Domain 2 of the anthrax protective antigen (PA) prepore heptamer unfolds and refolds during endosome acidification to generate an extended 100 Å β barrel pore that inserts into the endosomal membrane. The PA pore facilitates the pH-dependent unfolding and translocation of bound toxin enzymic components, lethal factor (LF) and/or edema factor, from the endosome to the cytoplasm. We constructed immobilized complexes of the prepore with the PA-binding domain of LF (LFN) to monitor the real-time prepore to pore kinetic transition using surface plasmon resonance and biolayer interferometry (BLI). The kinetics of this transition increased as the solution pH was decreased from 7.5 to 5.0, mirroring acidification of the endosome. Once it had undergone the transition, the LFN-PA pore complex was removed from the BLI biosensor tip and deposited onto electron microscopy grids, where PA pore formation was confirmed by negative stain electron microscopy. When the soluble receptor domain (ANTRX2/CMG2) binds the immobilized PA prepore, the transition to the pore state was observed only after the pH was lowered to early (pH 5.5) or late (pH 5.0) endosomal pH conditions. Once the pore formed, the soluble receptor readily dissociated from the PA pore. Separate binding experiments with immobilized PA pores and the soluble receptor indicate that the receptor has a weakened propensity to bind to the transitioned pore. This immobilized anthrax toxin platform can be used to identify or validate potential antimicrobial lead compounds capable of regulating and/or inhibiting anthrax toxin complex formation or pore transitions.
Domain 2 of the anthrax protective antigen (PA) prepore heptamer unfolds and refolds during endosome acidification to generate an extended 100 Å β barrel pore that inserts into the endosomal membrane. The PA pore facilitates the pH-dependent unfolding and translocation of bound toxin enzymic components, lethal factor (LF) and/or pan class="Disease">edema factor, from the endosome to the cytoplasm. We constructed immobilized complexes of the prepore with the PA-binding domain of LF (LFN) to monitor the real-time prepore to pore kinetic transition using surface plasmon resonance and biolayer interferometry (BLI). The kinetics of this transition increased as the solution pH was decreased from 7.5 to 5.0, mirroring acidification of the endosome. Once it had undergone the transition, the LFN-PA pore complex was removed from the BLI biosensor tip and deposited onto electron microscopy grids, where PA pore formation was confirmed by negative stain electron microscopy. When the soluble receptor domain (ANTRX2/CMG2) binds the immobilized PA prepore, the transition to the pore state was observed only after the pH was lowered to early (pH 5.5) or late (pH 5.0) endosomal pH conditions. Once the pore formed, the soluble receptor readily dissociated from the PA pore. Separate binding experiments with immobilized PA pores and the soluble receptor indicate that the receptor has a weakened propensity to bind to the transitioned pore. This immobilized anthrax toxin platform can be used to identify or validate potential antimicrobial lead compounds capable of regulating and/or inhibiting anthrax toxin complex formation or pore transitions.
Authors: A D Pannifer; T Y Wong; R Schwarzenbacher; M Renatus; C Petosa; J Bienkowska; D B Lacy; R J Collier; S Park; S H Leppla; P Hanna; R C Liddington Journal: Nature Date: 2001-11-08 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Eric F Pettersen; Thomas D Goddard; Conrad C Huang; Gregory S Couch; Daniel M Greenblatt; Elaine C Meng; Thomas E Ferrin Journal: J Comput Chem Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 3.376
Authors: D Borden Lacy; Darran J Wigelsworth; Roman A Melnyk; Stephen C Harrison; R John Collier Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2004-08-23 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Lorna M Cryan; Kaiane A Habeshian; Thomas P Caldwell; Meredith T Morris; P Christine Ackroyd; Kenneth A Christensen; Michael S Rogers Journal: J Biomol Screen Date: 2013-03-11
Authors: Ruth-Anne L Pimental; Kenneth A Christensen; Bryan A Krantz; R John Collier Journal: Biochem Biophys Res Commun Date: 2004-09-10 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Darran J Wigelsworth; Bryan A Krantz; Kenneth A Christensen; D Borden Lacy; Stephen J Juris; R John Collier Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2004-03-24 Impact factor: 5.157
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
Authors: Alexandra J Machen; Pierce T O'Neil; Bradley L Pentelute; Maria T Villar; Antonio Artigues; Mark T Fisher Journal: J Vis Exp Date: 2018-08-06 Impact factor: 1.355
Authors: Narahari Akkaladevi; Srayanta Mukherjee; Hiroo Katayama; Blythe Janowiak; Deepa Patel; Edward P Gogol; Bradley L Pentelute; R John Collier; Mark T Fisher Journal: J Membr Biol Date: 2015-01-13 Impact factor: 1.843
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
Authors: Pedro Jacquez; Gustavo Avila; Kyle Boone; Agamyrat Altiyev; Jens Puschhof; Roland Sauter; Emma Arigi; Blanca Ruiz; Xiuli Peng; Igor Almeida; Michael Sherman; Chuan Xiao; Jianjun Sun Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-06-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Vitalii Silin; John J Kasianowicz; Ariel Michelman-Ribeiro; Rekha G Panchal; Sina Bavari; Joseph W F Robertson Journal: Membranes (Basel) Date: 2016-06-24