Amyloid fibrils formed from initially soluble proteins with diverse sequences are associated with an array of human diseases. In the human disorder, dialysis-related amyloidosis (DRA), fibrils contain two major constituents, full-length human β2-microglobulin (hβ2m) and a truncation variant, ΔN6 which lacks the N-terminal six amino acids. These fibrils are assembled from initially natively folded proteins with an all antiparallel β-stranded structure. Here, backbone conformations of wild-type hβ2m and ΔN6 in their amyloid forms have been determined using a combination of dilute isotopic labeling strategies and multidimensional magic angle spinning (MAS) NMR techniques at high magnetic fields, providing valuable structural information at the atomic-level about the fibril architecture. The secondary structures of both fibril types, determined by the assignment of ~80% of the backbone resonances of these 100- and 94-residue proteins, respectively, reveal substantial backbone rearrangement compared with the location of β-strands in their native immunoglobulin folds. The identification of seven β-strands in hβ2m fibrils indicates that approximately 70 residues are in a β-strand conformation in the fibril core. By contrast, nine β-strands comprise the fibrils formed from ΔN6, indicating a more extensive core. The precise location and length of β-strands in the two fibril forms also differ. The results indicate fibrils of ΔN6 and hβ2m have an extensive core architecture involving the majority of residues in the polypeptide sequence. The common elements of the backbone structure of the two proteins likely facilitates their ability to copolymerize during amyloid fibril assembly.
Amyloid fibrils formed from initially soluble proteins with diverse sequences are associated with an array of human diseases. In the human disorder, dialysis-related amyloidosis (DRA), fibrils contain two major constituents, full-length human β2-microglobulin (hβ2m) and a truncation variant, ΔN6 which lacks the N-terminal six amino acids. These fibrils are assembled from initially natively folded proteins with an all antiparallel β-stranded structure. Here, backbone conformations of wild-type hβ2m and ΔN6 in their amyloid forms have been determined using a combination of dilute isotopic labeling strategies and multidimensional magic angle spinning (MAS) NMR techniques at high magnetic fields, providing valuable structural information at the atomic-level about the fibril architecture. The secondary structures of both fibril types, determined by the assignment of ~80% of the backbone resonances of these 100- and 94-residue proteins, respectively, reveal substantial backbone rearrangement compared with the location of β-strands in their native immunoglobulin folds. The identification of seven β-strands in hβ2m fibrils indicates that approximately 70 residues are in a β-strand conformation in the fibril core. By contrast, nine β-strands comprise the fibrils formed from ΔN6, indicating a more extensive core. The precise location and length of β-strands in the two fibril forms also differ. The results indicate fibrils of ΔN6 and hβ2m have an extensive core architecture involving the majority of residues in the polypeptide sequence. The common elements of the backbone structure of the two proteins likely facilitates their ability to copolymerize during amyloid fibril assembly.
Pathological amyloid fibrils are formed
by the misfolding and self-assembly
of proteins and peptides such as Aβ40/42 in Alzheimer’s
disease (AD), α-synuclein in Parkinson’s disease (PD),
islet amyloid polypeptide (IAPP or amylin) in type II diabetes mellitus,
and human β2-microglobulin (hβ2m)
in dialysis-related amyloidosis (DRA).[1−3] Despite the distinct
amino acid compositions of amyloid proteins, the self-assembled fibrils
adopt a universal and underpinning cross-β molecular structure
composed of arrays of ribbonlike β-sheets running parallel to
the long axis of the fibrils.[4−6] The structural basis of these
filamentous aggregates needs to be investigated to provide a mechanistic
understanding of their role in pathological events and to develop
therapeutic strategies against protein aggregation diseases. One avenue
toward this end is the determination of the molecular structure of
the final fibril aggregates. Magic angle spinning (MAS) NMR spectroscopy
has demonstrated its indispensable role in elucidating the backbone
conformations, supermolecular organization and registry of interstrand
arrangements of amyloid fibrils, which otherwise are inaccessible
by most common techniques. Indeed, models have been established for
a number of amyloid fibrils primarily based on MAS NMR analysis of
fibrils formed in vitro, including Aβ(1–40),[7−9] α-synuclein,[10−12] Sup35p,[13,14] humanprionprotein,[15,16] and other protein sequences.[6,17] In addition, MAS NMR
and cryo-electron microscopy (cryoEM) were used to determine the complete
high-resolution structure of three polymorphs of amyloid fibrils formed
by a peptide from transthyretin (TTR105–115).[18−20]Two amyloid fibril components, 99-residue hβ2m
and its truncated variant ΔN6 that lacks the N-terminal six
amino acids,[21] are found in osteoarticular
amyloid deposits in dialysis-related amyloidosis (DRA). Full-length
hβ2m is remarkably intransigent to fibril assembly
at physiological pH and temperature in the absence of cosolvents or
other additives.[22] A number of factors,
including pH, metal ions, and biologically relevant molecules including
collagen, glycosaminoglycans, lysophosphatidic acid, and nonesterified
fatty acids induce the fibril formation of hβ2m in vitro.[23−29] For example, at pH 2.5, predominantly unfolded hβ2m protein associates rapidly in vitro to form amyloid
fibrils.[30] In contrast with the requirement
for denaturing or destabilizing conditions to induce fibril formation
of the wild-type protein, ΔN6 readily forms fibrils in vitro from an initially “folded” monomeric
state at pH 6.2–7.2.[31,32] Most recently, even
trace amounts of ΔN6 (1%) have been found to facilitate the
fibril formation of the natively structured wild-type protein in vitro at pH 6.2–7.2.[31] The possession of trans-P32 in native ΔN6
rationalizes, in part, the ability of thisprotein to form amyloid
on the basis of its structural similarity to the transient folding
intermediate (IT) identified as a key precursor in amyloid
assembly of hβ2m.[31,33,34] These findings, together with the natural occurrence
of ΔN6 in fibrils in vivo, have resulted in
increasing attention on this variant,[31,32] despite the
absence of a consensus as to whether the truncated protein originates
prior to, or post, fibril assembly in vivo.[35,36] Therefore, hβ2m and ΔN6 provide an interesting
pair of proteins by which to study the mechanisms of amyloid assembly
at a fundamental level.[31,32,37]Since the identification of hβ2m as an amyloid
protein more than 20 years ago, numerous biochemical and biophysical
studies have investigated the structure and dynamics of the protein
under different solution conditions. X-ray crystallography and solution
NMR have provided high-resolution structures of the native, monomeric
wild-type protein, which shows a β-sandwich fold consisting
of seven antiparallel β-strands, stabilized by a single interstrand
disulfide bond.[31,38−42] Other studies focusing on the characterization of
precursors (i.e., the native monomer and its partially folded intermediates),
fragments, mutated variants, and oligomers of the wild-type protein,
have improved our understanding of the nature of the self-assembly
mechanisms of hβ2m into amyloid fibrils.[43−45] However, due to the complexity of the cross-β superstructure
and the insoluble and noncrystalline nature of these amyloid assemblies,
atomic-level information on structures within the fibril architecture
remains elusive. A limited number of pioneering studies have been
conducted; for example, Iwata et al. have successfully determined
the tertiary structure of a 22-residue segment of hβ2m (S20–K41) within amyloid fibrils primarily by using MAS
NMR,[46] while Eisenberg and co-workers have
focused on different 7-residue peptides, from the hβ2m sequence, that form 3D crystals.[47] However,
fibrils formed from a short peptide fragment are insufficient to represent
the structural features of the intact protein since the remaining
residues not included in the S20–K41 fragment have been found
to be crucial in the assembly of the intact protein into fibrils using
EPR, mutagenesis, cryoEM, and solution NMR.[31,48−51] The identification of the fibril cores, and therefore residues that
are crucial in the fibril assembly, was investigated by H/D exchange[48,52,53] and limited proteolysis experiments.[54,55] Both techniques provide a global profile of protein segments, showing
solvent protection or exposure, and the distribution of preferential
proteolytic sites. However, neither of these approaches addresses
the residue-specific conformational composition of the fibril core.
Thus, information elucidating the backbone rearrangement occurring
on the pathway of amyloid assembly from the native structure to fibrils,
is still missing. Therefore, an atomic-level structure of full-length
hβ2m and ΔN6 in their fibril forms is necessary
in order to understand the hierarchical assembly of these elementary
building blocks into the complex fibril architecture imaged by cryoEM.[56]We have recently reported the MAS NMR
characterization of full-length
hβ2m fibrils formed at pH 2.5,[57] resulting in the prediction of torsion angles for 40 residues
of this 100-residue protein (the recombinant protein contains an additional
N-terminal methionine, denoted here as M0). These results suggested
at least five segments of β-strands in the fibril structure.
The resonance assignments also revealed that H31–P32 peptide
bond adopts a trans-conformation in hβ2m fibrils, consistent with cis-to-trans isomerization of this residue being an important initiating
event in fibril formation.[34] However, a
clear picture of the secondary structural content of hβ2m fibrils requires complete assignment of the backbone resonances
of the protein in fibrillar form. In addition, no detailed structural
studies of the fibrils formed from ΔN6 have yet been performed.
Here we present the assignment of backbone resonances of hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils (80% and 88% complete, respectively)
using a combination of variously isotopically labeled samples and
a set of multidimensional NMR techniques at 750–900 MHz. The
resulting atomic-level comparison of the secondary structure within
the fibrils formed from these proteins reveals structural differences
that explain their ability to copolymerize at neutral pH.[32]
Materials and Methods
Protein
Preparation and Fibril Formation
Biosynthesis
and purification of hβ2m and ΔN6 followed protocols as
described previously.[31,57] The proteins were isotopically
labeled using different strategies for MAS NMR experiments. Briefly,
recombinant proteins were expressed in BL21(DE3) pLysS E. coli in the presence of HCDM1 minimal media. Three
different isotopically labeled samples were prepared for each protein,
including one uniformly 15N,13C-labeled protein
and two site-directed 13C- and uniformly 15N-labeled
proteins. These three protein samples were produced in minimal media
enriched with 1 g/L 15NH4Cl and using either
2 g/L d-glucose-13C6 (named as U-hβ2m or U-ΔN6), [1,3-13C]-glycerol (1,3-hβ2m or 1,3-ΔN6) or [2-13C]-glycerol (2-hβ2m or 2-ΔN6). All isotopes were purchased from Cambridge
Isotope Laboratories (Andover, MA) and used without further purification.The hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils were prepared by
incubation in a 96-well plate (Corning Incorporated, Costar) in a
BMG Fluostar Optima plate reader at 37 °C with constant shaking
at 600 rpm. Fibril growth was performed using 0.5 mg/mL soluble protein,
0.02% (w/v) NaN3 and different pHs and salt concentrations,
i.e. 10 mM sodium phosphate buffer containing 50 mM NaCl at pH 2.5
for hβ2m and 50 mM MES buffer containing 120 mM NaCl
at pH 6.2 for ΔN6. The hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils
were harvested after incubation for approximately 14 or 7 days, respectively.
The fibrils were centrifuged at 14,000g for 20 min
and characterized by negative stain transmission electron microscopy
(EM). The fibrils were prepared without seeding, and the consistency
of the fibril type was confirmed by analysis of NMR chemical shifts.
Solid-State NMR Experiments
The hydrated fibrils were
ultracentrifuged for 24 h at 300000g to pack the
pellet into 3.2 mm Bruker zirconia rotors (Bruker BioSpin, Billerica,
MA). The packed hydrated fibril samples have negligible water loss
as monitored by the 1H signal of H2O. MAS NMR
experiments were performed on a custom-designed 750 MHz spectrometer
(courtesy of Dr. David J. Ruben, Francis Bitter Magnet Laboratory,
Cambridge, MA), and Bruker 800 and 900 MHz spectrometers (1H frequency).Complete experimental details for the multidimensional
MAS NMR experiments are included in the Supporting
Information (SI). Briefly, three different kinds of 1D 13C experiments were conducted, including dipolar-coupling
based cross-polarization (CP), direct polarization (DP), and scalar-coupling
(J)-based INEPT. Two-dimensional (2D) homonuclear 13C–13C correlations were recorded using radio frequency-driven
recoupling (RFDR), either in a broadband or band-selective manner.[59−61] Two-dimensional heteronuclear 15N–13C correlations were achieved by Z-filtered transferred-echo double-resonance
(ZF TEDOR)[62,63] and proton-assisted insensitive
nuclei cross-polarization (PAIN-CP).[64] Two
categories of 3D 15N–13C–13C experiments were performed for sequential assignments,
including the conventional N–C–C experiments, i.e. NCOCX,
NCACX, and CONCA, and the most recently designed TEDOR-CC experiments.[65,66]All spectra were processed with NMRPipe.[68] Zero filling and Lorentzian-to-Gaussian apodization for
each dimension
were applied before Fourier transformation. Polynomial baseline correction
in the frequency domain was applied to the detection dimension. A
line broadening of 30–60 Hz was used for all 2D and 3D experiments.
Peak identification and assignment were performed with Sparky (T.
D. Goddard and D. G. Kneller, SPARKY 3, University of California,
San Francisco). Protein structures were visualized in PyMOL (The PyMOL
Molecular Graphics System, version 1.5.0.4, Schrödinger, LLC.).
The assigned N/CO/Cα/Cβ chemical shifts were used as input
for the TALOS+ program to predict backbone torsion angles (ϕ,
ψ).[69]
Results
High Degree
of Conformational Homogeneity of hβ2m and ΔN6
Fibrils
Obtaining homogeneous samples of
amyloid fibrils is an essential priority to ensure high-resolution
spectra that enable structural analysis. Figure 1 shows negative stain EM (a,b) and 2D MAS NMR spectra (c–h)
of hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils, revealing the sample
homogeneity as well as spectroscopic differences of the two fibril
types. EM images of negatively stained preparations of hβ2m (pH 2.5, 50 mM NaCl) and ΔN6 (pH 6.2, 120 mM NaCl)
show a predominantly homogeneous population of long, straight fibrils
with no amorphous aggregates present, consistent with previous results.[32,57] In order to examine the conformational homogeneity of the fibrils
further, we recorded 2D MAS NMR spectra using RFDR and ZF-TEDOR sequences
selective for one-bond 13C–13C (Figure 1c–e) and 13C–15N (Figure 1f–h) couplings. The spectra
exhibit excellent resolution, in which 13C and 15N line widths are ∼0.5 ppm and ∼0.9 ppm for backbone 13Cα and 15N resonances, respectively, and
∼0.35 ppm for side-chain methyl carbon peaks for both samples.
Figure 1
Spectroscopic characterization of hβ2m and ΔN6
fibrils. Negative stain electron micrographs (EM) of (a) hβ2m and (b) ΔN6 fibrils (scale bar 100 nm) and their MAS
NMR spectra of (c–e) 13C–13C and
(f–h) 13C–15N correlations. (c–e)
One-bond RFDR spectra of U–13C,15N-hβ2m (blue) and U–13C,15N-ΔN6
(red). The cross sections of S52 are shown in (e) to illustrate the
peak intensity and line width. (f–h) One-bond ZF TEDOR spectra
of 1,3-hβ2m (blue) and 1,3-ΔN6 (red). (c–e)
and (f–h) were acquired at 900 and 800 MHz 1H frequencies,
respectively. Assignments in spectra are residue-specific and are
based on 2D and 3D experiments.
Despite the similarly high degree of conformational homogeneity
of the hβ2m and ΔN6 fibril samples, a comparison
of the spectra reveals differences in the number of cross peaks and
their resonance positions. For example, the spectrum shown in Figure 1e of the ΔN6 fibrils displays all 9 serine13Cα-13Cβ cross peaks, whereas two are
absent in the spectra of hβ2m. Similarly, all three
glycine residues (G18, G29, and G43) are present in the backbone 15N–13C correlations of ΔN6 fibrils,
but only a single, strong cross peak (G43) and a weak one (G29) appear
in spectra of hβ2m fibrils (Figure 1h). The presence of the additional cross peaks in the spectra
of ΔN6 fibrils qualitatively suggests a more rigid backbone
in the truncated variant. Furthermore, those cross peaks displaying
low intensity (e.g., S88 of hβ2m (Figure 1e (blue)) and S11 of ΔN6 (Figure 1e (red)) or peak broadening (G43 of ΔN6 (Figure 1h (red)) suggest that these residues are in relatively
dynamic local regions in the fibril structure, i.e. flexible terminals,
turns, or loops. The fact that the fibrils of hβ2m and ΔN6 differ in the position of their N/Cα/Cβ
resonances suggest possible structural differences, which are likely
the result of the different lengths of the protein sequences and the
different pHs (2.5 and 6.2) employed in the fibril growth. However,
to rigorously compare the conformational differences between hβ2m and ΔN6 fibers, the secondary structure needs to be
determined from complete assignments.Spectroscopic characterization of hβ2m and ΔN6
fibrils. Negative stain electron micrographs (EM) of (a) hβ2m and (b) ΔN6 fibrils (scale bar 100 nm) and their MAS
NMR spectra of (c–e) 13C–13C and
(f–h) 13C–15N correlations. (c–e)
One-bond RFDR spectra of U–13C,15N-hβ2m (blue) and U–13C,15N-ΔN6
(red). The cross sections of S52 are shown in (e) to illustrate the
peak intensity and line width. (f–h) One-bond ZF TEDOR spectra
of 1,3-hβ2m (blue) and 1,3-ΔN6 (red). (c–e)
and (f–h) were acquired at 900 and 800 MHz 1H frequencies,
respectively. Assignments in spectra are residue-specific and are
based on 2D and 3D experiments.In Figure 2, we illustrate 13C cross-polarization (CP) and direct polarization (DP) spectra of
hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils at 313 K. The efficiency
of magnetization transfer in dipolar-based CP experiments largely
depends on the rigidity of the sites, while DP spectra sample regions
which exhibit short 13C T1’s. The overall
CP enchantment factor (εCP) is around 2.1–2.5
for both fibril samples, which is comparable to the values found for
the largely immobile protein DsbB,[70] protein
G B1 domain in microcrystals[71] and PI3-SH3
amyloid-like fibrils.[17] In contrast, inefficient
CP enhancement (εCP = ∼0.7) was found for
the largely mobile α-synuclein fibrils at 273 K.[72] We note that the overlaid 1D 13C
spectra of ΔN6 fibrils with (black) and without (red) 1H–13C CP transfer, in Figure 2b, show similar spectral features. We observed INEPT signals at 313
K for hβ2m fibrils, indicative of subnanosecond backbone
motions (Figure 2a), as assigned previously[57] to arise from spin systems (identified from
the through-bond TOBSY spectra) as the N-terminal seven residues,
MIQRTPK. ΔN6 fibrils, truncated at K6, show no INEPT intensity
(Figure 2b). These observations exclude the
possibility that the two proteins possess large reorientational dynamics
in their amyloid forms at the temperature employed (313 K).
Figure 2
Comparison
of 1D 13C spectra of (a) hβ2m and (b)
ΔN6 fibrils at 313 K using cross-polarization (CP,
top), direct polarization (DP, middle) and INEPT (bottom). In the
case of ΔN6 we superimposed the traces from DP (red) and CP
(black) to illustrate that the spectral features are largely preserved.
The intensities were scaled to match in the alphatic region. Each
CP and DP spectrum was recorded with 16 scans, while each INEPT spectrum
required 64 scans. All spectra were collected at 13 kHz MAS frequency,
100 kHz 1H TPPM decoupling, and at 800 MHz 1H frequency. The 1H–13C CP contact time
was ∼1.5 ms, and the recycle delay for the DP and INEPT spectra
was 5–5.5 s.
Comparison
of 1D 13C spectra of (a) hβ2m and (b)
ΔN6 fibrils at 313 K using cross-polarization (CP,
top), direct polarization (DP, middle) and INEPT (bottom). In the
case of ΔN6 we superimposed the traces from DP (red) and CP
(black) to illustrate that the spectral features are largely preserved.
The intensities were scaled to match in the alphatic region. Each
CP and DP spectrum was recorded with 16 scans, while each INEPT spectrum
required 64 scans. All spectra were collected at 13 kHz MAS frequency,
100 kHz 1H TPPM decoupling, and at 800 MHz 1H frequency. The 1H–13C CP contact time
was ∼1.5 ms, and the recycle delay for the DP and INEPT spectra
was 5–5.5 s.
13C and 15N Resonance Assignment of hβ2m and ΔN6
Fibrils
We next aimed to determine
the secondary structures of hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils
using MAS NMR spectra, and the initial step is the assignment of the
individual resonances in the protein sequences. In this study, we
employed two established strategies to complete the resonance assignment.
First, we performed a set of one-bond and multibond 2D 13C–13C and 13C–15N
correlation experiments to identify the spin systems and to establish
partial inter- and intraresidue connections. Samples of hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils with uniform 13C, 15N-labeling or labeling with 15N and 2-13C1-glycerol or 1,3-13C2-glycerol
(see Materials and Methods) were used. Second,
3D 15N–13C–13C spectra
were recorded using uniformly 13C,15N-labeled
proteins. The sequential assignment process involves the use of one-bond 13C–13C and 15N–13C correlation experiments to identify residues with characteristic
chemical shifts and specific labeling patterns in 2- and 1,3-samples,
as discussed below. The inter-residue multibond correlation spectra
were used to identify the connectivity of individual residues with
the immediately neighboring residues, giving a number of sequential
assignments. Those residues assigned in 2D spectra then served as
anchor points to facilitate the backbone assignments that map the
sequential connectivity. The match of sequence-specific assignments
obtained in the comprehensive set of 2D and 3D spectra minimizes the
ambiguity in the trial assignments.Uniform 13C,15N-labeling is the customary initial step in the spectral
assignment process since it generally yields spectra with high signal-to-noise
ratio. However, the simultaneous labeling of all carbon sites results
in significant cross peak overlap, a problem that is exacerbated for
relatively large proteins and protein assemblies. Thisproblem stimulated
the use of sparse labeling strategies using [1-13C]-glucose,
[2-13C]-glucose, [2-13C1]-glycerol
or [1,3-13C2]-glycerol as the sole 13C source. The reduced number of labeled sites can greatly simplify
spectra; for example, [2-13C1]-glycerol labels
the Cα site for residues including G, S, W, F, Y, A, V, and
L.[73,74] In contrast, these residues have 13C labeling at 13CO and 13Cβ sites for
protein samples prepared from E. coli grown on [1,3-13C2]-glycerol. As illustrated
in SI Figure 1a–c,
hβ2m fibrils labeled with [2-13C1]-glycerol or [1,3-13C2]-glycerol have relatively
higher Cα and Cβ intensity, respectively, in agreement
with the expected labeling pattern. Concurrently, the 13C line width is reduced due to the abolition of one-bond 13C–13C dipolar and scalar couplings in the specifically
labeled samples. The removal of the one-bond dipolar couplings also
attenuates dipolar truncation from homonuclear dipolar couplings,
resulting in better recoupling efficiency between inter-residue spins[75] (see the expanded region at approximately 15
ppm in SI Figure 1b and c).Figures 3, 4 and 5 illustrate the identification
of some of the spin
systems, as well as partial sequential connectivity in 2D spectra
of hβ2m and/or ΔN6 fibrils. Using the serine
residues as an example (Figure 3a), 1,3-hβ2m and 1,3-ΔN6 samples contain 13C-labeled
CO and Cβ carbons, and only the Cα sites are labeled in
samples prepared from growth on 2-glycerol. All nine serine residues
of ΔN6 fibrils have been successfully identified from Cβ–Cα
cross peaks in a one-bond RFDR spectrum of U-ΔN6 (Figure 3d). Their N–Cα and Cβ–C′
correlations appear in one-bond ZF TEDOR spectra (Figure 3b) and in the multibond RFDR spectrum of the 1,3-sample
(Figure 3c), respectively. Other residues including
Pro, Gly, and Thr show fingerprint chemical shifts in 2D 15N–13C correlation spectra. More examples can also
been found in Figure 4c and d, e.g. all three
glycines in ΔN6 fibrils were identified on the basis of the
cross peaks of the upfield 15N and 13Cα
chemical shifts (Figure 4b).
Figure 3
Identification of serine
residues of ΔN6 fibrils using 2D
MAS NMR and variously labeled samples. (a) 13C-labeling
scheme of serine using [2-13C]-glycerol (red) or [1,3-13C]-glycerol (green) as the carbon source.[74,76] (b) One-bond ZF-TEDOR of [2-13C-glycerol]-ΔN6.
(c) Multibond RFDR of [1,3-13C-glycerol]-ΔN6 using
an 11 ms mixing period. (d) One-bond RFDR of U–13C, 15N-labeled ΔN6 recorded using a 1.6 ms mixing
period. Spin systems of all nine serine residues were identified by
their characteristic downfield Cα and Cβ chemical shifts.
The assignments were from the following 2D and 3D spectra. Dashed
lines guide the assignment of each residue.
Figure 4
Sequential connectivity of ΔN6 fibrils established in 2D
correlations. (a) Schematic illustration of the backbone walk that
can be obtained through a set of inter-residue 13C–15N and 13C–13C correlations by
using 2-hβ2m and 2-ΔN6, which has mostly alternating 13C enrichment. (b) Multibond ZF TEDOR spectra of 2-ΔN6,
showing representative 15N(i)–13Cα/β(i – 1) connections of S55-F56-S57 (blue lines) and
S28-G29-F30-H31-P32 (violet lines). (c) Multibond ZF TEDOR spectra
of 1,3-ΔN6, showing the 15N(i)-13Cα/β(i-1) connectivity of D53-L54-S55-F56-S57-K58
(blue lines) and H31-P32-S33-D34 (violet lines). (d) Broad-band RFDR
showing the 13Cα(i)-13Cα(i ± 1) connectivity of S55–F56–S57-K58
(blue lines) and S28-G29-F30-H31-P32-S33 (violet lines). (e) Band
selective-RFDR of 2-ΔN6, showing the 13C′(i)-13Cα(i – 1)
correlations. (b,c) and (d,e) were acquired on 800 and 900 MHz spectrometers
(1H frequency), respectively.
Figure 5
Representative
sequential assignments of ΔN6 fibrils from
3D 15N–13C-13C correlation
experiments. (a) The inter- or intraresidue magnetization transfer
pathways in CONCA (red), NCACX (blue) and NCOCX (green). (b) Backbone
walks from S52 to K58 in 3D correlation experiments. 15N chemical shifts where each 2D plane is truncated are listed in
black squares. The horizontal axis indicates the CO/Cα chemical
shifts. The spectra were acquired using U–[13C,15N-labeled]-ΔN6 fibrils on a 750 MHz spectrometer (1H frequency). A representative strip plot for the same segment
of hβ2m fibrils is shown in SI Figure 2.
Identification of serine
residues of ΔN6 fibrils using 2D
MAS NMR and variously labeled samples. (a) 13C-labeling
scheme of serineusing [2-13C]-glycerol (red) or [1,3-13C]-glycerol (green) as the carbon source.[74,76] (b) One-bond ZF-TEDOR of [2-13C-glycerol]-ΔN6.
(c) Multibond RFDR of [1,3-13C-glycerol]-ΔN6 using
an 11 ms mixing period. (d) One-bond RFDR of U–13C, 15N-labeled ΔN6 recorded using a 1.6 ms mixing
period. Spin systems of all nine serine residues were identified by
their characteristic downfield Cα and Cβ chemical shifts.
The assignments were from the following 2D and 3D spectra. Dashed
lines guide the assignment of each residue.Sequential connectivity of ΔN6 fibrils established in 2D
correlations. (a) Schematic illustration of the backbone walk that
can be obtained through a set of inter-residue 13C–15N and 13C–13C correlations by
using 2-hβ2m and 2-ΔN6, which has mostly alternating 13C enrichment. (b) Multibond ZF TEDOR spectra of 2-ΔN6,
showing representative 15N(i)–13Cα/β(i – 1) connections of S55-F56-S57 (blue lines) and
S28-G29-F30-H31-P32 (violet lines). (c) Multibond ZF TEDOR spectra
of 1,3-ΔN6, showing the 15N(i)-13Cα/β(i-1) connectivity of D53-L54-S55-F56-S57-K58
(blue lines) and H31-P32-S33-D34 (violet lines). (d) Broad-band RFDR
showing the 13Cα(i)-13Cα(i ± 1) connectivity of S55–F56–S57-K58
(blue lines) and S28-G29-F30-H31-P32-S33 (violet lines). (e) Band
selective-RFDR of 2-ΔN6, showing the 13C′(i)-13Cα(i – 1)
correlations. (b,c) and (d,e) were acquired on 800 and 900 MHz spectrometers
(1H frequency), respectively.Two-dimensional MAS NMR has been used successfully to accomplish
backbone and side-chain assignment.[77,78] Here we show
that the combination of variously labeled samples of hβ2m and/or ΔN6 fibrils and 2D NMR experiments has enabled
the identification of amino acid spin systems and their sequential
connectivity for both hβ2m and ΔN6 fibril samples,
despite being 100 and 94-residue proteins, respectively. Figure 4a illustrates four inter-residue correlations that
can be established to connect the assignment of atoms in neighboring
residues. In the 2-hβ2m and 2-ΔN6 protein samples, 15N–13C and 13C–13C correlations including one-bond 15N(i)–13C′(i – 1) and
multibond 15N(i)–13Cα/β(i – 1), 13Cα(i)–13Cα(i ± 1) and 13C′(i)–13Cα(i –
1) correlations can be established by using ZF TEDOR with short or
long mixing times, and RFDR experiments, respectively. Unbroken blue
and violet lines in Figure 4b–e guide
the partial or complete connectivity of consecutive segments comprising
residues S55 to K58 and S28 to D34 of ΔN6 fibrils, respectively.
Colored and broken lines correlate the same residues in different
spectra. Different lengths of the mixing time were used to correlate
one- or multibond spins as described in the experimental details in
the Supporting Information. To avoid dipolar
truncation from one-bond spin pairs and to allow efficient detection
of the coupling of distant spin pairs, the use of both the 2- and
1,3-glycerol labeled samples is required. Sequential assignments from
S28 to D34 of ΔN6 fibrils were established from 15N(i)–13Cα(i + 1) and 15N(i)–13Cα/β(i – 1) correlations in Figure 4b and
c, respectively. The same connections can be identified from 13Cα–13Cα correlations in Figure 4d. The 13C labeling at Cα sites
for the majority of residues in 2-ΔN6 facilitates the detection
of such weak dipolar coupling, which otherwise is difficult to detect.
We used long-mixing RFDR (τRFDR = 16.2 ms) to establish
the inter-residue 13Cα–13Cα
correlations. A low-power (12.5 kHz) rectangular π pulse was
used in the dipolar recoupling to selectively excite the aliphatic
carbons, which has been shown to provide better efficiency.[61,79] Besides the sequential 13Cα–13Cα correlations, the connectivity of adjacent residues in the
spectra of ΔN6 fibrils was also established from 13C′(i)–13Cα(i – 1) contacts (Figure 4e).Representative
sequential assignments of ΔN6 fibrils from
3D 15N–13C-13C correlation
experiments. (a) The inter- or intraresidue magnetization transfer
pathways in CONCA (red), NCACX (blue) and NCOCX (green). (b) Backbone
walks from S52 to K58 in 3D correlation experiments. 15N chemical shifts where each 2D plane is truncated are listed in
black squares. The horizontal axis indicates the CO/Cα chemical
shifts. The spectra were acquired using U–[13C,15N-labeled]-ΔN6 fibrils on a 750 MHz spectrometer (1H frequency). A representative strip plot for the same segment
of hβ2m fibrils is shown in SI Figure 2.In order to overcome the difficulty of peak overlap in 2D
spectra
required to obtain near-complete assignments of hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils, the extension to one more spectral dimension
is necessary. Two categories of 3D experiments, distinguished by the
N–C magnetization transfer, were performed to obtain unambiguous
sequential assignment. The first category of experiments, including
NCOCX, NCACX and CONCA, utilizes band-selective SPECIFIC-CP to transfer
magnetization between 15N and 13CO, or between 15N and 13Cα.[80−84] Taking the 3D NCOCX experiment for example (as illustrated
by the green route in Figure 5a), the magnetization
was initiated from the amide1H of residue i and transferred to the directly bonded 15N via CP. Subsequently,
a SPECIFIC CP mixing sequence is utilized to transfer the magnetization
from N to C′ of its preceding residue i –
1. Finally, the homonuclear 13C–13C correlations
are established via spin diffusion. NCACX correlates the intraresidue
backbone to side-chain carbons of residue i, while
CONCA realizes the connectivity of residue i to its
succeeding neighbor i + 1. Reasonably good transfer
efficiencies of 35–45% were obtained, which again suggests
the high rigidity of the majority of the protein backbone of both
hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils.[70,82] Figure 5b shows representative strip plots
of the 13C–13C planes of the three 3D
NCC spectra of ΔN6 fibrils, providing an indication of the spectral
quality. The plot consists of strips from three 3D spectra: NCOCX
(green), NCACX (blue), and CONCA (red). The sequential connectivity
from S52 to K58 is established by N/CO/Cα/Cβ as well as
side-chain carbons. Residues including Ser and Thr are easily identified
by the downfield Cα/β chemical shifts. The side-chain 13C chemical shifts can also serve as an identifier of residues
including Lys, Arg, Glu, Gln, and Ala. Examples of the side-chain
assignment walks in NCOCX (green) and NCACX (blue) spectra include
well-resolved peaks of D53 Cγ (178.1 ppm), L54 Cγ/δ1/δ2
(30.2 ppm, 27.6 ppm, 25.0 ppm, respectively), and K58 Cγ/δ/ε
(25.4 ppm, 29.9 ppm, 42.3 ppm, respectively). Sequential connectivity
for the same region is observed in 2D spectra as guided by blue lines
in Figure 4, providing additional verification.
The same connectivity for hβ2m fibrils is obtained,
as illustrated in SI Figure 2, showing
similarly good resolution and intensity.
Determination of a trans-Conformation of P32
and the Single Disulfide Bridge Linking C25 and C80 in hβ2m and ΔN6 Fibrils
The cis-to-trans isomerization of the H31–P32 peptide bond in
hβ2m is intimately involved in the backbone rearrangement
required to initiate fibril formation, suggesting that isomerization
of the main-chain at residue 32 is mechanistically crucial in fibril
assembly.[34,50,85] The 13C chemical shift of proline has been utilized as a reliable sensor
to identify the bond conformation of X-Pro.[86,87] For example, the chemical shift difference between Cβ and
Cγ (ΔCβ/γ) is normally less than 5 ppm for trans-X-Pro but larger than 10 ppm for cis-conformers.[86,87] A common difficulty of assigning
proline in conventional 3D N–C–C spectra is the weak
intensity due to its lack of an N–H group.[88,89] It therefore precludes the assignment of the preceding residue as
well, usually causing the incomplete mapping of the secondary structure.
We have recently developed a new 3D experiment, TEDOR-CC, specifically
to resolve thisproblem.[65,66] As shown in Figure 6a, the initial magnetization was from the cross-polarization
of H–Cα or H–CO, instead of H–N in the
3D spectra illustrated in Figure 5a, ensuring
the signal of proline residues. In addition, simultaneous N–CO
and N–Cα transfers in TEDOR-CC were achieved using dipolar
recoupling π-pulse trains, without requiring high stability
for the long and simultaneous irradiation of all 1H, 15N, and 13C channels in the SPECIFIC-CP mixing.
The representative strip plot of 3D TEDOR-CC spectra of U-ΔN6
fibrils is shown in Figure 6b. Reliable connectivity
from G29 to S33 was established via the well-matched CO, Cα,
and Cβ chemical shifts in distinct NCOCX and NCACX spectra.
Two-dimensional planes showing full correlations of all carbons of
P32 are included in SI Figure 3.
Figure 6
Representative
sequential backbone walks from S28 to S33 in 3D
TEDOR-CC spectra of ΔN6 fibrils. (a) Simultaneous transfers
of N(i)–C′(i –
1) and N(i)–Cα(i).
The initial magnetization in TEDOR-CC is from 13C–1H CP, in contrast to the 15N–1H CP in conventional 3D 15N–13C–13C experiments, providing the optimal enhancement of proline
intensity. (b) 2D 13C–13C (F1–F3)
planes of the 3D TEDOR-CC spectrum of ΔN6 fibrils. 15N chemical shift (F2) for each 2D plane is indicated in black squares.
CO and Cα chemical shifts are shown on the x-axis. One-dimensional cross sections are shown for Cα peaks
in NCACX spectra in green. Homonuclear 13C–13C mixing was accomplished using 4.8 ms RFDR. The spectra
were acquired using the U-ΔN6 fibril on a 900 MHz spectrometer
(1H frequency).
Representative
sequential backbone walks from S28 to S33 in 3D
TEDOR-CC spectra of ΔN6 fibrils. (a) Simultaneous transfers
of N(i)–C′(i –
1) and N(i)–Cα(i).
The initial magnetization in TEDOR-CC is from 13C–1H CP, in contrast to the 15N–1H CP in conventional 3D 15N–13C–13C experiments, providing the optimal enhancement of proline
intensity. (b) 2D 13C–13C (F1–F3)
planes of the 3D TEDOR-CC spectrum of ΔN6 fibrils. 15N chemical shift (F2) for each 2D plane is indicated in black squares.
CO and Cα chemical shifts are shown on the x-axis. One-dimensional cross sections are shown for Cα peaks
in NCACX spectra in green. Homonuclear 13C–13C mixing was accomplished using 4.8 ms RFDR. The spectra
were acquired using the U-ΔN6 fibril on a 900 MHz spectrometer
(1H frequency).Additional verification of the assignment of P32 was from
2D 15N–13C correlation spectra of 2-
and 1,3-samples,
using the specific patterns of 13C-enrichment, as shown
in Figure 7. 15N–13Cα and 15N–13Cδ cross peaks
of P32 and P72 are present in the one-bond TEDOR spectrum of U-ΔN6
(Figure 7b), in contrast to the absence of
Cδ peaks in 1,3-ΔN6 (Figure 7c),
which agrees well with the labeling pattern of proline shown in Figure 7a. The presence of Cγ peaks in the multibond
TEDOR spectrum of 1,3-ΔN6 (Figure 7d),
while absent in the spectrum of the 2-sample (Figure 7f) verifies the identification of the spin system of proline.
The set of 2D spectra in Figure 7 helps to
sequentially assign the two proline residues as well. Histidine has 13C enrichment at C′ for the 1,3-ΔN6 and Cα
for 2-ΔN6, resulting in P32N–H31C′ cross peaks
in the one-bond TEDOR spectrum and P32N–H31Cα in multibond
spectra in Figure 7c and Figure 7f, respectively. The unambiguously assigned chemical shifts
of P32 in ΔN6 fibrils, together with our previously reported
values of the chemical shifts of this residue in the native monomer
of ΔN6,[31] and both native and fibril
conformations of hβ2m,[31,57] are shown
in SI Table 1. Specifically, ΔCβ/γ
of P32is 4.3–4.9 ppm for native and fibrillar ΔN6 and
fibrillar hβ2m, while for native hβ2m which contains cis-Pro32 ΔCβ/γ
it is 10 ppm.[31] More rigorously, we compared
the C′, Cβ, and Cγ chemical shifts of P32 in ΔN6
fibrils to folded proteins with known X-Pro conformations, confirming
assignment of the isomeric status of P32 in the different samples
(SI Figure 4).
Figure 7
Residue-specific assignment
of P32 and P72 of ΔN6 fibrils
from 2D ZF TEDOR spectra of proteins labeled at all 15N
sites and varied 13C sites by using U–[13C]-glucose, [1,3-13C1]-glycerol or [2-13C2]-glycerol as carbon sources. (a) 13C-labeling scheme of Pro, His, and Thr residues by using [2-13C2]-glycerol (red) or [1,3-13C2]-glycerol (green) as the carbon source. One-bond ZF TEDOR
of (b) U-ΔN6, (c) 1,3-ΔN6, (d) 2-ΔN6. Multibond
ZF TEDOR of (e) 1,3-ΔN6 and (f) 2-ΔN6. All spectra were
acquired at an 800 MHz 1H frequency.
Residue-specific assignment
of P32 and P72 of ΔN6 fibrils
from 2D ZF TEDOR spectra of proteins labeled at all 15N
sites and varied 13C sites by using U–[13C]-glucose, [1,3-13C1]-glycerol or [2-13C2]-glycerol as carbon sources. (a) 13C-labeling scheme of Pro, His, and Thr residues by using [2-13C2]-glycerol (red) or [1,3-13C2]-glycerol (green) as the carbon source. One-bond ZF TEDOR
of (b) U-ΔN6, (c) 1,3-ΔN6, (d) 2-ΔN6. Multibond
ZF TEDOR of (e) 1,3-ΔN6 and (f) 2-ΔN6. All spectra were
acquired at an 800 MHz 1H frequency.The disulfide bridge linking C25 and C80 functions as an
essential
constraint to maintain the hydrophobic core of native hβ2m and ΔN6.[31,90] To investigate whether
this S–S bond is retained in the fibrils formed from hβ2m and ΔN6, we assigned the chemical shifts of their
cysteines. SI Figure 5 shows spectra of
2D 15N–13CPAIN-CP and 3D 15N–13C–13C experiments for the
assignment of C80. As a third spin-assisted recoupling (TSAR) technique,
PAIN-CPutilizes second-order recoupling and yields efficient long-range 15N–13C correlations.[64] Taking S52 for example, it established correlations with
the nearby residue i ± 1 (E50 and H51) and i ± 2 (D53 and L54). Unambiguous assignment of C80
is obtained from the connectivity of A79-C80-R81-V82 in both 2D and
3D spectra (SI Figure 5). The assigned
chemical shifts of C80 are summarized in SI Table 1. The chemical shift of Cβ is a good indicator of whether
the cysteine is oxidized or reduced.[91] Specifically,
a chemical shift value of 34–48 ppm indicates the existence
of a S–S bond, while a more upfield value (22–34 ppm)
suggests a reduced cysteine.[91] As shown
in SI Table 1 and SI Figure 6, the Cβ values of C80 are ∼43 ppm and in the
middle of the distribution of Cβ chemical shifts of oxidized
cysteine for both hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils, suggesting
the existence of the disulfide bond. The absence of C25 resonances
is likely due to the chemical shift degeneracy in the fibrils of both
hβ2m and ΔN6, ruling out direct analysis of
its Cβ shifts.
Secondary Structure Prediction from N/CO/Cα/Cβ
Chemical
Shifts
The combination of multidimensional MAS NMR techniques
and site-specifically labeled samples has greatly facilitated the
sequential assignment of backbone atoms of the fibrils formed from
hβ2m at acidic pH (commencing from an acid unfolded
state) and from folded ΔN6 at pH 6.2. For hβ2m, approximately 80% of the backbone resonances were assigned, including
73 residues from CP-based experiments (i.e., 2D 13C/15N–13C and 3D 15N–13C–13C correlation experiments) and 6 from
INEPT-based 13C–13C TOBSY.[57] The remaining 21 residues, corresponding to
amino acids in the two terminal regions, are unassigned since these
resonances are missing in the MAS NMR spectra. For the truncated variant
ΔN6, 82 residues out of 94 residues, or 88%, were all assigned
from CP-based MAS NMR spectra. The missing resonances of these fibrils
are likely due to the intermediate backbone motion on the microsecond
to millisecond time scale that has been observed for regions of membrane
and amyloid proteins.[72,92,93] Alternatively, dynamic disorder of protein segments could also result
in loss of signal intensity due to homogeneous broadening. The assigned
resonances served as input into TALOS+ to predict the backbone torsion
angles (φ, ψ), as plotted in Figure 8. Secondary structures of hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils
were determined by the predicted torsion angles and shown on the top
of the plot. The hβ2m fibrils contain seven β-strands,
located in the central region (residues K19 to S88) of the protein
sequence. Interestingly, these strands appear at similar positions
for the ΔN6 fibrils, in spite of slight differences in the boundaries
of each segment. Additionally, the ΔN6 fibril structure contains
two additional β-strands in the N- and C-terminal regions, a
significant difference from the fibril form of the wild-type protein
which contains a dynamic N-terminal region. The absence of assignment
of residues in the C-terminal region of the hβ2m
fibrils, however, precludes comparison of the structure in this region
in the two fibrils types.
Figure 8
Secondary structure predictions of (a) hβ2m and
(b) ΔN6 in their fibril forms based on TALOS+ analysis of assigned
chemical shifts. TALOS+ predicted backbone dihedral angles (phi, blue
squares, psi, red circles), with error bars based on the 10 best database
matches. The predicted secondary structures are shown at the top of
(a) and (b) (β-strands, filled boxes; turn or loop, curved lines;
not assigned, dashed line). The white box in (a) depicts the seven
residues present in the spectrum of INEPT-based J-TOBSY.[94]
Secondary structure predictions of (a) hβ2m and
(b) ΔN6 in their fibril forms based on TALOS+ analysis of assigned
chemical shifts. TALOS+ predicted backbone dihedral angles (phi, blue
squares, psi, red circles), with error bars based on the 10 best database
matches. The predicted secondary structures are shown at the top of
(a) and (b) (β-strands, filled boxes; turn or loop, curved lines;
not assigned, dashed line). The white box in (a) depicts the seven
residues present in the spectrum of INEPT-based J-TOBSY.[94]
Discussion
Site-specific 13C enrichment
protocols have been applied
extensively to elucidate the structures of insoluble proteins using
MAS NMR, including microcrystalline proteins, protein assemblies,
membrane proteins, and protein models of amyloid fibrils.[17,65,74,76,95−98] By using a combination of U-
and 2- and 1,3-glycerol labeled samples, we have assigned >80%
of
the residues of fibrils formed from hβ2m at pH 2.5
and ΔN6 at pH 6.2 and conducted secondary structural analysis
of the two fibril forms.
Backbone Rearrangement from Monomeric Proteins
to Fibrils: What
Is Changed and Unchanged?
Fibril formation of native, monomeric
hβ2m is highly dependent on the solution conditions.[99] The fact that thisprotein forms fibrils under
acidic conditions but stays natively folded at neutral pH implies
that unfolding of the native protein is a required step in its assembly
into amyloid fibrils. Indeed, a significant backbone rearrangement
in the assembly of hβ2m into fibrils has been suggested
in many studies using solution NMR, EPR, H/D exchange, and limited
proteolysis.[48,51−55] The MAS NMR analysis presented here enables a direct
comparison of the secondary structure content of the monomeric and
fibrillar forms of hβ2m and ΔN6 spanning >80%
of the protein sequence, and provides the first analysis of fibrils
formed from ΔN6, showing distinct changes in the backbone structure
between the monomeric and fibril forms for both proteins (Figure 9). Taking natively folded hβ2m,
for example, its β-sandwich structure is composed of two antiparallel
β-sheets, one represented by the A-, B-, E-, and D-strands,
and the other by the C-, F-, and G-stands (Figure 9a).[31] One of the largest differences
between the monomeric and fibrillar structures occurs within the loop
regions of hβ2m in the native form, including B–C,
D–E, and F–G loops (Figure 9b),
which become part of the β-strands in fibrillar hβ2m. Specifically, the D–E loop in the native hβ2m protein forms noncovalent contacts with the MHC I heavy
chain[100,101] and is dynamic in the native monomeric protein.[31] Our results indicate that the native D- and
E-strands are extended in the fibril form by incorporating residues
initially in loops or dynamic regions into β-strands, which
lie in the fibril core.[54,55] This validates the
hypothesis in many structural studies of monomeric hβ2m which suggest the potential of these regions to assemble into amyloid
fibrils.[40,47,102−107] Conformational rearrangement of residues in the B–C and F–G
loops has also been observed in partially folded hβ2m,[31,34] and these residues are also involved in
the formation of β-strands in the fibrils studied here. All
these differences for hβ2m, together with similar
observations for ΔN6, suggest significant structural changes
occur in the monomer-to-fibril transition for both proteins. Moreover,
our results indicate that D-, E-, and F-strands of hβ2m are extended in length in the fibril form. Despite the presence
of seven β-strands in both monomeric native hβ2m and its fibrillar form, the precise location of the strands differs
significantly, suggestive of significant structural differences between
the secondary structure of the monomeric and fibril forms. Moreover,
considering that the hβ2m fibrils are formed from
an acid unfolded state at pH 2.5 that lacks secondary structure, the
results indicate that substantial refolding accompanies self-assembly
during the fibril formation of thisprotein at acidic pH.
Figure 9
(a) Similar β-sandwich structures of hβ2m (PDB: 2XKS(31)) and ΔN6 (PDB: 2XKU(31)) monomer in their native forms. The different cis- vs trans-conformations of P32 are highlighted
in squares. (b) Comparison of the secondary structures of hβ2m and ΔN6 in their native and fibril forms. Arrows indicate
β-strands. The secondary structures of hβ2m
and ΔN6 monomers were taken from a solution NMR study by Eichner
et al.[31] The H/D exchange plot at the bottom
is generated from data of hβ2m fibrils formed at
pH 2.5 by Skora et al.[53] and Hoshino
et al.,[48] where filled and open green rectangles
indicate residues with greater or less than 60% remaining intensity
after exchange at pD 2.5 for 7–8 days at 4 °C and 25 °C,
respectively.
Although
the β-strands have shifted in location or extended in length
in the fibril forms of hβ2m and ΔN6, the chemical
shift analysis presented here suggests that the disulfide bridge involving
residues C25 and C80 is preserved in both hβ2m and
ΔN6 fibrils. This finding concurs with previous studies that
identified the S–S bond as remaining intact in fibrils formed
from hβ2m and ΔN6 in vitro(32) and in vivo.[108] The requirement for an oxidized S–S
bond for formation of hβ2m fibrils in vitro(90,109−111) suggests its significant
role as a fundamental interaction in providing tight intramolecular
contact that presumably rigidifies the monomer in fibrils. For example,
Katou et al.[111] and Smith et al.[90] have shown that the reduced hβ2m protein, in which the only disulfide bond is abolished, forms curved
and flexible fibrils different from the long straight fibrils formed
at acidic pH.(a) Similar β-sandwich structures of hβ2m (PDB: 2XKS(31)) and ΔN6 (PDB: 2XKU(31)) monomer in their native forms. The different cis- vs trans-conformations of P32 are highlighted
in squares. (b) Comparison of the secondary structures of hβ2m and ΔN6 in their native and fibril forms. Arrows indicate
β-strands. The secondary structures of hβ2m
and ΔN6 monomers were taken from a solution NMR study by Eichner
et al.[31] The H/D exchange plot at the bottom
is generated from data of hβ2m fibrils formed at
pH 2.5 by Skora et al.[53] and Hoshino
et al.,[48] where filled and open green rectangles
indicate residues with greater or less than 60% remaining intensity
after exchange at pD 2.5 for 7–8 days at 4 °C and 25 °C,
respectively.
Conformational Differences
between hβ2m and
ΔN6 Fibrils Can Explain the Relatively Enhanced Amyloidogenic
Potential of the Truncation Variant
ΔN6 can form fibrils
at neutral pH, without the acid-induced unfolding required for formation
of fibrils from the wild-type protein in the absence of cosolvents
or other additives.[31] Such distinct amyloidogenicity
can be rationalized, in part, by the different behaviors of the two
proteins in monomer and fibril forms. For example, the requirement
for the cis-to-trans transition
of the H31–P32 bond in hβ2m fibril assembly
and retention of the trans-H31–P32 isomer
in fully assembled fibrils was previously reported (Figure 9a).[57] In the current
study, we identified the trans conformation of H31–P32
in ΔN6 fibrils via chemical shift analysis, the same conformer
as in its monomeric form.[31] Proline cis-to-trans isomerization, a process usually
accompanied by conformational rearrangement in a variety of proteins,
has been proposed to be a “switch” to trigger the assembly
of hβ2m amyloid fibrils based on the observation
of a trans-P32 folding intermediate on the fibril
formation pathway.[34,42,46,48] The identification of the trans-form of H31–P32 in both hβ2m and ΔN6
fibrils supports this view. From a thermodynamic point of view, P32
in native hβ2m is trapped in a cis conformation by favorable hydrogen bonds and hydrophobic contacts
in the native protein. Therefore, partial unfolding of the monomeric
structure at acidic pH or by adding denaturants, cosolvents, or Cu2+ ions becomes necessary for fibril formation of the wild-type
protein. The resulting backbone rearrangement, particularly the increased
conformational dynamics of the N-terminal residues, enables the cis-to-trans isomerization of P32.[31] The dynamic structure of the N-terminal 18 residues
in hβ2m fibrils renders them invisible in dipolar-coupling-based
MAS NMR spectra, while these residues have been observed in J-based 15N–1H HSQC spectra, suggesting high flexibility
of this region on the nanosecond time scale.[53] Low-temperature experiments are necessary to slow or quench the
rate of the backbone motion in order to complete the assignments of
the terminal residues of hβ2m fibrils. By contrast
with the dynamic terminal regions of fibrils formed from hβ2m, we show here that ΔN6 fibrils possess a short β-strand
within each terminal region of the sequence in a similar location
to the A- and G-strands in its native structure (Figure 9b). How these strands pack in the fibrils remains to be determined,
although retention of a native-like overall topology is highly unlikely,
given the incompatibility of the β-sandwich fold with a cross-β
architecture.[112]
The Fibril Core Determined
by the Distribution of Rigid β-Strands
and Dynamic Domains
The predicted backbone structure of hβ2m in the amyloid fibrils studied here contains seven β-strands
in the region from K19 to S88, indicating an approximately 70-residue
fibril core. This is in good agreement with the core region suggested
by previous H/D exchange[48,53] and limited proteolysis
experiments[54,55] (Figure 9b). Our data further show that the rigid core of hβ2m fibrils is constrained by an experimentally observed S–S
disulfide bond. The high β-strand content found in the fibril
core (55 of the 70 residues have φ and ψ angles consistent
with a β-strand) provides opportunities for extensive intermolecular
hydrogen bonds between stacked monomers, forming a rigid and stable
β-sheet core typical of amyloid.[48] The results presented here provide direct identification of residues
in hβ2m and ΔN6 amyloid fibrils, as well as
the location of β-strands in the core region, which are essentially
inaccessible by other techniques of structural analysis. Such a finding
is supported by the observation of different degrees of dynamics throughout
the protein sequence. For example, residues in the N-terminal 18 amino
acids are absent in dipolar-based spectra of fibrils formed from hβ2m and instead were identified in spectra of J-based solution-NMR
experiments.[53,57] The extensive motion of C-terminal
residues has also been found by studies using EPR.[51] Intriguingly, many features of the fibril core of hβ2m are conserved in fibrils formed from ΔN6, except that
the latter fibrils have β-strands in the N- and C- terminal
regions (Figure 9b). Recently, we reported
the biophysical characterization of copolymerized hβ2m and ΔN6 fibrils[32] in which the
two proteins copolymerize in heterofibrils in a ∼1:1 molar
ratio. The similar core-forming residues in the central region of
both proteins, defined by the occurrence and position of β-strands,
provide a prerequisite for determining the intermolecular hydrogen-bonding
patterns between the two protein components of the copolymer, and
may provide a structural rationale for why these two proteins copolymerize
so efficiently. Further investigation of the intermolecular packing
of the homo- and heteropolymeric fibrils and a comprehensive comparison
of their fibril morphology will provide mechanistic understanding
of the role of the naturally occurring truncation variant in the assembly
pathway and the extent to which the fibril architecture differs in
the different fibril forms.
Conclusion
In
summary, we have determined the location of the β-strand
domains of amyloid fibrils of hβ2m and ΔN6
by utilizing a variety of 13C/15N-labeling strategies
and combining these with multidimensional MAS NMR techniques at high
magnetic fields. The results reveal that approximately 70 residues
comprise the core of hβ2m fibrils, distributed into
seven β-strands and rigidified by the C25–C80 disulfide
bond. By contrast, ΔN6 fibrils contain an additional two β-strands
that extend the core region to 87 of the 94 residues in thisprotein
sequence. The relatively more rigid termini of the truncated variant,
together with the finding of its natively trans-P32
in monomeric and fibril forms, contrasts with the cis–trans isomerization required for fibril formation of native hβ2m, and provides a rationale for the enhanced ability of ΔN6
to form fibrils. The assignments (>80% of the protein sequence
complete
for these 100 and 94 residue proteins) provide a valuable foundation
for further investigation of the intermolecular packing between monomers
in these different fibril forms and to elucidate the extent to which
the structural architecture of the fibril forms differs. To assign
the remaining residues whose resonances are absent from current spectra,
we are performing experiments at liquid-nitrogen temperature to quench
the backbone dynamics, in combination with dynamic nuclear polarization
(DNP) techniques for sensitivity enhancement.[113−115] Together this information will inform development of 3D models for
the fibril architectures of these different β2m fibril
structures. Such information is essential for understanding how and
why fibrils develop in dialysis-related amyloidosis and to develop
future strategies to prevent amyloid deposition and disease.
Authors: Christopher P Jaroniec; Cait E MacPhee; Vikram S Bajaj; Michael T McMahon; Christopher M Dobson; Robert G Griffin Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2004-01-08 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Cong Liu; Minglei Zhao; Lin Jiang; Pin-Nan Cheng; Jiyong Park; Michael R Sawaya; Anna Pensalfini; Dawei Gou; Arnold J Berk; Charles G Glabe; James Nowick; David Eisenberg Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-12-03 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Lindsay J Sperling; Deborah A Berthold; Terry L Sasser; Victoria Jeisy-Scott; Chad M Rienstra Journal: J Mol Biol Date: 2010-04-13 Impact factor: 5.469
Authors: Michael T Colvin; Robert Silvers; Qing Zhe Ni; Thach V Can; Ivan Sergeyev; Melanie Rosay; Kevin J Donovan; Brian Michael; Joseph Wall; Sara Linse; Robert G Griffin Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2016-07-14 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Matthew R Elkins; Tuo Wang; Mimi Nick; Hyunil Jo; Thomas Lemmin; Stanley B Prusiner; William F DeGrado; Jan Stöhr; Mei Hong Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2016-07-28 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Robert Silvers; Michael T Colvin; Kendra K Frederick; Angela C Jacavone; Susan Lindquist; Sara Linse; Robert G Griffin Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2017-08-30 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Theodoros K Karamanos; Matthew P Jackson; Antonio N Calabrese; Sophia C Goodchild; Emma E Cawood; Gary S Thompson; Arnout P Kalverda; Eric W Hewitt; Sheena E Radford Journal: Elife Date: 2019-09-25 Impact factor: 8.140
Authors: Kevin W Tipping; Theodoros K Karamanos; Toral Jakhria; Matthew G Iadanza; Sophia C Goodchild; Roman Tuma; Neil A Ranson; Eric W Hewitt; Sheena E Radford Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-04-20 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Theodoros K Karamanos; Arnout P Kalverda; Gary S Thompson; Sheena E Radford Journal: Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 9.795