Structure of GroEL in Complex with an Early Folding Intermediate of Alanine Glyoxylate Aminotransferase

Primary hyperoxaluria type 1 is a rare autosomal recessive disease caused by mutations in the alanine glyoxylate aminotransferase gene (AGXT). We have previously shown that P11L and I340M polymorphisms together with I244T mutation (AGXT-LTM) represent a conformational disease that could be amenable to pharmacological intervention. Thus, the study of the folding mechanism of AGXT is crucial to understand the molecular basis of the disease. Here, we provide biochemical and structural data showing that AGXT-LTM is able to form non-native folding intermediates. The three-dimensional structure of a complex between the bacterial chaperonin GroEL and a folding intermediate of AGXT-LTM mutant has been solved by cryoelectron microscopy. The electron density map shows the protein substrate in a non-native extended conformation that crosses the GroEL central cavity. Addition of ATP to the complex induces conformational changes on the chaperonin and the internalization of the protein substrate into the folding cavity. The structure provides a three-dimensional picture of an in vivo early ATP-dependent step of the folding reaction cycle of the chaperonin and supports a GroEL functional model in which the chaperonin promotes folding of the AGXT-LTM mutant protein through forced unfolding mechanism.     

Conformational specificity of the chaperonin GroEL for the compact folding intermediates of alpha-lactalbumin.

The chaperonin GroEL binds unfolded polypeptides, preventing aggregation, and then mediates their folding in an ATP-dependent process. To understand the structural features in non-native polypeptides recognized by GroEL, we have used alpha-lactalbumin (alpha LA) as a model substrate. alpha LA (14.2 kDa) is stabilized by four disulfide bonds and a bound Ca2+ ion, offering the possibility of trapping partially folded disulfide intermediates between the native and the fully unfolded state. The conformers of alpha LA with high affinity for GroEL are compact, containing up to three disulfide bonds, and have significant secondary structure, but lack stable tertiary structure and expose hydrophobic surfaces. Complex formation requires almost the complete alpha LA sequence and is strongly dependent on salts that stabilize hydrophobic interactions. Unfolding of alpha LA to an extended state as well as the burial of hydrophobic surface upon formation of ordered tertiary structure prevent the binding to GroEL. Interestingly, GroEL interacts only with a specific subset of the many partially folded disulfide intermediates of alpha LA and thus may influence in vitro the kinetics of the folding pathways that lead to disulfide bonds with native combinations. We conclude that the chaperonin interacts with the hydrophobic surfaces exposed by proteins in a flexible compact intermediate or molten globule state.     

Active Cage Mechanism of Chaperonin-Assisted Protein Folding Demonstrated at Single-Molecule Level

The cylindrical chaperonin GroEL and its lid-shaped cofactor GroES of Escherichia coli have an essential role in assisting protein folding by transiently encapsulating non-native substrate in an ATP-regulated mechanism. It remains controversial whether the chaperonin system functions solely as an infinite dilution chamber, preventing off-pathway aggregation, or actively enhances folding kinetics by modulating the folding energy landscape. Here we developed single-molecule approaches to distinguish between passive and active chaperonin mechanisms. Using low protein concentrations (100 pM) to exclude aggregation, we measured the spontaneous and GroEL/ES-assisted folding of double-mutant maltose binding protein (DM-MBP) by single-pair fluorescence resonance energy transfer and fluorescence correlation spectroscopy. We find that GroEL/ES accelerates folding of DM-MBP up to 8-fold over the spontaneous folding rate. Accelerated folding is achieved by encapsulation of folding intermediate in the GroEL/ES cage, independent of repetitive cycles of protein binding and release from GroEL. Moreover, photoinduced electron transfer experiments provided direct physical evidence that the confining environment of the chaperonin restricts polypeptide chain dynamics. This effect is mediated by the net-negatively charged wall of the GroEL/ES cavity, as shown using the GroEL mutant EL(KKK2) in which the net-negative charge is removed. EL(KKK2)/ES functions as a passive cage in which folding occurs at the slow spontaneous rate. Taken together our findings suggest that protein encapsulation can accelerate folding by entropically destabilizing folding intermediates, in strong support of an active chaperonin mechanism in the folding of some proteins. Accelerated folding is biologically significant as it adjusts folding rates relative to the speed of protein synthesis.     

"Half of the sites" binding of D-glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase folding intermediate with GroEL

Two D-glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) folding intermediate subunits bind with chaperonin 60 (GroEL) to form a stable complex, which can no longer bind with additional GAPDH intermediate subunits, but does bind with one more lysozyme folding intermediate or one chaperonin 10 (GroES) molecule, suggesting that the two GAPDH subunits bind at one end of the GroEL molecule displaying a "half of the sites" binding profile. For lysozyme, GroEL binds with either one or two folding intermediates to form a stable 1:1 or 1:2 complex with one substrate on each end of the GroEL double ring for the latter. The 1:1 complex of GroEL.GroES binds with one lysozyme or one dimeric GAPDH folding intermediate to form a stable ternary complex. Both complexes of GroEL.lysozyme1 and GroEL.GAPDH2 bind with one GroES molecule only at the other end of the GroEL molecule forming a trans ternary complex. According to the stoichiometry of GroEL binding with the GAPDH folding intermediate and the formation of ternary complexes containing GroEL.GAPDH2, it is suggested that the folding intermediate of GAPDH binds, very likely in the dimeric form, with GroEL at one end only.     

Repetitive Protein Unfolding by the trans Ring of the GroEL-GroES Chaperonin Complex Stimulates Folding

A key constraint on the growth of most organisms is the slow and inefficient folding of many essential proteins. To deal with this problem, several diverse families of protein folding machines, known collectively as molecular chaperones, developed early in evolutionary history. The functional role and operational steps of these remarkably complex nanomachines remain subjects of active debate. Here we present evidence that, for the GroEL-GroES chaperonin system, the non-native substrate protein enters the folding cycle on the trans ring of the double-ring GroEL-ATP-GroES complex rather than the ADP-bound complex. The properties of this ATP complex are designed to ensure that non-native substrate protein binds first, followed by ATP and finally GroES. This binding order ensures efficient occupancy of the open GroEL ring and allows for disruption of misfolded structures through two phases of multiaxis unfolding. In this model, repeated cycles of partial unfolding, followed by confinement within the GroEL-GroES chamber, provide the most effective overall mechanism for facilitating the folding of the most stringently dependent GroEL substrate proteins.     

A thermodynamic coupling mechanism can explain the GroEL-mediated acceleration of the folding of barstar

Despite extensive structural and kinetic studies, the mechanism by which the Escherichia coli chaperonin GroEL assists protein folding has remained somewhat elusive. It appears that GroEL might play an active role in facilitating folding, in addition to its role in restricting protein aggregation by secluding folding intermediates. We have investigated the kinetic mechanism of GroEL-mediated refolding of the small protein barstar. GroEL accelerates the observed fast (millisecond) refolding rate, but it does not affect the slow refolding kinetics. A thermodynamic coupling mechanism, in which the concentration of exchange-competent states is increased by the law of mass action, can explain the enhancement of the fast refolding rates. It is not necessary to invoke a catalytic role for GroEL, whereby either the intrinsic refolding rate of a productive folding transition or the unfolding rate of a kinetically trapped off-pathway intermediate is increased by the chaperonin.     

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.     

GroEL Can Unfold Late Intermediates Populated on the Folding Pathways of Monellin

The modulation of the folding mechanism of the small protein single-chain monellin (MNEI) by the Escherichia coli chaperone GroEL has been studied. In the absence of the chaperone, the folding of monellin occurs via three parallel routes. When folding is initiated in the presence of a saturating concentration of GroEL, only 50-60% of monellin molecules fold completely. The remaining 40-50% of the monellin molecules remain bound to the GroEL and are released only upon addition of ATP. It is shown that the basic folding mechanism of monellin is not altered by the presence of GroEL, but that it occurs via only one of the three available routes when folding is initiated in the presence of saturating concentrations of GroEL. Two pathways become nonoperational because GroEL binds very tightly to early intermediates that populate these pathways in a manner that makes the GroEL-bound intermediates incompetent to fold. This accounts for the monellin molecules that remain GroEL-bound at the end of the folding reaction. The third pathway remains operational because the GroEL-bound early intermediate on this pathway is folding-competent, suggesting that this early intermediate binds to GroEL in a manner that is different from that of the binding of the early intermediates on the other two pathways. It appears, therefore, that the same protein can bind GroEL in more than one way. The modulation of the folding energy landscape of monellin by GroEL occurs because GroEL binds folding intermediates on parallel folding pathways, in different ways, and with different affinities. Moreover, when GroEL is added to refolding monellin at different times after commencement of refolding, the unfolding of two late kinetic intermediates on two of the three folding pathways can be observed. It appears that the unfolding of late folding intermediates is enabled by a thermodynamic coupling mechanism, wherein GroEL binds more tightly to an early intermediate than to a late intermediate on a folding pathway, with preferential binding energy being larger than the stability of the late intermediate. Hence, it is shown that GroEL can inadvertently and passively cause, through its ability to bind different folding intermediates differentially, the unfolding of late productive intermediates on folding pathways, and that its unfolding action is not restricted solely to misfolded or kinetically trapped intermediates.     

Chaperonin-mediated protein folding: fate of substrate polypeptide

Chaperonins are megadalton ring assemblies that mediate essential ATP-dependent assistance of protein folding to the native state in a variety of cellular compartments, including the mitochondrial matrix, the eukaryotic cytosol, and the bacterial cytoplasm. Structural studies of the bacterial chaperonin, GroEL, both alone and in complex with its co-chaperonin, GroES, have resolved the states of chaperonin that bind and fold non-native polypeptides. Functional studies have resolved the action of ATP binding and hydrolysis in driving the GroEL-GroES machine through its folding-active and binding-active states, respectively. Yet the exact fate of substrate polypeptide during these steps is only poorly understood. For example, while binding involves multivalent interactions between hydrophobic side-chains facing the central cavity of GroEL and exposed hydrophobic surfaces of the non-native protein, the structure of any polypeptide substrate while bound to GroEL remains unknown. It is also unclear whether binding to an open GroEL ring is accompanied by structural changes in the non-native substrate, in particular whether there is an unfolding action. As a polypeptide-bound ring becomes associated with GroES, do the large rigid-body movements of the GroEL apical domains serve as another source of a potential unfolding action? Regarding the encapsulated folding-active state, how does the central cavity itself influence the folding trajectory of a substrate? Finally, how do GroEL and GroES serve, as recently recognized, to assist the folding of substrates too large to be encapsulated inside the machine? Here, such questions are addressed with the findings available to date, and means of further resolving the states of chaperonin-associated polypeptide are discussed.     

Mechanisms of protein folding

The strong correlation between protein folding rates and the contact order suggests that folding rates are largely determined by the topology of the native structure. However, for a given topology, there may be several possible low free energy paths to the native state and the path that is chosen (the lowest free energy path) may depend on differences in interaction energies and local free energies of ordering in different parts of the structure. For larger proteins whose folding is assisted by chaperones, such as the Escherichia coli chaperonin GroEL, advances have been made in understanding both the aspects of an unfolded protein that GroEL recognizes and the mode of binding to the chaperonin. The possibility that GroEL can remove non-native proteins from kinetic traps by unfolding them either during polypeptide binding to the chaperonin or during the subsequent ATP-dependent formation of folding-active complexes with the co-chaperonin GroES has also been explored.     

The chaperonin cycle cannot substitute for prolyl isomerase activity, but GroEL alone promotes productive folding of a cyclophilin-sensitive substrate to a cyclophilin-resistant form.

The chaperonin GroEL and the peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase cyclophilin are major representatives of two distinct cellular systems that help proteins to adopt their native three-dimensional structure: molecular chaperones and folding catalysts. Little is known about whether and how these proteins cooperate in protein folding. In this study, we have examined the action of GroEL and cyclophilin on a substrate protein in two distinct prolyl isomerization states. Our results indicate that: (i) GroEL binds the same substrate in different prolyl isomerization states. (ii) GroEL-ES does not promote prolyl isomerizations, but even retards isomerizations. (iii) Cyclophilin cannot promote the correct isomerization of prolyl bonds of a GroEL-bound substrate, but acts sequentially after release of the substrate from GroEL. (iv) A denatured substrate with all-native prolyl bonds is delayed in folding by cyclophilin due to isomerization to non-native prolyl bonds; a substrate that has proceeded in folding beyond a stage where it can be bound by GroEL is still sensitive to cyclophilin. (v) If a denatured cyclophilin-sensitive substrate is first bound to GroEL, however, productive folding to a cyclophilin-resistant form can be promoted, even without GroES. We conclude that GroEL and cyclophilin act sequentially and exert complementary functions in protein folding.     

High salt-induced conversion of Escherichia coli GroEL into a fully functional thermophilic chaperonin

The GroE chaperonin system can adapt to and function at various environmental folding conditions. To examine chaperonin-assisted protein folding at high salt concentrations, we characterized Escherichia coli GroE chaperonin activity in 1.2 m ammonium sulfate. Our data are consistent with GroEL undergoing a conformational change at this salt concentration, characterized by elevated ATPase activity and increased exposure of hydrophobic surface, as indicated by increased binding of the fluorophore bis-(5, 5')-8-anilino-1-naphthalene sulfonic acid to the chaperonin. The presence of the salt results in increased substrate stringency and dependence on the full GroE system for release and productive folding of substrate proteins. Surprisingly, GroEL is fully functional as a thermophilic chaperonin in high concentrations of ammonium sulfate and is stable at temperatures up to 75 degrees C. At these extreme conditions, GroEL can suppress aggregation and mediate refolding of non-native proteins.     

Dual function of protein confinement in chaperonin-assisted protein folding.

The GroEL/GroES chaperonin system mediates the folding of a range of newly synthesized polypeptides in the bacterial cytosol. Using a rapid biotin-streptavidin-based inhibition of chaperonin function, we show that the cage formed by GroEL and its cofactor GroES can have a dual role in promoting folding. First, enclosure of nonnative protein in the GroEL:GroES complex is essential for folding to proceed unimpaired by aggregation. Second, folding inside the cage can be significantly faster than folding in free solution, independently of ATP-driven cycles of GroES binding and release. This suggests that confinement of unfolded protein in the narrow hydrophilic space of the chaperonin cage smoothes the energy landscape for the folding of some proteins, increasing the flux of folding intermediates toward the native state.     

Interaction of oxidized chaperonin GroEL with an unfolded protein at low temperatures

The chaperonin GroEL binds to non-native substrate proteins via hydrophobic interactions, preventing their aggregation, which is minimized at low temperatures. In the present study, we investigated the refolding of urea-denatured rhodanese at low temperatures, in the presence of ox-GroEL (oxidized GroEL), which contains increased exposed hydrophobic surfaces and retains its ability to hydrolyse ATP. We found that ox-GroEL could efficiently bind the urea-unfolded rhodanese at 4°C, without requiring excess amount of chaperonin relative to normal GroEL (i.e. non-oxidized). The release/reactivation of rhodanese from GroEL was minimal at 4°C, but was found to be optimal between 22 and 37°C. It was found that the loss of the ATPase activity of ox-GroEL at 4°C prevented the release of rhodanese from the GroEL-rhodanese complex. Thus ox-GroEL has the potential to efficiently trap recombinant or non-native proteins at 4°C and release them at higher temperatures under appropriate conditions.     

Chaperonin GroEL meets the substrate protein as a "load" of the rings

Chaperonin GroEL is an essential molecular chaperone that assists protein folding in the cell. With the aid of cochaperonin GroES and ATP, double ring-shaped GroEL encapsulates non-native substrate proteins inside the cavity of the GroEL-ES complex. Although extensive studies have revealed the outline of GroEL mechanism over the past decade, central questions remain: What are the in vivo substrate proteins? How does GroEL encapsulate the substrates inside the cavity in spite of an apparent entropic difficulty? Is the folding inside the GroEL-ES cavity the same as bulk spontaneous folding? In this review I summarize the recent progress on in vivo and in vitro aspects of GroEL. In particular, emerging evidence shows that the substrate protein itself influences the chaperonin GroEL structure and reaction cycle. Finally I propose the mechanistic similarity between GroEL and kinesin, a molecular motor that moves along a microtubule in an ATP-dependent manner.     

Structural plasticity and noncovalent substrate binding in the GroEL apical domain. A study using electrospay ionization mass spectrometry and fluorescence binding studies

Advances in understanding how GroEL binds to non-native proteins are reported. Conformational flexibility in the GroEL apical domain, which could account for the variety of substrates that GroEL binds, is illustrated by comparison of several independent crystallographic structures of apical domain constructs that show conformational plasticity in helices H and I. Additionally, ESI-MS indicates that apical domain constructs have co-populated conformations at neutral pH. To assess the ability of different apical domain conformers to bind co-chaperone and substrate, model peptides corresponding to the mobile loop of GroES and to helix D from rhodanese were studied. Analysis of apical domain-peptide complexes by ESI-MS indicates that only the folded or partially folded apical domain conformations form complexes that survive gas phase conditions. Fluorescence binding studies show that the apical domain can fully bind both peptides independently. No competition for binding was observed, suggesting the peptides have distinct apical domain-binding sites. Blocking the GroES-apical domain-binding site in GroEL rendered the chaperonin inactive in binding GroES and in assisting the folding of denatured rhodanese, but still capable of binding non-native proteins, supporting the conclusion that GroES and substrate proteins have, at least partially, distinct binding sites even in the intact GroEL tetradecamer.     

Efficient production of native actin upon translation in a bacterial lysate supplemented with the eukaryotic chaperonin TRiC

Recombinant expression of actin in bacteria results in non-native species that aggregate into inclusion bodies. Actin is a folding substrate of TRiC, the chaperonin of the eukaryotic cytosol. By employing bacterial in vitro translation lysates supplemented with purified chaperones, we have found that TRiC is the only eukaryotic chaperone necessary for correct folding of newly translated actin. The actin thus produced binds deoxyribonuclease I and polymerizes into filaments, hallmarks of its native state. In contrast to its rapid folding in the eukaryotic cytosol, actin translated in TRiC-supplemented bacterial lysate folds with slower kinetics, resembling the kinetics upon refolding from denaturant. Lysate supplementation with the bacterial chaperonin GroEL/ES or the DnaK/DnaJ/GrpE chaperones leads to prevention of actin aggregation, yet fails to support its correct folding. This combination of in vitro bacterial translation and TRiC-assisted folding allows a detailed analysis of the mechanisms necessary for efficient actin folding in vivo. In addition, it provides a robust alternative for the production of substantial amounts of eukaryotic proteins that otherwise misfold or lead to cellular toxicity upon expression in heterologous hosts.     

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.     

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.     

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.