Phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation are dynamic intracellular protein post-translational modifications that frequently are alternatively observed on the same serine and threonine residues. Phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation commonly occur in natively disordered regions of proteins, and often have opposing functional effects. In the microtubule-associated protein tau, hyperphosphorylation is associated with protein misfolding and aggregation as the neurofibrillary tangles of Alzheimer's disease, whereas OGlcNAcylation stabilizes the soluble form of tau. A series of peptides derived from the proline-rich domain (residues 174-251) of tau was synthesized, with free Ser/Thr hydroxyls, phosphorylated Ser/Thr (pSer/pThr), OGlcNAcylated Ser/Thr, and diethylphosphorylated Ser/Thr. Phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation were found by CD and NMR to have opposing structural effects on polyproline helix (PPII) formation, with phosphorylation favoring PPII, OGlcNAcylation opposing PPII, and the free hydroxyls intermediate in structure, and with phosphorylation structural effects greater than OGlcNAcylation. For tau196-209, phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation had similar structural effects, opposing a nascent α-helix. Phosphomimic Glu exhibited PPII-favoring structural effects. Structural changes due to Thr phosphorylation were greater than those of Ser phosphorylation or Glu, with particular conformational restriction as the dianion, with mean (3)JαN = 3.5 Hz (pThr) versus 5.4 Hz (pSer), compared to 7.2, 6.8, and 6.2 Hz for Thr, Ser, and Glu, respectively, values that correlate with the backbone torsion angle ϕ. Dianionic phosphothreonine induced strong phosphothreonine amide protection and downfield amide chemical shifts (δmean = 9.63 ppm), consistent with formation of a stable phosphate-amide hydrogen bond. These data suggest potentially greater structural importance of threonine phosphorylation than serine phosphorylation due to larger induced structural effects.
Phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation are dynamic intracellular protein post-translational modifications that frequently are alternatively observed on the same serine and threonine residues. Phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation commonly occur in natively disordered regions of proteins, and often have opposing functional effects. In the microtubule-associated protein tau, hyperphosphorylation is associated with protein misfolding and aggregation as the neurofibrillary tangles of Alzheimer's disease, whereas OGlcNAcylation stabilizes the soluble form of tau. A series of peptides derived from the proline-rich domain (residues 174-251) of tau was synthesized, with free Ser/Thr hydroxyls, phosphorylated Ser/Thr (pSer/pThr), OGlcNAcylated Ser/Thr, and diethylphosphorylated Ser/Thr. Phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation were found by CD and NMR to have opposing structural effects on polyproline helix (PPII) formation, with phosphorylation favoring PPII, OGlcNAcylation opposing PPII, and the free hydroxyls intermediate in structure, and with phosphorylation structural effects greater than OGlcNAcylation. For tau196-209, phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation had similar structural effects, opposing a nascent α-helix. Phosphomimic Glu exhibited PPII-favoring structural effects. Structural changes due to Thr phosphorylation were greater than those of Ser phosphorylation or Glu, with particular conformational restriction as the dianion, with mean (3)JαN = 3.5 Hz (pThr) versus 5.4 Hz (pSer), compared to 7.2, 6.8, and 6.2 Hz for Thr, Ser, and Glu, respectively, values that correlate with the backbone torsion angle ϕ. Dianionic phosphothreonine induced strong phosphothreonine amide protection and downfield amide chemical shifts (δmean = 9.63 ppm), consistent with formation of a stable phosphate-amidehydrogen bond. These data suggest potentially greater structural importance of threonine phosphorylation than serine phosphorylation due to larger induced structural effects.
Genome sequencing has
revealed that most higher eukaryotes have
a relatively limited set of genes, whose numbers do not correlate
with organismal complexity.[1] The ability
of a limited number of genes to achieve diverse protein functions
depends on a series of post-translational modifications (PTMs), including
phosphorylation, glycosylation, acylation, methylation, lipidation,
protein ligation, sulfation, and myriad oxidations, that result in
controllable and conditional functions of proteins. Intracellularly,
serine and threonine residues are modified by phosphorylation, regulated
by protein kinases and phosphatases that collectively account for
2.5% of human genes, and by OGlcNAcylation, controlled by OGlcNAc
transferases and OGlcNAcases (Figure 1).[2] Frequently, the same residues that are phosphorylated
are also observed under different conditions to be OGlcNAcylated.
Interestingly, in many cases, phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation are
observed to have opposing functional effects. Thus, improved understanding
of the differential structural effects of phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation
is of broad potential application in cellular biology.
Figure 1
Intracellular post-translational
modifications of Ser and Thr by
phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation. Glu is a common pSer/pThr mimic.
The diethylphosphate triester of Ser/Thr is neutral and sterically
similar to OGlcNAc.
Intracellular post-translational
modifications of Ser and Thr by
phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation. Glu is a common pSer/pThr mimic.
The diethylphosphate triester of Ser/Thr is neutral and sterically
similar to OGlcNAc.The protein tau is a
441 amino acid (largest isoform) natively
disordered microtubule-binding protein that is most prominent in neurons.
Hyperphosphorylated forms of tau aggregate as fibrils and precipitate
as the major protein components of the neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs)
observed in Alzheimer’s disease and other neurodegenerative
disorders, including frontotemporal dementia, Pick’s disease,
and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) (collectively termed tauopathies).[3] The protein tau consists of a number of functional
domains (Figure 2), including 4 hydrophobic
tubulin-binding domains (TBDs) (residues 242–367) that are
directly responsible for both binding microtubules and for tau aggregation,
an N-terminal hydrophobic region which dynamically interacts with
the TBDs, and a proline-rich domain (residues 174–241), which
also contains a second hydrophobic region (residues 220–231).[4] The proline-rich domain of tau serves as a linker
between the N-terminal sequence and the tubulin-binding domains. The
majority of phosphorylation sites identified to be important to hyperphosphorylation-mediated
tau aggregation are in the proline-rich domain, with additional phosphorylation
sites located C-terminal to the tubulin-binding domains in a region
that also interacts with the TBD to stabilize it.
Figure 2
Top: Schematic of the
primary sequence and functional domains of
tau. Red, hydrophobic regions A and B; green, proline-rich domain
(PRD); blue, tubulin-binding domain (TBD) repeats 1–4 (R1,
R2, R3, R4). The most commonly used boundaries of the TBDs are indicated;
notably, residues 242–251 of R1 have poor homology to analogous
residues in R2, R3, and R4 thus defined. The TBD boundaries have alternatively
been defined as R1 residues 252–282, R2 283–313, R3
314–344, R4 345–376. By this definition, the proline-rich
domain extends through proline 251. Most phosphorylation sites associated
with tau aggregation in Alzheimer’s disease are in the proline-rich
domain and in the C-terminal domain. Additional phosphorylation sites
are in the N-terminus and in the TBDs. Bottom: Sequences of tau-derived
proline-rich peptides examined in this study. All peptides were acetylated
at the N-terminus and contained C-terminal amides. Residues in blue
indicate sites modified by phosphorylation, diethylphosphorylation,
or OGlcNAcylation. Residues in red correspond to the key residues
of the hydrophobic B motif. Residue numbers are based on the largest
(441 residue) isoform of tau. N-terminal tyrosines were added to tau211–219 and tau229–238 for concentration
determination. In contrast to these peptides, addition of either an
N-terminal or C-terminal Tyr to tau174–183 resulted
in substantial changes to its CD spectrum.
Top: Schematic of the
primary sequence and functional domains of
tau. Red, hydrophobic regions A and B; green, proline-rich domain
(PRD); blue, tubulin-binding domain (TBD) repeats 1–4 (R1,
R2, R3, R4). The most commonly used boundaries of the TBDs are indicated;
notably, residues 242–251 of R1 have poor homology to analogous
residues in R2, R3, and R4 thus defined. The TBD boundaries have alternatively
been defined as R1 residues 252–282, R2 283–313, R3
314–344, R4 345–376. By this definition, the proline-rich
domain extends through proline 251. Most phosphorylation sites associated
with tau aggregation in Alzheimer’s disease are in the proline-rich
domain and in the C-terminal domain. Additional phosphorylation sites
are in the N-terminus and in the TBDs. Bottom: Sequences of tau-derived
proline-rich peptides examined in this study. All peptides were acetylated
at the N-terminus and contained C-terminal amides. Residues in blue
indicate sites modified by phosphorylation, diethylphosphorylation,
or OGlcNAcylation. Residues in red correspond to the key residues
of the hydrophobic B motif. Residue numbers are based on the largest
(441 residue) isoform of tau. N-terminal tyrosines were added to tau211–219 and tau229–238 for concentration
determination. In contrast to these peptides, addition of either an
N-terminal or C-terminal Tyr to tau174–183 resulted
in substantial changes to its CD spectrum.Knowledge of the structural effects of post-translational
modifications
of tau is important to understand the mechanisms of pathological protein
misfolding induced by hyperphosphorylation observed in the Alzheimer’s
diseased brain, as well as to understand how to maintain tau in a
soluble, nonaggregated form. Data on natively disordered proteins,
including tau, indicate that conformations observed in peptides are
similar to those observed in the larger protein contexts, because
of the absence of stable tertiary and quaternary structures.[5] Because of the challenges of both structure determination
in natively disordered proteins and of reliable preparation of homogeneous
samples of expressed proteins with defined patterns of multiple protein
post-translational modifications, particularly for OGlcNAcylation,
we have used peptide models to understand the local structural effects
of natively disordered regions of proteins.[6]We previously investigated the structural effects of phosphorylation
on peptides derived from the proline-rich domain of tau.[7] In that work, we found that phosphorylation of
taupeptides induced a structural change promoting polyproline helix
(PPII). OGlcNAcylation of tau, which has been identified on a series
of sites in the proline-rich domain that are also sites of phosphorylation,
has been found to be protective against hyperphosphorylation and neurofibrillary
tangle formation.[8] Indeed, inhibitors of
OGlcNAcase, the enzyme that removes the OGlcNAc group and thus can
functionally inhibit phosphorylation by preventing access of the kinase
substrate, are under investigation as potential therapeutics in Alzheimer’s
disease.[9] The mechanism of OGlcNAcylation-mediated
protection against NFT formation could be via prevention of phosphorylation,
and additionally or alternatively OGlcNAcylation could promote a structure
change that is different than that of phosphorylation.
Results
In view of the general observation of phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation
occurring on similar sites, particularly within natively disordered
regions of proteins, we sought to examine within a biologically relevant
sequence context the relative structural effects of phosphorylation
and OGlcNAcylation compared to the unmodified Ser/Thr residues. A
series of peptides derived from the proline-rich domain of tau was
synthesized, and their structures were analyzed as free hydroxyls
and as phosphorylated and OGlcNAcylated amino acids, by circular dichroism
and NMR (Figure 2). All residues that contained
post-translational modifications have been previously identified as
sites of these post-translational modifications in tau.[8,10]The protected Fmoc β-OGlcNAcserine and threonine amino
acids
were synthesized via a modification of the methodology of Arsequell
et al. (Scheme 1).[11] The protected OGlcNAcylated amino acids were incorporated in peptides,
and the peptides were subjected to TFA cleavage/deprotection and purified
by HPLC. The purified peptides containing protected OGlcNAc hydroxyls
were then subjected to deesterification via NaOMe/MeOH and purified
to generate peptides with defined patterns of OGlcNAcylation on multiple
residues (Scheme 2).[12]
Scheme 1
Synthesis of OGlcNAcylated Fmoc Amino Acids via a Modification of
Ref (11)
Scheme 2
Synthesis of OGlcNAcylated Peptides
via Initial Purification of the
Peracetylated Peptides Followed by Deacetylation under Basic Conditions
In contrast to the common use
of Glu as a mimic of phosphoserine/phosphothreonine,
there is no readily accessible mimic of OGlcNAcylated serine/threonine.
The diethylphosphate modification of serine and threonine, which is
readily incorporated into peptides using phosphoramidites by standard
chemistry employed for peptide phosphorylation, generates a derivatized
side chain that is neutral and sterically similar to OGlcNAc. However,
in contrast to OGlcNAcylated Ser/Thr, which typically require expensive
amino acids (Fmoc-Ac3–SerOGlcNAc and Fmoc-Ac3–ThrOGlcNAc cost $600/100 mg, a quantity sufficient
for the incorporation of just one OGlcNAcylated residue in a single
peptide synthesized at small scale) and/or substantial synthetic manipulation,
peptides with the diethylphosphate modification are readily synthesized
on solid phase from inexpensive, commercially available reagents (Figure 1). Diethylphosphate, which exhibits substantial
steric effects in model peptides,[13] is
thus potentially a practical mimic of the steric effects of OGlcNAcylation.
Therefore, in addition to synthesizing the OGlcNAcylated peptides,
we also synthesized peptides with the diethylphosphates at sites of
OGlcNAcylation to investigate them as potential readily accessible
mimics of OGlcNAcylation.Polyproline helix (PPII) is a predicted
major conformation of protein
proline-rich domains.[14] The PPII content
in peptides can be quantified using circular dichroism (CD), via the
weak positive band at ∼228 nm.[15] In larger peptides, the intensity of this band can be obscured by
the substantially more intense signal from α-helices ([θ]max ∼ −33 000 deg cm2 dmol–1 for α-helix, compared to [θ]max = +5000 deg cm2 dmol–1 for polyproline
helix); thus, even nascent α-helices and β-structure can
substantially obscure the CD signal of polyproline helix in larger
peptides. PPII is also characterized by a negative band at ∼200
nm, although other structures can contribute to the intensity of this
band, and thus analysis of this band is nonquantitative. Polyproline
helix can also be identified by changes in the λmax in CD and in NMR via coupling constants.[16] In general, it is difficult to identify polyproline helix in larger
peptides and proteins by either CD or NMR because of similarities
to data in random coil, though polyproline helix can be definitively
identified and is observed to thermally melt to a random coil conformation,
which has a different CD signature. Because of these complications,
smaller peptides often have substantial advantages for the definitive
identification of polyproline helix.In polyproline helix propensity
scales, serine and threonine have
low PPII propensities, due to the possibility of multiple side chain/main
chain hydrogen bonds and χ1 conformational heterogeneity.[17] The lowest PPII propensities are observed for
aromatic amino acids and for sterically hindered β-branched
amino acids (Thr, Ile, Val, and particularly the highly sterically
congested tert-leucine (Tle)), indicating that steric
hindrance near the protein backbone strongly opposes PPII.All
peptides were analyzed by circular dichroism. In tau174–183 (Figure 3), which contains the Alzheimer’s
disease phosphoepitope pThr175/pThr181, the phosphorylated peptide
was observed to have greater PPII (larger signal at 228 nm, a defined
maximum indicative of PPII) than the nonphosphorylated peptide.[7,15a,18] Interestingly, the CD of the
phosphorylated peptide was similar to the peptide with both threonines
changed to the phosphomimic (and PPII-favoring residue) Glu, although
the structural effect of replacement of Thr by Glu was less than that
of Thr phosphorylation (Figure 3b). In contrast,
the OGlcNAcylated peptide exhibited reduced PPII compared to the nonphosphorylated
peptide, indicating that OGlcNAcylation disfavors PPII.[19] The effect of diethylphosphorylation was qualitatively
similar to that of OGlcNAcylation, though greater in magnitude. The
structural change of OGlcNAcylation was also observable in a red shift
of the λmax of the CD minimum, from 201 nm in the
phosphorylated peptide to 203 nm in the OGlcNAcylated peptide and
to 204 nm in the diethylphosphorylated peptide, as well as in a greater
mean residue ellipticity at 190 nm for the OGlcNAcylated peptide.
Data on the OGlcNAc and diethylphosphatepeptides were similar to
those of a polyproline helix negative control, with the threonines
replaced by the sterically demanding tert-leucine.[7,15a]
Figure 3
CD
spectra of tau174–183 peptides (Ac–KTPPAPKTPP-NH2) in water with 5 mM
phosphate buffer and 25 mM KF at pH 7.5. (a) Thr, green squares; phosphothreonine,
red circles; ThrOGlcNAc, blue diamonds; ThrOPO3Et2, black triangles. (b) Peptides with Thr (green squares) or with
both Thr residues replaced by either Glu (Ac–KEPPAPKEPP-NH2) (magenta open circles) or tert-leucine (Tle) (Ac–KTlePPAPKTlePP-NH2) (purple open diamonds).
CD
spectra of tau174–183 peptides (Ac–KTPPAPKTPP-NH2) in water with 5 mM
phosphate buffer and 25 mM KF at pH 7.5. (a) Thr, green squares; phosphothreonine,
red circles; ThrOGlcNAc, blue diamonds; ThrOPO3Et2, black triangles. (b) Peptides with Thr (green squares) or with
both Thr residues replaced by either Glu (Ac–KEPPAPKEPP-NH2) (magenta open circles) or tert-leucine (Tle) (Ac–KTlePPAPKTlePP-NH2) (purple open diamonds).Similar opposing effects of phosphorylation versus
OGlcNAcylation
were also observed in other proline-rich peptides exhibiting residual
PPII structure (tau211–219, tau229–238), with phosphorylation inducing PPII and OGlcNAcylation opposing
PPII (Figure 4a,b). These peptides include
the sites of several major tau phosphoepitopes (pThr212, pSer214,
and pThr231) that are observed pathologically in Alzheimer’s
disease. The reduction in PPII for the OGlcNAcylated and diethylphosphorylated
peptides, particularly compared to the phosphorylated peptides, was
observable in reduced mean residue ellipticity at 228 nm, in a red
shift in the minimum around 200 nm, and in increased mean residue
ellipticity at 190 nm.
Figure 4
CD spectra of (a) tau211–219, (b) tau229–238, and (c) tau196–209 peptides
in water with 5 mM
phosphate buffer and 25 mM KF at pH 7.5. Unmodified Ser/Thr, green
squares; phosphoserine/phosphothreonine, red circles; Ser/Thr OGlcNAc,
blue diamonds; Ser/Thr OPO3Et2, black triangles.
CD spectra of (a) tau211–219, (b) tau229–238, and (c) tau196–209 peptides
in water with 5 mM
phosphate buffer and 25 mM KF at pH 7.5. Unmodified Ser/Thr, green
squares; phosphoserine/phosphothreonine, red circles; Ser/ThrOGlcNAc,
blue diamonds; Ser/Thr OPO3Et2, black triangles.In contrast, the structural effects
of OGlcNAcylation and phosphorylation
were not distinct in tau196–209, although, interestingly,
peptides with both post-translational modifications were different
from the unmodified peptide (Figure 4c). In
tau196–209, both OGlcNAcylation and phosphorylation
disrupted a nascent α-helix CD signature (minimum in CD ∼220
nm) in the unmodified peptides. This sequence is less proline-rich
than the other peptides examined (3 Pro in 14 residues), and includes
three consecutive PG(S/T) repeats. PGSPG(S/T) sequences in the PDB
are observed as α-helix nucleation sites, with the Ser side
chain and SPG(S/T) main chain oxygens acting as hydrogen bond acceptors
to nucleate (N-cap) the N-terminus of an α-helix (e.g., glutaminyl
cyclase (pdb 3si0), interleukin-5 receptor (pdb 3qt2)).[20] Phosphorylation has been observed to disrupt
α-helix formation when the phosphorylation site is at an internal
site in α-helices.[21] In contrast
to the results above, in this case, the diethylphosphate, which induced
increased α-helix, was structurally divergent from OGlcNAcylation.
The observation here of similar effects of phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation
on α-helicity emphasizes the importance of structural context
in understanding the effects of phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation.
Indeed, while in many cases phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation are
functionally opposing, in some cases OGlcNAcylation and phosphorylation
result in similar functional effects in proteins.[2]In order to identify whether the structural effects
of post-translational
modifications seen in smaller peptides were also observed in a broader
structural context, we examined the peptidetau211–238. This peptide contains six phosphorylation sites, incorporating
two proline-rich regions (residues 211–219 and 229–238)
separated by a hydrophobic segment (the “B” domain of
Figure 2, including the highly hydrophobic
VAVV motif). By circular dichroism, phosphorylation of tau211–238 induced an increase in mean residue ellipticity at 228 nm, consistent
with induced polyproline helix upon tau phosphorylation in data seen
in smaller peptides above (Figure 5). The magnitude
of the increase in mean residue ellipticity at 228 nm was substantially
less than seen in smaller peptides, and cannot be definitively structurally
assigned in the larger peptide, but is consistent with an equivalent
change in structure to polyproline helix within the proline-rich segments.
The magnitude of the change in mean residue ellipticity is smaller
because of the larger number of residues in the peptide, including
residues not affected by the local structural organization induced
by phosphorylation (signal dilution by other residues in the peptide,
including B domain residues that adopt an extended conformation in
tau[18b]). The data from these peptides confirm
induced polyproline helix upon phosphorylation in larger peptides
but emphasize the difficulty in identifying polyproline helix in larger
peptides and the special utility of smaller peptides for definitively
identifying polyproline helix.
Figure 5
CD spectra of unmodified (green squares)
and phosphorylated (red
circles) tau211–238 at 0.5 °C in water with
5 mM phosphate buffer pH 8 and 25 mM KF.
CD spectra of unmodified (green squares)
and phosphorylated (red
circles) tau211–238 at 0.5 °C in water with
5 mM phosphate buffer pH 8 and 25 mM KF.One additional peptide, tau234–251 (Figure 2), was examined by circular dichroism. Landrieu
and Lippens identified via 13Cα chemical shift index[22] analysis that enzymatic phosphorylation of a
tau protein fragment (residues 208–324) by cdk2/cyclinA3, including
phosphorylation at Ser235, resulted in an increase in 13Cα chemical shift consistent with a small induction of α-helix
in residues 236–239 of tau.[5e] Analysis
of the tau sequence suggests a short segment between residues 235
and 246 with the potential to form an α-helix, with the sequence
bounded by prolines at residues 236 and 247 serving as α-helix
start and stop signals.[23] The C-terminal
prolines at residues 247, 249, and 251 are expected to strongly prevent
α-helix propagation beyond residue 246, although the P247VPMP251 sequence could potentially function as a hydrophobic
α-helix C-cap. CD experiments revealed a very weak α-helical
signature in the nonphosphorylated peptide, with modestly increased
α-helicity in trifluoroethanol (TFE) (Figure 6, Figure S6, Supporting Information).[24] These data are consistent with analysis
of Griesinger, Mandelkow, Zweckstetter, and co-workers, who found
that residues 240–251 of nonphosphorylated tau do not adopt
a well-defined conformation,[5e,18b,25] and that residues 232–239 predominantly adopt a polyproline
helix conformation, as we observed above and previously[7] for tau229–238 and tau229–242. Phosphorylation of Ser235 resulted in a small
increase in α-helicity of this peptide, consistent with the
results of Landrieu and Lippens, with a greater α-helical induction
observed in the α-helix-promoting solvent TFE.[24] In contrast, phosphorylation at both Ser235 and Ser237,
in addition to exhibiting a weak α-helical signature, induced
a small positive band at ∼225 nm consistent with the local
induction of polyproline helix around these residues that was seen
in tau229–238. Overall, these results are consistent
with the expected low α-helicity of this peptide sequence, whose
α-helicity is hampered by a short sequence of potential α-helical
character (12 residues; Pro has good α-helical propensity only
at the first and second residues of an α-helix[26]), multiple residues with low α-helix propensity (3
Ser and a Thr within the central 10 residues between the prolines),
and a C-terminal proline residue, which prevents continuation of the
hydrogen-bonding pattern of the α-helix and substantially reduces
α-helical content of short α-helical peptides.[23b,23d,27] Notably, the α-helical
content and induced α-helicity could be substantially greater
in the dynamic presence of transient tertiary structure present in
tau.[4,18,28]
Figure 6
CD spectra
of unmodified (green squares), monophosphorylated at
Ser235 (magenta open circles), and doubly phosphorylated (at Ser235/Ser237)
(red circles) tau234–251 at 25 °C in water
with 5 mM phosphate buffer pH 8 and 25 mM KF.
CD spectra
of unmodified (green squares), monophosphorylated at
Ser235 (magenta open circles), and doubly phosphorylated (at Ser235/Ser237)
(red circles) tau234–251 at 25 °C in water
with 5 mM phosphate buffer pH 8 and 25 mM KF.To understand the structural basis for the observed opposing
conformational
effects of OGlcNAcylation versus phosphorylation in proline-rich motifs,
all taupeptides were examined by NMR spectroscopy. In addition to
analysis of taupeptides, the effects of post-translational modifications
were examined within the simple tau174–183-derived
model peptideAc-KXPP-NH2 (X = Ser, Thr, or phosphorylated
or OGlcNAcylated Ser or Thr), whose sequence (with Thr) is repeated
twice in tau174–183 (K174TPP177 and K180TPP183) and which is homologous to
the R230TPP233 sequence in tau229–238. This peptide was also applied to examine the effects of threonine
versus serine modification. In addition, the structural effects of
phosphorylation versus OGlcNAcylation were also examined within the
model peptide Ac-GPPXPPGY-NH2 context, which was previously
used to identify polyproline helix propensity,[15a] and in the related proline-rich peptide Ac-GPKXPPGY-NH2, which contains the KTPP sequence present in tau174–183 (for these peptides, X = ThrOH, ThrOPO32–, ThrOPO3Et2, and ThrOGlcNAc).In these
proline-rich model peptides, similar conformational effects
of post-translational modifications were observed by CD as were found
in proline-rich taupeptides, with phosphorylation increasing PPII
and OGlcNAcylation and diethylphosphorylation opposing PPII (Figure 7, Figures S7–S17, Tables
S5–S7, Supporting Information). Notably, comparison
of the CD spectra of KTPP and KSPPpeptides (Figure 7, Figures S7–S11, Tables S5 and
S6, Supporting Information) revealed a substantially larger
structural change for Thr phosphorylation than Ser phosphorylation
(Δ[θ]224 = +5310 and +2230 deg cm2 dmol–1 for pThr–Thr and pSer–Ser,
respectively). The larger change in structure upon Thr phosphorylation
than Ser phosphorylation was both due to lower population of PPII
for the peptide with Thr than with Ser and due to greater PPII with
pThr than with pSer. These data suggest that substantially larger
structural changes are induced because of threonine phosphorylation
than because of serine phosphorylation.
Figure 7
CD spectra of (a) Ac-KTPP-NH2 and (b) Ac-KSPP-NH2 peptides at 25 °C in
water with 5 mM phosphate pH 8
and 25 mM KF. Unmodified Ser/Thr, green squares; phosphoserine/phosphothreonine,
red circles; Ser/Thr OGlcNAc, blue diamonds; Ser/Thr OPO3Et2, black triangles. Data on these peptides at 2 °C,
where greater PPII is observed, are in the Supporting
Information (Figure S11).
CD spectra of (a) Ac-KTPP-NH2 and (b) Ac-KSPP-NH2 peptides at 25 °C in
water with 5 mM phosphate pH 8
and 25 mM KF. Unmodified Ser/Thr, green squares; phosphoserine/phosphothreonine,
red circles; Ser/ThrOGlcNAc, blue diamonds; Ser/Thr OPO3Et2, black triangles. Data on these peptides at 2 °C,
where greater PPII is observed, are in the Supporting
Information (Figure S11).Data on polyproline helix model peptides Ac-GPPTPPGY-NH2 and Ac-GPKTPPGY-NH2 peptides were similarly consistent
with data in taupeptides. Data from Ac-GPPpTPPGY-NH2 also
indicated no effect of 2 mM MgCl2 on the CD spectra (and
thus, no substantial effect of Mg2+ on structure) of phosphorylated
peptides. In addition, a greater mean residue ellipticity at 228 nm
was observed at 2 °C than at 25 °C, consistent with the
interpretation that these CD data are specifically indicative of PPII
content in the peptides, as was previously seen in other proline-rich
and polyproline helix-containing peptides.[7,15a−15c,16a,16e]A series of homonuclear (1-D 1H
and TOCSY) and heteronuclear
(1H–15N HSQC, 1H–13C HSQC, and 1H–13C HMBC) NMR
experiments was conducted on tau-derived peptides and proline-rich
model peptides to identify residue-specific and post-translational-modification-specific
changes in structure (Figures 8–11, Tables 1–4). NMR data in this series of peptides were consistent
with CD data, indicating that phosphorylation in proline-rich sequences
induces structural changes leading to more compact and more ordered
conformations, whereas OGlcNAcylation and diethylphosphorylation exhibited
evidence of more extended conformations, as expected for sterically
demanding amino acids in proline-rich domains.[7,15a−15c,16e] 1-D 1H NMR spectroscopy indicated substantial divergence of the
peptides that was a function of post-translational modification: across
all peptides, relative to unmodified Ser/Thr, phosphorylation induced
downfield amide chemical shifts and smaller 3JαN for phosphorylated residues; in contrast, OGlcNAcylation
of Thr residues induced upfield amide chemical shifts and amide chemical
shifts similar to those of Ser for SerOGlcNAc. In addition, experiments
on nonphosphorylated and phosphorylated tau211–238 indicated that the large amide chemical shift changes and conformational
restriction observed for phosphoresidues in tau211–219 and tau229–238 peptides were also observed in
the larger peptide context (Figures S54 and S55,
Supporting Information). Of particular note, in all peptides,
phosphorylated residues exhibited substantially downfield (δ
= 9.4–9.8 ppm as ThrOPO32–, 8.7–9.2
ppm as SerOPO32–) amide proton chemical
shifts, with amide proton chemical shifts substantially more downfield
for the dianionic than the monoanionic phosphates (monoanionic pSer/pThr
δ = 8.35–8.75 ppm) (Figures 8 and 9, Table 2, Table S36, Supporting Information), as has been observed previously
in some peptides and proteins.[5a,5c,5e,29]
Figure 8
1-D NMR spectra (amide region) of peptides
with Ser/Thr, Ser/Thr(OGlcNAc),
Ser/Thr(OPO3H–) (pH 4), Ser/Thr(OPO3(H)−/2–) (pH 6.5), and Ser/Thr(OPO32–) (pH 8). Experiments were conducted at
298 K in 90% H2O/10% D2O with 5 mM phosphate
(pH 4 or as indicated) and 25 mM NaCl. gS and gT indicate the resonances
of the SerOGlcNAc and ThrOGlcNAc, respectively, backbone amide protons.
GlcNAc(NHAc) indicates the sugar amide proton. (a) tau174–183 peptides; (b) tau211–219 peptides; (c) tau229–238 peptides; (d) Ac-KTPP-NH2 peptides.
Figure 11
(a) Temperature-dependent 1H NMR spectra of Ac-KT(OPO32–)PP-NH2. Experiments were conducted
in 90% H2O/10% D2O with 5 mM phosphate buffer
and 25 mM NaCl at pH 8.0. Experiments were conducted at 277 (top),
298, 308, 323, and 338 K (bottom). Experiments at 277, 298, and 308
K were conducted on a 600 MHz cryoprobe instrument, while experiments
at 323 and 338 K were conducted on a 400 MHz instrument. (b) Salt-dependent 1H NMR spectra of Ac-KT(OPO32–)PP-NH2. Experiments were conducted in 90% H2O/10% D2O in 5 mM phosphate buffer at pH 8.0 with 25 (top),
125, 225, 325, and 1000 (bottom) mM NaCl.
Table 1
Ser/Thr
NMR Data at 298 K for Peptidesa
3JαN, Hz
peptide
residue
ROH
ROPO3H–
ROPO32–
ROGlcNAc
ROPO3Et2
tau174–183
Thr
7.3, 7.3
6.7, 6.3
3.8, 3.5
7.5, 7.5
n.d.
tau211–219
Thr
7.0, 6.4
6.7, 6.6
3.7, 3.1
5.7, 4.2
7.0, 6.8
Ser
6.5
n.d.
5.5
7.8
7.3
tau229–238
Thr
7.3
7.1
3.7
6.5
5.9
Ser
n.d.
6.4, 6.4
5.3, 5.2
8.0, 6.9
7.4, 7.0
GPPTPPGY
Thr
7.3
6.5
3.5
5.9
7.9
GPKTPPGY
Thr
7.4
6.7
3.5
6.7
8.3
KTPP
Thr
7.2
6.1
3.5
6.4
8.4
KSPP
Ser
6.8
6.5
5.5
6.4
7.6
mean
Ser
6.8
6.4
5.4
7.3
7.3
Thr
7.2
6.6
3.5
6.3
7.4
3JαN values < 6
Hz correlate with compact and ordered
conformations, values > 8 Hz indicate extended conformations, and
values between 6 and 8 Hz are observed in disordered peptides. In
general, smaller 3JαN values indicate more compact conformations, while larger 3JαN values indicate more extended
conformations. tau196–209 is not included here because
of spectral overlap. n.d. = not determined due to spectral overlap.
Glu 3JαN values in tau174–183(Thr → Glu) are 6.6 and 5.8 Hz. tert-Leucine 3JαN values in tau174–183(Thr → Tle) are 8.8
and 7.9 Hz. In Ac-GPPXPPGY-NH2 peptides, the 3JαN value of Glu is 6.3 Hz, the
third most-restricted value for canonical amino acids after Ala (5.7
Hz) and Asp (6.2 Hz), while that of tert-leucine
is 8.3 Hz, larger than all canonical amino acids (Val 8.0 Hz, Ile
7.9 Hz) and indicative of a strong preference for the extended conformation.[15a] Data on phosphorylated peptides were obtained
at pH 4 (ROPO3H–) or pH 8 (ROPO32–) (typical phosphoserine/phosphothreonine pKa 5.5–6.0). Additional NMR data for all
peptides are in the Supporting Information.
Table 4
Mean 13C Chemical Shifts
(ppm) for Serine/Threonine Resonances Across All Peptides as a Function
of Side Chain and Post-Translational Modificationa
13Cα
13Cβ
OH
OPO32–
Δδb
OH
OPO32–
Δδ
Ser
53.3
53.0
–0.3
60.7
62.6
1.9
Thr
57.1
58.4
1.3
66.9
70.0
3.1
Full tabulated NMR data and statistical
analysis are in the Supporting Information.
Δδ = δ
(Ser/Thr(OPO32–)) – δ (Ser/Thr(OH)).
Figure 9
1H–15N HSQC spectra
of (a) tau174–183, (b) tau211–219, (c) tau229–238, and (d) Ac-KTPP-NH2 peptides. Green,
peptides with unmodified Ser/Thr; blue, peptides with Thr(OGlcNAc);
magenta, peptides with Ser/Thr(OPO3H–) (pH 4); red, peptides with Ser/Thr(OPO32–) (pH 8).
Table 2
Mean 1H Chemical Shifts
(ppm) for Serine/Threonine Resonances Across All Peptides as a Function
of Side Chain and Post-Translational Modificationa
HN
Hα
Hβ
OH
OGlcNAc
OPO3H–
OPO32–
OH
OGlcNAc
OPO3H–
OPO32–
OH
OGlcNAc
OPO3H–
OPO32–
Ser
8.32
8.31
8.62
8.99
4.50
4.50
4.68
4.63
3.87
3.79
4.13
4.05
Thr
8.23
8.01
8.43
9.63
4.56
4.55
4.63
4.35
4.11
4.12
4.43
4.27
Full tabulated
NMR data and statistical
analysis are in the Supporting Information.
1-D NMR spectra (amide region) of peptides
with Ser/Thr, Ser/Thr(OGlcNAc),
Ser/Thr(OPO3H–) (pH 4), Ser/Thr(OPO3(H)−/2–) (pH 6.5), and Ser/Thr(OPO32–) (pH 8). Experiments were conducted at
298 K in 90% H2O/10% D2O with 5 mM phosphate
(pH 4 or as indicated) and 25 mM NaCl. gS and gT indicate the resonances
of the SerOGlcNAc and ThrOGlcNAc, respectively, backbone amide protons.
GlcNAc(NHAc) indicates the sugar amide proton. (a) tau174–183 peptides; (b) tau211–219 peptides; (c) tau229–238 peptides; (d) Ac-KTPP-NH2 peptides.1H–15N HSQC spectra
of (a) tau174–183, (b) tau211–219, (c) tau229–238, and (d) Ac-KTPP-NH2 peptides. Green,
peptides with unmodified Ser/Thr; blue, peptides with Thr(OGlcNAc);
magenta, peptides with Ser/Thr(OPO3H–) (pH 4); red, peptides with Ser/Thr(OPO32–) (pH 8).3JαN values < 6
Hz correlate with compact and ordered
conformations, values > 8 Hz indicate extended conformations, and
values between 6 and 8 Hz are observed in disordered peptides. In
general, smaller 3JαN values indicate more compact conformations, while larger 3JαN values indicate more extended
conformations. tau196–209 is not included here because
of spectral overlap. n.d. = not determined due to spectral overlap.
Glu 3JαN values in tau174–183(Thr → Glu) are 6.6 and 5.8 Hz. tert-Leucine 3JαN values in tau174–183(Thr → Tle) are 8.8
and 7.9 Hz. In Ac-GPPXPPGY-NH2 peptides, the 3JαN value of Glu is 6.3 Hz, the
third most-restricted value for canonical amino acids after Ala (5.7
Hz) and Asp (6.2 Hz), while that of tert-leucine
is 8.3 Hz, larger than all canonical amino acids (Val 8.0 Hz, Ile
7.9 Hz) and indicative of a strong preference for the extended conformation.[15a] Data on phosphorylated peptides were obtained
at pH 4 (ROPO3H–) or pH 8 (ROPO32–) (typical phosphoserine/phosphothreonine pKa 5.5–6.0). Additional NMR data for all
peptides are in the Supporting Information.Full tabulated
NMR data and statistical
analysis are in the Supporting Information.Phosphorylated Ser/Thr
residues in these peptides were particularly
conformationally restricted. 3JαN values correlate with the ϕ backbone torsion angle via a parametrized
Karplus equation, with values between 6 and 8 Hz consistent with disorder
or averaging of multiple conformations, values > 8 Hz indicative
of
ordered, extended conformations, and values < 6 Hz indicative of
ordered, compact conformations, and more broadly with smaller values
indicating more compact conformations, larger values indicating more
extended conformations, and values further from random coil values
indicating greater extent of order.[30] The 3JαN values observed are
indicative of special conformational order for the phosphorylated
residues: across all peptides, dianionic phosphothreonine exhibits
a mean 3JαN = 3.5 Hz,
corresponding to ϕ = −55°, compared to a random
coil value for Thr (3JαN = 7.2 Hz, average ϕ = −83°); dianionic phosphoserine
exhibits a mean 3JαN =
5.4 Hz, corresponding to average ϕ = −70°, compared
to a random coil value for Ser (3JαN = 6.8 Hz, average ϕ = −80°)) (Table 1).[30] Notably, the substantial
conformational order induced by phosphorylation was dependent on the
dianionic phosphates: only small increases in order were induced by
monoanionic phosphoserine (3JαN = 6.4 Hz), phosphothreonine (3JαN = 6.6 Hz), and glutamic acid (3JαN = 6.2 Hz). Interestingly, the small
coupling constants for dianionic phosphorylated amino acids observed
herein are also consistent with a growing number of examples of proteins
in which phosphorylation induces α-helix formation when at its
N-terminus.[5e,21b,29a,31]1H–15N HSQC experiments indicated
that, in addition to large downfield changes in the chemical shifts
of amide protons, the serine/threonine amidenitrogens exhibited large
downfield changes in chemical shift upon phosphorylation across all
peptides (Figure 9, Table 3; tabulated data Table S39, Supporting
Information). In tau174–183, the dianionic
phosphothreonine amidenitrogens were 7.2 ppm downfield of the amides
of threonine and 6.6 ppm downfield of the amides of monoanionic phosphothreonine.
In contrast, OGlcNAcylated threonine exhibited amidenitrogen chemical
shifts only 0.6 ppm downfield of those of threonine. The large divergence
in amidenitrogen chemical shift between monoanionic and dianionic
phosphothreonine is not consistent with differences in the electron-withdrawing
nature of the different protonation states of these phosphates,[13b,32] suggesting that these differences are due to particular structure
induced by dianionic phosphothreonine, consistent with differences
in 3JαN values between
monoanionic and dianionic phosphopeptides. 1H–15N HSQC data from other proline-rich peptides (tau211–219, tau229–238, and Ac-KTPP-NH2) exhibited
similar trends, with large downfield changes in amidehydrogen and
amidenitrogen resonances for dianionic phosphoresidues compared to
the monoanionic phosphoresidues or unmodified Ser/Thr [amidenitrogens:
tau211–219 Δδmean = +0.1
and +1.0 ppm for monoanionic phosphoserine and phosphothreonine, respectively,
compared to unmodified Ser/Thr, versus Δδmean = +2.9 and +5.5 ppm for dianionic phosphoserine and phosphothreonine,
respectively, compared to unmodified Ser/Thr; tau229–238 Δδmean = +2.6 ppm (pSer(OPO32–)) and +5.6 ppm (Thr(OPO32–)) ppm for the dianionic phosphoresidues compared to the unmodified
Ser/Thr; Ac-KTPP-NH2 Δδ = +1.1 ppm (pThr(OPO3H–)) and Δδ = +6.5 ppm (pThr(OPO32–)) relative to unmodified Thr; Ac-GPPTPPGY-NH2, Δδ = +0.1 ppm (pThr(OPO3H–)) and Δδ = +6.2 ppm (pThr(OPO32–)) relative to unmodified Thr]. Collectively, these data demonstrate
very large induced changes in the electronic environment around the
amidenitrogens of dianionic phosphoserine and dianionic phosphothreonine
residues compared to Ser/Thr, Ser/Thr(OGlcNAc), or to monoanionic
phosphoserine or phosphothreonine.
Table 3
Mean Amide 15N Chemical
Shifts (ppm) for Serine/Threonine Resonances Across All Peptides as
a Function of Side Chain and Post-Translational Modificationa
OH
OPO3H–
OPO32–
Δδb
Ser
118.2
116.9
120.8
2.6
Thr
118.1
119.3
124.3
6.2
Full tabulated NMR data and statistical
analysis are in the Supporting Information.
Δδ = δ
(Ser/Thr(OPO32–)) – δ (Ser/Thr(OH)).
Full tabulated NMR data and statistical
analysis are in the Supporting Information.Δδ = δ
(Ser/Thr(OPO32–)) – δ (Ser/Thr(OH)).Notably, small downfield changes
in amidenitrogen chemical shift
are associated with the polyproline helix conformation (Δδ
= +1.1 ppm for change from random coil to polyproline helix).[16e] While the changes in phosphoserine/phosphothreonineamide chemical shifts are too large to be explained by secondary structure,
most other resonances in these peptides also exhibited small downfield
changes in 15N amide chemical shift upon phosphorylation,
consistent with the increased PPII seen by CD (Figure 10; tabulated data in the Supporting Information). In contrast, the amides of OGlcNAcylated tau174–183 exhibited small upfield changes in 15N chemical shift,
consistent with the reduced PPII seen in this peptide.
Figure 10
(a–d) 1H–13C HSQC spectra (Hα–Cα
region) of (a) tau174–183, (b) tau211–219, (c) tau229–238, and (d) Ac-KTPP-NH2 peptides. (e,f) 1H–13C HMBC spectra
(Hα—C=O region) of (e) tau174–183 and (f) Ac-KTPP-NH2 peptides. Green, peptides with unmodified
Ser/Thr; red, peptides with Ser/Thr(OPO32–) (pH 8). Full spectra and tabulated data are in the Supporting Information.
(a–d) 1H–13C HSQC spectra (Hα–Cα
region) of (a) tau174–183, (b) tau211–219, (c) tau229–238, and (d) Ac-KTPP-NH2 peptides. (e,f) 1H–13C HMBC spectra
(Hα—C=O region) of (e) tau174–183 and (f) Ac-KTPP-NH2 peptides. Green, peptides with unmodified
Ser/Thr; red, peptides with Ser/Thr(OPO32–) (pH 8). Full spectra and tabulated data are in the Supporting Information.1H–13C HSQC experiments were
conducted
on taupeptides to further characterize the residue-specific effects
of protein phosphorylation (Figure 10, Table 4). In addition, to determine
the effects of phosphorylation on the backbone carbonyls, 1H–13C HMBC experiments were conducted on nonphosphorylated
and phosphorylated tau174–183 and the model peptideAc-KTPP-NH2 (Figure 10e,f). PPII,
in contrast to α-helix or β-sheet, does not exhibit large
changes in Hα (Δδ = −0.03 ppm), Cα
(Δδ = +0.3 ppm), or C=O (Δδ = +0.1
ppm) chemical shift compared to random coil.[16e] These experiments revealed large changes in the 1H and 13C chemical shifts of phosphorylated residues, as expected
because of the electronic change of the side chain, though with substantially
larger chemical shift changes at phosphothreonine than at phosphoserine
(Table 3). In particular, as the dianion, phosphorylation
of serine induced downfield shifts in Hα (Δδ = +0.13
ppm) and upfield shifts in Cα (Δδ = −0.3
ppm), in contrast to upfield shifts in Hα (Δδ =
−0.21 ppm) and downfield shifts in Cα (Δδ
= +1.3 ppm) for phosphorylation of threonine. Data from other residues,
within the context of the small inherent changes in chemical shift
for PPII, also indicated that the structural changes upon phosphorylation
propagated to residues beyond the phosphorylated residues (Figure 10).[33] One defining feature
stabilizing the polyproline helix is an n → π* interaction
between adjacent carbonyls.[34] The observation
of changes in the carbonyl chemical shifts across all residues (including
the N-terminal acetyls) is consistent with phosphorylation-induced
changes in the environment around the backbone carbonyls of all residues
in the peptides.Full tabulated NMR data and statistical
analysis are in the Supporting Information.Δδ = δ
(Ser/Thr(OPO32–)) – δ (Ser/Thr(OH)).Peptides with phosphorylated
amino acids also exhibited relatively
slow amidehydrogen exchange considering the absence of tertiary structure
or hydrogen-bonded secondary structure, with most amide protons observable
at pH 8 for phosphorylated proline-rich peptides (Figure 8, Supporting Information). For the peptide Ac-KT(OPO32–)PP-NH2, slow amide exchange, small 3JαN values, and downfield pThramide chemical shifts
at pH 8 were persistent even at elevated temperature (up to 323 K)
and at high salt concentrations (up to 1 M NaCl) (Figure 11). These data are consistent
with a strong interaction that is in slow exchange and that cannot
be readily screened electrostatically, suggesting that the induced
structure is not primarily due to a simple lysine-phosphate or arginine-phosphate
electrostatic interaction of the phosphorylated residue with the prior
basic residue. These data on dianionic phosphorylated amino acids
are particularly striking, since in disordered peptides, amide protons
are generally not observed or are substantially exchange-broadened
at pH 8. Slow amide exchange on the NMR time scale at pH 8 is generally
associated with more stable structures (e.g., those involving hydrogen
bonding, an interaction that could slow amide exchange at the pSer/pThramides, though not other amides).[29d,29e,35] While PPII does not exhibit hydrogen bonding, PPII
is stabilized by n → π* interactions between adjacent
carbonyls, which could also potentially slow exchange of the amide
protons.[34a−34d,36](a) Temperature-dependent 1H NMR spectra of Ac-KT(OPO32–)PP-NH2. Experiments were conducted
in 90% H2O/10% D2O with 5 mM phosphate buffer
and 25 mM NaCl at pH 8.0. Experiments were conducted at 277 (top),
298, 308, 323, and 338 K (bottom). Experiments at 277, 298, and 308
K were conducted on a 600 MHz cryoprobe instrument, while experiments
at 323 and 338 K were conducted on a 400 MHz instrument. (b) Salt-dependent 1H NMR spectra of Ac-KT(OPO32–)PP-NH2. Experiments were conducted in 90% H2O/10% D2O in 5 mM phosphate buffer at pH 8.0 with 25 (top),
125, 225, 325, and 1000 (bottom) mM NaCl.Interestingly, by NMR, the effects of modifications on serine
versus
threonine were divergent in magnitude (Tables 1–4), as had been seen by CD above in
Ac-KXPP-NH2 peptides (Figure 5).
Greater overall conformational restriction (3JαN) was observed at phosphothreonine than at phosphoserine,
as well as a larger change in 3JαN (and thus in the main chain torsion angle ϕ) between the nonphosphorylated
and phosphorylated peptides (mean Δ3JαN = 3.7 Hz for Thr, versus 1.4 Hz for Ser). Phosphothreonineamide protons also exhibited greater downfield shifts than phosphoserineamides (mean amide δ 9.63 ppm for dianionic pThr, versus 8.99
ppm for dianionic pSer, compared to 8.23 and 8.32 ppm for Thr and
Ser; Δδmean = +1.40 ppm for threonine phosphorylation,
versus Δδmean = +0.67 ppm for serine phosphorylation
(Table 2)), as well as greater downfield shifts
in amidenitrogens (mean amide δ 124.3 ppm for dianionic pThr,
versus 120.8 ppm for dianionic pSer, compared to 118.1 and 118.2 ppm
for Thr (Δδmean = +6.2 ppm) and Ser (Δδmean = +2.6 ppm), respectively) (Table 3). Larger changes in chemical shifts were also observed for threonine
phosphorylation than serine phosphorylation on Hα, Cα,
and Cβ (Table 2, Table 4, Tables S37 and S40, Supporting Information). Collectively, these data are consistent with a stronger phosphate-amide
interaction in phosphothreonine than phosphoserine and greater induced
structural changes for phosphothreonine than phosphoserine. Notably,
threonine and serine residues are differentially phosphorylated and
dephosphorylated in vivo, and evolution of Thr and Ser residues occurs
at different rates, suggesting native functional differences between
Thr and Ser.[37]
Discussion
We
have described the direct comparison of the structural effects
of phosphorylation versus OGlcNAcylation, competing intracellular
protein post-translational modifications that often occur on the same
Ser/Thr residues, on peptide conformation within a typical natively
disordered protein context.[2,18,38] This work was specifically applied within the context of the tau
protein, where hyperphosphorylation is associated with protein misfolding
and aggregation, but OGlcNAcylation is protective against protein
misfolding.[3a,5d,8−10] We found that within proline-rich sequences phosphorylation
promotes conformational order and PPII formation, whereas OGlcNAcylation
or modification with the practical OGlcNAc mimic of diethylphosphorylation
leads to conformational preference against PPII and a more disordered
or extended conformation. The effects of phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation
are divergent: whereas phosphorylation induces significant conformational
order, particularly on threonine residues, the effects of OGlcNAcylation
are more subtle, confirming the strong conformational biases of serine
and threonine against PPII. Interestingly, in the RNA polymerase II
C-terminal domain repeat (SYSPTSPS), phosphorylation promotes binding
to the Pin1 WW domain as a polyproline helix, whereas ThrOGlcNAcylation
induces a more extended conformation, consistent with results on taupeptides herein.[19] As phosphorylation and
OGlcNAcylation are competing protein intracellular post-translational
modifications, which generally occur on disordered protein sequences,
these data suggest potentially general opposing modes of structural
changes due to these post-translational modifications.[39]Hyperphosphorylation of tau is associated
with conformational changes
leading to tau misfolding and aggregation as the neurofibrillary tangles
of Alzheimer’s disease.[3,10] Aggregation of tau
is mediated by the hydrophobic tubulin-binding domains (TBDs). The
TBDs may be stabilized against aggregation by binding to microtubules,
or via association with the N-terminus and C-terminus in a global
hairpin conformation that masks the hydrophobic residues of the TBDs.[4,40] Phosphorylation or pseudophosphorylation induces structural changes
that open this hairpin conformation, exposing the hydrophobic TBDs
to promote aggregation, while OGlcNAcylation is protective against
aggregation, potentially due to maintaining or stabilizing the global
hairpin, though to date no structural data exist to suggest this latter
possibility.[41] The importance of the N-terminus
in protecting the TBDs from aggregation is emphasized by the ability
of N-terminal taupeptides to inhibit tau aggregation, consistent
with a critical role of the structure of the proline-rich linker between
these domains in maintaining soluble tau.[42] Thus, changes in secondary structure in tau’s proline-rich
domain may mediate global changes in tau structure and function. Notably,
phosphorylation at Ser-Pro and Thr-Pro sites within the proline-rich
domain inhibits the ability of tau to promote tubulin polymerization.[5e] The most striking data herein are the high degree
of order observed at phosphothreonine residues, with 3JαN values that indicate very stable non-random
coil conformation at these residues. Overall, these data indicate
that phosphorylation of the tauproline-rich domain induces significant
conformational changes that result in ordering of the proline-rich
domain, particularly as observed by NMR in the dianionic state, whereas
the effects of OGlcNAcylation are somewhat similar to the free Ser/Thr
hydroxyls and specifically oppose the effects of phosphorylation,
consistent with the observed effects of OGlcNAcylation in opposing
tau aggregation.Phosphorylation of threonine residues was found
herein to induce
greater structural changes than serine phosphorylation, although both
phosphorylation events induced more ordered conformations, including
induced PPII, restriction of ϕ, and slower amide exchange.[21a,31c,43] The greater structural change
at Thr was due to a combination of both more disorder for nonphosphorylated
Thr than Ser and more induced order for pThr than pSer, with particular
conformational restriction of ϕ and evidence consistent with
a phosphate-amidehydrogen bond. To identify a possible structural
basis for these observations, phosphothreonine residues in several
high resolution crystal structures (protein–protein interactions
(see below) and globular proteins) were analyzed. The crystallographic
data revealed a significant degree of conformational restriction in
some phosphothreonine residues, consistent with the data herein. The
conformation of phosphothreonine 197 in protein kinase A (pdb 1rdq,
the highest resolution (1.26 Å) protein with pThr in the PDB)
exhibits pThr in a PPII conformation (ϕ = −67°,
ψ = +134°), χ1 = −53° (g−), χ2 = +119° (surprisingly,
eclipsing C–H/O–P bonds), a hydrogen bond between the
phosphate and the phosphothreonine amide, and close interaction between
the n – 1 carbonyl (conjugated to the hydrogen-bonded
pThramide) and the pThr carbonyl (O–C distance 2.88 Å,
substantially less than the 3.22 Å sum of van der Waals radii,
as well as an O–C–O angle of 107°, similar to the
Bürgi–Dunitz trajectory), as would be expected by a
PPII-favoring n → π* interaction (Figure 12).[44] Notably, Thr197
is a critical and conserved residue in the activation loop of PKA
and related protein kinases. Thr197 phosphorylation induces a substantial
disorder-to-order transition in PKA and increase in PKA activity and
stability, with Thr197 exhibiting no electron density in nonphosphorylated
PKA.[45] The side chain conformational restriction
observed crystallographically in phosphothreonine residues was also
observed by NMR in Ac-KT(OPO32–)PP-NH2, which exhibited 3JHαHβ = 9.5 Hz for phosphothreonine, near the maximum of the Karplus curve
and indicating χ1 ∼ −60° (g– rotamer) (compared to nonphosphorylated Thr 3JHαHβ = 6.4 Hz, as
expected for disorder; Figure S66, Supporting
Information), as well as 3JHβP = 9 Hz, which is close to ideal for an eclipsing
χ2 C–H/O–P bond (3JHβP = 9 Hz was also seen in tau174–183; see Figures S20 and S77, Supporting Information). Collectively, the data observed herein across multiple phosphothreonine-containing
peptides, including induction of polyproline helix by CD, small 3JαN (= restricted ϕ)
for phosphothreonine, large downfield changes in amide1H and 15N chemical shifts, and slow amidehydrogen exchange,
are consistent with this crystallographically observed conformation
of phosphothreonine, suggesting a potentially general mode for conformational
restriction by phosphothreonine residues in both disordered and globular
proteins.
Figure 12
Structure of phosphothreonine residue 197 in protein kinase A (pdb
1rdq, 1.26 Å resolution).[44] A similar
conformation of phosphothreonine (ϕ,ψ = −64°,
+131°; χ1 = g–; eclipsing C–H/O–P bonds (χ2 = +118°);
phosphate-amide hydrogen bond; n → π* interaction) was
observed in a tau peptide containing pThr231 bound to a monoclonal
antibody (pdb 4glr), or of a pSer phosphopeptide bound to Pin1 (pdb
1f8a).[19b,46b] Hydrogens were added in Pymol.
Structure of phosphothreonine residue 197 in protein kinase A (pdb
1rdq, 1.26 Å resolution).[44] A similar
conformation of phosphothreonine (ϕ,ψ = −64°,
+131°; χ1 = g–; eclipsing C–H/O–P bonds (χ2 = +118°);
phosphate-amidehydrogen bond; n → π* interaction) was
observed in a taupeptide containing pThr231 bound to a monoclonal
antibody (pdb 4glr), or of a pSer phosphopeptide bound to Pin1 (pdb
1f8a).[19b,46b] Hydrogens were added in Pymol.We previously observed that nature often employs
the polyproline
helix for phosphoprotein recognition by phosphoserine/phosphothreonine-binding
domains, including binding of phosphopeptides in a polyproline helix
by WW, FHA, Polo-box, and BRCT domains, though not by 14–3–3
domains.[7] In addition, recent analysis
of phosphorylation sites in intrinsically disordered proteins suggests
a greater propensity for PPII around phosphorylation sites.[37c] Serine and threonine have natively low PPII
propensities, suggesting the possibility of phosphorylation-mediated
switches to PPII.[7,15a] In proline-rich sequences, eukaryotic
proteins also exhibit low frequencies of Asp and Glu residues, but
high frequencies of Ser and Thr residues.[15a] These data suggest that phosphorylation can provide both conformational
preference for PPII and anion specificity via electrostatics to protein-binding
domains that recognize phosphorylated proteins via a polyproline helix
conformation. Notably, tau phosphorylated at residue 231 is observed
in a polyproline helix both when bound to the Pin1 WW domain (pdb
1i8h) and to an antiphosphotau antibody (pdb 4glr).[46] In this case, antibody recognition, which involves no inherent
conformational bias in recognition epitopes, utilized PPII for high
affinity (Kd = 1.1 nM) and high specificity
(>500-fold specificity) recognition of the phosphorylated peptide
over the nonphosphorylated peptide. In sum, these data suggest that
polyproline helix provides the possibility of increased specificity
and affinity in folding and recognition of phosphorylated Ser/Thr,
over both nonphosphorylated or OGlcNAcylated Ser/Thr.
Conclusions
Phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation are the most significant intracellular
post-translational modifications of serine and threonine.[2] We found opposing structural effects of phosphorylation
and OGlcNAcylation in proline-rich sequences, which are among the
most common sequences in eukaryotes,[1] but
similar effects of both modifications in opposing the unmodified hydroxyl
in sequences with a nascent α-helix. These data provide a plausible
structural basis for the observation that OGlcNAcylation of tau opposes
neurofibrillary tangle formation, because of its confirmation of the
disordered structure of sequences with unmodified serine and threonine
residues, while phosphorylation is associated with neurofibrillary
tangle formation, potentially because of a disorder to order transition
that promotes opening of the global hairpin conformation of tau. More
generally, these data provide a context for interpreting sequence-specific
structural effects of these post-translational modifications, with
broad potential application to understanding the intracellular effects
of phosphorylation and OGlcNAcylation. Across all peptides, dianionic
phosphoserine and dianionic phosphothreonine adopted ordered structures,
including induction of polyproline helix. We found particular conformational
restriction in phosphothreonine residues, with a highly ordered structure
adopted. Notably, phosphoproteomics experiments have revealed that
over 25% of phosphorylation sites are at Ser-Pro or Thr-Pro sequences,
suggesting that the results observed herein in taupeptides and in
proline-rich model peptides may have broad applicability in understanding
the effects of phosphorylation on protein structure, particularly
in regions of protein disorder.[37a]
Experimental Section
Peptide Synthesis and Characterization
Peptides were
synthesized by Fmoc solid phase peptide synthesis. All peptides were
acetylated at the N-terminus and contained C-terminal amides. Complete
synthetic procedures and characterization data are in the Supporting Information.
Circular Dichroism
CD spectra were collected on a Jasco
J-810 Spectropolarimeter in a 1 mm cell at 25 °C. Peptide concentrations
were 15–400 μM in water containing 5 mM phosphate buffer
(pH 8.0 or as indicated) and 25 mM KF. Data represent the average
of at least three independent trials. Data were background corrected
but were not smoothed. Error bars indicate standard error.
NMR Spectroscopy
NMR spectra of peptides were collected
at 298 K on a Brüker AVC 600 MHz NMR spectrometer equipped
with a triple resonance cryoprobe. 31P NMR spectra were
recorded on a Brüker DRX 400 MHz NMR spectrometer equipped
with a BBO probe. Peptides were dissolved in buffer containing 5 mM
phosphate (pH 4.0, 6.5, 7.2, or 8.0) with 25 mM NaCl, 100 μM
TSP, and 90% H2O/10% D2O. 3JαN and 3JHP were determined directly from the 1-D 1H NMR
spectra and proton-coupled 31P NMR spectra, respectively.
Authors: Francisco Corzana; Jesús H Busto; Gonzalo Jiménez-Osés; Marisa García de Luis; Juan L Asensio; Jesús Jiménez-Barbero; Jesús M Peregrina; Alberto Avenoza Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2007-07-07 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Francois-Xavier Theillet; Andres Binolfi; Tamara Frembgen-Kesner; Karan Hingorani; Mohona Sarkar; Ciara Kyne; Conggang Li; Peter B Crowley; Lila Gierasch; Gary J Pielak; Adrian H Elcock; Anne Gershenson; Philipp Selenko Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2014-06-05 Impact factor: 60.622
Authors: Nicole A Wenzell; Himal K Ganguly; Anil K Pandey; Megh R Bhatt; Glenn P A Yap; Neal J Zondlo Journal: Chembiochem Date: 2019-03-07 Impact factor: 3.164