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.     

Triggering protein folding within the GroEL-GroES complex

The folding of many proteins depends on the assistance of chaperonins like GroEL and GroES and involves the enclosure of substrate proteins inside an internal cavity that is formed when GroES binds to GroEL in the presence of ATP. Precisely how assembly of the GroEL-GroES complex leads to substrate protein encapsulation and folding remains poorly understood. Here we use a chemically modified mutant of GroEL (EL43Py) to uncouple substrate protein encapsulation from release and folding. Although EL43Py correctly initiates a substrate protein encapsulation reaction, this mutant stalls in an intermediate allosteric state of the GroEL ring, which is essential for both GroES binding and the forced unfolding of the substrate protein. This intermediate conformation of the GroEL ring possesses simultaneously high affinity for both GroES and non-native substrate protein, thus preventing escape of the substrate protein while GroES binding and substrate protein compaction takes place. Strikingly, assembly of the folding-active GroEL-GroES complex appears to involve a strategic delay in ATP hydrolysis that is coupled to disassembly of the old, ADP-bound GroEL-GroES complex on the opposite ring.     

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.     

Co-translational binding of GroEL to nascent polypeptides is followed by post-translational encapsulation by GroES to mediate protein folding

The eubacterial chaperonins GroEL and GroES are essential chaperones and primarily assist protein folding in the cell. Although the molecular mechanism of the GroEL system has been examined previously, the mechanism by which GroEL and GroES assist folding of nascent polypeptides during translation is still poorly understood. We previously demonstrated a co-translational involvement of the Escherichia coli GroEL in folding of newly synthesized polypeptides using a reconstituted cell-free translation system (Ying, B. W., Taguchi, H., Kondo, M., and Ueda, T. (2005) J. Biol. Chem. 280, 12035-12040). Employing the same system here, we further characterized the mechanism by which GroEL assists folding of translated proteins via encapsulation into the GroEL-GroES cavity. The stable co-translational association between GroEL and the newly synthesized polypeptide is dependent on the length of the nascent chain. Furthermore, GroES is capable of interacting with the GroEL-nascent peptide-ribosome complex, and experiments using a single-ring variant of GroEL clearly indicate that GroES association occurs only at the trans-ring, not the cis-ring, of GroEL. GroEL holds the nascent chain on the ribosome in a polypeptide length-dependent manner and post-translationally encapsulates the polypeptide using the GroES cap to accomplish the chaperonin-mediated folding process.     

Analysis of GroE-assisted folding under nonpermissive conditions.

The molecular chaperones GroEL and GroES facilitate protein folding in an ATP-dependent manner under conditions where no spontaneous folding occurs. It has remained unknown whether GroE achieves this by a passive sequestration of protein inside the GroE cavity or by changing the folding pathway of a protein. Here we used citrate synthase, a well studied model substrate, to discriminate between these possibilities. We demonstrate that GroE maintains unfolding intermediates in a state that allows productive folding under nonpermissive conditions. During encapsulation of non-native protein inside GroEL.GroES complexes, a folding reaction takes place, generating association-competent monomeric intermediates that are no longer recognized by GroEL. Thus, GroE shifts folding intermediates to a productive folding pathway under heat shock conditions where even the native protein unfolds in the absence of GroE.     

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.     

Effects of C-terminal Truncation of Chaperonin GroEL on the Yield of In-cage Folding of the Green Fluorescent Protein

Chaperonin GroEL from Escherichia coli consists of two heptameric rings stacked back-to-back to form a cagelike structure. It assists in the folding of substrate proteins in concert with the co-chaperonin GroES by incorporating them into its large cavity. The mechanism underlying the incorporation of substrate proteins currently remains unclear. The flexible C-terminal residues of GroEL, which are invisible in the x-ray crystal structure, have recently been suggested to play a key role in the efficient encapsulation of substrates. These C-terminal regions have also been suggested to separate the double rings of GroEL at the bottom of the cavity. To elucidate the role of the C-terminal regions of GroEL on the efficient encapsulation of substrate proteins, we herein investigated the effects of C-terminal truncation on GroE-mediated folding using the green fluorescent protein (GFP) as a substrate. We demonstrated that the yield of in-cage folding mediated by a single ring GroEL (SR1) was markedly decreased by truncation, whereas that mediated by a double ring football-shaped complex was not affected. These results suggest that the C-terminal region of GroEL functions as a barrier between rings, preventing the leakage of GFP through the bottom space of the cage. We also found that once GFP folded into its native conformation within the cavity of SR1 it never escaped even in the absence of the C-terminal tails. This suggests that GFP molecules escaped through the pore only when they adopted a denatured conformation. Therefore, the folding and escape of GFP from C-terminally truncated SR1·GroES appeared to be competing with each other.     

Monitoring protein conformation along the pathway of chaperonin-assisted folding

The GroEL/GroES chaperonin system mediates protein folding in the bacterial cytosol. Newly synthesized proteins reach GroEL via transfer from upstream chaperones such as DnaK/DnaJ (Hsp70). Here we employed single molecule and ensemble FRET to monitor the conformational transitions of a model substrate as it proceeds along this chaperone pathway. We find that DnaK/DnaJ stabilizes the protein in collapsed states that fold exceedingly slowly. Transfer to GroEL results in unfolding, with a fraction of molecules reaching locally highly expanded conformations. ATP-induced domain movements in GroEL cause transient further unfolding and rapid mobilization of protein segments with moderate hydrophobicity, allowing partial compaction on the GroEL surface. The more hydrophobic regions are released upon subsequent protein encapsulation in the central GroEL cavity by GroES, completing compaction and allowing rapid folding. Segmental chain release and compaction may be important in avoiding misfolding by proteins that fail to fold efficiently through spontaneous hydrophobic collapse.     

The C-terminal Tails of the Bacterial Chaperonin GroEL Stimulate Protein Folding by Directly Altering the Conformation of a Substrate Protein

Many essential cellular proteins fold only with the assistance of chaperonin machines like the GroEL-GroES system of Escherichia coli. However, the mechanistic details of assisted protein folding by GroEL-GroES remain the subject of ongoing debate. We previously demonstrated that GroEL-GroES enhances the productive folding of a kinetically trapped substrate protein through unfolding, where both binding energy and the energy of ATP hydrolysis are used to disrupt the inhibitory misfolded states. Here, we show that the intrinsically disordered yet highly conserved C-terminal sequence of the GroEL subunits directly contributes to substrate protein unfolding. Interactions between the C terminus and the non-native substrate protein alter the binding position of the substrate protein on the GroEL apical surface. The C-terminal tails also impact the conformational state of the substrate protein during capture and encapsulation on the GroEL ring. Importantly, removal of the C termini results in slower overall folding, reducing the fraction of the substrate protein that commits quickly to a productive folding pathway and slowing several kinetically distinct folding transitions that occur inside the GroEL-GroES cavity. The conserved C-terminal tails of GroEL are thus important for protein folding from the beginning to the end of the chaperonin reaction cycle.     

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.     

Effects of divalent cations on encapsulation and release in the GroEL-assisted folding

Chaperonin GroEL assists protein folding in the presence of ATP and magnesium. Recent studies have shown that several divalent cations other than magnesium induce conformational changes of GroEL, thereby influencing chaperonin-assisted protein folding, but little is known about the detailed mechanism for such actions. Thus, the effects of divalent cations on protein encapsulation by GroEL/ES complexes were investigated. Of the divalent cations, not only magnesium, but also manganese ions enabled the functional refolding and release of 5,10-methylenetetrahydroforate reductase (METF) by GroEL. Neither ATP hydrolysis nor METF refolding was observed in the presence of zinc ion, whereas only ATP hydrolysis was induced by cobalt and nickel ions. SDS-PAGE and gel filtration analyses revealed that cobalt, nickel and zinc ions permit the formation of stable substrate-GroEL-GroES cis-ternary complexes, but prevent the release of METF from GroEL.     

"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.     

Flexibility of GroES Mobile Loop Is Required for Efficient Chaperonin Function

Chaperonin GroEL and its partner GroES assist the folding of nascent and stress-damaged proteins in an ATP-dependent manner. Free GroES has a flexible "mobile loop" and binds to GroEL through the residues at the tip of the loop, capping the central cavity of GroEL to provide the substrate polypeptide a cage for secure in-cage folding. Here, we show that restriction of the flexibility of the loop by a disulfide cross-linking between cysteines within the loop results in the inefficient formation of a stable GroEL-polypeptide-GroES ternary complex and inefficient folding. Then, we generated substrate proteins with enhanced binding affinity to GroEL by fusion of one or two SBP (strongly binding peptide for GroEL) sequences and examined the effect of disulfide cross-linking on the assisted folding. The results indicate that the higher the binding affinity of the substrate polypeptide to GroEL, the greater the contribution of the mobile loop flexibility to efficient in-cage folding. It is likely that the flexibility helps GroES capture GroEL's binding sites that are already occupied by the substrate polypeptide with various binding modes.     

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.     

ATP-triggered conformational changes delineate substrate-binding and -folding mechanics of the GroEL chaperonin

The chaperonin GroEL assists the folding of nascent or stress-denatured polypeptides by actions of binding and encapsulation. ATP binding initiates a series of conformational changes triggering the association of the cochaperonin GroES, followed by further large movements that eject the substrate polypeptide from hydrophobic binding sites into a GroES-capped, hydrophilic folding chamber. We used cryo-electron microscopy, statistical analysis, and flexible fitting to resolve a set of distinct GroEL-ATP conformations that can be ordered into a trajectory of domain rotation and elevation. The initial conformations are likely to be the ones that capture polypeptide substrate. Then the binding domains extend radially to separate from each other but maintain their binding surfaces facing the cavity, potentially exerting mechanical force upon kinetically trapped, misfolded substrates. The extended conformation also provides a potential docking site for GroES, to trigger the final, 100° domain rotation constituting the "power stroke" that ejects substrate into the folding chamber.     

Topologies of a substrate protein bound to the chaperonin GroEL

The chaperonin GroEL assists polypeptide folding through sequential steps of binding nonnative protein in the central cavity of an open ring, via hydrophobic surfaces of its apical domains, followed by encapsulation in a hydrophilic cavity. To examine the binding state, we have classified a large data set of GroEL binary complexes with nonnative malate dehydrogenase (MDH), imaged by cryo-electron microscopy, to sort them into homogeneous subsets. The resulting electron density maps show MDH associated in several characteristic binding topologies either deep inside the cavity or at its inlet, contacting three to four consecutive GroEL apical domains. Consistent with visualization of bound polypeptide distributed over many parts of the central cavity, disulfide crosslinking could be carried out between a cysteine in a bound substrate protein and cysteines substituted anywhere inside GroEL. Finally, substrate binding induced adjustments in GroEL itself, observed mainly as clustering together of apical domains around sites of substrate binding.     

Role of Denatured-State Properties in Chaperonin Action Probed by Single-Molecule Spectroscopy

The bacterial chaperonin GroEL/GroES assists folding of a broad spectrum of denatured and misfolded proteins. Here, we explore the limits of this remarkable promiscuity by mapping two denatured proteins with very different conformational properties, rhodanese and cyclophilin A, during binding and encapsulation by GroEL/GroES with single-molecule spectroscopy, microfluidic mixing, and ensemble kinetics. We find that both proteins bind to GroEL with high affinity in a reaction involving substantial conformational adaptation. However, whereas the compact denatured state of rhodanese is encapsulated efficiently upon addition of GroES and ATP, the more expanded and unstructured denatured cyclophilin A is not encapsulated but is expelled into solution. The origin of this surprising disparity is the weaker interactions of cyclophilin A with a transiently formed GroEL-GroES complex, which may serve as a crucial checkpoint for substrate discrimination.     

GroEL-mediated protein folding.

I. Architecture of GroEL and GroES and the reaction pathway A. Architecture of the chaperonins B. Reaction pathway of GroEL-GroES-mediated folding II. Polypeptide binding A. A parallel network of chaperones binding polypeptides in vivo B. Polypeptide binding in vitro 1. Role of hydrophobicity in recognition 2. Homologous proteins with differing recognition-differences in primary structure versus effects on folding pathway 3. Conformations recognized by GroEL a. Refolding studies b. Binding of metastable intermediates c. Conformations while stably bound at GroEL 4. Binding constants and rates of association 5. Conformational changes in the substrate protein associated with binding by GroEL a. Observations b. Kinetic versus thermodynamic action of GroEL in mediating unfolding c. Crossing the energy landscape in the presence of GroEL III. ATP binding and hydrolysis-driving the reaction cycle IV. GroEL-GroES-polypeptide ternary complexes-the folding-active cis complex A. Cis and trans ternary complexes B. Symmetric complexes C. The folding-active intermediate of a chaperonin reaction-cis ternary complex D. The role of the cis space in the folding reaction E. Folding governed by a "timer" mechanism F. Release of nonnative polypeptides during the GroEL-GroES reaction G. Release of both native and nonnative forms under physiologic conditions H. A role for ATP binding, as well as hydrolysis, in the folding cycle V. Concluding remarks.     

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.     

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.