We demonstrate that conformational exchange processes in proteins on microsecond-to-millisecond time scales can be detected and quantified by solid-state NMR spectroscopy. We show two independent approaches that measure the effect of conformational exchange on transverse relaxation parameters, namely Carr-Purcell-Meiboom-Gill relaxation-dispersion experiments and measurement of differential multiple-quantum coherence decay. Long coherence lifetimes, as required for these experiments, are achieved by the use of highly deuterated samples and fast magic-angle spinning. The usefulness of the approaches is demonstrated by application to microcrystalline ubiquitin. We detect a conformational exchange process in a region of the protein for which dynamics have also been observed in solution. Interestingly, quantitative analysis of the data reveals that the exchange process is more than 1 order of magnitude slower than in solution, and this points to the impact of the crystalline environment on free energy barriers.
We demonstrate that conformational exchange processes in proteins on microsecond-to-millisecond time scales can be detected and quantified by solid-state NMR spectroscopy. We show two independent approaches that measure the effect of conformational exchange on transverse relaxation parameters, namely Carr-Purcell-Meiboom-Gill relaxation-dispersion experiments and measurement of differential multiple-quantum coherence decay. Long coherence lifetimes, as required for these experiments, are achieved by the use of highly deuterated samples and fast magic-angle spinning. The usefulness of the approaches is demonstrated by application to microcrystalline ubiquitin. We detect a conformational exchange process in a region of the protein for which dynamics have also been observed in solution. Interestingly, quantitative analysis of the data reveals that the exchange process is more than 1 order of magnitude slower than in solution, and this points to the impact of the crystalline environment on free energy barriers.
Functional processes in proteins, such
as enzymatic catalysis,
ligand binding, or allosteric signal transmission, rely on the ability
of proteins to sample multiple conformational states, differing in
structure and free energy. There is increasing evidence that the actual
functional states of proteins are in many cases higher-energy conformers
in dynamic equilibrium with the major, lowest-energy conformer, rather
than the lowest-energy state itself.[1−4] In many cases, the exchange processes between
these different functional states occur on a microsecond-to-millisecond
(μs–ms) time scale, which also coincides with typical
time scales of enzyme catalysis and protein folding. Therefore, the
accurate characterization of dynamic processes on this time scale,
and the identification and structural characterization of higher-energy
conformations in equilibrium as well as the relative populations and
exchange kinetics, are of primary importance for understanding protein
function. Due to their low population and short lifetimes, detecting
and characterizing such higher-energy conformers is a major experimental
challenge.NMR spectroscopy in the solution state plays a prominent
role in
studies of conformational exchange processes and is able to provide
information at atomic resolution.[5] In NMR,
the presence of low-populated conformational states, exchanging with
the major conformation on μs–ms time scales, is manifest
as enhanced decay of single- or multiple-quantum coherences. Thus,
a first indication about conformational exchange processes may be
obtained from inspection of transverse relaxation rates (e.g., R2 rate constants of 15N). Higher-than-average
values of R2 may indicate the presence
of exchange processes. In solution NMR, a variety of more quantitative
and direct techniques have been developed to probe conformational
exchange processes with great detail and accuracy.[5,6] The
most prominent ones of those are Carr–Purcell–Meiboom–Gill
(CPMG) relaxation-dispersion (RD)[6,7] and R1ρ relaxation-dispersion[8] techniques and the analysis of differential relaxation
of multiple-quantum coherences[9−11] These methods allow the determination
of thermodynamic and kinetic parameters in terms of relative populations
and exchange-rate constants, as well as site-specific chemical-shift
differences between the major, observable state and the higher-energy
conformation. Structural information about these minor, not directly
observable states can thus be obtained.Studies of protein dynamics
in the solid state have recently attracted
great interest,[12−18] motivated by numerous important biophysical questions related to
insoluble proteins, such as the dynamics and gating of membrane proteins
in native membranes or the conformational flexibility in fibrils.
Magic-angle spinning (MAS) solid-state NMR methods that probe either
fast (sub-microsecond) motions or slow (ms-to-seconds) dynamics in
an atom-resolved manner are available,[19−21] but so far a quantitative
investigation of processes occurring on the μs–ms time
scale has remained a major challenge.In this article, we present
approaches for the detection and quantitative
measurement of μs–ms conformational exchange processes
by MAS solid-state NMR that exploit the effect that conformational
exchange processes have on single- and multiple-quantum line widths.
We demonstrate two independent approaches, namely the measurement
of differential line broadening of zero- and double-quantum coherences
and CPMG RD. Both approaches rely on differences between
line widths (or, equivalently, lifetimes) to extract information about
conformational exchange, rather than on the line widths themselves.
This is crucial, as solid-state NMR line widths typically contain
contributions from coherent mechanisms (e.g., dipolar dephasing).[22] We find that under suitably chosen experimental
conditions, these differences in line widths are only weakly dependent
on coherent dephasing mechanisms, allowing thus—to a good approximation—the
quantitative analysis of the experimental data in terms of conformational
exchange (vide infra).In order for our approaches to be successful,
it must be ensured
that the lifetimes of the involved single- and multiple-quantum coherences
are sufficiently long that the differences can be measured with the
necessary precision. For example, CPMG RD experiments, such as used
in solution state, typically use delays of tens of milliseconds, during
which the coherence decay is monitored in the presence of a train
of refocusing pulses. In a typical solid protein sample undergoing
MAS at moderate frequency, coherence lifetimes are generally only
a few milliseconds at most, without high-power proton decoupling,
and CPMG approaches are, therefore, not readily applicable. High-power 1H decoupling can extend these lifetimes to 10–20 ms,
although at the cost of sample heating, which impedes quantitative
dynamical analysis. We circumvent these limitations by using highly
deuterated protein samples and high MAS frequencies. As reported earlier
by several groups, 15N single-quantum lifetimes in such
conditions become very long, often exceeding 100–200 ms.[23−25] As we find here, even heteronuclear multiple-quantum 1H–15N coherences have lifetimes of tens of milliseconds
under such conditions. These long lifetimes open the way to use transverse
relaxation parameters for quantitative measurement of conformational
exchange. We make use of this potential, and obtain insight into conformational
exchange processes in microcrystalline ubiquitin. We find evidence
for a conformational exchange process involving residues that also
undergo exchange in solution, but at a rate that is more than 1 order
of magnitude slower than in solution.
Results and Discussion
Differential Zero- and Double-Quantum 1H–15N Line Broadening Reveals Conformational Exchange
As a first approach for the study of conformational exchange in solid
protein samples, we investigate the differential rate of dephasing
of 1H–15N multiple-quantum coherences
(MQC). Differential line broadening of zero- and double-quantum coherences
(ZQC/DQC) is expected whenever the isotropic and/or anisotropic components
of the chemical shifts of the two involved nuclei undergo simultaneous
fluctuations.[9,26] This effect has been exploited
in solution state to probe conformational exchange,[10,27,28] and is often referred to as differential
zero- and double-quantum relaxation. (Although when considering μs–ms
processes, it is not a relaxation phenomenon in the sense of Redfield
theory.[29] In this paper, we will preferentially
use the terms “differential line width” or “differential
decay” instead of “differential relaxation”.)
Here, we explore the feasibility of exploiting these effects in the
solid state, by studying correlated chemical-shift modulation in amide 1H–15N spin pairs.We first analyze
the properties of differential ZQC and DQC decay in the solid state
by numerical spin simulations. To this end we consider the simplest
possible model, a two-spin 1H–15N system
undergoing stochastic jumps between two distinct conformations differing
in the orientation of the bond vector and CSA tensor orientations
and/or in the isotropic chemical shifts of the two nuclei. Figure 1 shows representative results of such simulations
for a system undergoing exchange between a major (90%) and a minor
(10%) conformation. Shown is the differential ZQC/DQC decay rate,
ΔRMQ = RDQ – RZQ, for various exchange-rate
constants. In order to identify the origin of the differential decay,
separate simulations were performed for (i) a scenario where minor
and major state have different isotropic chemical shifts but identical
chemical-shift anisotropy (CSA) tensors (blue), and (ii) a situation
where the two states have identical isotropic shifts, but the two
CSA tensors undergo orientational fluctuations (green). Modulation
of the isotropic shifts only (scenario i), leads to differential MQC
decay rates if exchange occurs on a time scale of microseconds to
a few milliseconds, slightly depending on the exchange parameters
and chemical-shift differences. This is identical to solution-state
NMR,[9,26,30] and the simulations
can be fully described by a formalism derived previously (see Supporting Information, Figure S1).[30] Fluctuations of the magnitude and/or the orientations
of the two CSA tensors (scenario ii) also induce differential decay,
which can be understood as an interference between MAS and these CSA
fluctuations. The origin of such fluctuations may be an exchange process
between a major and a minor conformation, as shown in Figure 1, or bond librations within a continuum of conformers,
such as restricted orientational diffusion (Figure
S2). Irrespective of the precise motional model, such CSA/CSA
modulations will lead to strong differential MQ decay whenever they
occur on a time scale of tens of nanoseconds to about one millisecond.
Finally, we note that via either of the two mechanisms (CSM/CSM or
CSA/CSA), the ΔRMQ can be positive
or negative, depending on the sign of the isotropic chemical-shift
changes of the two nuclei, and the CSA parameters (see Figures S3 and S4). Taken together, these simulations
indicate that the differential multiple-quantum line broadening in
the solid state is a sensitive reporter of conformational-exchange
processes on time scales in the range of tens of nanoseconds to milliseconds.
Figure 1
Numerical
simulations of the differential decay rates of zero-
and double-quantum coherences (differential multiple-quantum decay
rate), ΔRMQ = RDQ – RZQ, in a 1H–15N spin pair undergoing exchange. A two-site
exchange system involving a major state (populated at 90%) and a minor
state (10%) was assumed, with an exchange rate kex = kAB + kBA, where kAB denotes the forward
rate constant. ΔRMQ is shown as
a function of the exchange-rate constant. The different simulations
assume either only isotropic chemical-shift modulation (ΔνN = 160 Hz, ΔνH = 800 Hz), only CSA/CSA
modulations (jumps by 30°), or both, as indicated in the insert.
Details about the simulation parameters and additional simulations
are provided in the Supporting Information.
Numerical
simulations of the differential decay rates of zero-
and double-quantum coherences (differential multiple-quantum decay
rate), ΔRMQ = RDQ – RZQ, in a 1H–15N spin pair undergoing exchange. A two-site
exchange system involving a major state (populated at 90%) and a minor
state (10%) was assumed, with an exchange rate kex = kAB + kBA, where kAB denotes the forward
rate constant. ΔRMQ is shown as
a function of the exchange-rate constant. The different simulations
assume either only isotropic chemical-shift modulation (ΔνN = 160 Hz, ΔνH = 800 Hz), only CSA/CSA
modulations (jumps by 30°), or both, as indicated in the insert.
Details about the simulation parameters and additional simulations
are provided in the Supporting Information.To test the practical usefulness of differential
MQC decay for
dynamics studies in the solid state, we have applied the experiment
shown in Figure 2a to u-[2H,15N]-labeled microcrystalline ubiquitin, reprotonated stochastically
at 20% of the exchangeable sites, undergoing MAS at a frequency of
50 kHz, at a sample temperature of 300 K. In the pulse sequence of
Figure 2a, an initial state 2HN (a combination of
ZQ and DQ coherences) is prepared utilizing scalar coupling. Such
a J-coupling transfer is enabled by the long coherence
lifetimes of 1H and 15N.[25] During the subsequent MQC evolution delay, the operator
2HN builds
up from the initial 2HN whenever ZQC and DQC decay differently. From two separate
experiments, probing the 2HN and 2HN operators, respectively, one can quantify the differential
decay rate ΔRMQ = RDQ – RZQ. For this
experiment to be successful, it is necessary that the MQC are sufficiently
long-lived, such that the buildup can be followed. Under the conditions
employed in this study, we were able to follow the 1H,15N MQC decay over tens of milliseconds.
Figure 2
Measurement of differential
multiple-quantum decay rates. (a) Pulse
sequence used in this study. Differential zero- and double-quantum
line broadening is obtained from separate experiments that probe the
coherences, 2HN and 2HN, respectively, which are selected by setting the phases of
the pulses at the end of the MQC evolution delay.[9] Details about delays and phase settings are shown in Figure
S6 in the Supporting Information. (b,c)
Experimental data obtained on a microcrystalline sample of ubiquitin
at 300 K: (b) Representative examples of the buildup of 2HN from 2HN, along with best-fit
curves, ΔRMQ = (2 atanh(⟨2HN⟩/⟨2HN⟩))/T. Error bars were obtained from 2 times the standard deviation
of the spectral noise. (c) Fitted residue-wise differential multiple-quantum
decay-rate constants ΔRMQ, using
three different relaxation delays. Error margins were determined from
Monte Carlo simulation based on error bars determined from twice the
spectral noise. Residues with particularly large ΔRMQ are indicated. Note that, in principle, a single relaxation
delay would suffice to determine ΔRMQ. (d) Residues for which large ΔRMQ are observed (I23, K27, T55) as well as unobservable resonances
(E24, N25) in 1H-detected HSQC-type spectra[31] are plotted onto the structure. The H-bonding of I23(HN)-R54(CO)
is indicated.
Measurement of differential
multiple-quantum decay rates. (a) Pulse
sequence used in this study. Differential zero- and double-quantum
line broadening is obtained from separate experiments that probe the
coherences, 2HN and 2HN, respectively, which are selected by setting the phases of
the pulses at the end of the MQC evolution delay.[9] Details about delays and phase settings are shown in Figure
S6 in the Supporting Information. (b,c)
Experimental data obtained on a microcrystalline sample of ubiquitin
at 300 K: (b) Representative examples of the buildup of 2HN from 2HN, along with best-fit
curves, ΔRMQ = (2 atanh(⟨2HN⟩/⟨2HN⟩))/T. Error bars were obtained from 2 times the standard deviation
of the spectral noise. (c) Fitted residue-wise differential multiple-quantum
decay-rate constants ΔRMQ, using
three different relaxation delays. Error margins were determined from
Monte Carlo simulation based on error bars determined from twice the
spectral noise. Residues with particularly large ΔRMQ are indicated. Note that, in principle, a single relaxation
delay would suffice to determine ΔRMQ. (d) Residues for which large ΔRMQ are observed (I23, K27, T55) as well as unobservable resonances
(E24, N25) in 1H-detected HSQC-type spectra[31] are plotted onto the structure. The H-bonding of I23(HN)-R54(CO)
is indicated.Figure 2b shows experimental
buildup curves
of the state 2HN from 2HN for a set of representative residues. Fits of the differential
decay-rate constant ΔRMQ to these
curves are indicated as solid lines, and residue-wise values of ΔRMQ are shown in Figure 2c. Most strikingly, large ΔRMQ values
are observed for residues I23, K27, and T55, with respective values
of ΔRMQ = 179 ± 47, 53 ±
16, and 172 ± 44 s–1, greatly exceeding average
values for the other residues (average value of −1.4 s–1, standard deviation 12.3 s–1).
Figure 2d shows the location of these residues
in the structure of ubiquitin.The large values of ΔRMQ reveal
fluctuations of the isotropic and/or anisotropic components of the
chemical shifts of the 1H/15N nuclei of residues
I23, K27, and T55. As shown above, the two mechanisms (CSA/CSA, CSM/CSM)
are sensitive to different time scales of motion. From the present
data alone it is not possible to determine whether the underlying
process involves CSA/CSA fluctuations, (tens of nanoseconds to tens
of microseconds time scale), or if it arises from fluctuations of
the isotropic chemical shifts (tens of microseconds to a few milliseconds).
However, several arguments indicate that isotropic chemical-shift
modulations on a μs–ms time scale are at the origin of
the differential decay. The most important experimental evidence comes
from our recently reported 15N–1H dipole/15N CSA cross-correlated relaxation measurements.[31] This cross-correlated relaxation rate is sensitive
to motion occurring on the same time scale for which CSA/CSA fluctuations
induces differential MQC decay.[32] Notably,
residues I23, K27, and T55 did not show elevated 15N–1H dipole/15N CSA cross-correlated
relaxation-rate constants, showing that these residues do not undergo
large-scale nanosecond-to-microsecond motion.[31] This finding rules out the possibility that CSA/CSA fluctuations
are the main reason for the observed the differential MQC decay. As
a further indication for isotropic chemical-shift modulations, the
neighboring residues E24 and N25 are invisible in proton-detected
scalar-coupling-based NMR spectra,[31] presumably
as a consequence of short coherence decay times. Thus, the pronounced
differential MQC decay found here for the three residues strongly
suggest the presence of a conformational exchange process involving
fluctuations of isotropic chemical shifts occurring on a time scale
of tens of microseconds to a few milliseconds. CPMG RD data below
confirm this analysis. In principle, it would be possible to discriminate
between isotropic and anisotropic chemical-shift fluctuations as the
cause the of the large differential decay-rate constants by performing
the experiment at a different MAS frequency, which alters the position
of the maximum of the CSA/CSA contribution (see Figure S5), or through rf irradiation during the MQC evolution.[33,34]Figure 2c shows that some variation
in ΔRMQ values is also found for
other residues in
ubiquitin. We ascribe these residue-wise differences to local variations
of motional amplitudes, causing enhanced ΔRMQ via the CSA/CSA mechanism; for example, larger than
average |ΔRMQ| are observed in the
loop comprising Gly10 and Lys11, for which we have previously reported
extended mobility on a time scale of hundreds of nanoseconds.[31] The relatively large ΔRMQ for L43 is not statistically significant; indeed, CPMG
experiments do not show any conformational exchange for this residue
(see below).
15N CPMG Relaxation-Dispersion Experiments
In order to obtain more quantitative insight into the exchange process
revealed by the above MQC decay data, we explored single quantum 15N CPMG RD as a second experimental strategy to probe conformational
dynamics in the solid state. CPMG RD experiments measure the 15N coherence decay as a function of the repetition rates of
CPMG refocusing pulses, νCPMG. In order to be quantitatively
accurate, it must be ensured that all coherence decay mechanisms that
are not due to isotropic chemical-shift fluctuations do not depend
on the CPMG frequency (any CPMG frequency-independent contribution
to decay rates, however, would not hinder quantitative accuracy).
These mechanisms are (i) Redfield relaxation (in solution and in the
solid state), and (ii) coherent mechanisms leading to a decay, in
particular dipolar dephasing in the solid state. In order
to ensure that the former (Redfield relaxation) is independent of
the CPMG frequency, two approaches have been proposed in solution
state: a relaxation-compensated scheme on the one hand,[35] that ensures that in-phase coherence (N) and anti-phase coherence (2HN) evolve for the same
amount of time irrespective of νCPMG, as well as
an approach that only measures the decay of in-phase coherence, by
suppressing the buildup of anti-phase coherence through 1H decoupling.[36] For reasons of decoupling
efficiency, in the latter approach the 1H decoupling field
is slightly varied between different CPMG frequencies.[36] In the solid state, this latter approach is complicated
by the fact that varying the 1H decoupling field strength
induces artifacts related to partial interference between MAS and 1H irradiation, which can lead to a partial reintroduction
of dipolar couplings (see Figure S8). Therefore
we opted here for the former approach, a constant-time[37] relaxation-compensated[35] scheme.
This experiment measures the effective rate of 15N coherence
decay, R2eff, as a function of the CPMG
pulsing rate (see Figure 3a), by using a single
constant time delay without 1H decoupling. Long 15N SQ coherence lifetimes even without 1H decoupling[25] under fast MAS conditions enable this experiment.
Figure 3
(a) Pulse sequence used in this study to measure 15N
CPMG relaxation-dispersion data on deuterated proteins in the solid
state. Details are shown in the Supporting Information. (b) 15N CPMG RD solid-state NMR data obtained on microcrystalline
ubiquitin at 300 K sample temperature, collected at a 1H Larmor frequency of 600 MHz (red) and 800 MHz (black). Note the
different scale in the data of Ile23. Upper and lower error bars of R2eff were determined from Monte Carlo simulations,
based on twice the spectral noise (see Figure
S17). For residues I23, K27, and T55, solid lines represent
the Bloch–McConnell fit, in other cases lines represent the
mean values of the individual data points. Data for all other residues
are shown in the Supporting Information.
In addition to ensuring that the Redfield relaxation part is independent
of νCPMG, it must also be ensured that the decay
induced via coherent mechanisms (dipolar dephasing) is independent
of the CPMG frequency. We have investigated this issue experimentally
and through numerical simulations, as follows. Representative experimental
CPMG dispersions, i.e., the effective transverse decay rate, R2eff, as a function of the pulse repetition
rate νCPMG, are shown in Figure 3b, measured at two different B0 field strengths (14.1 and 18.8 T). Measurements at several B0 field strengths are valuable as the isotropic
chemical shift changes upon exchange (in Hertz) depend on the magnetic
field, and thus dispersion profiles change with B0.[38] Large dispersions, i.e.
a pronounced dependence of R2eff on νCPMG, are observed for residues I23, K27, and T55—the
same residues for which large ΔRMQ values also pointed to conformational exchange of these residues.
However, the overwhelming majority of residues display flat CPMG dispersion
curves, as exemplified in Figure 3b (K11, I36,
S65). The observation of such flat CPMG curves indicates that the
νCPMG-dependent variations of decay due to coherent
mechanisms are small, a consequence of the strong reduction of the
dipolar coupling network in our sample. In order to obtain a more
detailed understanding of the properties of CPMG experiments in a
rotating solid sample undergoing exchange, as required for any quantitative
interpretation, we then turned to numerical spin simulations. These
simulations, shown in the Supporting Information (Figures S9–S15), reveal that in the general case, CPMG dispersion
profiles in a rotating solid are more complex than in solution. Interference
effects between time-dependent fluctuations of anisotropic interactions
(dipolar couplings, CSA), MAS rotation, and the CPMG pulses may arise.
These interferences generally lead to increased decay rates R2eff. These increased decay rates are only slightly
dependent on the CPMG frequency (a νCPMG-independent
shift of dispersion profiles would be irrelevant for data analysis).
Variations of R2eff with νCPMG that are not due to isotropic chemical-shift fluctuation are estimated
to be below about 5 s–1. This is within the error
bar of our experiments. We therefore conclude from experimentally
observed flat CPMG curves and from simulations, that the possible
systematic errors in the CPMG curves—which might prohibit quantitative
interpretation of such curves in terms of dynamics—are below
our experimentally observed error bars. The large dispersions observed
for I23, K27, and T55 (Figure 3) are clearly
dominated by isotropic chemical shift fluctuations.We therefore
applied the Bloch-McConnell formalism, which is strictly
valid in solution-state, but which neglects any effects specific to
solid-state NMR, to interpret the dispersion profiles found for residues
I23, K27, and T55. A common exchange event for the three residues
was modeled, with a population of the minor state, pB, and exchange rate constant kex = kAB + kBA (where kAB and kBA denote forward and backward rate constants),
along with individual residue-specific chemical-shift differences
between major- and minor-state, ΔωAB. Solid
lines in Figure 3b show the best-fit curves
for such a fit. The data can be explained by a higher-energy conformation
populated to pB = 10.0% (±3.2%),
and an exchange rate kex = 2100 s–1 (±700 s–1). The chemical-shift
differences, |ΔωAB|, for Ile23, Lys27, and
Thr55 were obtained as 3.8 ppm (±1.2 ppm), 1.5 ppm (±0.6
ppm), and 2.0 ppm (±0.7 ppm), respectively. We note that fitting
the residues individually results in identical populations and rate
constants (within error margins) as a joint fit, although at lower
precision.We also verified that the use of the simplistic Bloch–McConnell
treatment, i.e., the neglect of the effect of coherent mechanisms,
does not introduce large systematic errors. To this end, we simulated
a larger (4-spin) system undergoing exchange with the above parameters,
as well as MAS and fluctuations of anisotropic interactions. The exchange
parameters resulting from a Bloch–McConnell fit to these simulations
shows that the systematic errors in the fitted values of pB, kex and |ΔωAB| are below their
respective random error levels given above (see Table S1).The extracted exchange parameters for I23,
K27, and T55 can be
used to estimate the differential decay experimental data: the proton
chemical shift difference required to reproduce the experimental ΔRMQ, based on these exchange parameters, are
of the order of 0.5 ppm (see Figure S19).Finally, we note that the plateau levels of R2eff vary substantially among the non-exchanging residues.
For example, while for Ile36 and Ser65 we find values of R2eff in the range of 10–20 s–1, Lys11, which also displays a flat dispersion curve, has much faster
transverse decay (about 50–70 s–1; Figure 3b). The absolute values of these plateaus cannot
rigorously be interpreted in terms of motion, as these plateau levels
contain contributions from coherent dephasing mechanisms. However,
the variability in these values between different residues points
to previously identified large amplitude motions on nanosecond time
scales in this region of the protein (loop spanning residues 8–11),
which increases the transverse relaxation-rate constants.[31](a) Pulse sequence used in this study to measure 15N
CPMG relaxation-dispersion data on deuterated proteins in the solid
state. Details are shown in the Supporting Information. (b) 15N CPMG RD solid-state NMR data obtained on microcrystalline
ubiquitin at 300 K sample temperature, collected at a 1H Larmor frequency of 600 MHz (red) and 800 MHz (black). Note the
different scale in the data of Ile23. Upper and lower error bars of R2eff were determined from Monte Carlo simulations,
based on twice the spectral noise (see Figure
S17). For residues I23, K27, and T55, solid lines represent
the Bloch–McConnell fit, in other cases lines represent the
mean values of the individual data points. Data for all other residues
are shown in the Supporting Information.
Comparison to Conformational Exchange in Solution
The
above data reveal a conformational exchange process in microcrystalline
ubiquitin in which the N-terminal part of the α-helix and the
adjacent loop (Figure 2d) are in exchange with
a minor conformation populated to 10%. At 300 K this process occurs
at a rate of about 1400–2800 s–1. It is interesting
to compare our findings to data obtained in solution. Comparative
studies of dynamics in solution and in crystals have been reported
recently for the case of sub-microsecond motion,[12,39−41] and we can perform such a comparison here for the
first time for μs–ms motion.Conformational exchange
processes in ubiquitin have been addressed in a number of solution-state
NMR studies.[10,28,42−46] Two regions have been found to undergo exchange, (i) the region
comprising residues I23-N25 and T55, i.e., the N-terminal part of
the α-helix and the adjacent loop, and (ii) residue V70; these
processes are thought to be independent.[46,47] The exchange
process involving V70 is fast in solution, and could initially only
be detected with T1ρ measurements at low temperatures,
including supercooled water,[45,46] and later with experiments
that selectively probe μs motion.[43] Even at low temperatures (260–278 K), the exchange process
involving V70 occurs at a time scale of about 100 μs.[45,46] Such fast motions would not induce CPMG dispersions of significant
amplitude, and may thus escape from detection in our CPMG experiment,
particularly as our experiments were performed at higher temperature
(300 K), where the process is expected to be even faster. An exchange
process on a time scale of tens of microseconds should, however, induce
differential MQC decay via the CSA/CSA mechanism, which we do not
observe. This suggests possible differences in the motion of V70 between
solution and microcrystals.Interestingly, the other region
for which conformational exchange
is present in solution, i.e. the N-terminal part of the helix and
adjacent loop, corresponds exactly to the region for which our experiments
reveal conformational exchange. However, the rate constant of this
process is clearly different. In solution, the conformational exchange
process occurs at a rate of about 12500–25000 s–1,[10,44,46] at temperatures
of 277–280 K, i.e., ∼20 K lower than the temperature
used here (300 K). At 298 K, the process is essentially undetectable
by T1ρ measurements in solution,
presumably because it is too fast (several tens of thousands per second).
The population of the higher-energy conformation could not be obtained
from solution-state measurements, as populations and chemical-shift
differences cannot be disentangled in the fast exchange regime from T1ρ measurements. Our data show that in
the crystalline state the motional rate constant is more than 1 order
of magnitude slower than in solution. We also investigated whether
differences in the solvent conditions, such as pH or viscosity may
explain such a large slowdown of the motion. However, solution-state
CPMG and differential MQC decay data in solvent conditions very similar
to the crystallization conditions, including up to 45% (v/v) precipitant,
do not show any detectable exchange (Figures S20
and S21). Thus, we conclude that it is indeed the crystalline
environment that causes the slowdown of the exchange process.It is interesting to speculate about the origin of the different
exchange rates in solution and microcrystals. In solution state, a
mechanistic picture of the observed conformational exchange process
has been proposed recently, primarily from mutation studies[47] and analyses of chemical shifts,[44] as well as from inspection of conformational heterogeneity
in various solution and X-ray structures. The conformational heterogeneity
is illustrated in Figure 4, showing ubiquitin’s
structure in the microcrystals used in this study (a,b) and in solution
(c,d). Most importantly, these structures differ in the conformation
of the loop D52 to T55. In microcrystals (panels a, b) this loop adopts
a type II β-turn conformation, with a H-bond between E24 (side
chain) and G53 (NH). The available solution structure, as well as
other crystal structures (e.g., PDB 1ubi), show a type I β-turn conformation
and a H-bond between D52 (NH) and E24 (CO); i.e., the two structures
differ by a flip of the peptide plane D52-G53. The exchange process
as detected by solution NMR is thought to correspond to an exchange
between the type I and the type II β-turn, as well as to the
breaking of the H-bond of I23(NH)-R54(CO) and side-chain reorganization.[10,44,47]
Figure 4
Structural comparison of the microcrystals
used in this study,
PDB 3ons(48) (a,b), and a solution structure of ubiquitin,
PDB 1d3z(49) (c,d). Intramolecular H-bonding among backbone
atoms and H-bonds involving side chains are indicated in red and blue.
Water-mediated intermolecular H-bonds are shown in yellow. Neighboring
molecules in the crystal lattice are shown in light blue in (a) and
(b), highlighting residues K63 and E64 of the neighboring molecules.
Note the different conformation of the loop E51-R54 in the two structures
(a,b) and (c,d), resulting in a flip of the orientation of NH(G53)
and CO(D52).
Structural comparison of the microcrystals
used in this study,
PDB 3ons(48) (a,b), and a solution structure of ubiquitin,
PDB 1d3z(49) (c,d). Intramolecular H-bonding among backbone
atoms and H-bonds involving side chains are indicated in red and blue.
Water-mediated intermolecular H-bonds are shown in yellow. Neighboring
molecules in the crystal lattice are shown in light blue in (a) and
(b), highlighting residues K63 and E64 of the neighboring molecules.
Note the different conformation of the loop E51-R54 in the two structures
(a,b) and (c,d), resulting in a flip of the orientation of NH(G53)
and CO(D52).The structural differences between the major conformational
states
in solution (type I β-turn) and in microcrystals (type II β-turn)
provide one explanation for the different exchange rate constants:
it appears that the relative energies of the lowest-energy state and
higher-energy states are reversed in solution and microcrystals. In
addition, a number of intermolecular contacts could also contribute
to a slowdown of the motion in microcrystals. Particularly, in microcrystals
the backbone carbonyl of D52 is H-bonded via a water molecule to a
lysine of a neighbor molecule (Figure 4a),
and the conformation of E24’s side chain is stabilized by an
intermolecular contact to E64 of another molecule (Figure 4b), thus stabilizing the type II β-turn conformation.
An exchange process involving a flip of the backbone of D52/G53, would
require that all these interactions be broken. The free-energy barrier
that needs to be overcome for breaking these interactions in microcrystals
would certainly slow down the exchange process.
Conclusions
In summary, we have provided the first
direct quantitative analysis
of the μs–ms dynamics of a protein in the solid state,
using two independent approaches based on transverse coherence decay.
To the best of our knowledge, transverse decay parameters have not
been used in a quantitative manner as measures of μs–ms
conformational exchange in solid-state NMR. The advent of deuteration
and fast MAS is changing this situation, thus providing new possibilities
for studying dynamics quantitatively.The measurement of the
differential MQC decay explored here allows
identifying the regions undergoing slow motional processes. In contrast
to solution-state experiments, both isotropic and anisotropic chemical-shift
fluctuations contribute to the differential MQC decay and report on
events on long time scales (hundreds of nanoseconds to milliseconds).
We foresee that similar approaches will be useful for spin pairs other
than 1H,15N, e.g., 13C,15N or 13C,13C pairs. From a suite of such experiments
using different nuclei, a comprehensive picture of the exchange process
may be obtained. Moreover, in the solid state MQC may be established
even for spins remote in sequence, and the differential decay of these
coherences may provide insight into correlated motions over longer
distances. Recent reports of proton–proton double-quantum transfer
over up to 10 Å may indicate one possible route in this direction.[50,51] At this point, we did not attempt a quantitative analysis of differential
MQC decay in terms of exchange parameters. Such an analysis is complicated
by the fact that a single experimental observable, i.e., the differential
line broadening, is sensitive to a number of parameters, including
chemical-shift parameters for two nuclei and exchange rates. As shown
here, CPMG RD experiments can provide such quantitative information
about conformational exchange processes. When combined with advanced
deuteration and back-protonation schemes, similar approaches as used
here for 15N may become applicable also to other backbone
and side-chain moieties. For example, using sparse random protonation[52] or methyl-selective labeling,[39,41] very long 13C coherence lifetimes are achieved, which
enable CPMG experiments, opening possibilities toward a detailed characterization
of higher-energy conformations in proteins in the solid state. Deuteration
and fast MAS will also enable the measurement of other probes of conformational
exchange, such as T1ρ RDs, and may
also be interpretable in terms of quantitative exchange parameters.
Progress in this direction has been reported recently.[22,53]This study has focused on a microcrystalline protein. We find
the
conformational exchange process to be altered by the crystalline environment,
relative to free solution. This direct demonstration of the impact
of the environment on dynamics is of physicochemical interest, and
it also indicates that one must be careful in interpreting data from
crystalline preparation in terms of biological relevance in solution
state. Importantly, the proposed experiments open new avenues for
the study of more complex molecules, for which the solid state is
the biologically relevant preparation, such as membrane proteins and
amyloid fibrils. It has been shown recently that proton-detected experiments,
akin to the approaches used here, can also be applied to highly deuterated
samples of membrane proteins or amyloid fibrils.[54,55] Long heteronuclear coherence lifetimes in such samples are expected
to enable similar experiments as shown here. Further improvements
in experimental design in terms of more efficient coherence transfers
(CP instead of INEPT), proton decoupling, and optimized levels of
protonation may be envisaged to improve sensitivity, which will be
particularly useful for such challenging samples. We foresee that
studies of μs–ms motion will be instrumental for understanding
complex biomolecular processes, such as allosteric binding and gating
of membrane proteins.
Materials and Methods
Protein Preparation
u-[2H,15N]-ubiquitin
was produced by bacterial overexpression in D2O based media,
and purified using standard procedures. Prior to crystallization,
the protein was dissolved in a D2O/H2O mixture
(ratio 8/2) at pH 9 for several days to ensure uniform back-protonation
of exchangeable hydrogen sites at the desired H/D ratio. Microcrystals
were obtained by addition of methylpentanediol (MPD) at pH 4.3, as
described,[56] using a mixture of D2O/H2O and MPD-d12.[31] The resulting ratio of H/D on exchangeable sites was approximately
8/2. Protein microcrystals were filled into a 1.3 mm Bruker rotor
or a 1.8 mm rotor, using an ultracentrifuge device.[57]
NMR Experiments
Differential MQC decay experiments
and RD experiments at 800 MHz 1H Larmor frequency were
carried out on a Bruker Avance III 800 MHz spectrometer, equipped
with a 1.3 mm HCN triple-resonance probe. The MAS frequency was set
to νr = 50kHz and stable to within 10 Hz. CPMG RD
experiments at 600 MHz 1H Larmor frequency were carried
out on a Bruker Avance II spectrometer. A custom-made 1.8 mm triple-resonance
probe (Ago Samoson, Tallinn, Estonia) was used for these measurements,
and the sample was spun at 45 kHz. Additional measurements, shown
in the Supporting Information (Figures
S8 and S15), were recorded on a Varian DirectDrive 600 MHz spectrometer,
equipped with 1.6 mm fast-MAS triple-resonance HXY probe. The effective
sample temperature was adjusted to 300 K in all cases, using the bulk
water line as a chemical-shift thermometer. All spectra were referenced
to internal DSS (3-(trimethylsilyl)-1-propanesulfonic acid, sodium
salt). Pulse-sequence details and delay settings are specified in
the Supporting Information. Solution-state
NMR spectra (Supporting Information) were
collected on a 600 MHz Varian DirectDrive spectrometer equipped with
a triple-resonance probe operating at room temperature. In CPMG experiments
at 800 MHz, 12 different CPMG frequencies (νCPMG =
50, 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800 Hz) and
an additional duplicate data point at νCPMG = 350
Hz were collected, while at 600 MHz, 11 values of νCPMG were measured (33.3, 66.7, 100, 133.3, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600,
700, 900 Hz). In all instances the CPMG frequency is defined as νCPMG = 1/(2δ), where δ is the spacing between the
centers of successive π pulses, thus following the most widely
used definition in solution-state studies.
Data Analysis
All spectra were processed with nmrPipe[58] and visualized with NMRView (OneMoon Scientific.
Inc.). All peak intensities were obtained from NMRView, and further
processed using MATLAB/Octave scripts. Differential MQC decay rates
were obtained as ΔRMQ = (2 tanh–1(⟨2HN⟩/⟨2HN⟩))/T, where T is the evolution delay. Errors were estimated from 1000
Monte Carlo runs, taking 2 times the standard deviation of the spectral
noise as uncertainties of the individual peak intensities. Relaxation-dispersion
data were analyzed by numerical integration of the Bloch-McConnell
equations in MATLAB. Data for the three residues were jointly fit
to a two-state exchange model. Error bars of the individual R2eff data points were obtained by taking 2 times
the standard deviation of the spectral noise as estimates of the uncertainties
of the peak intensities. Error bars of R2eff were allowed to be asymmetric, i.e., different toward higher/lower
values (see Figure S17). Error bars of
the extracted exchange parameters were obtained from 10 000
Monte Carlo runs, based on these asymmetric error estimates of R2eff. Additionally, we estimated the error bars
of the exchange parameters from inspection of the reduced χ2 surface of the fit procedure, and error estimates are similar
(see Figure S16). Numerical simulations
of the spin evolution in an exchanging system during the two pulse
sequences, as shown in the Supporting Information, were performed using the GAMMA simulation software.[59]
Authors: Ovidiu C Andronesi; Stefan Becker; Karsten Seidel; Henrike Heise; Howard S Young; Marc Baldus Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2005-09-21 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Józef R Lewandowski; Hans Jürgen Sass; Stephan Grzesiek; Martin Blackledge; Lyndon Emsley Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2011-10-03 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Petra Rovó; Colin A Smith; Diego Gauto; Bert L de Groot; Paul Schanda; Rasmus Linser Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2019-01-08 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Juan Miguel Lopez del Amo; Vipin Agarwal; Riddhiman Sarkar; Justin Porter; Sam Asami; Martin Rübbelke; Uwe Fink; Yi Xue; Oliver F Lange; Bernd Reif Journal: J Biomol NMR Date: 2014-07-03 Impact factor: 2.835
Authors: Diego F Gauto; Pavel Macek; Alessandro Barducci; Hugo Fraga; Audrey Hessel; Tsutomu Terauchi; David Gajan; Yohei Miyanoiri; Jerome Boisbouvier; Roman Lichtenecker; Masatsune Kainosho; Paul Schanda Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2019-07-05 Impact factor: 15.419