE. Maximum refolding yield of tryptophanase molecules (about 80%) was attained in the presence of a 15-fold excess of GroE 21-mer over tryptophanase monomer. The GroEL subunit was required for this improvement in refolding yield, whereas the GroES subunit was not. Light scattering experiments of the refolding reaction revealed that GroE bound to tryptophanase folding intermediates and suppressed their aggregation. The presence of ATP was required for the efficient dissociation of tryptophanase from GroEL. However, our experiments indicated that tryptophanase dissociated readily from GroEL in the presence of not only ATP, but also in the presence of non-hydrolyzable ATP analogues such as ATP gamma S (adenosine 5'-O-(3-thiotriphosphate)) and AMP-PNP (adenyl-5'-yl imidodiphosphate) as well. Surprisingly, the release of tryptophanase from GroEL was facilitated in the presence of ADP as well. We concluded that the binding of nucleotides such as ATP and ADP changed the conformation of GroEL and facilitated the dissociation of tryptophanase molecules. The conformation formed in the presence of ADP was distinct from the conformation formed in the presence of ATP, as shown by the selective dissociation of various folding proteins from the two conformations.     

Closing the folding chamber of the eukaryotic chaperonin requires the transition state of ATP hydrolysis

Chaperonins use ATPase cycling to promote conformational changes leading to protein folding. The prokaryotic chaperonin GroEL requires a cofactor, GroES, which serves as a "lid" enclosing substrates in the central cavity and confers an asymmetry on GroEL required for cooperative transitions driving the reaction. The eukaryotic chaperonin TRiC/CCT does not have such a cofactor but appears to have a "built-in" lid. Whether this seemingly symmetric chaperonin also operates through an asymmetric cycle is unclear. We show that unlike GroEL, TRiC does not close its lid upon nucleotide binding, but instead responds to the trigonal-bipyramidal transition state of ATP hydrolysis. Further, nucleotide analogs inducing this transition state confer an asymmetric conformation on TRiC. Similar to GroEL, lid closure in TRiC confines the substrates in the cavity and is essential for folding. Understanding the distinct mechanisms governing eukaryotic and bacterial chaperonin function may reveal how TRiC has evolved to fold specific eukaryotic proteins.     

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.     

Allosteric signaling of ATP hydrolysis in GroEL-GroES complexes

The double-ring chaperonin GroEL and its lid-like cochaperonin GroES form asymmetric complexes that, in the ATP-bound state, mediate productive folding in a hydrophilic, GroES-encapsulated chamber, the so-called cis cavity. Upon ATP hydrolysis within the cis ring, the asymmetric complex becomes able to accept non-native polypeptides and ATP in the open, trans ring. Here we have examined the structural basis for this allosteric switch in activity by cryo-EM and single-particle image processing. ATP hydrolysis does not change the conformation of the cis ring, but its effects are transmitted through an inter-ring contact and cause domain rotations in the mobile trans ring. These rigid-body movements in the trans ring lead to disruption of its intra-ring contacts, expansion of the entire ring and opening of both the nucleotide pocket and the substrate-binding domains, admitting ATP and new substrate protein.     

Combined thermodynamic and kinetic analysis of GroEL interacting with CXCR4 transmembrane peptides

GroEL along with ATP and its co-chaperonin GroES has been demonstrated to significantly enhance the folding of newly translated G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). This work extends the previous studies to explore the guest capture and release processes in GroEL-assisted folding of GPCRs, by the reduced approach of employing CXCR4 transmembrane peptides as model substrates. Each of the CXCR4-derived peptides exhibited high affinity for GroEL with a binding stoichiometry near seven. It is found that the peptides interact with the paired α helices in the apical domain of the chaperonin which are similar with the binding sites of SBP (strongly binding peptide: SWMTTPWGFLHP). Complementary binding study with a single-ring version of GroEL indicates that each of the two chaperonin rings is competent for accommodating all the seven CXCR4 peptides bound to GroEL under saturation condition. Meanwhile, the binding kinetics of CXCR4 peptides with GroEL was also examined; ATP alone, or in combination of GroES evidently promoted the release of the peptide substrates from the chaperonin. The results obtained would be beneficial to understand the thermodynamic and kinetic nature of GroEL-GPCRs interaction which is the central molecular event in the assisted folding process.