Literature DB >> 11551947

A comparison of the GroE chaperonin requirements for sequentially and structurally homologous malate dehydrogenases: the importance of folding kinetics and solution environment.

B C Tieman1, M F Johnston, M T Fisher.   

Abstract

Escherichia coli malate dehydrogenase (EcMDH) and its eukaryotic counterpart, porcine mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase (PmMDH), are highly homologous proteins with significant sequence identity (60%) and virtually identical native structural folds. Despite this homology, EcMDH folds rapidly and efficiently in vitro and does not seem to interact with GroE chaperonins at physiological temperatures (37 degrees C), whereas PmMDH folds much slower than EcMDH and requires these chaperonins to fold to the native state at 37 degrees C. Double jump experiments indicate that the slow folding behavior of PmMDH is not limited by proline isomerization. Although the folding enhancer glycerol (<5 m) does not alter the renaturation kinetics of EcMDH, it dramatically accelerates the spontaneous renaturation of PmMDH at all temperatures tested. Kinetic analysis of PmMDH renaturation with increasing glycerol concentrations suggests that this osmolyte increases the on-pathway kinetics of the monomer folding to assembly-competent forms. Other osmolytes such as trimethylamine N-oxide, sucrose, and betaine also reactivate PmMDH at nonpermissive temperatures (37 degrees C). Glycerol jump experiments with preformed GroEL.PmMDH complexes indicate that the shift between stringent (requires ATP and GroES) and relaxed (only requires ATP) complex conformations is rapid (<3-5 s). The similarity in irreversible misfolding kinetics of PmMDH measured with glycerol or the activated chaperonin complex (GroEL.GroES.ATP) suggests that these folding aids may influence the same step in the PmMDH folding reaction. Moreover, the interactions between glycerol-induced PmMDH folding intermediates and GroEL.GroES.ATP are diminished. Our results support the notion that the protein folding kinetics of sequentially and structurally homologous proteins, rather than the structural fold, dictates the GroE chaperonin requirement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11551947     DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M106693200

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biol Chem        ISSN: 0021-9258            Impact factor:   5.157


  10 in total

1.  Designing a high throughput refolding array using a combination of the GroEL chaperonin and osmolytes.

Authors:  Paul A Voziyan; Mary Johnston; Angela Chao; Greg Bomhoff; Mark T Fisher
Journal:  J Struct Funct Genomics       Date:  2005

2.  GroEL/S substrate specificity based on substrate unfolding propensity.

Authors:  Kristin N Parent; Carolyn M Teschke
Journal:  Cell Stress Chaperones       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 3.667

3.  Residues in substrate proteins that interact with GroEL in the capture process are buried in the native state.

Authors:  George Stan; Bernard R Brooks; George H Lorimer; D Thirumalai
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-03-14       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Enhanced recombinant M-CSF production in CHO cells by glycerol addition: model and validation.

Authors:  Chi-Hsien Liu; Li-Hsin Chen
Journal:  Cytotechnology       Date:  2007-06-13       Impact factor: 2.058

5.  Probing structurally altered and aggregated states of therapeutically relevant proteins using GroEL coupled to bio-layer interferometry.

Authors:  Subhashchandra Naik; Ozan S Kumru; Melissa Cullom; Srivalli N Telikepalli; Elizabeth Lindboe; Taylor L Roop; Sangeeta B Joshi; Divya Amin; Phillip Gao; C Russell Middaugh; David B Volkin; Mark T Fisher
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2014-07-28       Impact factor: 6.725

6.  Functional refolding of the Campylobacter jejuni MOMP (major outer membrane protein) porin by GroEL from the same species.

Authors:  Florence Goulhen; Emmanuelle Dé; Jean-Marie Pagès; Jean-Michel Bolla
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  2004-03-15       Impact factor: 3.857

7.  Strategies for folding of affinity tagged proteins using GroEL and osmolytes.

Authors:  Hiroo Katayama; Mitchell McGill; Andrew Kearns; Marek Brzozowski; Nicholas Degner; Bliss Harnett; Boris Kornilayev; Dubravka Matković-Calogović; Todd Holyoak; James P Calvet; Edward P Gogol; John Seed; Mark T Fisher
Journal:  J Struct Funct Genomics       Date:  2008-12-12

8.  Chaperonin-Based Biolayer Interferometry To Assess the Kinetic Stability of Metastable, Aggregation-Prone Proteins.

Authors:  Wendy A Lea; Pierce T O'Neil; Alexandra J Machen; Subhashchandra Naik; Tapan Chaudhri; Wesley McGinn-Straub; Alexander Tischer; Matthew T Auton; Joshua R Burns; Michael R Baldwin; Karen R Khar; John Karanicolas; Mark T Fisher
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  2016-08-19       Impact factor: 3.162

9.  Structural perturbation and enhancement of the chaperone-like activity of alpha-crystallin by arginine hydrochloride.

Authors:  Volety Srinivas; Bakthisaran Raman; Kunchala Sridhar Rao; Tangirala Ramakrishna; Ch Mohan Rao
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 6.725

10.  Probing the kinetic stabilities of Friedreich's ataxia clinical variants using a solid phase GroEL chaperonin capture platform.

Authors:  Ana R Correia; Subhashchandra Naik; Mark T Fisher; Cláudio M Gomes
Journal:  Biomolecules       Date:  2014-10-20
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.