The architecture of functional modules in the Hsp90 co-chaperone Sti1/Hop

Sti1/Hop is a modular protein required for the transfer of client proteins from the Hsp70 to the Hsp90 chaperone system in eukaryotes. It binds Hsp70 and Hsp90 simultaneously via TPR (tetratricopeptide repeat) domains. Sti1/Hop contains three TPR domains (TPR1, TPR2A and TPR2B) and two domains of unknown structure (DP1 and DP2). We show that TPR2A is the high affinity Hsp90-binding site and TPR1 and TPR2B bind Hsp70 with moderate affinity. The DP domains exhibit highly homologous α-helical folds as determined by NMR. These, and especially DP2, are important for client activation in vivo. The core module of Sti1 for Hsp90 inhibition is the TPR2A-TPR2B segment. In the crystal structure, the two TPR domains are connected via a rigid linker orienting their peptide-binding sites in opposite directions and allowing the simultaneous binding of TPR2A to the Hsp90 C-terminal domain and of TPR2B to Hsp70. Both domains also interact with the Hsp90 middle domain. The accessory TPR1-DP1 module may serve as an Hsp70-client delivery system for the TPR2A-TPR2B-DP2 segment, which is required for client activation in vivo.     

Functional comparison of human and Drosophila Hop reveals novel role in steroid receptor maturation

Hsp70/Hsp90 organizing protein (Hop) coordinates Hsp70 and Hsp90 interactions during assembly of steroid receptor complexes. Hop is composed of three tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) domains (TPR1, TPR2a, and TPR2b) and two DP repeat domains (DP1 and DP2); Hsp70 interacts directly with TPR1 and Hsp90 with TPR2a, but the function of other domains is less clear. Human Hop and the Saccharomyces cerevisiae ortholog Sti1p, which share a common domain arrangement, are functionally interchangeable in a yeast growth assay and in supporting the efficient maturation of glucocorticoid receptor (GR) function. To gain a better understanding of Hop structure/function relationships, we have extended comparisons to the Hop ortholog from Drosophila melanogaster (dHop), which lacks DP1. Although dHop binds Hsp70 and Hsp90 and can rescue the growth defect in yeast lacking Sti1p, dHop failed to support GR function in yeast, which suggests a novel role for Hop in GR maturation that goes beyond Hsp binding. Chimeric Hop constructs combining human and Drosophila domains demonstrate that the C-terminal domain DP2 is critical for this previously unrecognized role in steroid receptor function.     

Ligand binding by TPR domains

Tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) domains bind specific peptide ligands and are thought to mediate protein-protein interactions in a variety of biological systems. Here we compare peptide ligand-binding by several different TPR domains. We present specific examples that demonstrate that TPR domains typically undergo little or no structural rearrangement upon ligand binding. Our data suggest that, contrary to a recent proposal, coupled folding and binding is not the common mechanism of ligand recognition by TPR domains.     

Effect of mutation of the tetratricopeptide repeat and asparatate-proline 2 domains of Sti1 on Hsp90 signaling and interaction in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Through simultaneous interactions with Hsp70 and Hsp90 via separate tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) domains, the cochaperone protein Hop/Sti1 has been proposed to play a critical role in the transfer of client proteins from Hsp70 to Hsp90. However, no prior mutational analysis demonstrating a critical in vivo role for the TPR domains of Sti1 has been reported. We used site-directed mutagenesis of the TPR domains combined with a genetic screen to isolate mutations that disrupt Sti1 function. A single amino acid alteration in TPR2A disrupted Hsp90 interaction in vivo but did not significantly affect function. However, deletion of a conserved residue in TPR2A or mutations in the carboxy-terminal DP2 domain completely disrupted Sti1 function. Surprisingly, mutations in TPR1, previously shown to interact with Hsp70, were not sufficient to disrupt in vivo functions unless combined with mutations in TPR2B, suggesting that TPR1 and TPR2B have redundant or overlapping in vivo functions. We further examined the genetic and physical interaction of Sti1 with a mutant form of Hsp90, providing insight into the importance of the TPR2A domain of Sti1 in regulating Hsp90 function.     

The crystal structure of NlpI. A prokaryotic tetratricopeptide repeat protein with a globular fold

There are several different families of repeat proteins. In each, a distinct structural motif is repeated in tandem to generate an elongated structure. The nonglobular, extended structures that result are particularly well suited to present a large surface area and to function as interaction domains. Many repeat proteins have been demonstrated experimentally to fold and function as independent domains. In tetratricopeptide (TPR) repeats, the repeat unit is a helix-turn-helix motif. The majority of TPR motifs occur as three to over 12 tandem repeats in different proteins. The majority of TPR structures in the Protein Data Bank are of isolated domains. Here we present the high-resolution structure of NlpI, the first structure of a complete TPR-containing protein. We show that in this instance the TPR motifs do not fold and function as an independent domain, but are fully integrated into the three-dimensional structure of a globular protein. The NlpI structure is also the first TPR structure from a prokaryote. It is of particular interest because it is a membrane-associated protein, and mutations in it alter septation and virulence.     

Ppp5c 和TTC16 基因的TPR 结构域与Hsp70、Hsp90 蛋白 的相互作用及对细胞周期的影响

目的:研究Ppp5c及TTC16基因的TPR(tetratricopeptide repeat)结构域短片段和Hsp70及Hsp90家族蛋白的相互做用,及其过表达对细胞周期的影响。方法:通过生物信息学的分析及PCR的方法,克隆Ppp5c及TTC16基因的TPR结构域以及HSPA1A、HSP90AA1的全长基因,并连入酵母双杂交载体,通过ClonTech的酵母双杂交实验体系研究蛋白和蛋白之间的相互作用。把Ppp5c及TTC16基因的TPR结构域克隆入真核表达载体,构架稳定表达Ppp5c及TTC16基因的TPR结构域的MCF-7细胞系,并通过流式细胞实验观察细胞周期。结果:Ppp5c及TTC16基因的TPR结构域能与HSPA1A或HSP90AA1发生相互作用。Ppp5c及TTC16基因的TPR结构域在MCF-7中的过表达能严重影响细胞周期,引起细胞凋亡和S期阻滞。结论:本实验初步揭示了不同蛋白的TPR结构域在与Hsp70及Hsp90蛋白的相互作用性质的异同点以及其过表达对细胞周期的影响,为全面理解TPR结构域的功能、Ppp5c以及TTC16蛋白在细胞内的功能奠定了前期实验基础。     

The tetratricopeptide repeats of receptors involved in protein translocation across membranes

Transport of polypeptides across membranes is a general and essential process in every cell. This process is utilized by molecular machines composed of soluble and membrane-inserted proteins. At least one component of the molecular transport machines present in different membranes contains a subunit with a domain composed of 3 tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) motifs. These domains are important for protein-protein interaction, for example, recognition of chaperones. To understand the evolution of these TPR domain-containing receptors involved in protein translocation, we inferred their phylogenetic relationships. We show that the evolutionary rate of these TPR domains is reduced when compared with the remaining sequence. The reduction is explained by the interaction of the TPR domains with their substrates. Based on the TPR tree, we propose that Sec72 recognizes Hsp70 and that Tom34 recognizes Hsp90. The phylogeny can further be used to assign the localization of the Toc64 isoforms to mitochondria or chloroplasts. Our findings are discussed in the context of the evolutionary development of translocation systems with focus on the occurrence of Hsp70/Hsp90-recognizing TPR domains in these machineries.     

Removal of a consensus proline is not sufficient to allow tetratricopeptide repeat oligomerization

Tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) domains are ubiquitous protein interaction domains that adopt a modular antiparallel array of α‐helices. The TPR fold typically adopts a monomeric state, and consensus TPRs sequences successfully fold into the expected monomeric topology. The versatility of the TPR fold also supports different quaternary structures, which may function as regulatory switches. One example is yeast mitochondrial fission 1 (Fis1) that appears to interconvert between monomer and dimer states in regulating division of peroxisomes and mitochondria. Whether human Fis1 can also interconvert like the yeast molecule is unknown. A TPR consensus proline residue present in human Fis1 is absent in the yeast molecule and, when added, prevents yeast Fis1 dimerization suggesting that the TPR consensus proline might have persisted to prevent TPR oligomerization. Here, we address this question with human Fis1 and the consensus TPR protein CTPR3. We demonstrate that human Fis1 does not form a noncovalent dimer via its TPR domain, despite conditions that favor dimerization of the yeast protein. We also show that the presence of the consensus proline is not sufficient to forbid TPR dimerization. Lastly, an analysis of all available TPR protein structures (22 nonredundant structures, totaling 64 TPRs—42 with the consensus proline and 22 without) revealed that the consensus proline is not necessary for turn formation, but does favor shorter turns. This work suggests the TPR consensus proline is not to prevent oligomerization, but to favor tight turns between repeats.     

Crystal structure of TTC0263, a thermophilic TPR protein from Thermus thermophilus HB27

The hypothetical protein TTC0263 of Thermus thermophilus HB27 is a thermophilic tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR)-containing protein. In the present study, the TPR region (residues 26-230) was resolved at 2.5 A with R-factors of R/Rfree = 23.6%/28.6%. TTC0263 consists of 11 helices that form five TPR units. Uniquely, it contains one atypical "extended" TPR (eTPR) unit. This comprises extended helical residues near the loop region of TTC0263, such that the helical length of eTPR is longer than that of the canonical TPR sequence. In addition, the hybrid TPR domain of TTC0263 possesses oligomer-forming characteristics. TPR domains are generally involved in forming multi-subunit complexes by interacting with each other or with other subunit proteins. The dynamic structure of TTC0263 described here goes some way to explaining how TPR domains mediate the formation of multi-subunit complexes.     

C-terminal sequences outside the tetratricopeptide repeat domain of FKBP51 and FKBP52 cause differential binding to Hsp90

Hsp90 assembles with steroid receptors and other client proteins in association with one or more Hsp90-binding cochaperones, some of which contain a common tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) domain. Included in the TPR cochaperones are the Hsp70-Hsp90-organizing protein Hop, the FK506-binding immunophilins FKBP52 and FKBP51, the cyclosporin A-binding immunophilin CyP40, and protein phosphatase PP5. The TPR domains from these proteins have similar x-ray crystallographic structures and target cochaperone binding to the MEEVD sequence that terminates Hsp90. However, despite these similarities, the TPR cochaperones have distinctive properties for binding Hsp90 and assembling with Hsp90.steroid receptor complexes. To identify structural features that differentiate binding of FKBP51 and FKBP52 to Hsp90, we generated an assortment of truncation mutants and chimeras that were compared for coimmunoprecipitation with Hsp90. Although the core TPR domain (approximately amino acids 260-400) of FKBP51 and FKBP52 is required for Hsp90 binding, the C-terminal 60 amino acids (approximately 400-end) also influence Hsp90 binding. More specifically, we find that amino acids 400-420 play a critical role for Hsp90 binding by either FKBP. Within this 20-amino acid region, we have identified a consensus sequence motif that is also present in some other TPR cochaperones. Additionally, the final 30 amino acids of FKBP51 enhance binding to Hsp90, whereas the corresponding region of FKBP52 moderates binding to Hsp90. Taking into account the x-ray crystal structure for FKBP51, we conclude that the C-terminal regions of FKBP51 and FKBP52 outside the core TPR domains are likely to assume alternative conformations that significantly impact Hsp90 binding.     

Structural and functional discussion of the tetra-trico-peptide repeat, a protein interaction module

Tetra-trico-peptide repeat (TPR) domains are found in numerous proteins, where they serve as interaction modules and multiprotein complex mediators. TPRs can be found in all kingdoms of life and regulate diverse biological processes, such as organelle targeting and protein import, vesicle fusion, and biomineralization. This review considers the structural features of TPR domains that permit the great ligand-binding diversity of this motif, given that TPR-interacting partners display variations in both sequence and secondary structure. In addition, tools for predicting TPR-interacting partners are discussed, as are the abilities of TPR domains to serve as protein-protein interaction scaffolds in biotechnology and therapeutics.     

The Assembly and Intermolecular Properties of the Hsp70-Tomm34-Hsp90 Molecular Chaperone Complex

Maintenance of protein homeostasis by molecular chaperones Hsp70 and Hsp90 requires their spatial and functional coordination. The cooperation of Hsp70 and Hsp90 is influenced by their interaction with the network of co-chaperone proteins, some of which contain tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) domains. Critical to these interactions are TPR domains that target co-chaperone binding to the EEVD-COOH motif that terminates Hsp70/Hsp90. Recently, the two-TPR domain-containing protein, Tomm34, was reported to bind both Hsp70 and Hsp90. Here we characterize the structural basis of Tomm34-Hsp70/Hsp90 interactions. Using multiple methods, including pull-down assays, fluorescence polarization, hydrogen/deuterium exchange, and site-directed mutagenesis, we defined the binding activities and specificities of Tomm34 TPR domains toward Hsp70 and Hsp90. We found that Tomm34 TPR1 domain specifically binds Hsp70. This interaction is partly mediated by a non-canonical TPR1 two-carboxylate clamp and is strengthened by so far unidentified additional intermolecular contacts. The two-carboxylate clamp of the isolated TPR2 domain has affinity for both chaperones, but as part of the full-length Tomm34 protein, the TPR2 domain binds specifically Hsp90. These binding properties of Tomm34 TPR domains thus enable simultaneous binding of Hsp70 and Hsp90. Importantly, we provide evidence for the existence of an Hsp70-Tomm34-Hsp90 tripartite complex. In addition, we defined the basic conformational demands of the Tomm34-Hsp90 interaction. These results suggest that Tomm34 represents a novel scaffolding co-chaperone of Hsp70 and Hsp90, which may facilitate Hsp70/Hsp90 cooperation during protein folding.     

Structure of TPR domain-peptide complexes: critical elements in the assembly of the Hsp70-Hsp90 multichaperone machine

The adaptor protein Hop mediates the association of the molecular chaperones Hsp70 and Hsp90. The TPR1 domain of Hop specifically recognizes the C-terminal heptapeptide of Hsp70 while the TPR2A domain binds the C-terminal pentapeptide of Hsp90. Both sequences end with the motif EEVD. The crystal structures of the TPR-peptide complexes show the peptides in an extended conformation, spanning a groove in the TPR domains. Peptide binding is mediated by electrostatic interactions with the EEVD motif, with the C-terminal aspartate acting as a two-carboxylate anchor, and by hydrophobic interactions with residues upstream of EEVD. The hydrophobic contacts with the peptide are critical for specificity. These results explain how TPR domains participate in the ordered assembly of Hsp70-Hsp90 multichaperone complexes.     

Multiple domains of the co-chaperone Hop are important for Hsp70 binding

The Hop/Sti1 co-chaperone binds to both Hsp70 and Hsp90. Biochemical and co-crystallographic studies have suggested that the EEVD-containing C terminus of Hsp70 or Hsp90 binds specifically to one of the Hop tetratricopeptide repeat domains, TPR1 or TPR2a, respectively. Mutational analyses of Hsp70 and Hop were undertaken to better characterize interactions between the C terminus of Hsp70 and Hop domains. Surprisingly, truncation of EEVD plus as many as 34 additional amino acids from the Hsp70 C terminus did not reduce the ability of Hsp70 mutants to co-immunoprecipitate with Hop, although further truncation eliminated Hop binding. Hop point mutations targeting a carboxylate clamp position in TPR1 disrupted Hsp70 binding, as was expected; however, similar point mutations in TPR2a or TPR2b also inhibited Hsp70 binding in some settings. Using a yeast-based in vivo assay for Hop function, wild type Hop and TPR2b mutants could fully complement deletion of Sti1p; TPR1 and TPR2a point mutants could partially restore activity. Conformations of Hop and Hop mutants were probed by limited proteolysis. The TPR1 mutant digested in a similar manner to wild type; however, TPR2a and TPR2b mutants each displayed greater resistance to chymotryptic digestion. All point mutants retained an ability to dimerize, and none appeared to be grossly misfolded. These results raise questions about current models for Hop/Hsp70 interaction.     

Ectopic Expression of the Tetratricopeptide Repeat Domain of SPINDLY Causes Defects in Gibberellin Response

The SPINDLY (SPY) protein of Arabidopsis is a negative regulator of gibberellin (GA) response. The SPY protein has 10 copies of the tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) at the N terminus. TPR motifs function as protein-protein interaction domains. Several spy alleles are affected only in the TPR region suggesting that protein-protein interactions mediated by this domain are important for proper GA signaling. We have used a reverse genetics approach to further investigate the role of the TPR domain. The TPR domain of SPY was overexpressed in wild-type, gai, and spy plants. Expression of the TPR domain alone is not sufficient to rescue spy mutants. Expression of the TPR domain in a wild-type background produces phenotypes similar to those caused by loss-of-function spy mutants including resistance to GA biosynthesis inhibitors, short hypocotyl length, and early flowering. The dwarfing of the floral shoot internodes caused by the gai mutation was suppressed by expression of the TRP domain. Expression of the TPR domain had no effect on the abundance of endogenous SPY mRNA. The TPR domain was found to interact with SPY both in vitro and in yeast two-hybrid assays. These data indicate that the TPR domain of SPY can participate in protein-protein interactions and that these interactions are important for the proper functioning of SPY.     

Ligand discrimination by TPR domains. Relevance and selectivity of EEVD-recognition in Hsp70 x Hop x Hsp90 complexes

Protein-protein interaction modules containing so-called tetratricopeptide repeats (TPRs) mediate the assembly of Hsp70/Hsp90 multi-chaperone complexes. The TPR1 and TPR2A domains of the Hsp70/Hsp90 adapter protein p60/Hop specifically bind to short peptides corresponding to the C-terminal tails of Hsp70 and Hsp90, respectively, both of which contain the highly conserved sequence motif EEVD-COOH. Here, we quantitatively assessed the contribution of TPR-mediated peptide recognition to Hsp70.Hop.Hsp90 complex formation. The interaction of TPR2A with the C-terminal pentapeptide of Hsp90 (MEEVD) is identified as the core contact for Hop binding to Hsp90. (In peptide sequences, italics are used to highlight residues specific for Hsp70 or Hsp90.) In contrast, formation of the Hsp70.Hop complex depends not only on recognition of the C-terminal Hsp70 heptapeptide (PTIEEVD) by TPR1 but also on additional contacts between Hsp70 and Hop. The sequence motifs for TPR1 and TPR2A binding were defined by alanine scanning of the C-terminal octapeptides of Hsp70 and Hsp90 and by screening of combinatorial peptide libraries. Asp0 and Val-1 of the EEVD motif are identified as general anchor residues, but the highly conserved glutamates of the EEVD sequence, which are critical in Hsp90 binding by TPR2A, do not contribute appreciably to the interaction of Hsp70 with TPR1. Rather, TPR1 prefers hydrophobic amino acids in these positions. Moreover, the TPR domains display a pronounced tendency to interact preferentially with hydrophobic aliphatic and aromatic side chains in positions -4 and -6 of their respective peptide ligands. Ile-4 in Hsp70 and Met-4 in Hsp90 are most important in determining the specific binding of TPR1 and TPR2A, respectively.     

Domain:domain interactions within Hop, the Hsp70/Hsp90 organizing protein, are required for protein stability and structure

The major heat shock protein (Hsp) chaperones Hsp70 and Hsp90 both bind the co-chaperone Hop (Hsp70/Hsp90 organizing protein), which coordinates Hsp actions in folding protein substrates. Hop contains three tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) domains that have binding sites for the conserved EEVD C termini of Hsp70 and Hsp90. Crystallographic studies have shown that EEVD interacts with positively charged amino acids in Hop TPR-binding pockets (called carboxylate clamps), and point mutations of these carboxylate clamp positions can disrupt Hsp binding. In this report, we use circular dichroism to assess the effects of point mutations and Hsp70/Hsp90 peptide binding on Hop conformation. Our results show that Hop global conformation is destabilized by single point mutations in carboxylate clamp positions at pH 5, while the structure of individual TPR domains is unaffected. Binding of peptides corresponding to the C termini of Hsp70 and Hsp90 alters the global conformation of wild-type Hop, whereas peptide binding does not alter conformation of individual TPR domains. These results provide biophysical evidence that Hop-binding pockets are directly involved with domain:domain interactions, both influencing Hop global conformation and Hsp binding, and contributing to proper coordination of Hsp70 and Hsp90 interactions with protein substrates.     

Two structures of cyclophilin 40: folding and fidelity in the TPR domains

BACKGROUND: The "large immunophilin" family consists of domains of cyclophilin or FK506 binding protein linked to a tetratricopeptide (TPR) domain. They are intimately associated with steroid receptor complexes and bind to the C-terminal domain of Hsp90 via the TPR domain. The competitive binding of specific large immunophilins and other TPR-Hsp90 proteins provides a regulatory mechanism for Hsp90 chaperone activity. RESULTS: We have solved the X-ray structures of monoclinic and tetragonal forms of Cyp40. In the monoclinic form, the TPR domain consists of seven helices of variable length incorporating three TPR motifs, which provide a convincing binding surface for the Hsp90 C-terminal MEEVD sequence. The C-terminal residues of Cyp40 protrude out beyond the body of the TPR domain to form a charged helix-the putative calmodulin binding site. However, in the tetragonal form, two of the TPR helices have straightened out to form one extended helix, providing a dramatically different conformation of the molecule. CONCLUSIONS: The X-ray structures are consistent with the role of Cyclophilin 40 as a multifunctional signaling protein involved in a variety of protein-protein interactions. The intermolecular helix-helix interactions in the tetragonal form mimic the intramolecular interactions found in the fully folded monoclinic form. These conserved intra- and intermolecular TPR-TPR interactions are illustrative of a high-fidelity recognition mechanism. The two structures also open up the possibility that partially folded forms of TPR may be important in domain swapping and protein recognition.