Botulinum neurotoxins are highly toxic, and bind two receptors to achieve their high affinity and specificity for neurons. Here we present the first structure of a botulinum neurotoxin bound to both its receptors. We determine the 2.3-Å structure of a ternary complex of botulinum neurotoxin type B bound to both its protein receptor synaptotagmin II and its ganglioside receptor GD1a. We show that there is no direct contact between the two receptors, and that the binding affinity towards synaptotagmin II is not influenced by the presence of GD1a. The interactions of botulinum neurotoxin type B with the sialic acid 5 moiety of GD1a are important for the ganglioside selectivity. The structure demonstrates that the protein receptor and the ganglioside receptor occupy nearby but separate binding sites, thus providing two independent anchoring points.
Botulinum neurotoxins are highly toxic, and bind two receptors to achieve their high affinity and specificity for neurons. Here we present the first structure of a botulinum neurotoxin bound to both its receptors. We determine the 2.3-Å structure of a ternary complex of botulinum neurotoxin type B bound to both its protein receptor synaptotagmin II and its ganglioside receptor GD1a. We show that there is no direct contact between the two receptors, and that the binding affinity towards synaptotagmin II is not influenced by the presence of GD1a. The interactions of botulinum neurotoxin type B with the sialic acid 5 moiety of GD1a are important for the ganglioside selectivity. The structure demonstrates that the protein receptor and the ganglioside receptor occupy nearby but separate binding sites, thus providing two independent anchoring points.
Botulinum neurotoxins (BoNT) are the most toxic substances known, with an
LD50 value of approximately 1 ng/kg[1]. Seven distinct serotypes of BoNTs (A–G)
exist[2,3]. Due to their extreme toxicity, they are one of the
top potential bioterrorism agents. However, members of botulinum neurotoxins (BoNT/A
and B) are also extensively used therapeutically to treat numerous medical
conditions, such as cervical dystonia, cerebral palsy, strabismus, hemifacial spasm
and myofascial pain, as well as for cosmetic purposes[4-6].These toxins are composed of three domains: the Light Chain (LC), the
translocation domain (HN) and the binding domain (HC). The LC
(~ 50 kDa), is a Zn-protease responsible for the cleavage of the SNARE
(soluble NSF attachment protein receptor) proteins targeted by the toxin. SNARE
proteins are central in synaptic vesicle exocytosis; cleavage of SNARE proteins by
BoNTs inhibits acetylcholine release at the neuromuscular junctions[7]. HN (~ 50 kDa) is
responsible for transport of the LC over the endosomal membrane. HC
(~50 kDa) binds to receptors on nerve terminals[2,8,9]. HC is further divided
into HCN and HCC, with HCN being highly conserved
and HCC diverse in sequence. The receptors bound by HCC and
the final protein being targeted by the LC varies between serotypes. In general,
BoNTs achieve their high affinity and specificity for neurons by binding two
receptors; gangliosides and one of the two synaptic vesicle proteins, synaptotagmin
(Syt) or synaptic vesicle protein 2 (SV2). BoNT/A, D and E use SV2 as their protein
receptor[10-13], BoNT/F might also utilize
SV2[14,15], although this has not been functionally
confirmed[13,16]. BoNT/B and BoNT/G, bind Syt, both
the Syt-I and Syt–II isoforms, as their protein receptors[18-24]. In addition, the protein receptors of a BoNT subtype, type
DC, are Syt-I and Syt-II[17].
Gangliosides bind in a ganglioside binding site (GBS), conserved in all serotypes
except C and D, consisting of a SXWY motif[14,15,25-30].
BoNT/C and D have in the same site an analogous GBS[31-33].
Independent of which receptor the BoNT bind, the end result is similar; cleavage of
SNARE proteins by the LC leading to muscle paralysis[8].Structures showing BoNT binding to either its protein receptor or
gangliosides alone have been reported, including BoNT/B in complex with its protein
receptor, synaptotagmin II (Syt-II)[19,22], BoNT/A with
ganglioside GT1b[28], and BoNT/F
with ganglioside GD1a[34].
Structures are also available for BoNT/B, C, and D bound to smaller sugars[25,31,33,35]. However, how BoNTs bind to both protein receptors
and gangliosides simultaneously remains to be established at the structural level.
Furthermore, no structure of BoNT/B bound to a complex ganglioside has previously
been determined.Here, we solve the structure of the first ternary complex of a BoNT bound to
both its protein receptor and ganglioside. We determine the 2.3 Å structure
of BoNT/B bound to Syt-II and the ganglioside GD1a. We show that the binding of GD1a
does not influence the toxins affinity for Syt-II. Our results show that the two
receptor binding sites are independent of each other.
Results
Overall structure of the complex
In a similar approach as previously reported, BoNT/B-HC was
constructed and purified as a fusion construct together with Syt-II[22]. This recombinant protein was
then pre-incubated with GD1a, a major brain ganglioside known to bind
BoNT/B[36], devoid of
the ceramide part. Subsequent co-crystallization experiments yielded crystals
that diffracted to 2.3 Å (Table
1). The structure was solved using molecular replacement. Residues
862–1291 of BoNT/B-HC were visible in the electron density,
with the exception of two flexible loops between residues 1151–1159 and
1245–1252. Well-defined electron density became visible during
refinement, accounting for both the fused Syt-II toxin binding region (residues
45–59), and the entire GD1a gangliosidesugar (Fig. 1a). The remainder of the fused Syt-II was disordered
and not visible in the electron density. The asymmetric unit contained two
BoNT/B molecules, which were virtually identical (r.m.s.d. of 0.4
Å).
Table 1
Data collection and refinement statistics
Data collection
Space group
P21
Cell dimensions
a, b, c
(Å)
47.2, 158.2, 75.2
α, β,
γ (°)
90.0, 108.4, 90.0
Resolution (Å)
44.7 – 2.3 (2.42-2.3)
Rmeas (%)
14.1 (79.3)
I/σ (I)
10.9 (2.3)
Completeness (%)
99.7 (98.5)
Redundancy
4.3
Refinement
Resolution
44.7 – 2.3
No. unique reflections
50612
Rwork/Rfree
15.5 / 18.9
No. atoms
Protein
7161
Syt-II ligand
284
GD1a ligand
176
Water
264
B-factors
Protein
25.0
Syt-II Ligand
31.2
GD1a ligand
26.9
Water
21.1
R.m.s. deviations
Bond lengths (Å)
0.008
Bond angles (°)
1.28
The data was collected from one crystal. Values in parenthesis are
for the highest-resolution shell
Figure 1
Dual receptor binding to BoNT/B
(a) Overall view of BoNT/B (gray) with GD1a (green) and mouse Syt-II
(orange) bound. Lower panel shows a close up view on the GD1a and Syt-II binding
sites, with the GD1a moieties and the Syt-II residues, interacting with BoNT/B,
shown as sticks. Phenylalanine 54 is indicated, this position is a leucine in
human Syt-II that has a drastically lower affinity to BoNT/B than mouse
Syt-II[17,44]. (b) Schematic overview of
possible hydrogen bonds between GD1a and BoNT/B (red dashed lines) and an
internal hydrogen bond (blue dashed line). The hydrogen bond distance is shown
for each bond (Å). Red stars show residues that previously, via
mutagenesis, have been shown to be important for ganglioside binding[26]. In GD1a, a ceramide is
present at the R position, the GD1a oligosaccharide used here has a hydrogen in
this position. (c) Stereo view of the bound GD1a, with its electron density
(2FO-FC map contoured at 1.5σ) in blue, and
the possible hydrogen bonds to BoNT/B residues as dashed lines.
The structure shows that Syt-II is bound in a hydrophobic crevice on the
tip of BoNT/B (Fig. 1a). The overall
structure obtained in the ternary complex is virtually identical to the
previously reported BoNT/B•Syt-II complex structures[19,22], demonstrating that simultaneous ganglioside binding
does not cause any significant structure changes in BoNT/B.
Ganglioside binding to BoNT/B
This is the first structure of BoNT/B in complex with a complex
ganglioside. The ganglioside binding site (GBS) on BoNT/B has been previously
mapped, mainly through mutagenesis studies, and contains a conserved SXWY
motif[26]. The ternary
complex structure revealed that GD1a indeed binds to this established GBS (Fig. 1 and 2). Four subunits of GD1a (Sialic acid (Sia5), Galactose (Gal4),
N-acetylglucosamine (GalNAc3) and Sia6) make contacts to the GBS of BoNT/B
(Fig. 1b). Sia5 forms hydrogen bonds to
N1273, N1105, G1277 and Y1263, Gal4 to I1240, H1241, S1260 and E1190. GalNAc3
and Sia6 form one hydrogen bond each, to E1190 and W1262 respectively. W1262 is
furthermore forming crucial aromatic stacking interactions with Gal4. The
remaining two subunits of GD1a, Glc1 and Gal2, do not interact with the GBS, but
are still visible in the electron density due to the crystal packing to the
second monomer in the asymmetric unit (Fig.
3). These crystal contacts are not biologically relevant; BoNT/B has
previously been shown to have a single GBS[26]. Key residues in the GBS mapped by previous mutagenesis
studies, are highlighted with a star in the figure (Fig. 1b)[26].
Figure 2
Comparison of the ganglioside binding to BoNT/B, BoNT/A and BoNT/F
The residues corresponding to W1262 and H1241 are shown in all
structures. In the schematic panels (a, c & e) the individual sugar
moieties are depicted as follows; triangles = Sia, rectangles = Gal, circle =
GalNAc, star = Glc. In all panels BoNT/B with GD1a bound is depicted in gray and
dark gray, respectively. The right hand panels (b, d & f) are stereo
figures of the GBS. (a–b) Comparison to BoNT/A with GT1b (green, PDB
code: 2VU9). (c–d) Comparison to BoNT/F and its bound GD1a (magenta, PDB
code: 3RSJ). (e–f) Comparison to BoNT/B and its bound sialyllactose
(cyan, PDB code: 1F31).
Figure 3
The asymmetric unit
The asymmetric unit containing two molecules of BoNT/B (gray), with the
bound recognition domain of Syt-II (orange) and GD1a (green). The second copy of
each molecule is colored in beige. All residues that interact with GD1a are
shown as sticks. Crystal contacts are formed between the two BoNT/B protomers
(gray and beige) in the asymmetric unit via the bound GD1a molecules. GD1a is
bound to the GBS, as described in Fig. 1.
The crystal contacts are formed by Glc1, Gal2 and Sia6. The green GD1a forms 3
hydrogen bonds, to S984, N1025 and L1022. The beige GD1a forms 5 hydrogen bonds,
to S984, F986, N1025 and T1026. These interactions are not biologically relevant
since BoNT/B has been shown to have a single GBS[26].
We next compared the structure of BoNT/B•GD1a with the previously
reported structures of BoNT/A•GT1b[28] and BoNT/F•GD1a[34] (Fig. 2).
We found that there are significant differences in the position of most sugar
moieties (Fig. 2a–d). However, the
position of Gal4 is fairly conserved in all three structures. Interestingly GD1a
has shifted one unit when compared with the previously determined structure of
BoNT/B with bound sialyllactose[25] (Fig. 2e,f). This
shift could indicate plasticity in the binding site, with different sugars being
able to occupy the binding sites in different binding registers. Alternatively,
the use of a partial mimic of the ganglioside or soaking could have influenced
the position[25].
BoNT/B ternary complex
Importantly, the structure of BoNT/B in the ternary complex, does not
undergo any significant conformational changes as compared to
apo BoNT/B and the BoNT/B•Syt-II complex[19,22,25] with an
HCC r.m.s.d. of 0.4 and 0.3 Å, respectively. Binding of
the receptors induces only minor adjustments of the positions of side chains in
the binding sites. For instance, W1262 moves slightly in the direction of Gal4.
Gal2 and Glc1 are located between the membrane and the toxin, and are likely
flexible. However, even allowing these moieties to be flexible, sterical and
distance restraints likely prevents the ganglioside to reach the protein
receptor in BoNT/B for a direct interaction. The closest distance between GD1a
and Syt-II is 15 Å. E1190 interacts with GD1a and E1191 interacts with
Syt-II, this is the closest connection between the binding sites. This result
further establishes that the high binding affinity mainly is the product of two
independent anchoring points, with no direct interactions between the binding
sites or the receptors (Fig. 1 and 4). Furthermore, the toxins binding to the
receptors impose sterical restrains on the interaction with the membrane (Fig 4).
Figure 4
Model of BoNT binding to the neuronal membrane
The HC (green), with its bound Syt-II (brown) and GD1a
(blue), is from this study, while the HN (purple) and LC (red) is
superimposed using the structure of the entire BoNT/B (PDB code: 2NP0). The
protein orientation is restricted by the binding of the two receptors. The
structure presented here supports the entry of the translocation domain into the
membrane with the end of the long helixes first[22,28]. The
regions linking both the protein receptor and ganglioside receptor to the
membrane does allow for a certain degree of flexibility of the toxins
orientation.
GD1a does not influence the affinity for Syt-II
To further confirm the lack of allosteric effects between the dual
receptors, we measured the binding affinity of ratSyt-II peptide (residue
40–60) to BoNT/B-HC, without and with a pre-incubation with
GD1a oligosaccharide. Isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) gave a
KD of 0.14 ± 0.05 µM and 0.18 ± 0.06
µM, respectively (Fig. 5). The
presence of GD1a did thus not significantly affect the binding affinity between
Syt-II and BoNT/B, further indicating that there is no allosteric contribution
in the binding of Syt-II and GD1a.
Figure 5
ITC titrations of Syt-II to BoNT/B
Representative ITC titrations of Syt-II to BoNT/B, without (a) and with
(b) pre-incubation of 75 µM GD1a. (a) KD = 0.14 ±
0.05 µM (b) KD = 0.18 ± 0.06 µM. The error is
the standard deviation on at least two independent measurements. The baseline
above zero in (b) is due to a slight buffer mismatch, and does not influence the
calculated values.
Discussion
The dual receptor concept for BoNT family toxins was proposed 27 years
ago[37]. The ternary
structure, of BoNT/B bound to both Syt-II and GD1a concurrently, presented here, now
proves the dual receptor model at the structural level. The structure demonstrates
that the binding sites are separate and there are only minor changes in the
structure upon binding of the receptors. There is no allosteric contribution in the
binding of Syt-II and GD1a to BoNT/B. Due to the high sequence similarity between
the recognition domains of Syt-I and Syt-II, it is likely that these receptors bind
the toxin in a very similar way.This is the first structure reported of BoNT/B bound to a complex
ganglioside. Previous experiments have shown that GT1b and GD1a support BoNT/B
binding, but that GD1b and GM1 bind substantially weaker[21,36,38]. The structure presented here
reveals the structural basis for this selectivity that arises from the interactions
of Sia5. The Sia5 moiety is strongly bound to BoNT/B with key interactions for the
overall binding of the ganglioside. Both GT1b and GD1a have a Sia5 moiety, whereas
GD1b and GM1 do not, explaining the differences in affinity. Furthermore, K1265 and
R1269, close to W1262, are well positioned to interact with the second sialic acid
moiety present in GT1b (but not in GD1a), likely contributing to GT1b having even
higher affinity than GD1a for binding BoNT/B[25,36].The detailed description of dual receptor binding to BoNT/B can be used to
develop toxin countermeasures targeting both sites simultaneous, thus benefitting
from the high affinity achieved by binding multiple sites, as naturally occurring in
the BoNTs.
Methods
Constructs and peptides
The cDNA encoding BoNT/B-HC (residues 857 – 1291,
GenBank: AB232927) was synthesized by GeneArt (Regensburg, Germany), with codon
optimized for E.coli expression. The cDNA encoding mouse Syt II
was generously provided by M. Fukuda (Ibaraki, Japan). The
BoNT/B-HC•Syt-II fusion construct was built by fusing
BoNT/B-HC directly to the N-terminus of Syt II (residues
8–61) by overlapping PCR, and subcloned into pET-28a vector at Nhe/XhoI
site. The following additional residues from pET28 vectors were also expressed
in the fusion protein:N-terminus before BoNT/B-HC: MGSSHHHHHHSSGLVPRGSHMASM;C-terminus after Syt II: VLEHHHHHH.Peptide corresponding to the toxin-binding site in ratSyt-II (residue
40–60) was synthesized (>95% purity) by JPT Peptide
Technologies Gmgh (Germany).
Protein expression and purification
Double His-6 tagged BoNT/B-HC – Syt-II was expressed
in Escherichia coli (BL21 strain). The cells were grown in
terrific broth medium containing 50 µg/mL kanamycin, and grown in 2 L
flasks at 37°C, pH 7.0, with addition of air to mix the medium and
maintain an excess of oxygen, to an OD600 of ~1.5. The
temperature was then lowered to 20°C, and expression induced by the
addition of IPTG with a final concentration of 1mM. After over-night induction
the cells were harvested and frozen in −80°C. For protein
purification, the pelleted cells were thawed, resuspended to an OD600 of
~100 in 50 mM KPi pH 7.5, 300 mM NaCl and 10% glycerol. Lysation
was performed by passing the cell suspension 2 times through an Emulsiflex-C3
(Avestin, Germany) at 20 kPsi. Unlysed cells and cell debri was spun down via
ulta-centrifugation at 4°C, 267k ×g for 60 min. The supernatant
was collected, imidazole, pH 7.8, was added to a final concentration of 12 mM,
and incubated with 0.5 mL Ni-NTA per 10 mL supernatant at 4°C for 60
min, rotating. The material was then packed in a disposable 10 mL column
(BioRad), washed 20 column volumes with wash buffer (50 mM Hepes, pH 7.8, 300 mM
NaCl and 45 mM imidazole, pH 7.8). The protein was then eluted using wash buffer
supplemented with 500 mM imidazole, pH 7.8. Purification was then finished by
running the protein over a Superdex 200 10/300GL size exclusion column,
pre-equilibrated with 20 mM Hepes pH 7.0, 150 mM NaCl. The peak fractions were
pooled and concentrated to 5.0 mg/mL, using a 30 kDa molecular weight cut off
spin concentrator (Vivaspin). Glycerol was then added to a final concentration
of 10%, and the protein was subsequently flash frozen in liquid nitrogen
and stored at −80°C. Expression and purification of
BoNT/B-HC for isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) experiments
was performed in the same way as BoNT/B-HC – SytII, with the
exception that BoNT/B-HC was not frozen, and the final buffer in the
size exclusion chromatography was 20 mM KPi pH 7.0, 150 mM NaCl.
Crystallization and structure determination
Purified protein was thawed, GD1a oligosaccharide (Elicityl, France) was
added to a final concentration of 2.5 mM, and was subsequently crystallized
using the vapor diffusion technique. Diffraction quality crystals grew from a
solution containing 0.2 M MgCl2, 0.1 M Hepes pH 7.0 – 7.2 and
20–24% PEG 6000. Crystals appeared between 8–12 weeks.
For cryo protection, they were washed in mother liquor supplemented with
40% PEG 6000, and subsequently flash frozen in liquid nitrogen.
Diffraction data was collected at 0.918 Å at beamline 14.1, BESSY,
Berlin. The crystals diffracted to 2.3 Å, and were in space group
P21. Data processing and reduction were carried out using
XDS[39] and programs
from the CCP4 suite[40].
Relevant statistics are shown in Table 1.
The structure was solved via molecular replacement, using the previously solved
structure of BoNT/B as a search model (PDB code: 2NM1). A few cycles of
refinement in Refmac5 and Phenix.refine[41,42], interspersed
with model building using Coot[43], were needed to build the full model and its ligands. The
final structure contains residues 862–1291, with the exception of two
loops, 1152–1158 and 1246–1252 that had ambiguous electron
density. At the N-terminus, 6 residues of BoNT/B are missing (MNSEIL), as well
as the N-terminal tag. The Syt-II binding domain, residues 45–59, has
well defined electron density, leaving residues 1–44 of Syt-II (which
acts as a linker in this construct) flexible. Furthermore, the entire GD1a
molecule is visible in the electron density. The highest resolution data, to 2.3
Å, had a twin fraction of ca 35 %, as analyzed via
phenix.xtriage[42]. The
structure was therefore refined using twin refinement. Another crystal form, in
space group C2, diffracted to 2.6 Å and did not have twinning. The
structure was also solved with this data, which was not twinned, and used for
comparison with the higher resolution structure obtained from the twinned data.
Final Rwork/Rfree of the untwinned data was 21.5 / 26.1
%. No substantial differences were observed between the two structures,
and since the twinned data with higher resolution gave better final electron
density, we choose to use that data for the final model building.
Isothermal titration calorimetry
Binding of synaptotagmin to BoNT/B-HC was measured via
isothermal titration calorimetry on a ITC200 (GE Healthcare) at 25°C and
1000 rpm. 200 µL of BoNT/B-HC (typically concentrated to
10–25 µM, in 20 mM KPi pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl) was added to the
cell. In the case of GD1a oligosaccharide addition, 0.25 mM was added to the
protein and incubated for 10 min on ice before adding the protein to the cell.
Binding was measured upon addition of Syt-II peptide in a stepwise manner,
typically 16 injections of 2.6 µL each, at a concentration of
10–15 times the protein concentration in the cell. The first titration
was 0.5 µL, and was subsequently deleted in the data analysis. The
analysis was performed using the software provided by the manufacturer.
Authors: T J Smith; J Lou; I N Geren; C M Forsyth; R Tsai; S L Laporte; W H Tepp; M Bradshaw; E A Johnson; L A Smith; J D Marks Journal: Infect Immun Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 3.441
Authors: Lisheng Peng; Ronnie P-A Berntsson; William H Tepp; Rose M Pitkin; Eric A Johnson; Pål Stenmark; Min Dong Journal: J Cell Sci Date: 2012-03-27 Impact factor: 5.285
Authors: Qing Chai; Joseph W Arndt; Min Dong; William H Tepp; Eric A Johnson; Edwin R Chapman; Raymond C Stevens Journal: Nature Date: 2006-12-13 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Min Dong; Huisheng Liu; William H Tepp; Eric A Johnson; Roger Janz; Edwin R Chapman Journal: Mol Biol Cell Date: 2008-09-24 Impact factor: 4.138
Authors: Felix L Yeh; Min Dong; Jun Yao; William H Tepp; Guangyun Lin; Eric A Johnson; Edwin R Chapman Journal: PLoS Pathog Date: 2010-11-24 Impact factor: 6.823
Authors: Alessandra Flores; Jorge Ramirez-Franco; Richard Desplantes; Kévin Debreux; Géraldine Ferracci; Florian Wernert; Marie-Pierre Blanchard; Yves Maulet; Fahamoe Youssouf; Marion Sangiardi; Cécile Iborra; Michel Robert Popoff; Michael Seagar; Jacques Fantini; Christian Lévêque; Oussama El Far Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2019-08-20 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Jasmin Strotmeier; Stefan Mahrhold; Nadja Krez; Constantin Janzen; Jianlong Lou; James D Marks; Thomas Binz; Andreas Rummel Journal: FEBS Lett Date: 2014-02-25 Impact factor: 4.124