YidC Protein,a Molecular Chaperone for LacY Protein Folding via the SecYEG Protein Machinery

To understand how YidC and SecYEG function together in membrane protein topogenesis, insertion and folding of the lactose permease of Escherichia coli (LacY), a 12-transmembrane helix protein LacY that catalyzes symport of a galactoside and an H⁺, was studied. Although both the SecYEG machinery and signal recognition particle are required for insertion of LacY into the membrane, YidC is not required for translocation of the six periplasmic loops in LacY. Rather, YidC acts as a chaperone, facilitating LacY folding. Upon YidC depletion, the conformation of LacY is perturbed, as judged by monoclonal antibody binding studies and by in vivo cross-linking between introduced Cys pairs. Disulfide cross-linking also demonstrates that YidC interacts with multiple transmembrane segments of LacY during membrane biogenesis. Moreover, YidC is strictly required for insertion of M13 procoat protein fused into the middle cytoplasmic loop of LacY. In contrast, the loops preceding and following the inserted procoat domain are dependent on SecYEG for insertion. These studies demonstrate close cooperation between the two complexes in membrane biogenesis and that YidC functions primarily as a foldase for LacY.     

Cysteine residues in the transmembrane regions of M13 procoat protein suggest that oligomeric coat proteins assemble onto phage progeny

The M13 phage assembles in the inner membrane of Escherichia coli. During maturation, about 2,700 copies of the major coat protein move from the membrane onto a single-stranded phage DNA molecule that extrudes out of the cell. The major coat protein is synthesized as a precursor, termed procoat protein, and inserts into the membrane via a Sec-independent pathway. It is processed by a leader peptidase from its leader (signal) peptide before it is assembled onto the phage DNA. The transmembrane regions of the procoat protein play an important role in all these processes. Using cysteine mutants with mutations in the transmembrane regions of the procoat and coat proteins, we investigated which of the residues are involved in multimer formation, interaction with the leader peptidase, and formation of M13 progeny particles. We found that most single cysteine residues do not interfere with the membrane insertion, processing, and assembly of the phage. Treatment of the cells with copper phenanthroline showed that the cysteine residues were readily engaged in dimer and multimer formation. This suggests that the coat proteins assemble into multimers before they proceed onto the nascent phage particles. In addition, we found that when a cysteine is located in the leader peptide at the -6 position, processing of the mutant procoat protein and of other exported proteins is affected. This inhibition of the leader peptidase results in death of the cell and shows that there are distinct amino acid residues in the M13 procoat protein involved at specific steps of the phage assembly process.     

Robust Driving Forces for Transmembrane Helix Packing

The packing structures of transmembrane helices are traditionally attributed to patterns in residues along the contact surface. In this view, besides keeping the helices confined in the membrane, the bilayer has only a minor effect on the helices structure. Here, we use two different approaches to show that the lipid environment has a crucial effect in determining the cross-angle distribution of packed helices. We analyzed structural data of a membrane proteins database. We show that the distribution of cross angles of helix pairs in this database is statistically indistinguishable from the cross-angle distribution of two noninteracting helices imbedded in the membrane. These results suggest that the cross angle is, to a large extent, determined by the tilt angle of the individual helices. We test this hypothesis using molecular simulations of a coarse-grained model that contains no specific residue interactions. These simulations reproduce the same cross-angle distribution as found in the database. As the tilt angle of a helix is dominated by hydrophobic mismatch between the protein and surrounding lipids, our results indicate that hydrophobic mismatch is the dominant factor guiding the transmembrane helix packing. Other short-range forces might then fine-tune the structure to its final configuration.     

M13 procoat protein insertion into YidC and SecYEG proteoliposomes and liposomes

M13 procoat protein was one of the first model proteins used to study bacterial membrane protein insertion. It contains a signal peptide of 23 amino acid residues and is not membrane targeted by the signal recognition particle. The translocation of its periplasmic domain is independent of the preprotein translocase (SecAYEG) but requires electrochemical membrane potential and the membrane insertase YidC of Escherichia coli. We show here that YidC is sufficient for efficient membrane insertion of the purified M13 procoat protein into energized YidC proteoliposomes. When no membrane potential is applied, the insertion is substantially reduced. Only in the presence of YidC, membrane insertion occurs if bilayer integrity is preserved and membrane potential is stable for more than 20 min. A mutant of the M13 procoat protein, H5EE, with two additional negatively charged residues in the periplasmic domain inserted into YidC proteoliposomes and SecYEG proteoliposomes with equal efficiencies. We conclude that the protein can use both the YidC-only pathway and the Sec pathway. This poses the questions of how procoat H5EE is inserted in vivo and how insertion pathways are selected in the cell.     

Efficient translocation of positively charged residues of M13 procoat protein across the membrane excludes electrophoresis as the primary force for membrane insertion.

The coat protein of bacteriophage M13 is inserted into the Escherichia coli plasma membrane as a precursor protein, termed procoat, with a typical leader peptide of 23 amino acid residues. Its membrane insertion requires the electrochemical potential but not the cellular components SecA and SecY. Since the electrochemical gradients result in the periplasmic side of the membrane being positively charged, the membrane potential could contribute to the transfer of the negatively charged central region of procoat across the membrane. Here we demonstrate that the central domain following the leader peptide can be translocated across the membrane even when the net charge of the region is changed from -3 to +3. This rules out an electrophoresis-like insertion mechanism for procoat. We also show that the sec independence of procoat insertion is linked to the presence of the second apolar domain. The deletion of most of the second apolar domain from a procoat fusion protein results in sec dependent membrane insertion of the hybrid protein. Moreover, like other proteins that require the sec genes, translocation of this sec dependent procoat protein is inhibited when positively charged residues are introduced after the leader peptide. Loop models involving one or two hydrophobic regions are presented that account for the differences in tolerance of positively charged residues.     

Conditional lethal mutations separate the M13 procoat and Pf3 coat functions of YidC: different YIDC structural requirements for membrane protein insertion

Conditional lethal YidC mutants have been isolated to decipher the role of YidC in the assembly of Sec-dependent and Sec-independent membrane proteins. We now show that the membrane insertion of the Sec-independent M13 procoat-lep protein is inhibited in a short time in a temperature-sensitive mutant when shifted to the nonpermissive temperature. This provides an additional line of evidence that YidC plays a direct role in the insertion of the Sec-independent M13 procoat protein. However, in the temperature-sensitive mutant, the insertion of the Sec-independent Pf3 phage coat protein and the Sec-dependent leader peptidase were not strongly inhibited at the restricted temperatures. Conversely, using a cold-sensitive YidC strain, we find that the membrane insertion of the Sec-independent Pf3 coat protein is blocked, and the Sec-dependent leader peptidase is inhibited at the nonpermissive temperature, whereas the insertion of the M13 procoat protein is nearly normal. These data show that the YidC function for procoat and its function for Pf3 coat and possibly leader peptidase are genetically separable and suggest that the YidC structural requirements are different for the Sec-independent M13 procoat and Pf3 coat phage proteins that insert by different mechanisms.     

Features of transmembrane segments that promote the lateral release from the translocase into the lipid phase

Topogenic sequences direct the membrane topology of proteins by being recognized and decoded by integral membrane translocases. In this paper, we have compared the minimal sequence characteristics of helical-hairpin, reverse signal-anchor, and stop-transfer sequences in bacterial membrane proteins that use either the YidC or SecYEG translocases for membrane insertion. We find that a stretch composed of 3 leucines and 16 alanines is required for efficient membrane-anchoring of the M13 procoat protein that inserts by a helical hairpin mechanism, and that a stretch composed of only 19 alanines has a detectable membrane-anchoring ability. Similar results were obtained for the reverse signal-anchor sequence of the single-spanning Pf3 coat protein and for stop-transfer segments engineered into leader peptidase. We have also determined the contribution to the apparent free energy of membrane insertion of M13 procoat for all 20 amino acids. The relative order of the contributions is similar to that determined for a stop-transfer sequence in the mammalian endoplasmic reticulum, but the absolute difference between the contributions for the most hydrophobic and most hydrophilic residues is somewhat larger in the E. coli system. These results are significant because they define the features of a membrane protein transmembrane segment that induce lateral release from the YidC and Sec translocases into the lipid bilayer in bacteria.     

How do helix–helix interactions help determine the folds of membrane proteins? Perspectives from the study of homo‐oligomeric helical bundles

The final, structure-determining step in the folding of membrane proteins involves the coalescence of preformed transmembrane helices to form the native tertiary structure. Here, we review recent studies on small peptide and protein systems that are providing quantitative data on the interactions that drive this process. Gel electrophoresis, analytical ultracentrifugation, and fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) are useful methods for examining the assembly of homo-oligomeric transmembrane helical proteins. These methods have been used to study the assembly of the M2 proton channel from influenza A virus, glycophorin, phospholamban, and several designed membrane proteins-all of which have a single transmembrane helix that is sufficient for association into a transmembrane helical bundle. These systems are being studied to determine the relative thermodynamic contributions of van der Waals interactions, conformational entropy, and polar interactions in the stabilization of membrane proteins. Although the database of thermodynamic information is not yet large, a few generalities are beginning to emerge concerning the energetic differences between membrane and water-soluble proteins: the packing of apolar side chains in the interior of helical membrane proteins plays a smaller, but nevertheless significant, role in stabilizing their structure. Polar, hydrogen-bonded interactions occur less frequently, but, nevertheless, they often provide a strong driving force for folding helix-helix pairs in membrane proteins. These studies are laying the groundwork for the design of sequence motifs that dictate the association of membrane helices.     

Molecular dissection of TatC defines critical regions essential for protein transport and a TatB-TatC contact site

The twin arginine transport (Tat) system transports folded proteins across the prokaryotic cytoplasmic membrane and the plant thylakoid membrane. TatC is the largest and most conserved component of the Tat machinery. It forms a multisubunit complex with TatB and binds the signal peptides of Tat substrates. Here we have taken a random mutagenesis approach to identify substitutions in Escherichia coli TatC that inactivate protein transport. We identify 32 individual amino acid substitutions that abolish or severely compromise TatC activity. The majority of the inactivating substitutions fall within the first two periplasmic loops of TatC. These regions are predicted to have conserved secondary structure and results of extensive amino acid insertion and deletion mutagenesis are consistent with these conserved elements being essential for TatC function. Three inactivating substitutions were identified in the fifth transmembrane helix of TatC. The inactive M205R variant could be suppressed by mutations affecting amino acids in the transmembrane helix of TatB. A physical interaction between TatC helix 5 and the TatB transmembrane helix was confirmed by the formation of a site-specific disulphide bond between TatC M205C and TatB L9C variants. This is the first molecular contact site mapped to single amino acid level between these two proteins.     

Orientational preferences of neighboring helices can drive ER insertion of a marginally hydrophobic transmembrane helix

α-helical integral membrane proteins critically depend on the correct insertion of their transmembrane α helices into the lipid bilayer for proper folding, yet a surprisingly large fraction of the transmembrane α helices in multispanning integral membrane proteins are not sufficiently hydrophobic to insert into the target membrane by themselves. How can such marginally hydrophobic segments nevertheless form transmembrane helices in the folded structure? Here, we show that a transmembrane helix with a strong orientational preference (N(cyt)-C(lum) or N(lum)-C(cyt)) can both increase and decrease the hydrophobicity threshold for membrane insertion of a neighboring, marginally hydrophobic helix. This effect helps explain the "missing hydrophobicity" in polytopic membrane proteins.     

Indecisive M13 procoat protein mutants bind to SecA but do not activate the translocation ATPase

The M13 procoat protein serves as the paradigm for the Sec-independent membrane insertion pathway. This protein is inserted into the inner membrane of Escherichia coli with two hydrophobic regions and a central periplasmic loop region of 20 amino acid residues. Extension of the periplasmic loop region renders M13 procoat membrane insertion Sec-dependent. Loop regions with 118 or more residues required SecA and SecYEG and were efficiently translocated in vivo. Two mutants having loop regions of 80 and 100 residues, respectively, interacted with SecA but failed to activate the membrane translocation ATPase of SecA in vitro. Similarly, a procoat mutant with two additional glutamyl residues in the loop region showed binding to SecA but did not stimulate the ATPase. The three mutants were also defective for precursor-stimulated binding of SecA to the membrane surface. Remarkably, the mutant proteins act as competitive inhibitors of the Sec translocase. This suggests that the region to be translocated is sensed by SecA but the activation of the SecA translocation ATPase is only successful for substrates with a minimum length of the translocated region.     

Peptide mimics of the M13 coat protein transmembrane segment. Retention of helix-helix interaction motifs

Sequence-specific noncovalent helix-helix interactions between transmembrane (TM) segments in proteins are investigated by incorporating selected TM sequences into synthetic peptides using the construct CKKK-TM-KKK. The peptides are of suitable hydrophobicity for spontaneous membrane insertion, whereas formation of an N-terminal S-S bond can bring pairs of TM helices into proximity and promote their parallel orientation. Using the propensity of the protein to undergo thermally induced alpha-helix --> beta-sheet transitions as a parameter for helix stability, we compared the wild type and mutant (V29A and V31A) bacteriophage M13 coat proteins with their corresponding TM peptide constructs (M13 residues 24-42). Our results demonstrated that the relevant helix-helix tertiary contacts found in the intact proteins persist in the peptide mimics. Molecular dynamics simulations support the tight "two in-two out" dimerization motif for V31A consistent with mutagenesis data. The overall results reinforce the notion of TM segments as autonomous folding domains and suggest that the generic peptide construct provides a viable reductionist system for membrane protein structural and computational analysis.     

Membrane Insertion of Marginally Hydrophobic Transmembrane Helices Depends on Sequence Context

In mammalian cells, most integral membrane proteins are initially inserted into the endoplasmic reticulum membrane by the so-called Sec61 translocon. However, recent predictions suggest that many transmembrane helices (TMHs) in multispanning membrane proteins are not sufficiently hydrophobic to be recognized as such by the translocon. In this study, we have screened 16 marginally hydrophobic TMHs from membrane proteins of known three-dimensional structure. Indeed, most of these TMHs do not insert efficiently into the endoplasmic reticulum membrane by themselves. To test if loops or TMHs immediately upstream or downstream of a marginally hydrophobic helix might influence the insertion efficiency, insertion of marginally hydrophobic helices was also studied in the presence of their neighboring loops and helices. The results show that flanking loops and nearest-neighbor TMHs are sufficient to ensure the insertion of many marginally hydrophobic helices. However, for at least two of the marginally hydrophobic helices, the local interactions are not enough, indicating that post-insertional rearrangements are involved in the folding of these proteins.     

FRET study of membrane proteins: simulation-based fitting for analysis of membrane protein embedment and association

A new formalism for the simultaneous determination of the membrane embedment and aggregation of membrane proteins is developed. This method is based on steady-state F?rster (or fluorescence) resonance energy transfer (FRET) experiments on site-directed fluorescence labeled proteins in combination with global data analysis utilizing simulation-based fitting. The simulation of FRET was validated by a comparison with a known analytical solution for energy transfer in idealized membrane systems. The applicability of the simulation-based fitting approach was verified on simulated FRET data and then applied to determine the structural properties of the well-known major coat protein from bacteriophage M13 reconstituted into unilamellar DOPC/DOPG (4:1 mol/mol) vesicles. For our purpose, the cysteine mutants Y24C, G38C, and T46C of this protein were produced and specifically labeled with the fluorescence label AEDANS. The energy transfer data from the natural tryptophan at position 26, which is used as a donor, to AEDANS were analyzed assuming a helix model for the transmembrane domain of the protein. As a result of the FRET data analysis, the topology and bilayer embedment of this domain were quantitatively characterized. The resulting tilt of the transmembrane helix of the protein is 18 +/- 2 degrees. The tryptophan is located at a distance of 8.5 +/- 0.5 A from the membrane center. No specific aggregation of the protein was found. The methodology developed here is not limited to M13 major coat protein and can be used in principle to study the bilayer embedment of any small protein with a single transmembrane domain.     

Helix packing moments reveal diversity and conservation in membrane protein structure

Helical membrane proteins are more tightly packed and the packing interactions are more diverse than those found in helical soluble proteins. Based on a linear correlation between amino acid packing values and interhelical propensity, we propose the concept of a helix packing moment to predict the orientation of helices in helical membrane proteins and membrane protein complexes. We show that the helix packing moment correlates with the helix interfaces of helix dimers of single pass membrane proteins of known structure. Helix packing moments are also shown to help identify the packing interfaces in membrane proteins with multiple transmembrane helices, where a single helix can have multiple contact surfaces. Analyses are described on class A G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) with seven transmembrane helices. We show that the helix packing moments are conserved across the class A family of GPCRs and correspond to key structural contacts in rhodopsin. These contacts are distinct from the highly conserved signature motifs of GPCRs and have not previously been recognized. The specific amino acid types involved in these contacts, however, are not necessarily conserved between subfamilies of GPCRs, indicating that the same protein architecture can be supported by a diverse set of interactions. In GPCRs, as well as membrane channels and transporters, amino acid residues with small side-chains (Gly, Ala, Ser, Cys) allow tight helix packing by mediating strong van der Waals interactions between helices. Closely packed helices, in turn, facilitate interhelical hydrogen bonding of both weakly polar (Ser, Thr, Cys) and strongly polar (Asn, Gln, Glu, Asp, His, Arg, Lys) amino acid residues. We propose the use of the helix packing moment as a complementary tool to the helical hydrophobic moment in the analysis of transmembrane sequences.     

Helix packing in polytopic membrane proteins: role of glycine in transmembrane helix association.

The nature and distribution of amino acids in the helix interfaces of four polytopic membrane proteins (cytochrome c oxidase, bacteriorhodopsin, the photosynthetic reaction center of Rhodobacter sphaeroides, and the potassium channel of Streptomyces lividans) are studied to address the role of glycine in transmembrane helix packing. In contrast to soluble proteins where glycine is a noted helix breaker, the backbone dihedral angles of glycine in transmembrane helices largely fall in the standard alpha-helical region of a Ramachandran plot. An analysis of helix packing reveals that glycine residues in the transmembrane region of these proteins are predominantly oriented toward helix-helix interfaces and have a high occurrence at helix crossing points. Moreover, packing voids are generally not formed at the position of glycine in folded protein structures. This suggests that transmembrane glycine residues mediate helix-helix interactions in polytopic membrane proteins in a fashion similar to that seen in oligomers of membrane proteins with single membrane-spanning helices. The picture that emerges is one where glycine residues serve as molecular notches for orienting multiple helices in a folded protein complex.     

M13 procoat inserts into liposomes in the absence of other membrane proteins

Procoat, the precursor form of the major coat protein of coliphage M13, assembles into the Escherichia coli inner membrane and is cleaved to mature coat protein by leader peptidase. This assembly process has previously been reconstituted using lipids and purified leader peptidase in a cell-free protein synthesis reaction (Watts, C., Silver, P., and Wickner, W. (1981) Cell 25, 347-353; Ohno-Iwashita, Y., and Wickner, W. (1983) J. Biol. Chem. 258, 1895-1900). We now report that procoat can also cross a liposomal membrane composed of only purified phospholipids; leader peptidase is not needed to catalyze insertion. When procoat is synthesized in vitro in the presence of liposomes with encapsulated chymotrypsin, the procoat inserts spontaneously through the membrane and is degraded. The protease was shown by several criteria to be in the lumen of the liposomes. These results demonstrate that the precursor form of an E. coli integral membrane protein can cross a membrane without the aid of leader peptidase or any other membrane proteins.     

Current status of membrane protein structure classification

For over 2 decades, continuous efforts to organize the jungle of available protein structures have been underway. Although a number of discrepancies between different classification approaches for soluble proteins have been reported, the classification of membrane proteins has so far not been comparatively studied because of the limited amount of available structural data. Here, we present an analysis of α‐helical membrane protein classification in the SCOP and CATH databases. In the current set of 63 α‐helical membrane protein chains having between 1 and 13 transmembrane helices, we observed a number of differently classified proteins both regarding their domain and fold assignment. The majority of all discrepancies affect single transmembrane helix, two helix hairpin, and four helix bundle domains, while domains with more than five helices are mostly classified consistently between SCOP and CATH. It thus appears that the structural constraints imposed by the lipid bilayer complicate the classification of membrane proteins with only few membrane‐spanning regions. This problem seems to be specific for membrane proteins as soluble four helix bundles, not restrained by the membrane, are more consistently classified by SCOP and CATH. Our findings indicate that the structural space of small membrane helix bundles is highly continuous such that even minor differences in individual classification procedures may lead to a significantly different classification. Membrane proteins with few helices and limited structural diversity only seem to be reasonably classifiable if the definition of a fold is adapted to include more fine‐grained structural features such as helix–helix interactions and reentrant regions. Proteins 2010. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Marginally hydrophobic transmembrane α‐helices shaping membrane protein folding

Cells have developed an incredible machinery to facilitate the insertion of membrane proteins into the membrane. While we have a fairly good understanding of the mechanism and determinants of membrane integration, more data is needed to understand the insertion of membrane proteins with more complex insertion and folding pathways. This review will focus on marginally hydrophobic transmembrane helices and their influence on membrane protein folding. These weakly hydrophobic transmembrane segments are by themselves not recognized by the translocon and therefore rely on local sequence context for membrane integration. How can such segments reside within the membrane? We will discuss this in the light of features found in the protein itself as well as the environment it resides in. Several characteristics in proteins have been described to influence the insertion of marginally hydrophobic helices. Additionally, the influence of biological membranes is significant. To begin with, the actual cost for having polar groups within the membrane may not be as high as expected; the presence of proteins in the membrane as well as characteristics of some amino acids may enable a transmembrane helix to harbor a charged residue. The lipid environment has also been shown to directly influence the topology as well as membrane boundaries of transmembrane helices—implying a dynamic relationship between membrane proteins and their environment.     

Folding of Aquaporin 1: Multiple evidence that helix 3 can shift out of the membrane core

The folding of most integral membrane proteins follows a two‐step process: initially, individual transmembrane helices are inserted into the membrane by the Sec translocon. Thereafter, these helices fold to shape the final conformation of the protein. However, for some proteins, including Aquaporin 1 (AQP1), the folding appears to follow a more complicated path. AQP1 has been reported to first insert as a four‐helical intermediate, where helix 2 and 4 are not inserted into the membrane. In a second step, this intermediate is folded into a six‐helical topology. During this process, the orientation of the third helix is inverted. Here, we propose a mechanism for how this reorientation could be initiated: first, helix 3 slides out from the membrane core resulting in that the preceding loop enters the membrane. The final conformation could then be formed as helix 2, 3, and 4 are inserted into the membrane and the reentrant regions come together. We find support for the first step in this process by showing that the loop preceding helix 3 can insert into the membrane. Further, hydrophobicity curves, experimentally measured insertion efficiencies and MD‐simulations suggest that the barrier between these two hydrophobic regions is relatively low, supporting the idea that helix 3 can slide out of the membrane core, initiating the rearrangement process.