A mutation in GroEL interferes with protein folding by reducing the rate of discharge of sequestered polypeptides.

GroEL140, a mutant Escherichia coli chaperonin unable to support bacteriophage lambda head assembly, was purified to near homogeneity and compared to wild type GroEL (cpn60). GroEL140 exhibited a 1.5-fold lower ATPase activity relative to the wild type protein. The hydrolysis of ATP by both polypeptides was fully inhibited by an excess of ATP gamma S and partially inhibited by ADP and 5'-adenylylimidodiphosphate, suggesting that adenine nucleotides display different affinities for the ATP binding site of chaperonins. GroEL140 was more sensitive to trypsin digestion compared to wild type GroEL indicating that the mutation destabilized the conformation of the mutant. The proteolytic susceptibility of both chaperonins was similarly enhanced upon addition of ATP, ADP or non-hydrolyzable ATP analogs, providing evidence (i) of a conformational change in the chaperonin structure which is likely to drive the protein discharge process, and (ii) that hydrolysis of ATP is not required to achieve topological modifications. GroEL140 retained its ability to bind non-native ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (Rbu-P2-carboxylase), but released bound proteins upon addition of ATP and GroES (cpn 10) 6-7-fold less efficiently compared to GroEL. This functional defect was shown to be related to a suboptimal, but not an absence of, interaction with GroES since (i) GroEL140 and GroES were unable to form a complex isolatable by size exclusion chromatography, and (ii) increasing the incubation time or the concentration of GroES enhanced the amount of refolded Rbu-P2-carboxylase discharged from GroEL140-Rbu-P2-carboxylase binary complexes. Pulse-chase experiments involving a double immunoabsorption technique confirmed that Rbu-P2-carboxylase remained associated two times longer with GroEL140 than with GroEL in vivo.     

Mechanism of chaperonin action: GroES binding and release can drive GroEL-mediated protein folding in the absence of ATP hydrolysis.

As a basic principle, assisted protein folding by GroEL has been proposed to involve the disruption of misfolded protein structures through ATP hydrolysis and interaction with the cofactor GroES. Here, we describe chaperonin subreactions that prompt a re-examination of this view. We find that GroEL-bound substrate polypeptide can induce GroES cycling on and off GroEL in the presence of ADP. This mechanism promotes efficient folding of the model protein rhodanese, although at a slower rate than in the presence of ATP. Folding occurs when GroES displaces the bound protein into the sequestered volume of the GroEL cavity. Resulting native protein leaves GroEL upon GroES release. A single-ring variant of GroEL is also fully functional in supporting this reaction cycle. We conclude that neither the energy of ATP hydrolysis nor the allosteric coupling of the two GroEL rings is directly required for GroEL/GroES-mediated protein folding. The minimal mechanism of the reaction is the binding and release of GroES to a polypeptide-containing ring of GroEL, thereby closing and opening the GroEL folding cage. The role of ATP hydrolysis is mainly to induce conformational changes in GroEL that result in GroES cycling at a physiologically relevant rate.     

The Escherichia coli heat shock proteins GroEL and GroES modulate the folding of the beta-lactamase precursor.

One of the fundamental problems in biochemistry is the role of accessory proteins in the process of protein folding. The Escherichia coli heat shock protein complex GroEL/ES has been suggested to be a 'chaperonin' and be involved in both oligomer assembly as well as protein transport through the membrane. We show here that the folding of the purified precursor of beta-lactamase is inhibited by purified GroEL or the GroEL/ES complex with a stoichiometry of one particle per molecule of pre-beta-lactamase. Purified GroES alone has no effect on folding. After Mg2+ ATP addition folding resumes and the yield of active enzyme is higher than in the absence of GroEL or GroEL/ES. Unexpectedly, GroEL or GroEL/ES, when added to folded pre-beta-lactamase, lead to an apparent net 'unfolding', probably to a collapsed state of the protein, which can be reversed by the addition of Mg2+ ATP. The reversible and Mg2+ ATP-dependent association of GroEL/ES with non-native proteins might explain its postulated role in both protein transport and oligomer assembly.     

Stimulating the substrate folding activity of a single ring GroEL variant by modulating the cochaperonin GroES

In mediating protein folding, chaperonin GroEL and cochaperonin GroES form an enclosed chamber for substrate proteins in an ATP-dependent manner. The essential role of the double ring assembly of GroEL is demonstrated by the functional deficiency of the single ring GroEL(SR). The GroEL(SR)-GroES is highly stable with minimal ATPase activity. To restore the ATP cycle and the turnover of the folding chamber, we sought to weaken the GroEL(SR)-GroES interaction systematically by concatenating seven copies of groES to generate groES(7). GroES Ile-25, Val-26, and Leu-27, residues on the GroEL-GroES interface, were substituted with Asp on different groES modules of groES(7). GroES(7) variants activate ATP activity of GroEL(SR), but only some restore the substrate folding function of GroEL(SR), indicating a direct role of GroES in facilitating substrate folding through its dynamics with GroEL. Active GroEL(SR)-GroES(7) systems may resemble mammalian mitochondrial chaperonin systems.     

The lower hydrolysis of ATP by the stress protein GroEL is a major factor responsible for the diminished chaperonin activity at low temperature

The chaperonins GroEL and GroES were shown to facilitate the refolding of urea-unfolded rhodanese in an ATP-dependent process at 25 or 37 degrees C. A diminished chaperonin activity was observed at 10 degrees C, however. At low temperature, GroEL retains its ability to form a complex with urea-unfolded rhodanese or with GroES. GroEL is also able to bind ATP at 10 degrees C. Interestingly, the ATPase activity of GroEL was highly decreased at low temperatures. Hydrolysis of ATP by GroEL was 60% less at 10 degrees C than at 25 degrees C. We conclude that the reduced hydrolysis of ATP by GroEL is a major but perhaps not the only factor responsible for the diminished chaperonin activity at 10 degrees C. GroEL may function primarily at higher temperatures in which the ability of GroEL to hydrolyze ATP is not compromised.     

Chaperones GroEL/GroES Accelerate the Refolding of a Multidomain Protein through Modulating On-pathway Intermediates

Despite a vast amount information on the interplay of GroEL, GroES, and ATP in chaperone-assisted folding, the molecular details on the conformational dynamics of folding polypeptide during its GroEL/GroES-assisted folding cycle is quite limited. Practically no such studies have been reported to date on large proteins, which often have difficulty folding in vitro. The effect of the GroEL/GroES chaperonin system on the folding pathway of an 82-kDa slow folding protein, malate synthase G (MSG), was investigated. GroEL bound to the burst phase intermediate of MSG and accelerated the slowest kinetic phase associated with the formation of native topology in the spontaneous folding pathway. GroEL slowly induced conformational changes on the bound burst phase intermediate, which was then transformed into a more folding-compatible form. Subsequent addition of ATP or GroES/ATP to the GroEL-MSG complex led to the formation of the native state via a compact intermediate with the rate several times faster than that of spontaneous refolding. The presence of GroES doubled the ATP-dependent reactivation rate of bound MSG by preventing multiple cycles of its GroEL binding and release. Because GroES bound to the trans side of GroEL-MSG complex, it may be anticipated that confinement of the substrate underneath the co-chaperone is not required for accelerating the rate in the assisted folding pathway. The potential role of GroEL/GroES in assisted folding is most likely to modulate the conformation of MSG intermediates that can fold faster and thereby eliminate the possibility of partial aggregation caused by the slow folding intermediates during its spontaneous refolding pathway.     

伴侣分子（GroE）纯化及其催化的重组蛋白质折叠反应

我们自Ｅ．ｃｏｌｉ细胞中纯化出ＧｒｏＥＬ和ＧｒｏＥＳ,对其有活性的分子状态和反应条件进行了探索,结果表明,只有在等摩尔的ＧｒｏＥＬ和ＧｒｏＥＳ以及１ｍｍｏｌ／ＬＡＴＰ和适当浓度的Ｋ＋存在时;才会有较高的催化折叠效率,它可使ｌｍｇ／ｍｌ的ＩＬ－２的正确折叠率由３０％提高到５８％,使ＩＬ－２和ＧＭ－ＣＳＦ的比活性提高１倍以上。它提高重组蛋白质正确拆叠率的关键是可以降低折叠过程中形成聚合体。     

Interaction of GroEL and GroEL/GroES complexes with a nonnative subtilisin variant: a small-angle neutron scattering study

Small-angle neutron scattering and contrast variation were used to study the solution structure of GroEL and GroEL/GroES chaperonins complexed with a nonnative variant of the polypeptide substrate, subtilisin (PJ9). The subtilisin was 86% deuterated (dPJ9) so that it contrasted sufficiently with the chaperonin, allowing the contrast variation technique to be used to separate the scattering from the two components bound in the complex. Both the native double-ring GroEL and a single-ring mutant were used with dPJ9 bound in a 1:1 stoichiometry per GroEL toroid. This allowed both the position and the shape of dPJ9 in the GroEL/dPJ9 complexes to be determined. A single-ring GroEL/GroES variant complexed with one dPJ9 molecule was used to study the structural changes of dPJ9 in GroEL/GroES/dPJ9 complexes formed with ADP and with ATP. It was found that both the shape and the position of the bound dPJ9 in the GroEL/GroES/dPJ9 complex with ADP were the same as those in the GroEL/dPJ9 complex. However, dPJ9 assumed a more symmetric shape when bound in the GroEL/GroES/dPJ9 complex with ATP. This important observation reflects the relative ability of ATP to promote refolding of protein substrates relative to that of ADP.     

GroEL mediates protein folding with a two successive timer mechanism

GroEL encapsulates nonnative substrate proteins in a central cavity capped by GroES, providing a safe folding cage. Conventional models assume that a single timer lasting approximately 8 s governs the ATP hydrolysis-driven GroEL chaperonin cycle. We examine single molecule imaging of GFP folding within the cavity, binding release dynamics of GroEL-GroES, ensemble measurements of GroEL/substrate FRET, and the initial kinetics of GroEL ATPase activity. We conclude that the cycle consists of two successive timers of approximately 3 s and approximately 5 s duration. During the first timer, GroEL is bound to ATP, substrate protein, and GroES. When the first timer ends, the substrate protein is released into the central cavity and folding begins. ATP hydrolysis and phosphate release immediately follow this transition. ADP, GroES, and substrate depart GroEL after the second timer is complete. This mechanism explains how GroES binding to a GroEL-substrate complex encapsulates the substrate rather than allowing it to escape into solution.     

The affinity of the GroEL/GroES complex for peptides under conditions of protein folding

The affinity of four short peptides for the Escherichia coli molecular chaperone GroEL was studied in the presence of the co-chaperone GroES and nucleotides. Our data show that binding of GroES to one ring enhances the interaction of the peptides with the opposite GroEL ring, a finding that was related to the structural readjustments in GroEL following GroES binding. We further report that the GroEL/GroES complex has a high affinity for peptides during ATP hydrolysis when protein substrates would undergo repeated cycles of assisted folding. Although we could not determine at which step(s) during the cycle our peptides interacted with GroEL, we propose that successive state changes in GroEL during ATP hydrolysis may create high affinity complexes and ensure maximum efficiency of the chaperone machinery under conditions of protein folding.     

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.     

Football- and bullet-shaped GroEL-GroES complexes coexist during the reaction cycle

GroEL is an Escherichia coli chaperonin that is composed of two heptameric rings stacked back-to-back. GroEL assists protein folding with its cochaperonin GroES in an ATP-dependent manner in vitro and in vivo. However, it is still unclear whether GroES binds to both rings of GroEL simultaneously under physiological conditions. In this study, we monitored the GroEL-GroES interaction in the reaction cycle using fluorescence resonance energy transfer. We found that nearly equivalent amounts of symmetric GroEL-(GroES)(2) (football-shaped) complex and asymmetric GroEL-GroES (bullet-shaped) complex coexist during the functional reaction cycle. We also found that D398A, an ATP hydrolysis defective mutant of GroEL, forms a football-shaped complex with ATP bound to the two rings. Furthermore, we showed that ADP prevents the association of ATP to the trans-ring of GroEL, and as a consequence, the second GroES cannot bind to GroEL. Considering the concentrations of ADP and ATP in E. coli, ADP is expected to have a small effect on the inhibition of GroES binding to the trans-ring of GroEL in vivo. These results suggest that we should reconsider the chaperonin-mediated protein-folding mechanism that involves the football-shaped complex.     

Isolation and characterisation of mutants of GroEL that are fully functional as single rings

A key aspect of the reaction mechanism for the molecular chaperone GroEL is the transmission of an allosteric signal between the two rings of the GroEL complex. Thus, the single-ring mutant SR1 is unable to act as a chaperone as it cannot release bound substrate or GroES. We used a simple selection procedure to identify mutants of SR1 that restored chaperone activity in vivo. A large number of single amino acid changes, mapping at diverse positions throughout the protein, enabled SR1 to regain its ability to act as a chaperone while remaining as a single ring. In vivo assays were used to identify the proteins that had regained maximal activity. In some cases, no difference could be detected between strains expressing wild-type GroEL and those expressing the mutated proteins. Three of the most active proteins where the mutations were in distinct parts of the protein were purified to homogeneity and characterised in vitro. All were capable of acting efficiently as chaperones for two different GroES-dependent substrates. All three proteins bound nucleotide as effectively as did GroEL, but the binding of GroES in the presence of ATP or ADP was reduced significantly relative to the wild-type. These active single rings should provide a useful tool for studying the nature of the allosteric changes that occur in the GroEL reaction cycle.     

New aspects on the mechanism of GroEL-assisted protein folding

The mechanism of assisted protein folding by the chaperonin GroEL alone or in complex with the co-chaperonin GroES and in the presence or absence of nucleotides has been subject to extensive investigations during the last years. In this paper we present data where we have inactivated GroEL by stepwise blocking the nucleotide binding sites using the non-hydrolyzable ATP analogue, (Cr(H2O)4)3+ATP. We correlated the amount of accessible nucleotide binding sites with the residual ATP hydrolysis activity of GroEL as well as the residual refolding activity for two different model substrates. Under the conditions used, folding of the substrate proteins and ATP hydrolysis were directly proportional to the residual, accessible nucleotide binding sites. In the presence of GroES, 50% of the nucleotide binding sites were protected from inactivation by CrATP and the resulting protein retains 50% of both ATPase and refolding activity. The results strongly suggest that under the conditions used in our experiments, the nucleotide binding sites are additive in character and that by blocking of a certain number of binding sites a proportional amount of ATP hydrolysis and refolding activities are inactivated. The experiments including GroES suggest that full catalytic activity of GroEL requires both rings of the chaperonin. Blocking of the nucleotide binding sites of one ring still allows function of the second ring.     

Transient conformational remodeling of folding proteins by GroES—individually and in concert with GroEL

The commonly accepted dogma of the bacterial GroE chaperonin system entails protein folding mediated by cycles of several ATP-dependent sequential steps where GroEL interacts with the folding client protein. In contrast, we herein report GroES-mediated dynamic remodeling (expansion and compression) of two different protein substrates during folding: the endogenous substrate MreB and carbonic anhydrase (HCAII), a well-characterized protein folding model. GroES was also found to influence GroEL binding induced unfolding and compression of the client protein underlining the synergistic activity of both chaperonins, even in the absence of ATP. This previously unidentified activity by GroES should have important implications for understanding the chaperonin mechanism and cellular stress response. Our findings necessitate a revision of the GroEL/ES mechanism.     

Analysis of peptides and proteins in their binding to GroEL

The GroEL–GroES is an essential molecular chaperon system that assists protein folding in cell. Binding of various substrate proteins to GroEL is one of the key aspects in GroEL‐assisted protein folding. Small peptides may mimic segments of the substrate proteins in contact with GroEL and allow detailed structural analysis of the interactions. A model peptide SBP has been shown to bind to a region in GroEL that is important for binding of substrate proteins. Here, we investigated whether the observed GroEL–SBP interaction represented those of GroEL–substrate proteins, and whether SBP was able to mimic various aspects of substrate proteins in GroE‐assisted protein folding cycle. We found that SBP competed with substrate proteins, including α‐lactalbumin, rhodanese, and malate dehydrogenase, in binding to GroEL. SBP stimulated GroEL ATP hydrolysis rate in a manner similar to that of α‐lactalbumin. SBP did not prevent GroES from binding to GroEL, and GroES association reduced the ATPase rates of GroEL/SBP and GroEL/α‐lactalbumin to a comparable extent. Binding of both SBP and α‐lactalbumin to apo GroEL was dominated by hydrophobic interaction. Interestingly, association of α‐lactalbumin to GroEL/GroES was thermodynamically distinct from that to GroEL with reduced affinity and decreased contribution from hydrophobic interaction. However, SBP did not display such differential binding behaviors to apo GroEL and GroEL/GroES, likely due to the lack of a contiguous polypeptide chain that links all of the bound peptide fragments. Nevertheless, studies using peptides provide valuable information on the nature of GroEL–substrate protein interaction, which is central to understand the mechanism of GroEL‐assisted protein folding. Copyright © 2010 European Peptide Society and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

GroEL-GroES cycling: ATP and nonnative polypeptide direct alternation of folding-active rings.

The double-ring chaperonin GroEL mediates protein folding in the central cavity of a ring bound by ATP and GroES, but it is unclear how GroEL cycles from one folding-active complex to the next. We observe that hydrolysis of ATP within the cis ring must occur before either nonnative polypeptide or GroES can bind to the trans ring, and this is associated with reorientation of the trans ring apical domains. Subsequently, formation of a new cis-ternary complex proceeds on the open trans ring with polypeptide binding first, which stimulates the ATP-dependent dissociation of the cis complex (by 20- to 50-fold), followed by GroES binding. These results indicate that, in the presence of nonnative protein, GroEL alternates its rings as folding-active cis complexes, expending only one round of seven ATPs per folding cycle.     

Elucidation of steps in the capture of a protein substrate for efficient encapsulation by GroE

We have identified five structural rearrangements in GroEL induced by the ordered binding of ATP and GroES. The first discernable rearrangement (designated T --> R(1)) is a rapid, cooperative transition that appears not to be functionally communicated to the apical domain. In the second (R(1) --> R(2)) step, a state is formed that binds GroES weakly in a rapid, diffusion-limited process. However, a second optical signal, carried by a protein substrate bound to GroEL, responds neither to formation of the R(2) state nor to the binding of GroES. This result strongly implies that the substrate protein remains bound to the inner walls of the initially formed GroEL.GroES cavity, and is not yet displaced from its sites of interaction with GroEL. In the next rearrangement (R(2).GroES --> R(3).GroES) the strength of interaction between GroEL and GroES is greatly enhanced, and there is a large and coincident loss of fluorescence-signal intensity in the labeled protein substrate, indicating that there is either a displacement from its binding sites on GroEL or at least a significant change of environment. These results are consistent with a mechanism in which the shift in orientation of GroEL apical domains between that seen in the apo-protein and stable GroEL.GroES complexes is highly ordered, and transient conformational intermediates permit the association of GroES before the displacement of bound polypeptide. This ensures efficient encapsulation of the polypeptide within the GroEL central cavity underneath GroES.     

Characterisation of a GroEL Single-Ring Mutant that Supports Growth of Escherichia coli and Has GroES-Dependent ATPase Activity

Binding and folding of substrate proteins by the molecular chaperone GroEL alternates between its two seven-membered rings in an ATP-regulated manner. The association of ATP and GroES to a polypeptide-bound ring of GroEL encapsulates the folding proteins in the central cavity of that ring (cis ring) and allows it to fold in a protected environment where the risk of aggregation is reduced. ATP hydrolysis in the cis ring changes the potentials within the system such that ATP binding to the opposite (trans) ring triggers the release of all ligands from the cis ring of GroEL through a complex network of allosteric communication between the rings. Inter-ring allosteric communication thus appears indispensable for the function of GroEL, and an engineered single-ring version (SR1) cannot substitute for GroEL in vivo. We describe here the isolation and characterisation of an active single-ring form of the GroEL protein (SR-A92T), which has an exceptionally low ATPase activity that is strongly stimulated by the addition of GroES. Dissection of the kinetic pathway of the ATP-induced structural changes in this active single ring can be explained by the fact that the mutation effectively blocks progression through the full allosteric pathway of the GroEL reaction cycle, thus trapping an early allosteric intermediate. Addition of GroES is able to overcome this block by binding this intermediate and pulling the allosteric pathway to completion via mass action, explaining how bacterial cells expressing this protein as their only chaperonin are viable.     

From minichaperone to GroEL 2: importance of avidity of the multisite ring structure

Structural studies on minichaperones and GroEL imply a continuous ring of binding sites around the neck of GroEL. To investigate the importance of this ring, we constructed an artificial heptameric assembly of minichaperones to mimic their arrangement in GroEL. The heptameric Gp31 co-chaperonin from bacteriophage T4, an analogue of GroES, was used as a scaffold to display the GroEL minichaperones. A fusion protein, MC(7), was generated by replacing a part of the highly mobile loop of Gp31 (residues 23-44) with the sequence of the minichaperone (residues 191-376 of GroEL). The purified recombinant protein assembled into a heptameric ring composed of seven 30.6 kDa subunits. Although single minichaperones (residues 193-335 to 191-376 of GroEL) have certain chaperone activities in vitro and in vivo, they cannot refold heat and dithiothreitol-denatured mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase (mtMDH), a reaction that normally requires GroEL, its co-chaperonin GroES and ATP. But, MC(7) refolded MDH in vitro. The expression of MC(7) complements in vivo two temperature-sensitive Escherichia coli alleles, groEL44 and groEL673, at 43 degrees C. Although MC(7) could not compensate for the complete absence of GroEL in vivo, it enhanced the colony-forming ability of cells containing limiting amounts of wild-type GroEL at 37 degrees C. MC(7 )also reduces aggregate formation and cell death in mammalian cell models of Huntington's disease. The assembly of seven minichaperone subunits on a heptameric ring significantly improves their activity, demonstrating the importance of avidity in GroEL function.