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.     

The chaperonin GroEL binds a polypeptide in an alpha-helical conformation.

Chaperones facilitate folding and assembly of nascent polypeptides in vivo and prevent aggregation in refolding assays in vitro. A given chaperone acts on a number of different proteins. Thus, chaperones must recognize features present in incompletely folded polypeptide chains and not strictly dependent on primary structural information. We have used transferred nuclear Overhauser effects to demonstrate that the Escherichia coli chaperonin GroEL binds to a peptide corresponding to the N-terminal alpha-helix in rhodanese, a mitochondrial protein whose in vitro refolding is facilitated by addition of GroEL, GroES, and ATP. Furthermore, the peptide, which is unstructured when free in aqueous solution, adopts an alpha-helical conformation upon binding to GroEL. Modification of the peptide to reduce its intrinsic propensity to take up alpha-helical structure lowered its affinity for GroEL, but, nonetheless, it could be bound and took up a helical conformation when bound. We propose that GroEL interacts with sequences in an incompletely folded chain that have the potential to adopt an amphipathic alpha-helix and that the chaperonin binding site promotes formation of a helix.     

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.     

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.     

Double mutant MBP refolds at same rate in free solution as inside the GroEL/GroES chaperonin chamber when aggregation in free solution is prevented

Under "permissive" conditions at 25°C, the chaperonin substrate protein DM-MBP refolds 5-10 times more rapidly in the GroEL/GroES folding chamber than in free solution. This has been suggested to indicate that the chaperonin accelerates polypeptide folding by entropic effects of close confinement. Here, using native-purified DM-MBP, we show that the different rates of refolding are due to reversible aggregation of DM-MBP while folding free in solution, slowing its kinetics of renaturation: the protein exhibited concentration-dependent refolding in solution, with aggregation directly observed by dynamic light scattering. When refolded in chloride-free buffer, however, dynamic light scattering was eliminated, refolding became concentration-independent, and the rate of refolding became the same as that in GroEL/GroES. The GroEL/GroES chamber thus appears to function passively toward DM-MBP.     

Interaction of GroE with an all-beta-protein.

Molecular chaperones are involved in protein folding both in vivo and in vitro. The Escherichia coli chaperone GroEL interacts with a number of nonnative proteins. A common structural motif of nonnative proteins, which is recognized by GroEL, has not yet been identified. In order to study the role of beta-sheet secondary structure on the interaction of nonnative proteins with GroEL, we used the F(ab) fragment of a monoclonal antibody as a model substrate protein. Here we show that GroEL interacts functionally with this all-beta-protein during reactivation. Antibody fragments refold spontaneously in good yield from the guanidine-denatured state. Functional refolding to the native state is inhibited transiently by GroEL, but there is no complete folding arrest in the absence of Mg-ATP and GroES. The yield of these unspecifically released GroEL-bound F(ab) fragments corresponds to that of the spontaneous reactivation in the absence of chaperones. However, the refolding kinetics in the presence of GroEL are considerably slower. The addition of Mg-ATP to the GroEL.F(ab) complex results in an immediate release of bound substrate protein and a significant increase in the amount of reconstituted antibody fragments compared to spontaneous reactivation. GroES is not essential for functional GroEL-mediated refolding of the F(ab) fragment but affects the reactivation yield to a small extent. Interestingly, stimulation of the GroEL-mediated F(ab) refolding depends primarily on the binding and not on hydrolysis of adenosine triphosphates. Previous results indicate the binding of alpha-helices to GroEL. The results presented in this paper suggest that beta-sheet secondary structural elements are recognized by GroEL. We therefore conclude that the interaction of a nonnative protein with GroEL depends mainly on the nature of the early folding intermediate but not on a specific element of secondary structure.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

NMR analysis of the binding of a rhodanese peptide to a minichaperone in solution.

A detailed structural analysis of interactions between denatured proteins and GroEL is essential for an understanding of its mechanism. Minichaperones constitute an excellent paradigm for obtaining high-resolution structural information about the binding site and conformation of substrates bound to GroEL, and are particularly suitable for NMR studies. Here, we used transferred nuclear Overhauser effects to study the interaction in solution between minichaperone GroEL(193-335) and a synthetic peptide (Rho), corresponding to the N-terminal alpha-helix (residues 11 to 23) of the mitochondrial rhodanese, a protein whose in vitro refolding is mediated by minichaperones. Using a 60 kDa maltose-binding protein (MBP)-GroEL(193-335) fusion protein to increase the sensitivity of the transferred NOEs, we observed characteristic sequential and mid-range transferred nuclear Overhauser effects. The peptide adopts an alpha-helical conformation upon binding to the minichaperone. Thus the binding site of GroEL is compatible with binding of alpha-helices as well as extended beta-strands. To locate the peptide-binding site on GroEL(193-335), we analysed changes in its chemical shifts on adding an excess of Rho peptide. All residues with significant chemical shift differences are localised in helices H8 and H9. Non-specific interactions were not observed. This indicates that the peptide Rho binds specifically to minichaperone GroEL(193-335). The binding region identified by NMR in solution agrees with crystallographic studies with small peptides and with fluorescence quenching studies with denatured proteins.     

Catalysis, commitment and encapsulation during GroE-mediated folding.

The Escherichia coli GroE chaperones assist protein folding under conditions where no spontaneous folding occurs. To achieve this, the cooperation of GroEL and GroES, the two protein components of the chaperone system, is an essential requirement. While in many cases GroE simply suppresses unspecific aggregation of non-native proteins by encapsulation, there are examples where folding is accelerated by GroE.Using maltose-binding protein (MBP) as a substrate for GroE, it had been possible to define basic requirements for catalysis of folding. Here, we have analyzed key steps in the interaction of GroE and the MBP mutant Y283D during catalyzed folding. In addition to high temperature, high ionic strength was shown to be a restrictive condition for MBP Y283D folding. In both cases, the complete GroE system (GroEL, GroES and ATP) compensates the deceleration of MBP Y283D folding. Combining kinetic folding experiments and electron microscopy of GroE particles, we demonstrate that at elevated temperatures, symmetrical GroE particles with GroES bound to both ends of the GroEL cylinder play an important role in the efficient catalysis of MBP Y283D refolding. In principle, MBP Y283D folding can be catalyzed during one encapsulation cycle. However, because the commitment to reach the native state is low after only one cycle of ATP hydrolysis, several interaction cycles are required for catalyzed folding.     

Chaperonin-assisted folding of glutamine synthetase under nonpermissive conditions: off-pathway aggregation propensity does not determine the co-chaperonin requirement

One of the proposed roles of the GroEL-GroES cavity is to provide an "infinite dilution" folding chamber where protein substrate can fold avoiding deleterious off-pathway aggregation. Support for this hypothesis has been strengthened by a number of studies that demonstrated a mandatory GroES requirement under nonpermissive solution conditions, i.e., the conditions where proteins cannot spontaneously fold. We have found that the refolding of glutamine synthetase (GS) does not follow this pattern. In the presence of natural osmolytes trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO) or potassium glutamate, refolding GS monomers readily aggregate into very large inactive complexes and fail to reactivate even at low protein concentration. Surprisingly, under these "nonpermissive" folding conditions, GS can reactivate with GroEL and ATP alone and does not require the encapsulation by GroES. In contrast, the chaperonin dependent reactivation of GS under another nonpermissive condition of low Mg2+ (<2 mM MgCl2) shows an absolute requirement of GroES. High-performance liquid chromatography gel filtration analysis and irreversible misfolding kinetics show that a major species of the GS folding intermediates, generated under these "low Mg2+" conditions exist as long-lived metastable monomers that can be reactivated after a significantly delayed addition of the GroEL. Our results indicate that the GroES requirement for refolding of GS is not simply dictated by the aggregation propensity of this protein substrate. Our data also suggest that the GroEL-GroES encapsulated environment is not required under all nonpermissive folding conditions.     

Design of a molecular chaperone-assisted protein folding bioreactor

Escherichia coli molecular chaperone GroEL and co-chaperone GroES are well known to assist the folding/refolding of a diverse range of substrate proteins. Despite this, there have been relatively few reports of the GroEL/GroES molecular chaperone system being used as a biotechnology tool for protein folding/refolding. In this paper, a solution-phase protein folding bioreactor is described that involves the complete GroEL/GroES system. The main features of this bioreactor are the use of a stirred-cell concentrator fitted with a 100 kDa molecular weight cutoff membrane and an attached buffer reservoir. This bioreactor system was used successfully for assisted-batch refolding of guanidinium chloride (Gu-HCl) unfolded mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase (mMDH). We believe that protein folding bioreactor systems of this type could have wide potential utility for the folding/refolding of unfolded protein substrates.     

Essential role of the chaperonin folding compartment in vivo

The GroEL/GroES chaperonin system of Escherichia coli forms a nano-cage allowing single protein molecules to fold in isolation. However, as the chaperonin can also mediate folding independently of substrate encapsulation, it remained unclear whether the folding cage is essential in vivo. To address this question, we replaced wild-type GroEL with mutants of GroEL having either a reduced cage volume or altered charge properties of the cage wall. A stepwise reduction in cage size resulted in a gradual loss of cell viability, although the mutants bound non-native protein efficiently. Strikingly, a mild reduction in cage size increased the yield and the apparent rate of green fluorescent protein folding, consistent with the view that an effect of steric confinement can accelerate folding. As shown in vitro, the observed acceleration of folding was dependent on protein encapsulation by GroES but independent of GroES cycling regulated by the GroEL ATPase. Altering the net-negative charge of the GroEL cage wall also strongly affected chaperonin function. Based on these findings, the GroEL/GroES compartment is essential for protein folding in vivo.     

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.     

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.     

GroEL recognises sequential and non-sequential linear structural motifs compatible with extended beta-strands and alpha-helices.

The chaperonin GroEL binds a variety of polypeptides that share no obvious sequence similarity. The precise structural, chemical and dynamic features that are recognised remain largely unknown. Structural models of the complex between GroEL and its co-chaperonin GroES, and of the isolated apical domain of GroEL (minichaperone; residues 191-376) with a 17 residue N-terminal tag show that a linear sequential sequence (extended beta-strand) can be bound. We have analysed characteristics of the motifs that bind to GroEL by using affinity panning of immobilised GroEL minichaperones for a library of bacteriophages that display the fungal cellulose-binding domain of the enzyme cellobiohydrolase I. This protein has seven non-sequential residues in its binding site that form a linear binding motif with similar dimensions and characteristics to the peptide tag that was bound to the minichaperone GroEL(191-376). The seven residues thus form a constrained scaffold. We find that GroEL does bind suitable mutants of these seven residues. The side-chains recognised do not have to be totally hydrophobic, but polar and positively charged chains can be accommodated. Further, the spatial distribution of the side-chains is also compatible with those in an alpha-helix. This implies that GroEL can bind a wide range of structures, from extended beta-strands and alpha-helices to folded states, with exposed side-chains. The binding site can accommodate substrates of approximately 18 residues when in a helical or seven when in an extended conformation. The data support two activities of GroEL: the ability to act as a temporary parking spot for sticky intermediates by binding many motifs; and an unfolding activity of GroEL by binding an extended sequential conformation of the substrate.     

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.     

Polypeptide in the chaperonin cage partly protrudes out and then folds inside or escapes outside

The current mechanistic model of chaperonin-assisted protein folding assumes that the substrate protein in the cage, formed by GroEL central cavity capped with GroES, is isolated from outside and exists as a free polypeptide. However, using ATPase-deficient GroEL mutants that keep GroES bound, we found that, in the rate-limiting intermediate of a chaperonin reaction, the unfolded polypeptide in the cage partly protrudes through a narrow space near the GroEL/GroES interface. Then, the entire polypeptide is released either into the cage or to the outside medium. The former adopts a native structure very rapidly and the latter undergoes spontaneous folding. Partition of the in-cage folding and the escape varies among substrate proteins and is affected by hydrophobic interaction between the polypeptide and GroEL cavity wall. The ATPase-active GroEL with decreased in-cage folding produced less of a native model substrate protein in Escherichia coli cells. Thus, the polypeptide in the critical GroEL-GroES complex is neither free nor completely confined in the cage, but it is interacting with GroEL's apical region, partly protruding to outside.     

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.