| Literature DB >> 24983988 |
Derek R Dee1, Yasumi Horimoto2, Rickey Y Yada3.
Abstract
The native folding of certain zymogen-derived enzymes is completely dependent upon a prosegment domain to stabilize the folding transition state, thereby catalyzing the folding reaction. Generally little is known about how the prosegment accomplishes this task. It was previously shown that the prosegment catalyzes a late-stage folding transition between a stable misfolded state and the native state of pepsin. In this study, the contributions of specific prosegment residues to catalyzing pepsin folding were investigated by introducing individual Ala substitutions and measuring the effects on the bimolecular folding reaction between the prosegment peptide and pepsin. The effects of mutations on the free energies of the individual misfolded and native ground states and the transition state were compared using measurements of prosegment-pepsin binding and folding kinetics. Five out of the seven prosegment residues examined yielded relatively large kinetic effects and minimal ground state perturbations upon mutation, findings which indicate that these residues form strengthened and/or non-native contacts in the transition state. These five residues are semi- to strictly conserved, while only a non-conserved residue had no kinetic effect. One conserved residue was shown to form native structure in the transition state. These results indicated that the prosegment, which is only 44 residues long, has evolved a high density of contacts that preferentially stabilize the folding transition state over the ground states. It is postulated that the prosegment forms extensive non-native contacts during the process of catalyzing correct inter- and intra-domain contacts during the final stages of folding. These results have implications for understanding the folding of multi-domain proteins and for the evolution of prosegment-catalyzed folding.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24983988 PMCID: PMC4077824 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0101339
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Zymogen-derived proteins deviate from common trends in protein folding.
(A) Comparison of the non- and PS-catalyzed folding of αLP [8], SGPB [5] and pepsin [7]. (B) Relation between topology and folding rate for a number of two- and three-state folding proteins (circles, data taken from [3], [21], [22]). The folding rate of αLP (squares), SGPB (triangles) and pepsin (stars) is accelerated to the value (hollow points) expected based on the topology, only when the PS is included. (C) Reaction scheme of pepsin PS-catalyzed folding. The PS binds Rp and catalyzes its conversion to Np at pH 5.3, where the PS is a strong inhibitor of Np. The PS dissociates from Np at pH<3.
Figure 2Effects of PS point mutants on binding and catalyzing pepsin folding.
(A) Structure of pepsinogen (PDB code: 3PSG) with the PS (pink) located between the N- and C-terminal lobes, forming part of a six-stranded β-sheet, and K36 of the PS interacts with the catalytic residues, D32 and D215 (red). PS residues selected for mutation to Ala are shown in space-filling form and coloured according to type (grey-hydrophobic, orange-polar, blue-basic, red-acidic). (B) Comparison of wild-type and mutant PS-catalyzed folding of pepsin. The rate of PS-catalyzed folding (k f) was determined by adding PS to Rp, at pH 5.3, 15°C (see : folding rate followed Arrhenius temp-dependence from 0—15°C, shown in ), and measuring the formation of Np based on enzyme activity measured at pH 1.2, 25°C. The data were fit according to a monoexponential function to obtain k f. (C) Comparison of wild-type and mutant PS affinity for Rp. PS-Rp binding was determined by following the increase in Trp-fluorescence of pepsin as a function of [PS]. The data were fit according to eq 1 to determine the dissociation constant, K d, at 20°C, pH 5.3. (d) Comparison of wild-type and mutant PS affinity for Np. The reduction in Np activity was measured as a function of [PS]. The data were fit according to a competitive inhibitor model, eq 2, to determine the inhibition (dissociation) constant, K i, at 20°C, pH 5.3. All data are reported as the average ± SD of 3-5 measurements for each PS peptide.
Changes in binding and folding constantsa and associated free energiesb upon mutation of the PS.
| PS-mutant |
|
|
| ΔΔ | ΔΔ | ΔΔ | ΔΔ | Φ |
| WT | 1.42±0.34 | 0.31±0.03 | 64.8±11.4 | |||||
| V4A | 0.27±0.03 | 1.19±0.23 | 50.9±6.9 | 0.79±0.12 | 0.94±0.15 | −0.14±0.13 | −0.93±0.18 | −1.0±0.3 |
| L6A | 0.13±0.01 | 0.64±0.09 | 193.5±38.8 | 0.43±0.10 | 1.36±0.15 | 0.64±0.16 | 0.20±0.18 | 6.6±6.0 |
| S11A | 0.18±0.02 | 0.68±0.07 | 270.1±31.5 | 0.47±0.08 | 1.18±0.15 | 0.83±0.12 | 0.36±0.15 | 3.2±1.4 |
| R13A | 0.24±0.02 | 1.96±0.29 | 382.2±37.2 | 1.08±0.10 | 1.02±0.15 | 1.03±0.12 | −0.05±0.15 | −21±67 |
| I17A | 1.40±0.26 | 0.21±0.09 | 393.8±65.1 | −0.21±0.24 | 0.01±0.18 | 1.05±0.14 | 1.26±0.28 | 0.0±0.1 |
| F25A | 0.26±0.04 | 0.25±0.03 | 230.4±29.1 | −0.12±0.08 | 0.96±0.17 | 0.74±0.13 | 0.86±0.15 | 1.1±0.3 |
| K36A | 0.28±0.03 | 0.72±0.14 | 113.3±20.3 | 0.50±0.13 | 0.94±0.15 | 0.33±0.15 | −0.17±0.19 | −5.5±6.4 |
Folding rate constants were measured at 15°C while binding constants were determined at 20°C. Data are given as the mean ± SD obtained from non-linear curve fitting.
Free energy units are in kcal/mol with ± SD derived by propagation of errors.
Figure 3Changes in the PS-catalyzed folding energy landscape upon mutation of the PS peptide.
(A) The changes in energy of each conformation were determined as changes in binding energies. (B) Φ-values calculated from the ratio of the changes in activation energy (ΔΔG) and free energy difference between PS-Np and PS-Rp (ΔΔG). Error bars show ± SD derived by propagation of errors.
Figure 4Brønsted plot.
A comparison of the mutation effects on the folding activation energy as a function of the change in equilibrium stability. Dashed lines indicate the trend lines for ΔΔG values that would give rise to Φ-values of 0 or 1 and error bars show ± SD.