The structural biology of Toll-like receptors

The membrane-bound Toll-like receptors (TLRs) trigger innate immune responses after recognition of a wide variety of pathogen-derived compounds. Despite the wide range of ligands recognized by TLRs, the receptors share a common structural framework in their extracellular, ligand-binding domains. These domains all adopt horseshoe-shaped structures built from leucine-rich repeat motifs. Typically, on ligand binding, two extracellular domains form an "m"-shaped dimer sandwiching the ligand molecule bringing the transmembrane and cytoplasmic domains in close proximity and triggering a downstream signaling cascade. Although the ligand-induced dimerization of these receptors has many common features, the nature of the interactions of the TLR extracellular domains with their ligands varies markedly between TLR paralogs.     

Comprehensive modeling and functional analysis of Toll‐like receptor ligand‐recognition domains

Toll‐like receptors (TLRs) are innate immune pattern‐recognition receptors endowed with the capacity to detect microbial pathogens based on pathogen‐associated molecular patterns. The understanding of the molecular principles of ligand recognition by TLRs has been greatly accelerated by recent structural information, in particular the crystal structures of leucine‐rich repeat‐containing ectodomains of TLR2, 3, and 4 in complex with their cognate ligands. Unfortunately, for other family members such as TLR7, 8, and 9, no experimental structural information is currently available. Methods such as X‐ray crystallography or nuclear magnetic resonance are not applicable to all proteins. Homology modeling in combination with molecular dynamics may provide a straightforward yet powerful alternative to obtain structural information in the absence of experimental (structural) data, provided that the generated three‐dimensional models adequately approximate what is found in nature. Here, we report the development of modeling procedures tailored to the structural analysis of the extracellular domains of TLRs. We comprehensively compared secondary structure, torsion angles, accessibility for glycosylation, surface charge, and solvent accessibility between published crystal structures and independently built TLR2, 3, and 4 homology models. Finding that models and crystal structures were in good agreement, we extended our modeling approach to the remaining members of the TLR family from human and mouse, including TLR7, 8, and 9.     

Homology modeling of human Toll‐like receptors TLR7, 8, and 9 ligand‐binding domains

Toll‐like receptors (TLRs) play a key role in the innate immune system. The TLR7, 8, and 9 compose a family of intracellularly localized TLRs that signal in response to pathogen‐derived nucleic acids. So far, there are no crystallographic structures for TLR7, 8, and 9. For this reason, their ligand‐binding mechanisms are poorly understood. To enable first predictions of the receptor–ligand interaction sites, we developed three‐dimensional structures for the leucine‐rich repeat ectodomains of human TLR7, 8, and 9 based on homology modeling. To achieve a high sequence similarity between targets and templates, structural segments from all known TLR ectodomain structures (human TLR1/2/3/4 and mouse TLR3/4) were used as candidate templates for the modeling. The resulting models support previously reported essential ligand‐binding residues. They also provide a basis to identify three potential receptor dimerization mechanisms. Additionally, potential ligand‐binding residues are identified using combined procedures. We suggest further investigations of these residues through mutation experiments. Our modeling approach can be extended to other members of the TLR family or other repetitive proteins.     

Summary and comparison of the signaling mechanisms of the Toll/interleukin-1 receptor family

The Toll/interleukin-1 (IL-1) receptor (TIR) family comprises two groups of transmembrane proteins, which share functional and structural properties. The members of the IL-1 receptor (IL-1R) subfamily are characterized by three extracellular immunoglobulin (Ig)-like domains. They form heterodimeric signaling receptor complexes consisting of receptor and accessory proteins. The members of the Toll-like receptor (TLR) subfamily recognize alarm signals that can be derived either from pathogens or the host itself. TLRs possess leucine-rich repeats in their extracellular part. TLRs can form dimeric receptor complexes consisting of two different TLRs or homodimers in the case of TLR4. The TLR4 receptor complex requires supportive molecules for optimal response to its ligand lipopolysaccharide (LPS). A hallmark of the TIR family is the cytoplasmic TIR domain that is indispensable for signal transduction. The TIR domain serves as a scaffold for a series of protein-protein interactions which result in the activation of a unique signaling module consisting of MyD88, interleukin-1 receptor associated kinase (IRAK) family members and Tollip, which is used exclusively by TIR family members. Subsequently, several central signaling pathways are activated in parallel, the activation of NFkappaB being the most prominent event of the inflammatory response. Recent developments indicate that in addition to the common signaling module MyD88/IRAK/Tollip, other molecules can modulate signaling by TLRs, especially of TLR4, resulting in differential biological answers to distinct pathogenic structures. Subtle differences in TLR signaling pathways are now becoming apparent, which reveal how the innate immune system decides at a very early stage the direction in which the adaptive immune response will develop. The creation of pathogen-specific mediator environments by dendritic cells defines whether a cellular or humoral response will be activated in response to the pathogen.     

Anchorage‐dependent binding of integrin I‐domain to adhesion ligands

The dynamic interactions between leukocyte integrin receptors and ligands in the vascular endothelium, extracellular matrix, or invading pathogens result in leukocyte adhesion, extravasation, and phagocytosis. This work examined the mechanical strength of the connection between iC3b, a complement component that stimulates phagocytosis, and the ligand‐binding domain, the I‐domain, of integrin α_Mβ₂. Single‐molecule force measurements of α_M I‐domain–iC3b complexes were conducted by atomic force microscope. Strikingly, depending on loading rates, immobilization of the I‐domain via its C‐terminus resulted in a 1.3‐fold to 1.5‐fold increase in unbinding force compared with I‐domains immobilized via the N‐terminus. The force spectra (unbinding force versus loading rate) of the I‐domain–iC3b complexes revealed that the enhanced mechanical strength is due to a 2.4‐fold increase in the lifetime of the I‐domain–iC3b bond. Given the structural and functional similarity of all integrin I‐domains, our result supports the existing allosteric regulatory model by which the ligand binding strength of integrin can be increased rapidly when a force is allowed to stretch the C‐terminus of the I‐domain. This type of mechanism may account for the rapid ligand affinity adjustment during leukocyte migration. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The crystal structure of maleylacetate reductase from Rhizobium sp. strain MTP‐10005 provides insights into the reaction mechanism of enzymes in its original family

Maleylacetate reductase plays a crucial role in catabolism of resorcinol by catalyzing the NAD(P)H‐dependent reduction of maleylacetate, at a carbon–carbon double bond, to 3‐oxoadipate. The crystal structure of maleylacetate reductase from Rhizobium sp. strain MTP‐10005, GraC, has been elucidated by the X‐ray diffraction method at 1.5 Å resolution. GraC is a homodimer, and each subunit consists of two domains: an N‐terminal NADH‐binding domain adopting an α/β structure and a C‐terminal functional domain adopting an α‐helical structure. Such structural features show similarity to those of the two existing families of enzymes in dehydroquinate synthase‐like superfamily. However, GraC is distinct in dimer formation and activity expression mechanism from the families of enzymes. Two subunits in GraC have different structures from each other in the present crystal. One subunit has several ligands mimicking NADH and the substrate in the cleft and adopts a closed domain arrangement. In contrast, the other subunit does not contain any ligand causing structural changes and adopts an open domain arrangement. The structure of GraC reveals those of maleylacetate reductase both in the coenzyme, substrate‐binding state and in the ligand‐free state. The comparison of both subunit structures reveals a conformational change of the Tyr326 loop for interaction with His243 on ligand binding. Structures of related enzymes suggest that His243 is likely a catalytic residue of GraC. Mutational analyses of His243 and Tyr326 support the catalytic roles proposed from structural information. The crystal structure of GraC characterizes the maleylacetate reductase family as a third family in the dehydroquinate synthase‐like superfamily. Proteins 2016; 84:1029–1042. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Receptor tyrosine kinase activation: From the ligand perspective

Receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) are single-span transmembrane receptors in which relatively conserved intracellular kinase domains are coupled to divergent extracellular modules. The extracellular domains initiate receptor signaling upon binding to either soluble or membrane-embedded ligands. The diversity of extracellular domain structures allows for coupling of many unique signaling inputs to intracellular tyrosine phosphorylation. The combinatorial power of this receptor system is further increased by the fact that multiple ligands can typically interact with the same receptor. Such ligands often act as biased agonists and initiate distinct signaling responses via activation of the same receptor. Mechanisms behind such biased agonism are largely unknown for RTKs, especially at the level of receptor–ligand complex structure. Using recent progress in understanding the structures of active RTK signaling units, we discuss selected mechanisms by which ligands couple receptor activation to distinct signaling outputs.     

Statistical analysis of structural determinants for protein–DNA‐binding specificity

DNA‐binding proteins play critical roles in biological processes including gene expression, DNA packaging and DNA repair. They bind to DNA target sequences with different degrees of binding specificity, ranging from highly specific (HS) to nonspecific (NS). Alterations of DNA‐binding specificity, due to either genetic variation or somatic mutations, can lead to various diseases. In this study, a comparative analysis of protein–DNA complex structures was carried out to investigate the structural features that contribute to binding specificity. Protein–DNA complexes were grouped into three general classes based on degrees of binding specificity: HS, multispecific (MS), and NS. Our results show a clear trend of structural features among the three classes, including amino acid binding propensities, simple and complex hydrogen bonds, major/minor groove and base contacts, and DNA shape. We found that aspartate is enriched in HS DNA binding proteins and predominately binds to a cytosine through a single hydrogen bond or two consecutive cytosines through bidentate hydrogen bonds. Aromatic residues, histidine and tyrosine, are highly enriched in the HS and MS groups and may contribute to specific binding through different mechanisms. To further investigate the role of protein flexibility in specific protein–DNA recognition, we analyzed the conformational changes between the bound and unbound states of DNA‐binding proteins and structural variations. The results indicate that HS and MS DNA‐binding domains have larger conformational changes upon DNA‐binding and larger degree of flexibility in both bound and unbound states. Proteins 2016; 84:1147–1161. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Endosomal Signaling and a Novel Pathway Defined by the Natural Killer Receptor KIR2DL4 (CD158d)

In addition to ligand‐induced activation of receptors at the cell surface, certain internalized receptor–ligand complexes are activated in endosomes which are, now recognized as important intracellular platforms of signal transduction. The major receptor families that signal from endosomes and illustrate the diversity and complexity of endosomal signaling include receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs), G‐protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs) and toll‐like receptors (TLRs). Natural killer (NK) cells, an important component of the innate immune system, not only provide a rapid defense against foreign invaders, such as bacteria and viruses, but also positively shape local responses by cytokine and chemokine secretion. The NK cell receptor KIR2DL4 (CD158d) utilizes a new mode of endosomal signaling after binding its ligand, soluble HLA‐G, in the extracellular milieu. Internalization of the receptor and its ligand into endosomes and initiation of signaling at this site result in a proinflammatory and proangiogenic response with important functions at sites of ligand expression, such as at the maternal–fetal interface during early pregnancy. After a brief overview of the modes of endosomal signaling and its value in generating distinct physiological responses, this review will highlight the mechanism and physiological significance of a novel intracellular signaling pathway used by the endosome‐resident immune receptor KIR2DL4.     

Activation of nuclear receptors: a perspective from structural genomics

Crystal structures of more than two dozen different nuclear receptor ligand binding domains have defined a simple paradigm of receptor activation, in which agonist binding induces the activation function-2 (AF-2) helix to form a charge clamp for coactivator recruitment. Recent structural studies present a surprising contrast. Activation of the mouse LRH-1 receptor is independent of a bound agonist despite its large ligand binding pocket, whereas the activation of the Drosophila DHR38 receptor is dependent on ecdysteroids even though the receptor lacks a ligand binding pocket. These new findings shed light on the diverse structural mechanisms that nuclear receptors have evolved for activation, and have important implications in their respective signaling pathways.     

Linkers in the structural biology of protein–protein interactions

Linkers or spacers are short amino acid sequences created in nature to separate multiple domains in a single protein. Most of them are rigid and function to prohibit unwanted interactions between the discrete domains. However, Gly‐rich linkers are flexible, connecting various domains in a single protein without interfering with the function of each domain. The advent of recombinant DNA technology made it possible to fuse two interacting partners with the introduction of artificial linkers. Often, independent proteins may not exist as stable or structured proteins until they interact with their binding partner, following which they gain stability and the essential structural elements. Gly‐rich linkers have been proven useful for these types of unstable interactions, particularly where the interaction is weak and transient, by creating a covalent link between the proteins to form a stable protein–protein complex. Gly‐rich linkers are also employed to form stable covalently linked dimers, and to connect two independent domains that create a ligand‐binding site or recognition sequence. The lengths of linkers vary from 2 to 31 amino acids, optimized for each condition so that the linker does not impose any constraints on the conformation or interactions of the linked partners. Various structures of covalently linked protein complexes have been described using X‐ray crystallography, nuclear magnetic resonance and cryo‐electron microscopy techniques. In this review, we evaluate several structural studies where linkers have been used to improve protein quality, to produce stable protein–protein complexes, and to obtain protein dimers.     

Molecular recognition in bone morphogenetic protein (BMP)/receptor interaction

Bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) and other members of the TGF-beta superfamily are secreted signalling proteins determining the development, maintenance and regeneration of tissues and organs. These dimeric proteins bind, via multiple epitopes, two types of signalling receptor chains and numerous extracellular modulator proteins that stringently control their activity. Crystal structures of free ligands and of complexes with type I and type II receptor extracellular domains and with the modulator protein Noggin reveal structural epitopes that determine the affinity and specificity of the interactions. Modelling of a ternary complex BMP/(BMPR-IA(EC))2 / (ActR-II(EC))2 suggests a mechanism of receptor activation that does not rely on direct contacts between extracellular domains of the receptors. Mutational and interaction analyses indicate that the large hydrophobic core of the interface of BMP-2 (wrist epitope) with the type I receptor does not provide a hydrophobic hot spot for binding. Instead, main chain amide and carbonyl groups that are completely buried in the contact region represent major binding determinants. The affinity between ligand and receptor chains is probably strongly increased by two-fold interactions of the dimeric ligand and receptor chains that exist as homodimers in the membrane (avidity effects). BMP muteins with disrupted epitopes for receptor chains or modulator proteins provide clues for drug design and development.     

Importance of extra- and intracellular domains of TLR1 and TLR2 in NFkappa B signaling

Recognition of ligands by toll-like receptor (TLR) 2 requires interactions with other TLRs. TLRs form a combinatorial repertoire to discriminate between the diverse microbial ligands. Diversity results from extracellular and intracellular interactions of different TLRs. This paper demonstrates that TLR1 and TLR2 are required for ara-lipoarabinomannan- and tripalmitoyl cysteinyl lipopeptide-stimulated cytokine secretion from mononuclear cells. Confocal microscopy revealed that TLR1 and TLR2 cotranslationally form heterodimeric complexes on the cell surface and in the cytosol. Simultaneous cross-linking of both receptors resulted in ligand-independent signal transduction. Using chimeric TLRs, we found that expression of the extracellular domains along with simultaneous expression of the intracellular domains of both TLRs was necessary to achieve functional signaling. The domains from each receptor did not need to be contained within a single contiguous protein. Chimeric TLR analysis further defined the toll/IL-1R domains as the area of crucial intracellular TLR1-TLR2 interaction.     

Insulin and epidermal growth factor receptor family members share parallel activation mechanisms

Insulin receptor (IR) and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) were the first receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) to be studied in detail. Both are important clinical targets—in diabetes and cancer, respectively. They have unique extracellular domain compositions among RTKs, but share a common module with two ligand‐binding leucine‐rich‐repeat (LRR)‐like domains connected by a flexible cysteine‐rich (CR) domain (L1‐CR‐L2 in IR/domain, I‐II‐III in EGFR). This module is linked to the transmembrane region by three fibronectin type III domains in IR, and by a second CR in EGFR. Despite sharing this conserved ligand‐binding module, IR and EGFR family members are considered mechanistically distinct—in part because IR is a disulfide‐linked (αβ)₂ dimer regardless of ligand binding, whereas EGFR is a monomer that undergoes ligand‐induced dimerization. Recent cryo‐electron microscopy (cryo‐EM) structures suggest a way of unifying IR and EGFR activation mechanisms and origins of negative cooperativity. In EGFR, ligand engages both LRRs in the ligand‐binding module, “closing” this module to break intramolecular autoinhibitory interactions and expose new dimerization sites for receptor activation. How insulin binds the activated IR was less clear until now. Insulin was known to associate with one LRR (L1), but recent cryo‐EM structures suggest that it also engages the second LRR (albeit indirectly) to “close” the L1‐CR‐L2 module, paralleling EGFR. This transition simultaneously breaks autoinhibitory interactions and creates new receptor‐receptor contacts—remodeling the IR dimer (rather than inducing dimerization per se) to activate it. Here, we develop this view in detail, drawing mechanistic links between IR and EGFR.     

The extracellular domains of ErbB3 retain high ligand binding affinity at endosome pH and in the locked conformation

The extracellular, ligand binding regions of ErbB receptors consist of four domains that can assume at least two alternative conformations, extended and locked. The locked conformation, observed in several crystal structures, is held together by a noncovalent intramolecular tether and is incompatible with current models for receptor dimerization and ligand activation. Based on structures of ligand-receptor complexes in the extended conformation, the high affinity ligand binding pocket between domains I and III is disrupted in the locked conformation. Therefore the biological role of the locked conformation is not clear. To address the impact of the locked conformation on ligand binding, we compared extracellular domains of wild-type ErbB3, mutant domains in a constitutively locked or extended conformation and partial extracellular domain constructs. We found that the constitutively locked receptor domains and truncated constructs carrying only domains I-II or III-IV strongly bind ligand, albeit with reduced affinity compared to wild-type receptor. This suggests that the locked conformation cannot be discounted for ligand binding. The significant binding by both partial interfaces in domains I and III also suggests that "partial bivalency" may be the reason for the low nanomolar and high picomolar binding observed for ErbB3 in the respective "low" and high affinity states. In contrast to EGFR (ErbB1), ErbB3 retains high ligand binding affinity at an endosome-comparable pH in both the extended and locked conformations. Ligand affinity for the locked conformation even improves at low pH. For ErbB3, the contribution of domain I to ligand binding is strong and increases at low pH while its contribution is thought to be minimal for EGFR, regardless of pH. This shift in domain contribution and pH dependency provides a mechanistic explanation for some of the divergent properties of EGFR and ErbB3.     

Integrin activation takes shape

Integrins are cell surface adhesion receptors that are essential for the development and function of multicellular animals. Here we summarize recent findings on the regulation of integrin affinity for ligand (activation), one mechanism by which cells modulate integrin function. The focus is on the structural basis of integrin activation, the role of the cytoplasmic domain in integrin affinity regulation, and potential mechanisms by which activation signals are propagated from integrin cytoplasmic domains to the extracellular ligand-binding domain.     

Structural coupling of the EF hand and C‐terminal GTPase domains in the mitochondrial protein Miro

Miro is a highly conserved calcium‐binding GTPase at the regulatory nexus of mitochondrial transport and autophagy. Here we present crystal structures comprising the tandem EF hand and carboxy terminal GTPase (cGTPase) domains of Drosophila Miro. The structures reveal two previously unidentified ‘hidden’ EF hands, each paired with a canonical EF hand. Each EF hand pair is bound to a helix that structurally mimics an EF hand ligand. A key nucleotide‐sensing element and a Pink1 phosphorylation site both lie within an extensive EF hand–cGTPase interface. Our results indicate structural mechanisms for calcium, nucleotide and phosphorylation‐dependent regulation of mitochondrial function by Miro.     

Homology modeling and structural comparison of leucine rich repeats of toll like receptors 1-10 of ruminants

Toll-like receptors (TLRs) are transmembrane receptors composed of extra cellular leucine rich repeats (LRRs) that identify specific pathogen associated molecular patterns triggering a innate immune cascade. The LRR regions of TLR 1–10 proteins of goat (Capra hircus), sheep (Ovis aries), buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) and bovine (Bos taurus) were modeled using MODELLER 9v7 tool and validated. The similarities and variations of these 10 TLRs extracellular regions of each species were compared using online servers like FATCAT, SSM and SSAP. It was evident that the LRRs of TLRs like 1, 2, 3 and 6 showed structural convergence with <1 % RMSD deviation while TLRs like 5, 7, 8 and 9 had high divergence. Docking analysis showed that TLR 2, 3 and 7 of all the selected four ruminant species were able to bind with their corresponding ligands like Peptidoglycan (PGN), Poly I:C, Resiquimod (R-848) and Imiquimod. However, there were variations in the active site regions, interacting residues and the number of bonded interactions. Variations seen among TLR structures and their ligand binding characteristics is likely to be responsible for species and breed specific genetic resistance observed among species or breeds.     

Structural aspects of nucleic acid-sensing Toll-like receptors

Invading pathogens elicit potent immune responses in cells through interactions between structurally conserved molecules derived from the pathogens and specialized innate immune receptors such as the Toll-like receptors (TLRs). Nucleic acid is one of the principal TLR ligands. Nucleic acid-sensing TLRs recognize an array of nucleic acids, including double-stranded RNA, single-stranded RNA, and DNAs with specific sequence motifs. Although ligand-induced dimerization is commonly observed followed by TLR activation, both the specific recognition mechanisms and the ligand–receptor interactions vary among different TLRs. In this review, we highlight our current understanding of how these receptors recognize their cognate ligands based on the recent advances in structural biology.