In vitro binding of ribosomes to the beta subunit of the Sec61p protein translocation complex

The Sec61p complex forms the core element of the protein translocation complex (translocon) in the rough endoplasmic reticulum (rough ER) membrane. Translating or nontranslating ribosomes bind with high affinity to ER membranes that have been stripped of ribosomes or to liposomes containing purified Sec61p. Here we present evidence that the beta subunit of the complex (Sec61beta) makes contact with nontranslating ribosomes. A fusion protein containing the Sec61beta cytoplasmic domain (Sec61beta(c)) prevents the binding of ribosomes to stripped ER-derived membranes and also binds to ribosomes directly with an affinity close to the affinity of ribosomes for stripped ER-derived membranes. The ribosome binding activity of Sec61beta(c), like that of native ER membranes, is sensitive to high salt concentrations and is not based on an unspecific charge-dependent interaction of the relatively basic Sec61beta(c) domain with ribosomal RNA. Like stripped ER membranes, the Sec61beta(c) sequence binds to large ribosomal subunits in preference over small subunits. Previous studies have shown that Sec61beta is inessential for ribosome binding and protein translocation, but translocation is impaired by the absence of Sec61beta, and it has been proposed that Sec61beta assists in the insertion of nascent proteins into the translocation pore. Our results suggest a physical interaction of the ribosome itself with Sec61beta; this may normally occur alongside interactions between the ribosome and other elements of Sec61p, or it may represent one stage in a temporal sequence of binding.     

Signal Recognition Particle-dependent Targeting of Ribosomes to the Rough Endoplasmic Reticulum in the Absence and Presence of the Nascent Polypeptide-associated Complex

Proteins with RER-specific signal sequences are cotranslationally translocated across the rough endoplasmic reticulum through a proteinaceous channel composed of oligomers of the Sec61 complex. The Sec61 complex also binds ribosomes with high affinity. The dual function of the Sec61 complex necessitates a mechanism to prevent signal sequence-independent binding of ribosomes to the translocation channel. We have examined the hypothesis that the signal recognition particle (SRP) and the nascent polypeptide-associated complex (NAC), respectively, act as positive and negative regulatory factors to mediate the signal sequence-specific attachment of the ribosome-nascent chain complex (RNC) to the translocation channel. Here, SRP-independent translocation of a nascent secretory polypeptide was shown to occur in the presence of endogenous wheat germ or rabbit reticulocyte NAC. Furthermore, SRP markedly enhanced RNC binding to the translocation channel irrespective of the presence of NAC. Binding of RNCs, but not SRP-RNCs, to the Sec61 complex is competitively inhibited by 80S ribosomes. Thus, the SRP-dependent targeting pathway provides a mechanism for delivery of RNCs to the translocation channel that is not inhibited by the nonselective interaction between the ribosome and the Sec61 complex.     

Binding of Signal Recognition Particle Gives Ribosome/Nascent Chain Complexes a Competitive Advantage in Endoplasmic Reticulum Membrane Interaction

Most secretory and membrane proteins are sorted by signal sequences to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane early during their synthesis. Targeting of the ribosome-nascent chain complex (RNC) involves the binding of the signal sequence to the signal recognition particle (SRP), followed by an interaction of ribosome-bound SRP with the SRP receptor. However, ribosomes can also independently bind to the ER translocation channel formed by the Sec61p complex. To explain the specificity of membrane targeting, it has therefore been proposed that nascent polypeptide-associated complex functions as a cytosolic inhibitor of signal sequence- and SRP-independent ribosome binding to the ER membrane. We report here that SRP-independent binding of RNCs to the ER membrane can occur in the presence of all cytosolic factors, including nascent polypeptide-associated complex. Nontranslating ribosomes competitively inhibit SRP-independent membrane binding of RNCs but have no effect when SRP is bound to the RNCs. The protective effect of SRP against ribosome competition depends on a functional signal sequence in the nascent chain and is also observed with reconstituted proteoliposomes containing only the Sec61p complex and the SRP receptor. We conclude that cytosolic factors do not prevent the membrane binding of ribosomes. Instead, specific ribosome targeting to the Sec61p complex is provided by the binding of SRP to RNCs, followed by an interaction with the SRP receptor, which gives RNC–SRP complexes a selective advantage in membrane targeting over nontranslating ribosomes.     

Binding of ribosomes to the rough endoplasmic reticulum mediated by the Sec61p-complex

The cotranslational translocation of proteins across the ER membrane involves the tight binding of translating ribosomes to the membrane, presumably to ribosome receptors. The identity of the latter has been controversial. One putative receptor candidate is Sec61 alpha, a multi- spanning membrane protein that is associated with two additional membrane proteins (Sec61 beta and gamma) to form the Sec61p-complex. Other receptors of 34 and 180 kD have also been proposed on the basis of their ability to bind at low salt concentration ribosomes lacking nascent chains. We now show that the Sec61p-complex has also binding activity but that, at low salt conditions, it accounts for only one third of the total binding sites in proteoliposomes reconstituted from a detergent extract of ER membranes. Under these conditions, the assay has also limited specificity with respect to ribosomes. However, if the ribosome-binding assay is performed at physiological salt concentration, most of the unspecific binding is lost; the Sec61p- complex then accounts for the majority of specific ribosome-binding sites in reconstituted ER membranes. To study the membrane interaction of ribosomes participating in protein translocation, native rough microsomes were treated with proteases. The amount of membrane-bound ribosomes is only slightly reduced by protease treatment, consistent with the protease-resistance of Sec61 alpha which is shielded by these ribosomes. In contrast, p34 and p180 can be readily degraded, indicating that they are not essential for the membrane anchoring of ribosomes in protease-treated microsomes. These data provide further evidence that the Sec61p-complex is responsible for the membrane- anchoring of ribosomes during translocation and make it unlikely that p34 or p180 are essential for this process.     

Role of the cytoplasmic segments of Sec61alpha in the ribosome-binding and translocation-promoting activities of the Sec61 complex

The Sec61 complex performs a dual function in protein translocation across the RER, serving as both the high affinity ribosome receptor and the translocation channel. To define regions of the Sec61 complex that are involved in ribosome binding and translocation promotion, ribosome-stripped microsomes were subjected to limited digestions using proteases with different cleavage specificities. Protein immunoblot analysis using antibodies specific for the NH(2) and COOH terminus of Sec61alpha was used to map the location of proteolysis cleavage sites. We observed a striking correlation between the loss of binding activity for nontranslating ribosomes and the digestion of the COOH- terminal tail or cytoplasmic loop 8 of Sec61alpha. The proteolyzed microsomes were assayed for SRP-independent translocation activity to determine whether high affinity binding of the ribosome to the Sec61 complex is a prerequisite for nascent chain transport. Microsomes that do not bind nontranslating ribosomes at physiological ionic strength remain active in SRP-independent translocation, indicating that the ribosome binding and translocation promotion activities of the Sec61 complex do not strictly correlate. Translocation-promoting activity was most severely inhibited by cleavage of cytosolic loop 6, indicating that this segment is a critical determinant for this function of the Sec61 complex.     

Sec61p is the main ribosome receptor in the endoplasmic reticulum of Saccharomyces cerevisiae

A characteristic feature of the co-translational protein translocation into the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) is the tight association of the translating ribosomes with the translocation sites in the membrane. Biochemical analyses identified the Sec61 complex as the main ribosome receptor in the ER of mammalian cells. Similar experiments using purified homologues from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the Sec61p complex and the Ssh1p complex, respectively, demonstrated that they bind ribosomes with an affinity similar to that of the mammalian Sec61 complex. However, these studies did not exclude the presence of other proteins that may form abundant ribosome binding sites in the yeast ER. We now show here that similar to the situation found in mammals in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae the two Sec61-homologues Sec61p and Ssh1p are essential for the formation of high-affinity ribosome binding sites in the ER membrane. The number of binding sites formed by Ssh1p under standard growth conditions is at least 4 times less than those formed by Sec61p.     

Identification of cytoplasmic residues of Sec61p involved in ribosome binding and cotranslational translocation

The cytoplasmic surface of Sec61p is the binding site for the ribosome and has been proposed to interact with the signal recognition particle receptor during targeting of the ribosome nascent chain complex to the translocation channel. Point mutations in cytoplasmic loops six (L6) and eight (L8) of yeast Sec61p cause reductions in growth rates and defects in the translocation of nascent polypeptides that use the cotranslational translocation pathway. Sec61 heterotrimers isolated from the L8 sec61 mutants have a greatly reduced affinity for 80S ribosomes. Cytoplasmic accumulation of protein precursors demonstrates that the initial contact between the large ribosomal subunit and the Sec61 complex is important for efficient insertion of a nascent polypeptide into the translocation pore. In contrast, point mutations in L6 of Sec61p inhibit cotranslational translocation without significantly reducing the ribosome-binding activity, indicating that the L6 and L8 sec61 mutants affect different steps in the cotranslational translocation pathway.     

Coordination of N-glycosylation and protein translocation across the endoplasmic reticulum membrane by Sss1 protein

Secretory proteins are translocated across the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane through a channel formed by three proteins, namely Sec61p, Sbh1p, and Sss1p (Johnson, A. E., and van Waes, M. A. (1999) Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 15, 799-842). Sec61p and Sss1p are essential for translocation (Esnault, Y., Blondel, M. O., Deshaies, R. J., Schekman, R., and Kepes, F. (1993) EMBO J. 12, 4083-4093). Sec61p is a polytopic membrane protein that lines the protein translocation channel. The role of Sss1p is unknown. During import into the ER through the Sec61p channel, many proteins are N-glycosylated before translocation is completed. In addition, both the Sec61 channel and oligosaccharyl transferase (OST) copurify with ribosomes from rough ER, suggesting that OST is located in close proximity to the Sec61 channel (Gorlich, D., Prehn, S., Hartmann, E., Kalies, K.-U., and Rapoport, T. A. (1992) Cell 71, 489-503 and Wang, L., and Dobberstein, B. (1999) FEBS Lett. 457, 316-322). Here, we demonstrate a direct interaction between Sss1p and a subunit of OST, Wbp1p, using the split-ubiquitin system and co-immunoprecipitation. We generated mutants in the cytoplasmic domain of Sss1p that disturb the interaction with OST and are viable but display a translocation defect specific for proteins with glycosylation acceptor sites. Our data suggest that Sss1p coordinates translocation across the ER membrane and N-linked glycosylation of secretory proteins.     

The β Subunit of the Sec61 Complex Facilitates Cotranslational Protein Transport and Interacts with the Signal Peptidase during Translocation

The Sec61 complex is the central component of the protein translocation apparatus of the ER membrane. We have addressed the role of the β subunit (Sec61β) during cotranslational protein translocation. With a reconstituted system, we show that a Sec61 complex lacking Sec61β is essentially inactive when elongation and membrane targeting of a nascent chain occur at the same time. The translocation process is perturbed at a step where the nascent chain would be inserted into the translocation channel. However, if sufficient time is given for the interaction of the nascent polypeptide with the mutant Sec61 complex, translocation is almost normal. Thus Sec61β kinetically facilitates cotranslational translocation, but is not essential for it.

Using chemical cross-linking we show that Sec61β not only interacts with subunits of the Sec61 complex but also with the 25-kD subunit of the signal peptidase complex (SPC25), thus demonstrating for the first time a tight interaction between the SPC and the Sec61 complex. Interestingly, the cross-links between Sec61β and SPC25 and between Sec61β and Sec61α depend on the presence of membrane-bound ribosomes, suggesting that these interactions are induced when translocation is initiated. We propose that the SPC is transiently recruited to the translocation site, thus enhancing its activity.

     

Single rRNA Helices Bind Independently to the Protein‐Conducting Channel SecYEG

Ribosomes tightly interact with protein‐conducting channels in the plasma membrane of bacteria (SecYEG) and in the endoplasmic reticulum of eukaryotes (Sec61 complex). This interaction is mediated by multiple junctions and is highly conserved during evolution. Although it is well known that both ribosomal proteins and ribosomal RNA (rRNA) are involved in the ribosome–channel interaction, detailed analyses on how these components contribute to this binding are lacking. Here, we demonstrate that the evolutionary conservation of ribosome binding is solely mediated by rRNA. Moreover, we show that in vitro transcribed 23 S rRNA binds with similar characteristics to protein translocation channels as native 23 S rRNA or 50 S ribosomal subunits. This indicates that base modifications, which exist in native rRNA, do not crucially influence the binding. In two of the ribosome‐channel junctions (c1 and c2), exclusively rRNA helices are involved. Using in vitro transcribed rRNA mutants, we now provide evidence that large parts of the rRNA can be deleted without altering its binding properties, as long as the rRNA helices of the c1 and c2 junctions remain intact. We demonstrate that the connection sites c1 and c2 generate high‐affinity binding sites that act independently of each other. This could explain why membrane‐bound ribosomes have an extremely low off‐rate .     

The protein translocation channel binds proteasomes to the endoplasmic reticulum membrane

Misfolded secretory proteins are transported across the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane into the cytosol for degradation by proteasomes. A large fraction of proteasomes in a cell is associated with the ER membrane. We show here that binding of proteasomes to ER membranes is salt sensitive, ATP dependent, and mediated by the 19S regulatory particle. The base of the 19S particle, which contains six AAA-ATPases, binds to microsomal membranes with high affinity, whereas the 19S lid complex binds weakly. We demonstrate that ribosomes and proteasomes compete for binding to the ER membrane and have similar affinities for their receptor. Ribosomes bind to the protein conducting channel formed by the Sec61 complex in the ER membrane. We co-precipitated subunits of the Sec61 complex with ER-associated proteasome 19S particles, and found that proteoliposomes containing only the Sec61 complex retained proteasome binding activity. Collectively, our data suggest that the Sec61 channel is a principal proteasome receptor in the ER membrane.     

Identification of a Novel Stage of Ribosome/Nascent Chain Association with the Endoplasmic Reticulum Membrane

Protein translocation in the mammalian endoplasmic reticulum (ER) occurs cotranslationally and requires the binding of translationally active ribosomes to components of the ER membrane. Three candidate ribosome receptors, p180, p34, and Sec61p, have been identified in binding studies with inactive ribosomes, suggesting that ribosome binding is mediated through a receptor-ligand interaction. To determine if the binding of nascent chain-bearing ribosomes is regulated in a manner similar to inactive ribosomes, we have investigated the ribosome/nascent chain binding event that accompanies targeting. In agreement with previous reports, indicating that Sec61p displays the majority of the ER ribosome binding activity, we observed that Sec61p is shielded from proteolytic digestion by native, bound ribosomes. The binding of active, nascent chain bearing ribosomes to the ER membrane is, however, insensitive to the ribosome occupancy state of Sec61p. To determine if additional, Sec61p independent, stages of the ribosome binding reaction could be identified, ribosome/nascent chain binding was assayed as a function of RM concentration. At limiting RM concentrations, a protease resistant ribosome-membrane junction was formed, yet the nascent chain was salt extractable and cross-linked to Sec61p with low efficiency. At nonlimiting RM concentrations, bound nascent chains were protease and salt resistant and cross-linked to Sec61p with higher efficiency. On the basis of these and other data, we propose that ribosome binding to the ER membrane is a multi-stage process comprised of an initial, Sec61p independent binding event, which precedes association of the ribosome/nascent chain complex with Sec61p.     

Investigating the SecY plug movement at the SecYEG translocation channel

Protein translocation occurs across the energy-conserving bacterial membrane at the SecYEG channel. The crystal structure of the channel has revealed a possible mechanism for gating and opening. This study evaluates the plug hypothesis using cysteine crosslink experiments in combination with various allelic forms of the Sec complex. The results demonstrate that the SecY plug domain moves away from the center of the channel toward SecE during polypeptide translocation, and further show that the translocation-enhancing prlA3 mutation and SecG subunit change the properties of channel gating. Locking the plug in the open state preactivates the Sec complex, and a super-active translocase can be created when combined with the prlA4 mutation located in the pore of the channel. Dimerization of the Sec complex, which is essential for translocase activity, relocates the plug toward the open position. We propose that oligomerization may result in SecYEG cooperative interactions important to prime the translocon function.     

Yeast ribosomes bind to highly purified reconstituted Sec61p complex and to mammalian p180

To determine whether the yeast Sec61p translocation pore is a high-affinity ribosome receptor in the endoplasmic reticulum, we isolated the Sec61p complex using an improved protocol in which contaminants found previously to be associated with the complex are absent. The purified complex, which contains Sec61p with an amino terminal hexahistidine tag, was active since it rescued a sec61–3 post-translational translocation defect in a reconstituted system. Co-reconstitution of the Sec61p and Sec63p complexes into liposomes failed to support post-translational translocation, suggesting that Sec62p is required for this process. By Scatchard analysis, the purified Sec61p complex bound to yeast ribosomes when reconstituted into liposomes with a K_D of 5.6 n m , a value similar to the K_D obtained when ribosome binding to total microsomal protein was measured (2.7 n m ). In addition, a mammalian protein, p180, which has been proposed to be a ribosome receptor, was expressed in yeast, and endoplasmic reticulum-derived microsomes isolated from this strain exhibited ∼2.3-fold greater binding to yeast ribosomes. Despite this increase in ribosome binding, neither co- nor post-translational translocation was compromised in vivo . In sum, our data suggest that the Sec61p complex is a ribosome receptor in the yeast endoplasmic reticulum membrane.     

A mammalian homolog of SEC61p and SECYp is associated with ribosomes and nascent polypeptides during translocation.

SEC61p is essential for protein translocation across the endoplasmic reticulum membrane of S. cerevisiae. We have found a mammalian homolog that shows more than 50% sequence identity with the yeast protein. Moreover, several regions of SEC61p have significant similarities with corresponding ones of SecYp of bacteria, indicating a strong evolutionary conservation of the mechanism of protein translocation. Mammalian Sec61p, like the yeast protein, is located in the immediate vicinity of nascent polypeptides during their membrane passage. It is tightly associated with membrane-bound ribosomes, suggesting that the nascent chain passes directly from the ribosome into a protein-conducting channel. These results define Sec61p as a ubiquitous key component of the protein translocation apparatus.     

The ribosome quality control pathway can access nascent polypeptides stalled at the Sec61 translocon

Cytosolic ribosomes that stall during translation are split into subunits, and nascent polypeptides trapped in the 60S subunit are ubiquitinated by the ribosome quality control (RQC) pathway. Whether the RQC pathway can also target stalls during cotranslational translocation into the ER is not known. Here we report that listerin and NEMF, core RQC components, are bound to translocon-engaged 60S subunits on native ER membranes. RQC recruitment to the ER in cultured cells is stimulated by translation stalling. Biochemical analyses demonstrated that translocon-targeted nascent polypeptides that subsequently stall are polyubiquitinated in 60S complexes. Ubiquitination at the translocon requires cytosolic exposure of the polypeptide at the ribosome–Sec61 junction. This exposure can result from either failed insertion into the Sec61 channel or partial backsliding of translocating nascent chains. Only Sec61-engaged nascent chains early in their biogenesis were relatively refractory to ubiquitination. Modeling based on recent 60S–RQC and 80S–Sec61 structures suggests that the E3 ligase listerin accesses nascent polypeptides via a gap in the ribosome–translocon junction near the Sec61 lateral gate. Thus the RQC pathway can target stalled translocation intermediates for degradation from the Sec61 channel.     

Preferential targeting of a signal recognition particle-dependent precursor to the Ssh1p translocon in yeast

Protein translocation across the endoplasmic reticulum membrane occurs via a "translocon" channel formed by the Sec61p complex. In yeast, two channels exist: the canonical Sec61p channel and a homolog called Ssh1p. Here, we used trapped translocation intermediates to demonstrate that a specific signal recognition particle-dependent substrate, Sec71p, is targeted exclusively to Ssh1p. Strikingly, we found that, in the absence of Ssh1p, precursor could be successfully redirected to canonical Sec61p, demonstrating that the normal targeting reaction must involve preferential sorting to Ssh1p. Our data therefore demonstrate that Ssh1p is the primary translocon for Sec71p and reveal a novel sorting mechanism at the level of the endoplasmic reticulum membrane enabling precursors to be directed to distinct translocons. Interestingly, the Ssh1p-dependent translocation of Sec71p was found to be dependent upon Sec63p, demonstrating a previously unappreciated functional interaction between Sec63p and the Ssh1p translocon.     

A single Sec61-complex functions as a protein-conducting channel

During cotranslational translocation of proteins into the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) translating ribosomes bind to Sec61-complexes. Presently two models exist how these membrane protein complexes might form protein-conducting channels. While electron microscopic data suggest that a ring-like structure consisting of four Sec61-complexes build the channel, the recently solved crystal structure of a homologous bacterial protein complex led to the speculation that the actual tunnel is formed by just one individual Sec61-complex. Using protease protection assays together with quantitative immunoblotting we directly examined the structure of mammalian protein-conducting channels. We found that in native ER-membranes one single Sec61alpha-molecule is preferentially protected by a membrane bound ribosome, both, in the presence and absence of nascent polypeptides. In addition we present evidence that the nascent polypeptide destabilizes the ring-like translocation apparatus formed by four Sec61-complexes. Moreover, we found that after solubilization of ER-membranes a single Sec61-complex is sufficient to protect the nascent polypeptide chain against added proteases. Finally, we could show that this single Sec61-complex allows the movement of the nascent chain, when it has been released from the ribosome by puromycin treatment. Collectively, our data suggest that the active protein-conducting channel in the ER is formed by a single Sec61-complex.     

The mammalian and yeast translocon complexes comprise a characteristic Sec61 channel

In eukaryotes, protein translocation across and insertion into the membrane of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) is facilitated by a protein-conducting channel, the Sec61 complex or translocon. In our previous electrophysiological studies, we characterized the mammalian Sec61 channel from Canis familiaris. Here we extended these initial results to the Sec61 channel from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae and compared the basic electrophysiological properties of both channel preparations with respect to the gating behaviour, distribution of channel open states, ionic conductance, approximated pore dimensions, reversal potential and selectivity as well as voltage-dependent open probability. We found that the Sec61 complexes from both species displayed conformable characteristics of the highly dynamic channel in an intrinsically open state. In contrast, the bacterial Sec61-homologue, the SecYEG complex from Escherichia coli, displayed under the same experimental conditions significantly different properties residing in an intrinsically closed state. We therefore propose that considerable differences between the respective eukaryote and prokaryote protein-conducting channel units and their regulation exist.     

The Sec translocon mediated protein transport in prokaryotes and eukaryotes

Protein transport via the Sec translocon represents an evolutionary conserved mechanism for delivering cytosolically-synthesized proteins to extra-cytosolic compartments. The Sec translocon has a three-subunit core, termed Sec61 in Eukaryotes and SecYEG in Bacteria. It is located in the endoplasmic reticulum of Eukaryotes and in the cytoplasmic membrane of Bacteria where it constitutes a channel that can be activated by multiple partner proteins. These partner proteins determine the mechanism of polypeptide movement across the channel. During SRP-dependent co-translational targeting, the ribosome threads the nascent protein directly into the Sec channel. This pathway is in Bacteria mainly dedicated for membrane proteins but in Eukaryotes also employed by secretory proteins. The alternative pathway, leading to post-translational translocation across the Sec translocon engages an ATP-dependent pushing mechanism by the motor protein SecA in Bacteria and a ratcheting mechanism by the lumenal chaperone BiP in Eukaryotes. Protein transport and biogenesis is also assisted by additional proteins at the lateral gate of SecY/Sec61α and in the lumen of the endoplasmic reticulum or in the periplasm of bacterial cells. The modular assembly enables the Sec complex to transport a vast array of substrates. In this review we summarize recent biochemical and structural information on the prokaryotic and eukaryotic Sec translocons and we describe the remarkably complex interaction network of the Sec complexes.