Ryan K Spencer1, Hao Li, James S Nowick. 1. Department of Chemistry, University of California, Irvine , Irvine, California 92697-2025, United States.
Abstract
A peptide derived from Aβ17-36 crystallizes to form trimers that further associate to form higher-order oligomers. The trimers consist of three highly twisted β-hairpins in a triangular arrangement. Two trimers associate face-to-face in the crystal lattice to form a hexamer; four trimers in a tetrahedral arrangement about a central cavity form a dodecamer. These structures provide a working model for the structures of oligomers associated with neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's disease.
A peptide derived from Aβ17-36 crystallizes to form trimers that further associate to form higher-order oligomers. The trimers consist of three highly twisted β-hairpins in a triangular arrangement. Two trimers associate face-to-face in the crystal lattice to form a hexamer; four trimers in a tetrahedral arrangement about a central cavity form a dodecamer. These structures provide a working model for the structures of oligomers associated with neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's disease.
Here we report the X-ray crystallographic
structures of trimers and higher-order oligomeric assemblies of a
peptide derived from the β-amyloid peptide (Aβ). Oligomers
of Aβ are now thought to play a central role in neurodegeneration
in Alzheimer’s disease.[1] Selkoe
et al. found that small Aβ oligomers disrupt long-term potentiation,
with trimers showing the highest disruption.[7] Ashe et al. found that a 56 kDa Aβ oligomer, termed Aβ*56,
impairs memory.[6] The oligomer appears to
be a dodecamer composed of four trimers. Understanding the structures
of these oligomers is essential to understanding their mechanism of
action. Trimers are particularly enigmatic, because their structure
cannot be explained by simply pairing monomers.The hydrophobic
central and C-terminal regions of Aβ are
known to participate in aggregation to form fibrils and are likely
involved in the aggregation of oligomers.[13] Although many molecular details of the aggregation processes have
yet to be elucidated, the formation of β-sheets appears to be
involved. While the structures of the fibrils are relatively well
understood, the structures of trimers and higher-order oligomers are
not known.[19]Peptide fragments derived
from amyloidogenic peptides and proteins
are valuable tools for studying the structures of amyloid fibrils
and oligomers.[22] In the current study,
we set out to use a peptide fragment derived from both the central
and C-terminal regions of Aβ to elucidate the structures of
Aβ oligomers.[15,16] We designed peptide 1a as a mimic of Aβ17–36 in which residues
17–23 (LVFFAED) and 30–36 (AIIGLMV) form the β-strands
of a β-hairpin (Figure 1). In this structure, the δ-linked ornithine
β-turn mimic connecting Asp23 and Ala30 promotes a β-hairpin structure and replaces residues 24–29
(VGSNKG). The δ-linked ornithine connecting Leu17 and Val36 forms a macrocycle to further enforce the β-hairpin
structure. We incorporated an N-methyl group on Gly33 to help prevent uncontrolled aggregation through edge-to-edge
H-bonding between β-sheets.[31] We
replaced Met35 with the hydrophilic isostere ornithine
(α-linked) to enhance solubility and further prevent uncontrolled
aggregation. We designed an analogue of peptide 1a containing
4-iodophenylalanine at the Phe19 position (peptide 1b) for crystallographic phase determination.
Figure 1
(A) Cartoon illustrating
the design of peptide 1a and
the envisioned relationship to Aβ17–36. (B)
Chemical structure of 1a illustrating Aβ17–23, Aβ30–36 M35O, the N-methyl
group, and the δ-linked ornithine β-turn mimic.
(A) Cartoon illustrating
the design of peptide 1a and
the envisioned relationship to Aβ17–36. (B)
Chemical structure of 1a illustrating Aβ17–23, Aβ30–36 M35O, the N-methyl
group, and the δ-linked ornithine β-turn mimic.The synthesis and crystallization
of peptides 1a and 1b were straightforward.[32] The
peptides were synthesized using Fmoc-based solid-phase peptide synthesis,
solution-phase cyclization, and RP-HPLC purification. Initial crystallization
conditions for peptide 1a were identified using the Hampton
Research crystallization kits: Crystal Screen, Index, and PEG/Ion
(288 experiments). Conditions with HEPES buffer and Jeffamine M-600
were selected and further optimized (0.1 M HEPES at pH 6.75 with 30%
Jeffamine M-600) to give rapid (<24 h) formation of good crystals.
Crystal diffraction data were collected at the Advanced Light Source
at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory with a synchrotron source
at 1.0 Å wavelength. Diffraction data were collected to 1.70
Å resolution. Data were scaled and merged using XDS, and phases
were determined by isomorphous replacement of the Phe19 4-iodophenylalanine derivative 1b.[33] The structure of peptide 1a was
solved and refined in the R3 space group. The asymmetric
unit contains 16 nearly identical monomers (rmsd ≈ 0.2 Å, Figure S3). Coordinates for hydrogens were generated
by phenix.refine during refinement.[34]The X-ray crystallographic structure reveals that peptide 1a folds to form a β-hairpin comprising two heptapeptide
β-strands. Eight residues (Leu17, Phe19, Ala21, Asp23, Ala30, Ile32, Leu34, and Val36) make up one surface of
the β-hairpin (the LFA face), and six residues (Val18, Phe20, Glu22, Ile31, Gly33, and Orn35) make up the other surface (the VF face).
The β-hairpin has a strong twist in which each residue rotates
in a right-handed fashion ∼25° along the β-strand
axis.[35] Contacts between the side chains
of residues located diagonally across the β-sheet help stabilize
the twisted β-hairpin (Phe19-Val36, Ala21-Leu34, and Asp23-Ile32;
Figures 2A and S1).
Figure 2
X-ray crystallographic structure of peptide 1a: (A)
β-hairpin monomer; (B) trimer, cartoon and stick representation
with ordered water; (C) trimer, space-filling representation; (D)
detail of trimer interface illustrating the hydrophobic cluster formed
by Leu17, Phe19, Ala21, Asp23, Ile32, Leu34, and Val36.
X-ray crystallographic structure of peptide 1a: (A)
β-hairpin monomer; (B) trimer, cartoon and stick representation
with ordered water; (C) trimer, space-filling representation; (D)
detail of trimer interface illustrating the hydrophobic cluster formed
by Leu17, Phe19, Ala21, Asp23, Ile32, Leu34, and Val36.Three β-hairpins assemble
in a triangular fashion and interlock
to form a trimer, with each β-hairpin making up one edge of
the equilateral triangle (Figure 2). The central
Aβ strand (17–23) constitutes the inner edges of the
equilateral triangle, and the C-terminal strand (30–36) constitutes
the outer edges. A hole runs through the center of the triangle, and
the NH and C=O groups of Phe20 line the hole. The
side chains of Phe19 surround the front of the hole, and
the side chains of Phe20 surround the back of the hole.
Three ordered water molecules hydrogen bond to the NH and C=O
groups of Phe20 and fill the hole in the center of the
triangle (Figure 2B).[36] The β-hairpins come together at the corners of the triangle
and stabilize the trimer through both polar and nonpolar interactions.
The main chains of Val18 and Glu22 H-bond at
each corner to create a four-stranded β-sheet (Figure S2). The side chains of Leu17, Phe19, Ala21, Asp23, Ile32, Leu34, and Val36 form an extensive hydrophobic cluster at the
corners where the β-hairpins meet. The side chain of Leu17 makes extensive contacts with the side chains of Ala21, Asp23, Ile32, and Leu34 of the adjacent β-hairpin and is buttressed by the side chains
of Phe19 and Val36 (Figures 2D and S2).The trimers assemble
loosely in the crystal lattice to form hexamers
and dodecamers (Figure 3). The hexamer consists
of two trimers clasped through the VF faces. In the hexamer, the Ile31 residues of the two trimers H-bond through bridging waters.
Loose contacts between Phe20 and Ile31 appear
to further stabilize the hexamer. The dodecamer consists of four trimers
in a tetrahedral arrangement around a central cavity, with the LFA
faces lining the cavity. Hydrophobic contacts occur between the Leu17 residues of the trimers. Salt bridges between the Asp23 residues and the δ-linked ornithines preceding Leu17 further stabilize the dodecamer. The contacts stabilizing
the hexamers and dodecamers appear to be in opposition, preventing
either oligomer from packing tightly.
Figure 3
(A) Hexamer and (B) dodecamer observed
in the X-ray crystallographic
structure of peptide 1a.
(A) Hexamer and (B) dodecamer observed
in the X-ray crystallographic
structure of peptide 1a.To test whether trimer formation results from N-methylation of Gly33, we prepared and studied peptide 2a, in which Phe20 is N-methylated
and Gly33 is not. Peptide 2a crystallized
in conditions similar to those for peptide 1a. Phases
were determined by isomorphous replacement of the Phe19 4-iodophenylalanine derivative 2b. The
structure of peptide 2a was solved and refined in the P3221 space group and contains 12 nearly identical
monomers (rmsd ≈ 0.3 Å, Figure S4).The X-ray crystallographic structure of peptide 2a is nearly identical to that of peptide 1a.
Peptide 2a crystallizes as a β-hairpin that assembles
to form
trimers, which further form hexamers and dodecamers. Moving the N-methyl group from Gly33 to Phe20 does not significantly alter the structures of the oligomers. The
central Aβ strand (17–23) still forms the inner edges
of the trimer, and the C-terminal strand (30–36) still forms
the outer edges. In the X-ray crystallographic structure of peptide 2a, the N-methyl groups from Phe20 replace the three ordered waters that fill the hole in the center
of the triangle (Figure 4). While N-methylation of either Phe20 or Gly33 is necessary
to prevent aggregation, it does not dictate the formation of the trimer,
hexamer, or dodecamer.
Figure 4
Detail of the X-ray crystallographic structure of the
trimers formed
by peptides 1a (left) and 2a (right). The N-methyl groups of 2a take the place of the
ordered water molecules in 1a.
Detail of the X-ray crystallographic structure of the
trimers formed
by peptides 1a (left) and 2a (right). The N-methyl groups of 2a take the place of the
ordered water molecules in 1a.The trimer formed by peptides 1a and 2a is unlike the structures of fibrils or oligomers previously observed
for amyloidogenic peptides or proteins. A similar triangular assembly
of three β-hairpins occurs in actinohivin, a 114-amino-acid
lectin that binds HIV gp120.[37] Actinohivin
contains three nearly identical sequences in tandem that form the
three β-hairpins and fold into a triangular assembly (Figure 5, PDB 3A07). Each β-hairpin comprises two pentapeptide
β-strands connected by a turn of three residues. Although these
β-strands are smaller than those of peptide 1a,
they occupy similar positions to residues 17–23 and 30–36
of 1a in the trimer. Actinohivin binds to mannose-containing
glycans on gp120 with high affinity through trivalent interactions
of the concave surfaces formed by the three near-repeats. This mode
of interaction suggests that trimers of Aβ may bind to molecules
on the surface of neurons through trivalent interactions of three
β-hairpins formed by Aβ17–36.
Figure 5
Cartoon representation showing the structural
similarities of actinohivin
(left) and peptide 1a trimer (right).
Cartoon representation showing the structural
similarities of actinohivin
(left) and peptide 1a trimer (right).We modeled a trimer of Ac-Aβ17–36-NHMe
β-hairpins to generate a working model of a trimer of Aβ.
We used the crystallographic coordinates of peptide 1a to generate residues 17–23 (LVFFAED) and 30–36 (AIIGLMV)
of the trimer and added loops comprising residues 24–29 (VGSNKG).
We performed replica-exchange molecular dynamics (REMD) in NAMD using
the CHARMM22 force field with generalized Born implicit solvent to
generate realistic conformations of the loops.[39] Figure 6 illustrates 20 low-energy
structures from the simulation. These structures provide a working
model in which residues 24–29 act as a loop connecting the
17–23 and 30–36 β-strands. The concave surfaces
formed by the loops and the twisted β-strands might serve as
binding sites in multivalent biological interactions.
Figure 6
Cartoon representation
of 20 low-energy structures for Ac-Aβ17–36-NHMe generated by REMD.
Cartoon representation
of 20 low-energy structures for Ac-Aβ17–36-NHMe generated by REMD.The X-ray crystallographic structures of the trimers and
higher-order
oligomeric assemblies formed by peptides 1a and 2a provide working models for the structures of the trimers
and higher-order oligomers of Aβ that are important in neurodegeneration.
In this model, Aβ associates to form trimers comprising three
β-hairpins in a triangular arrangement. The trimers are stabilized
through interactions among the central region of Aβ17–23 (LVFFAED). These interactions are buttressed by hydrophobic interactions
with the hydrophobic C-terminal region of Aβ—either Aβ30–36 (AIIGLMV) or another segment of the extensive
hydrophobic C-terminal sequence. Two trimers can stack to form hexamers.
While the hexamers formed by peptides 1a and 2a associate along the VF face, there is little distinction between
the residues of the VF face and the LFA face, and stacking might occur
through interactions among either face. Although the dodecamer in
Figure 3b might explain the structure of Aβ*56,
an assembly consisting of a stack of four trimers is also possible
and may provide greater contact and stabilization. These structures
and ideas serve as a starting point for developing and testing hypotheses
about the structures and mechanism of action of amyloid oligomers.
Authors: Dominic M Walsh; Igor Klyubin; Julia V Fadeeva; William K Cullen; Roger Anwyl; Michael S Wolfe; Michael J Rowan; Dennis J Selkoe Journal: Nature Date: 2002-04-04 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Rakez Kayed; Elizabeth Head; Jennifer L Thompson; Theresa M McIntire; Saskia C Milton; Carl W Cotman; Charles G Glabe Journal: Science Date: 2003-04-18 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Liping Yu; Rohinton Edalji; John E Harlan; Thomas F Holzman; Ana Pereda Lopez; Boris Labkovsky; Heinz Hillen; Stefan Barghorn; Ulrich Ebert; Paul L Richardson; Laura Miesbauer; Larry Solomon; Diane Bartley; Karl Walter; Robert W Johnson; Philip J Hajduk; Edward T Olejniczak Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2009-03-10 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Jun-Xia Lu; Wei Qiang; Wai-Ming Yau; Charles D Schwieters; Stephen C Meredith; Robert Tycko Journal: Cell Date: 2013-09-12 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Patrick J Salveson; Sepehr Haerianardakani; Alexander Thuy-Boun; Adam G Kreutzer; James S Nowick Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2018-04-20 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Karunakar Kar; Matthew A Baker; George A Lengyel; Cody L Hoop; Ravindra Kodali; In-Ja Byeon; W Seth Horne; Patrick C A van der Wel; Ronald Wetzel Journal: J Mol Biol Date: 2016-12-13 Impact factor: 5.469
Authors: Tuan D Samdin; Michał Wierzbicki; Adam G Kreutzer; William J Howitz; Mike Valenzuela; Alberto Smith; Victoria Sahrai; Nicholas L Truex; Matthew Klun; James S Nowick Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2020-06-22 Impact factor: 15.419