Chaperonin-mediated protein folding: GroES binds to one end of the GroEL cylinder, which accommodates the protein substrate within its central cavity.

The mechanism of GroEL (chaperonin)-mediated protein folding is only partially understood. We have analysed structural and functional properties of the interaction between GroEL and the co-chaperonin GroES. The stoichiometry of the GroEL 14mer and the GroES 7mer in the functional holo-chaperonin is 1:1. GroES protects half of the GroEL subunits from proteolytic truncation of the approximately 50 C-terminal residues. Removal of this region results in an inhibition of the GroEL ATPase, mimicking the effect of GroES on full-length GroEL. Image analysis of electron micrographs revealed that GroES binding triggers conspicuous conformational changes both in the GroES adjacent end and at the opposite end of the GroEL cylinder. This apparently prohibits the association of a second GroES oligomer. Addition of denatured polypeptide leads to the appearance of irregularly shaped, stain-excluding masses within the GroEL double-ring, which are larger with bound alcohol oxidase (75 kDa) than with rhodanese (35 kDa). We conclude that the functional complex of GroEL and GroES is characterized by asymmetrical binding of GroES to one end of the GroEL cylinder and suggest that binding of the substrate protein occurs within the central cavity of GroEL.     

Conservation among HSP60 sequences in relation to structure, function, and evolution

The chaperonin HSP60 (GroEL) proteins are essential in eubacterial genomes and in eukaryotic organelles. Functional regions inferred from mutation studies and the Escherichia coli GroEL 3D crystal complexes are evaluated in a multiple alignment across 43 diverse HSP60 sequences, centering on ATP/ADP and Mg2+ binding sites, on residues interacting with substrate, on GroES contact positions, on interface regions between monomers and domains, and on residues important in allosteric conformational changes. The most evolutionary conserved residues relate to the ATP/ADP and Mg2+ binding sites. Hydrophobic residues that contribute in substrate binding are also significantly conserved. A large number of charged residues line the central cavity of the GroEL-GroES complex in the substrate-releasing conformation. These span statistically significant intra- and inter-monomer three-dimensional (3D) charge clusters that are highly conserved among sequences and presumably play an important role interacting with the substrate. Unaligned short segments between blocks of alignment are generally exposed at the outside wall of the Anfinsen cage complex. The multiple alignment reveals regions of divergence common to specific evolutionary groups. For example, rickettsial sequences diverge in the ATP/ADP binding domain and gram-positive sequences diverge in the allosteric transition domain. The evolutionary information of the multiple alignment proffers attractive sites for mutational studies.     

Analysis of Mutationally Altered Forms of the Cct6 Subunit of the Chaperonin from Saccharomyces Cerevisiae

The Cct double-ring chaperonin complex of Saccharomyces cerevisiae is comprised of eight essential subunits, Cct1p-Cct8p, and assists the folding of substrates such as actins and tubulins. Single and multiple amino acid replacements of Cct6p were constructed by oligonucleotide-directed mutagenesis, including changes of charged to alanine residues and uncharged to charged residues. The replacements were targeted, in part, to residues corresponding to functionally critical regions identified in the published crystal structure of the Escherichia coli chaperonin, GroEL. Here, we report the critical hydrophobic residues and clusters of hydrophilic residues in regions corresponding to those from the apical domain of GroEL implicated in peptide binding and peptide release, and certain residues in the putative equatorial domain implicated in subunit-to-subunit interaction. In contrast to their homologous counterparts in Cct2p and Cct1p, the highly conserved putative ATP binding motifs of Cct6p were relatively amenable to mutations. Our data suggest that the entire Cct6p molecule might be essential for assembly of Cct complex and might participate in binding substrates. However, there appeared to exist a functional hierarchy in ATP binding/hydrolysis among Cct subunits, as suggested by the high tolerance of Cct6p to mutations within the putative ATP binding pocket.     

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.     

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

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

Kinetic model for the coupling between allosteric transitions in GroEL and substrate protein folding and aggregation

The bacterial chaperonin GroEL and the co-chaperonin GroES assist in the folding of a number of structurally unrelated substrate proteins (SPs). In the absence of chaperonins, SP folds by the kinetic partitioning mechanism (KPM), according to which a fraction of unfolded molecules reaches the native state directly, while the remaining fraction gets trapped in a potentially aggregation-prone misfolded state. During the catalytic reaction cycle, GroEL undergoes a series of allosteric transitions (T<-->R-->R"-->T) triggered by SP capture, ATP binding and hydrolysis, and GroES binding. We developed a general kinetic model that takes into account the coupling between the rates of the allosteric transitions and the folding and aggregation of the SP. Our model, in which the GroEL allosteric rates and SP-dependent folding and aggregation rates are independently varied without prior assumption, quantitatively fits the GroEL concentration-dependent data on the yield of native ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (Rubisco) as a function of time. The extracted kinetic parameters for the GroEL reaction cycle are consistent with the available values from independent experiments. In addition, we also obtained physically reasonable parameters for the kinetic steps in the reaction cycle that are difficult to measure. If experimental values for GroEL allosteric rates are used, the time-dependent changes in native-state yield at eight GroEL concentrations can be quantitatively fit using only three SP-dependent parameters. The model predicts that the differences in the efficiencies (as measured by yields of the native state) of GroEL, single-ring mutant (SR1), and variants of SR1, in the rescue of mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase, citrate synthase, and Rubisco, are related to the large variations in the allosteric transition rates. We also show that GroEL/S mutants that efficiently fold one SP at the expense of all others are due to a decrease in the rate of a key step in the reaction cycle, which implies that wild-type GroEL has evolved as a compromise between generality and specificity. We predict that, under maximum loading conditions and saturating ATP concentration, the efficiency of GroEL (using parameters for Rubisco) depends predominantly on the rate of R-->R" transition, while the equilibrium constant of the T<-->R has a small effect only. Both under sub- and superstoichiometric GroEL concentrations, enhanced efficiency is achieved by rapid turnover of the reaction cycle, which is in accord with the predictions of the iterative annealing mechanism. The effects are most dramatic at substoichiometric conditions (most relevant for in vivo situations) when SP aggregation can outcompete capture of SP by chaperonins.     

Determination of the number of active GroES subunits in the fused heptamer GroES required for interactions with GroEL

A double-heptamer ring chaperonin GroEL binds denatured substrate protein, ATP, and GroES to the same heptamer ring and encapsulates substrate into the central cavity underneath GroES where productive folding occurs. GroES is a disk-shaped heptamer, and each subunit has a GroEL-binding loop. The residues of the GroEL subunit responsible for GroES binding largely overlap those involved in substrate binding, and the mechanism by which GroES can replace the substrate when GroES binds to GroEL/substrate complex remains to be clarified. To address this question, we generated single polypeptide GroES by fusing seven subunits with various combinations of active and GroEL binding-defective subunits. Functional tests of the fused GroES variants indicated that four active GroES subunits were required for efficient formation of the stable GroEL/GroES complex and five subunits were required for the productive GroEL/substrate/GroES complex. An increase in the number of defective GroES subunits resulted in a slowing of encapsulation and folding. These results indicate the presence of an intermediate GroEL/substrate/GroES complex in which the substrate and GroES bind to GroEL by sharing seven common binding sites.     

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.     

Factors governing the substrate recognition by GroEL chaperone: a sequence correlation approach

The chaperonin GroEL binds to a large number of polypeptides, prevents their self-association, and mediates appropriate folding in a GroES and adenosine triphosphate-dependent manner. But how the GroEL molecule actually recognizes the polypeptide and what are the exact GroEL recognition sites in the substrates are still poorly understood. We have examined more than 50 in vivo substrates as well as well-characterized in vitro substrates, for their binding characteristics with GroEL. While addressing the issue, we have been driven by the basic concept that GroES, being the cochaperonin of GroEL, is the best-suited substrate for GroEL, as well as by the fact that polypeptide substrate and GroES occupy the same binding sites on the GroEL apical domain. GroES interacts with GroEL through selective hydrophobic residues present on its mobile loop region, and we have considered the group of residues on the GroES mobile loop as the key element in choosing a substrate for GroEL. Considering the hydrophobic region on the GroES mobile loop as the standard, we have attempted to identify the homologous region on the peptide sequences in the proteins of our interest. Polypeptides have been judged as potential GroEL substrates on the basis of the presence of the GroES mobile loop-like hydrophobic segments in their amino acid sequences. We have observed 1 or more GroES mobile loop-like hydrophobic patches in the peptide sequence of some of the proteins of our interest, and the hydropathy index of most of these patches also seems to be approximately close to that of the standard. It has been proposed that the presence of hydrophobic patches having substantial degree of hydropathy index as compared with the standard segment is a necessary condition for a peptide sequence to be recognized by GroEL molecules. We also observed that the overall hydrophobicity is also close to 30% in these substrates, although this is not the sufficient criterion for a polypeptide to be assigned as a substrate for GroEL. We found that the binding of aconitase, alpha-lactalbumin, and murine dihydrofolate reductase to GroEL falls in line with our present model and have also predicted the exact regions of their binding to GroEL. On the basis of our GroEL substrate prediction, we have presented a model for the binding of apo form of some proteins to GroEL and the eventual formation of the holo form. Our observation also reveals that in most of the cases, the GroES mobile loop-like hydrophobic patch is present in the unstructured region of the protein molecule, specifically in the loop or beta-sheeted region. The outcome of our study would be an essential feature in identifying a potential substrate for GroEL on the basis of the presence of 1 or more GroES mobile loop-like hydrophobic segments in the amino acid sequence of those polypeptides and their location in three-dimensional space.     

Probing the "annealing" mechanism of GroEL minichaperone using molecular dynamics simulations

Although the intact chaperonin machinery is needed to rescue natural substrate proteins (SPs) under non-permissive conditions the "minichaperone" alone, containing only the isolated apical domain of GroEL, can assist folding of a certain class of proteins. To understand the annealing function of the minichaperone, we have carried out molecular dynamics simulations in the NPT ensemble totaling 300ns for four systems; namely, the isolated strongly binding peptide (SBP), the minichaperone, and the SBP and a weakly binding peptide (WBP) in complex with the minichaperone. The SBP, which is structureless in isolation, adopts a beta-hairpin conformation in complex with the minichaperone suggesting that favorable non-specific interactions of the SPs confined to helices H and I of the apical domains can induce local secondary structures. Comparison of the dynamical fluctuations of the apo and the liganded forms of the minichaperone shows that the stability (needed for SP capture) involves favorable hydrophobic interactions and hydrogen bond network formation between the SBP and WBP, and helices H and I. The release of the SP, which is required for the annealing action, involves water-mediated interactions of the charged residues at the ends of H and I helices. The simulation results are consistent with a transient binding release (TBR) model for the annealing action of the minichaperone. According to the TBR model, SP annealing occurs in two stages. In the first stage the SP is captured by the apical domain. This is followed by SP release (by thermal fluctuations) that places it in a different region of the energy landscape from which it can partition rapidly to the native state with probability Phi or be trapped in another misfolded state. The process of binding and release can result in enhancement of the native state yield. The TBR model suggests "that any cofactor that can repeatedly bind and release SPs can be effective in assisting protein folding." By comparing the structures of the non-chaperone alpha-casein (which has no sequence similarity with the apical domain) and the minichaperone and the hydrophobicity profiles we show that alpha-casein has a pair of helices that have similar sequence and structural profiles as H and I. Based on this comparison we identify residues that stabilize (destabilize) alpha-casein-protein complexes. This suggests that alpha-casein assists folding by the TBR mechanism.     

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.     

Protein substrate binding induces conformational changes in the chaperonin GroEL. A suggested mechanism for unfoldase activity

Chaperonins are molecules that assist proteins during folding and protect them from irreversible aggregation. We studied the chaperonin GroEL and its interaction with the enzyme human carbonic anhydrase II (HCA II), which induces unfolding of the enzyme. We focused on conformational changes that occur in GroEL during formation of the GroEL-HCA II complex. We measured the rate of GroEL cysteine reactivity toward iodo[2-(14)C]acetic acid and found that the cysteines become more accessible during binding of a cysteine free mutant of HCA II. Spin labeling of GroEL with N-(1-oxyl-2,2,5, 5-tetramethyl-3-pyrrolidinyl)iodoacetamide revealed that this additional binding occurred because buried cysteine residues become accessible during HCA II binding. In addition, a GroEL variant labeled with 6-iodoacetamidofluorescein exhibited decreased fluorescence anisotropy upon HCA II binding, which resembles the effect of GroES/ATP binding. Furthermore, by producing cysteine-modified GroEL with the spin label N-(1-oxyl-2,2,5, 5-tetramethyl-3-pyrrolidinyl)iodoacetamide and the fluorescent label 5-((((2-iodoacetyl)amino)ethyl)amino)naphthalene-1-sulfonic acid, we detected increases in spin-label mobility and fluorescence intensity in GroEL upon HCA II binding. Together, these results show that conformational changes occur in the chaperonin as a consequence of protein substrate binding. Together with previous results on the unfoldase activity of GroEL, we suggest that the chaperonin opens up as the substrate protein binds. This opening mechanism may induce stretching of the protein, which would account for reported unfoldase activity of GroEL and might explain how GroEL can actively chaperone proteins larger than HCA II.     

A newly synthesized protein interacts with GroES on the surface of chaperonin GroEL.

To facilitate folding and assembly of different proteins, chaperonin GroEL requires the presence of its helper protein GroES. Using a photochemical cross-linking approach, we show that GroES and newly synthesized pre-beta-lactamase (pre-beta lac) contact with each other only within the ternary complex with GroEL. Possibly owing to this contact GroES is able to directly influence the pre-beta lac/GroEL interaction. Furthermore, the cross-linking of pre-beta lac to GroES suggests that the binding of the protein ligands to GroEL occurs near the GroES binding site, known to be in the central hole space of GroEL.     

Identifying natural substrates for chaperonins using a sequence-based approach

The Escherichia coli chaperonin machinery, GroEL, assists the folding of a number of proteins. We describe a sequence-based approach to identify the natural substrate proteins (SPs) for GroEL. Our method is based on the hypothesis that natural SPs are those that contain patterns of residues similar to those found in either GroES mobile loop and/or strongly binding peptide in complex with GroEL. The method is validated by comparing the predicted results with experimentally determined natural SPs for GroEL. We have searched for such patterns in five genomes. In the E. coli genome, we identify 1422 (about one-third) sequences that are putative natural SPs. In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, 2885 (32%) of sequences can be natural substrates for Hsp60, which is the analog of GroEL. The precise number of natural SPs is shown to be a function of the number of contacts an SP makes with the apical domain (N(C)) and the number of binding sites (N(B)) in the oligomer with which it interacts. For known SPs for GroEL, we find approximately 4 < N(C) < 5 and 2 相似文献   

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

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

Structural features of the GroEL-GroES nano-cage required for rapid folding of encapsulated protein

GroEL and GroES form a chaperonin nano-cage for proteins up to approximately 60 kDa to fold in isolation. Here we explored the structural features of the chaperonin cage critical for rapid folding of encapsulated substrates. Modulating the volume of the GroEL central cavity affected folding speed in accordance with confinement theory. Small proteins (approximately 30 kDa) folded more rapidly as the size of the cage was gradually reduced to a point where restriction in space slowed folding dramatically. For larger proteins (approximately 40-50 kDa), either expanding or reducing cage volume decelerated folding. Additionally, interactions with the C-terminal, mildly hydrophobic Gly-Gly-Met repeat sequences of GroEL protruding into the cavity, and repulsion effects from the negatively charged cavity wall were required for rapid folding of some proteins. We suggest that by combining these features, the chaperonin cage provides a physical environment optimized to catalyze the structural annealing of proteins with kinetically complex folding pathways.     

GroEL stability and function. Contribution of the ionic interactions at the inter-ring contact sites

The chaperonin GroEL consists of a double ring structure made of identical subunits that display different modes of allosteric communication. The protein folding cycle requires the simultaneous positive intra-ring and negative inter-ring cooperativities of ATP binding. This ensures GroES binding to one ring and release of the ligands from the opposite one. To better characterize inter-ring allosterism, the thermal stability as well as the temperature dependence of the functional and conformational properties of wild type GroEL, a single ring mutant (SR1) and two single point mutants suppressing one interring salt bridge (E434K and E461K) were studied. The results indicate that ionic interactions at the two interring contact sites are essential to maintain the negative cooperativity for protein substrate binding and to set the protein thermostat at 39 degrees C. These electrostatic interactions contribute distinctly to the stability of the inter-ring interface and the overall protein stability, e.g. the E434K thermal inactivation curve is shifted to lower temperatures, and its unfolding temperature and activation energy are also lowered. An analysis of the ionic interactions at the inter-ring contact sites reveals that at the so called "left site" a network of electrostatic interactions involving three charged residues might be established, in contrast to what is found at the "right site" where only two oppositely charged residues interact. Our data suggest that electrostatic interactions stabilize protein-protein interfaces depending on both the number of ionic interactions and the number of residues engaged in each of these interactions. In the case of GroEL, this combination sets the thermostat of the protein so that the chaperonin distinguishes physiological from stress temperatures.     

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.     

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.     

Allostery Wiring Diagrams in the Transitions that Drive the GroEL Reaction Cycle

Determining the network of residues that transmit allosteric signals is crucial to understanding the function of biological nanomachines. During the course of a reaction cycle, biological machines in general, and Escherichia coli chaperonin GroEL in particular, undergo large-scale conformational changes in response to ligand binding. Normal mode analyses, based on structure-based coarse-grained models where each residue is represented by an α carbon atom, have been widely used to describe the motions encoded in the structures of proteins. Here, we propose a new C^α-side chain elastic network model of proteins that includes information about the physical identity of each residue and accurately accounts for the side-chain topology and packing within the structure. Using the C^α-side chain elastic network model and the structural perturbation method, which probes the response of a local perturbation at a given site at all other sites in the structure, we determine the network of key residues (allostery wiring diagram) responsible for the T → R and R″ → T transitions in GroEL. A number of residues, both within a subunit and at the interface of two adjacent subunits, are found to be at the origin of the positive cooperativity in the ATP-driven T → R transition. Of particular note are residues G244, R58, D83, E209, and K327. Of these, R38, D83, and K327 are highly conserved. G244 is located in the apical domain at the interface between two subunits; E209 and K327 are located in the apical domain, toward the center of a subunit; R58 and D83 are equatorial domain residues. The allostery wiring diagram shows that the network of residues are interspersed throughout the structure. Residues D83, V174, E191, and D359 play a critical role in the R″ → T transition, which implies that mutations of these residues would compromise the ATPase activity. D83 and E191 are also highly conserved; D359 is moderately conserved. The negative cooperativity between the rings in the R″ → T transition is orchestrated through several interface residues within a single ring, including N10, E434, D435, and E451. Signal from the trans ring that is transmitted across the interface between the equatorial domains is responsible for the R″ → T transition. The cochaperonin GroES plays a passive role in the R″ → T transition. Remarkably, the binding affinity of GroES for GroEL is allosterically linked to GroEL residues 350-365 that span helices K and L. The movements of helices K and L alter the polarity of the cavity throughout the GroEL functional cycle and undergo large-scale motions that are anticorrelated with the other apical domain residues. The allostery wiring diagrams for the T → R and R″ → T transitions of GroEL provide a microscopic foundation for the cooperativity (anticooperativity) within (between) the ring (rings). Using statistical coupling analysis, we extract evolutionarily linked clusters of residues in GroEL and GroES. We find that several substrate protein binding residues as well as sites related to ATPase activity belong to a single functional network in GroEL. For GroES, the mobile loop residues and GroES/GroES interface residues are linked.