Michael T Colvin1, Robert Silvers1, Birgitta Frohm2, Yongchao Su1, Sara Linse2, Robert G Griffin1. 1. †Department of Chemistry and Francis Bitter Magnet Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States. 2. ‡Department of Biochemistry and Structural Biology, Lund University, SE22100 Lund, Sweden.
Abstract
The presence of amyloid plaques composed of amyloid beta (Aβ) fibrils is a hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The Aβ peptide is present as several length variants with two common alloforms consisting of 40 and 42 amino acids, denoted Aβ1-40 and Aβ1-42, respectively. While there have been numerous reports that structurally characterize fibrils of Aβ1-40, very little is known about the structure of amyloid fibrils of Aβ1-42, which are considered the more toxic alloform involved in AD. We have prepared isotopically (13)C/(15)N labeled AβM01-42 fibrils in vitro from recombinant protein and examined their (13)C-(13)C and (13)C-(15)N magic angle spinning (MAS) NMR spectra. In contrast to several other studies of Aβ fibrils, we observe spectra with excellent resolution and a single set of chemical shifts, suggesting the presence of a single fibril morphology. We report the initial structural characterization of AβM01-42 fibrils utilizing (13)C and (15)N shift assignments of 38 of the 43 residues, including the backbone and side chains, obtained through a series of cross-polarization based 2D and 3D (13)C-(13)C, (13)C-(15)N MAS NMR experiments for rigid residues along with J-based 2D TOBSY experiments for dynamic residues. We find that the first ∼5 residues are dynamic and most efficiently detected in a J-based TOBSY spectrum. In contrast, residues 16-42 are easily observed in cross-polarization experiments and most likely form the amyloid core. Calculation of ψ and φ dihedral angles from the chemical shift assignments indicate that 4 β-strands are present in the fibril's secondary structure.
The presence of amyloid plaques composed of amyloid beta (Aβ) fibrils is a hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The Aβ peptide is present as several length variants with two common alloforms consisting of 40 and 42 amino acids, denoted Aβ1-40 and Aβ1-42, respectively. While there have been numerous reports that structurally characterize fibrils of Aβ1-40, very little is known about the structure of amyloid fibrils of Aβ1-42, which are considered the more toxic alloform involved in AD. We have prepared isotopically (13)C/(15)N labeled AβM01-42 fibrils in vitro from recombinant protein and examined their (13)C-(13)C and (13)C-(15)N magic angle spinning (MAS) NMR spectra. In contrast to several other studies of Aβ fibrils, we observe spectra with excellent resolution and a single set of chemical shifts, suggesting the presence of a single fibril morphology. We report the initial structural characterization of AβM01-42 fibrils utilizing (13)C and (15)N shift assignments of 38 of the 43 residues, including the backbone and side chains, obtained through a series of cross-polarization based 2D and 3D (13)C-(13)C, (13)C-(15)N MAS NMR experiments for rigid residues along with J-based 2D TOBSY experiments for dynamic residues. We find that the first ∼5 residues are dynamic and most efficiently detected in a J-based TOBSY spectrum. In contrast, residues 16-42 are easily observed in cross-polarization experiments and most likely form the amyloid core. Calculation of ψ and φ dihedral angles from the chemical shift assignments indicate that 4 β-strands are present in the fibril's secondary structure.
Protein misfolding
and aggregation and the subsequent formation
of amyloid fibrils is established as part of the pathology of over
40 human diseases,[1,2] including Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease,[3,4] Parkinson’s disease,[5−10] dialysis related amyloidosis,[11,12] type II diabetes,[13,14] Huntington’s disease,[15] and Alzheimer’s
disease (AD).[16−18] Of these, AD is probably the most prevalent and devastating
of the neurodegenerative diseases. For example, in the US there are
currently about 5.2 million ADpatients. In addition to the enormous
personal suffering, the cost associated with care for these individuals
is $214 billion annually. By 2050 these numbers are projected to increase
to 16 million patients and a cost of $1.2 trillion. There is therefore
an urgent need for new therapeutic or diagnostic approaches for the
treatment of AD and for a fundamental understanding of the underlying
chemical and structural biology.One of the hallmarks of AD
is the accumulation of amyloidogenic
senile plaques found in Alzheimer’s patients consisting of
fibrils composed of β-amyloid protein (Aβ), a peptide
with 39–43 residues, that is produced from cleavage of the
amyloid precursor protein (APP) by β- and γ-secretases.[19,20] Among the most prevalent alloforms are peptides with 40 (Aβ1–40) and 42 (Aβ1–42) amino
acid residues with the latter identified as the more toxic species
that possesses a significantly higher aggregation propensity and as
a result nucleates fibril formation.[21−23] In addition to AD, the
toxic effects of Aβ are also linked to Down’s syndrome
(trisomy 21), a genetic disease leading to intellectual impairment
and diminished physical growth and elevated risk of early on-set AD,
as the gene for Aβ is located on chromosome 21.[24] Aβ1–40 aggregates have also been
shown to act as prions possessing transmissibility, with Aβ1–40 prions containing cerebral deposits possessing
Aβ1–40 and Aβ1–42,
while Aβ1–42 prions form smaller amyloid deposits
consisting of mostly Aβ1–42.[25−27] Moreover, Aβ fibrils present reactive surfaces for secondary
nucleation and generation of toxic species from monomers in a fibril-catalyzed
reaction.[28−31] Elucidating the structural details of Aβ1–42 fibrils is therefore an important first step toward understanding
this autocatalytic process. In addition, structures can guide the
rational design of diagnostic and therapeutic tools with which to
diagnose and treat AD, and potentially Down’s syndrome as well.Negative
stain transmission micrograph of AβM01–42 fibrils.Unfortunately, Aβ fibrils
are insoluble and do not diffract
to high resolution, rendering conventional tools for biological structure
determination such as solution NMR spectroscopy and X-ray diffraction
currently incapable of characterizing samples such as these. Fortunately,
magic angle spinning (MAS) nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy
has proven to be a powerful technique to elucidate the structural
details of amyloid fibrils on an atomic level, including backbone
conformations, supramolecular organization, and registry of interstrand
arrangements of amyloid fibrils.[32] Using
this approach, we have recently determined the high-resolution structure
of amyloid fibrils formed by a small peptide within transthyretin
(TTR105–115) utilizing the combination of cryo-electron
microscopy (cryo-EM) and MAS NMR spectra.[33,34] Similar approaches have been used to determine the structure of
Aβ1–40 carrying the Osaka mutation (E22Δ)[35,36] and Het-S.[37−39]The initial MAS NMR characterization of an
amyloid was an Aβ
fragment consisting of the residues Aβ34–42 and revealed an antiparallel cross-β structure.[40] Subsequently, investigations of Aβ10–35[41,42] lead to a structural model where
the basic subunit of the fibril consists of two Aβ10–35 monomers that possess parallel in-register organization and is consistent
with the EM, STEM, and MAS NMR experiments.[43] Following these investigations, a number of studies were devoted
to investigating the structural features of Aβ with different
fibril morphologies, and several structural models were proposed.[40,43−58] One of the commonalities present in these structural models is a
hairpin conformation consisting of two β-strands connected by
a flexible loop. Tycko and co-workers have utilized mass per unit
length (MPL) measurements of different polymorphs of Aβ prepared
from peptide synthesized protein with specific amino acids uniformly 13C and 15N labeled finding that different polymorphs
were found to be two or 3-fold symmetric.[55,59] They have also presented data consistent with a parallel-in-register
alignment of the strands in the sheet. In addition, FS-REDOR[69] experiments indicate that a salt bridge exists
between D23 and K28, which may help to stabilize the loop region within
the fibrils.[45] More recently, Bertini et
al. characterized AβM01–40 fibrils of recombinant
protein with all residues 13C and 15N labeled,
which were prepared under different conditions from those extensively
studied by Tycko and co-workers.[49] In that
report, the authors observed spectra consistent with a different fibril
form, which possessed 2-fold symmetry. Additionally, Reif and co-workers
have also characterized AβM01–40 prepared
from recombinant material under conditions slightly different from
Bertini and Tycko and proposed that an asymmetric dimer is the basic
subunit of AβM01–40 fibrils.[50]Various site-specific mutations of Aβ1–40 are related to familial or early onset AD, including the Arctic
mutant (E22G), the Iowa mutant (D23N), and the Osaka mutant (E22Δ).
As a result, significant attention has also been devoted to determining
the aggregation mechanism[60] and the structure
of the various mutants of Aβ1–40. Tycko and
co-workers reported results indicating that D23N Aβ1–40 fibrils are polymorphic, with some having parallel interstrand arrangements,
while others have antiparallel interstrand arrangements.[61,62] Later, they showed that through multiple rounds of seeding the sample
yields a single polymorph.[63] Recently,
a high resolution structure of the E22Δ Osaka mutant was reported
by Huber et al.[35] and Schuetz et al.[36] Following assignments of the amyloid fibrils
the authors utilized a variety of isotope labeling schemes and recoupling
sequences to generate an excellent high resolution structure with
a number of intra- and intermolecular constraints.[35,36] The structure proposed for the E22Δ mutant is substantially
different from other models proposed for Aβ1–40. In particular, while the Osaka structure has strands that are parallel
in register, the strands are intercalated in a “cinnamon roll”
arrangement rather than forming a simple hairpin proposed in models
for wild-type Aβ1–401D MAS NMR spectra of
AβM01–42 recorded
at ω0H/2π = 800 MHz at 277 K and ωr/2π = 20 kHz with 83 kHz 1H decoupling during
acquisition. (a) Cross-polarization 1D 13C spectrum recorded
with 512 transients. (b) 13C-INEPT spectrum recorded with
1024 transients. (c) Cross-polarization 1D 15N spectrum
recorded with 512 transients.In comparison with the extensive studies of Aβ1–40, little is known about the structure of Aβ1–42 fibrils,[64−68] which are established to be more toxic,[69] and possess different aggregation properties in comparison with
Aβ1–40.[30] Furthermore,
genetic mutations that correlate with a predisposition to AD are known
to result in elevated levels of Aβ1–42.[70] To date, the characterization of Aβ1–42 has largely been limited to H/D exchange and cryo-EM
studies,[71] which provide valuable information
about the fibrils, but do not provide atomic level structural and
distance information. Although a sparse number of MAS NMR studies
have been reported on Aβ1–42 fibrils,[71] a complete structure has yet to be elucidated.
Because of the propensity for Aβ1–42 to aggregate
rapidly, it is challenging to produce homogeneous fibril samples that
can yield high quality MAS NMR spectra with sufficient spectral resolution
permitting structural characterization. Additionally, the differences
in behavior of the two alloforms, their distinct morphologies as observed
by cryo-EM and low propensity to form joint fibrils[72] may be indicative of a different structure at short length
scale, which propagates into the higher order morphology with shorter
and more tightly twisted AβM01–42 compared
to AβM01–40 fibrils,[72] and alternate pathways for aggregation.[30] We have therefore focused our efforts on studies of AβM01–42 and employed a preparation method that utilized
size exclusion chromatography (SEC) to isolate monomeric AβM01–42. This is followed by fibrilization yielding samples
that exhibit high quality MAS NMR spectra that allow for a more complete
characterization of the structure of the fibrils. Furthermore, this
approach to sample preparation has recently been shown to result in
reproducible aggregation kinetics.[73] Herein,
we use MAS NMR along with a new sample preparation to explore the
structure of AβM01–42 fibrils with the goals
of first assigning the MAS spectra and, subsequently, in a future
publication reporting the fibril structure.(a) 1.6 ms mixing RFDR
spectrum recorded at 800 MHz, ωr/2π = 20 kHz,
VT gas regulated to 277 K with 83 kHz
CW 1H decoupling during evolution, and 83 kHz TPPM 1H decoupling during acquisition. (b) 1.6 ms mixing ZF-TEDOR
spectrum recorded at 800 MHz, ωr/2π = 20 kHz,
VT gas regulated to 277 K with 83 kHz TPPM during acquisition.
Results and Discussion
The procedures
used in the protein expression and purification
are described in the methods section below with details provided elsewhere.[73] Briefly, the peptide was purified from inclusion
bodies using ion exchange chromatography in batch format followed
by two rounds of size exclusion chromatography to isolate pure AβM01–42 monomers. Fibrils formed spontaneously when this
solution was kept at room temperature at pH 8 overnight. An EM of
the resultant fibrils, which have been lyophilized to allow for resuspension
in a smaller volume before packing into the rotor, is shown in Figure 1. The fibrils have relatively uniform twist distance
and thickness, with an average length of ca. 300 nm, with no amorphous
aggregates present and only one morphology observed. No significant
difference is found relative to fresh fibril samples.[29,72] For a typical β-sheet interpeptide spacing of ca. 0.5 nm,
this means that less than 0.2% of the peptide monomer units are at
the fibril ends, and the NMR spectra acquired will reliably report
on the core structure of the fibrils. The length of the fibrils observed
in the EM is consistent with the observation that Aβ1–42 fibrils usually are shorter than Aβ1–40 fibrils.[27,68]
Figure 1
Negative
stain transmission micrograph of AβM01–42 fibrils.
Representative
strip plot of NCOCX (green), CONCA (red), and NCACX
(blue) spectra (recorded at 750 and 800 MHz, respectively). ωr/2π = 12.5 kHz, T = 277 K, τmix(DARR) = 80 ms. A 83 kHz 1H decoupling field
was applied during acquisition.2D 13C–13C-TOBSY recorded at T = 277 K, ω0H/2π = 800 MHz, ωr/2π = 20 kHz, and τmix(TOBSY) = 9.6
ms. A 83 kHz 1H decoupling field was applied during acquisition.We began structurally characterizing
the AβM01–42 fibrils by recording 1D spectra
at ω0H/2π
= 800 MHz illustrated in Figure 2, which shows
(a) 13C cross-polarization, (b) 13C J-based
INEPT transfers, and (c) 15N cross-polarization. We found
that seeding subsequent samples is successful and we observe the identical
chemical shifts from one sample preparation to another, producing
identical 1D and 2D spectra. The appearance of significant intensity
in both the CP- and J-based experiments indicate that both rigid and
dynamic residues are present within the AβM01–42 fibrils. Similar to the 13C spectra, the 15N 1D spectra display sharp peaks, particularly within the amide region,
as well as the side chains of lysine and arginine. The breadth of
the 15Nδ1/ε2 His side chain lines
in our metal-ion depleted samples is likely due to those residues
undergoing dynamics on the NMR time scale, most likely proton exchange.
In preliminary experiments at 150 K we observe that the line widths
decrease consistent with this hypothesis. The 15N spectrum
is typically a sensitive indicator of the order within amyloid proteins,
and taken in its totality suggests that our samples are microscopically
well ordered, and typically associated with high quality MAS NMR spectra.
Figure 2
1D MAS NMR spectra of
AβM01–42 recorded
at ω0H/2π = 800 MHz at 277 K and ωr/2π = 20 kHz with 83 kHz 1H decoupling during
acquisition. (a) Cross-polarization 1D 13C spectrum recorded
with 512 transients. (b) 13C-INEPT spectrum recorded with
1024 transients. (c) Cross-polarization 1D 15N spectrum
recorded with 512 transients.
The expected spectral quality was confirmed by the excellent resolution
observed in the 2D RFDR[74] (Figure 3A) and ZF-TEDOR[75] (Figure 3B) spectra where line widths of ∼0.5 ppm
are observed for well resolved resonances. Interestingly, and in contrast
to previous reports, only a single set of resonances was observed,
and is well illustrated by the three isoleucine, two serines, etc.
cross peaks present in the RFDR spectrum indicating that only a single
fibril morphology is present within our sample.
Figure 3
(a) 1.6 ms mixing RFDR
spectrum recorded at 800 MHz, ωr/2π = 20 kHz,
VT gas regulated to 277 K with 83 kHz
CW 1H decoupling during evolution, and 83 kHz TPPM 1H decoupling during acquisition. (b) 1.6 ms mixing ZF-TEDOR
spectrum recorded at 800 MHz, ωr/2π = 20 kHz,
VT gas regulated to 277 K with 83 kHz TPPM during acquisition.
2D 13C–13C MAS spectrum of AβM01–42 fibrils
using DARR mixing recorded at a field
strength corresponding to ω0H/2π = 800 MHz, T = 277 K and ωr/2π = 20 kHz. τmix = 80 ms, with a 83 kHz 1H decoupling field applied
during acquisition.Until recently, most
studies of Aβ involved protein prepared
via peptide synthesis and consequently 13C/15N labeling of individual amino acids. This approach has yielded a
good deal of useful structural data; however, because of the cost
of labeled amino acids it has not been feasible to prepare uniformly
labeled Aβ and therefore to obtain a sufficiently large number
of structural constraints to calculate an atomic resolution structure
(>5 constraints per residue). In addition, it has recently been
reported
that synthetic Aβ is not as neurotoxic as biosynthetic preparations,[69] and the aggregation of synthetic peptides is
slowed.[69] Finally, MAS NMR line widths
are broader in synthetic samples. For example, the spectra in prior
publications[40,44−46] are significantly
broader than those published recently by Bertini et al.[49] and Reif, and co-workers.[54] These differences could be possibly due to racemization
that occurs during synthesis and impurities that are difficult to
separate, whereas recombinant expression in has excellent fidelity
with respect to both sequence homogeneity and chirality. We also note
that that biosynthetic preparations of PI3-SH3,[76] β2-microglobulin,[11,12,77] and α-synuclein[7,78−94] yield well resolved spectra. In addition, recombinant expression
of protein opens the possibilities of utilizing sparse isotopic labeling
schemes, which can aid in producing high quality MAS NMR spectra (i.e.,
1,3-13C2 -glycerol, 2-13C1-glycerol,[95−98] and 1,6-13C2- and 2-13C1-glucose),[99−102] which have recently been employed for fibrils of Aβ1–40 E22Δ, β2-microglobulin and its ΔN6 variant.[33,79,83]Schematic showing the amino acids and
side chains with the side
chains filled in. Red circles correspond to assigned 13C’s, blue circles correspond to assigned 15N’s,
and gray circles correspond to resonances that are not observed.Predicted ψ and φ angles using TALOS.
Shaded blue regions
indicate predicted β-strands. On the top of the figure the black
boxes indicate the location of the beta strands, the solid black line
indicate regions that are in loop or random coil conformations and
the dashed line indicates regions which have not yet been assigned.In addition, we recorded 3D spectra
(NCOCX, NCACX, and CONCA)[103−107] with representative strip plots shown in Figure 4 to complete unambiguous assignments of the backbone and side
chain resonances (Table S1). The most intense
signals observed in the NCOCX, CONCA, and NCACX spectra correspond
to residues 25–34 indicating that these residues are particularly
rigid relative to the other residues. We also recorded a 2D 13C–13C-TOBSY[108] to assign
resonances belonging to dynamic portions of the molecule, (Figure 5). The residues at the N-terminus appear in the
J-based experiments, which has been previously observed in a variety
of fibrils.[11,12,49,77]
Figure 4
Representative
strip plot of NCOCX (green), CONCA (red), and NCACX
(blue) spectra (recorded at 750 and 800 MHz, respectively). ωr/2π = 12.5 kHz, T = 277 K, τmix(DARR) = 80 ms. A 83 kHz 1H decoupling field
was applied during acquisition.
Figure 5
2D 13C–13C-TOBSY recorded at T = 277 K, ω0H/2π = 800 MHz, ωr/2π = 20 kHz, and τmix(TOBSY) = 9.6
ms. A 83 kHz 1H decoupling field was applied during acquisition.
Initially, essentially all of the
peaks present in the 2D TOBSY
and the 3D NCOCX and NCACX were assigned, the exceptions being R5-D7
and Y10-Q15. Since these residues could be in an intermediate exchange
regime, they may be observed with longer mixing times, or alternatively
lower temperatures to quench the relevant motions. With this in mind
we recorded an 80 ms mixing DARR (Figure 6)
and were able to assign R5, Y10, E11, and V12. We note that these
resonances are significantly weaker than the resonances observed in
the 3D experiments lending support to our speculation that the resonances
absent are in an intermediate motional regime.
Figure 6
2D 13C–13C MAS spectrum of AβM01–42 fibrils
using DARR mixing recorded at a field
strength corresponding to ω0H/2π = 800 MHz, T = 277 K and ωr/2π = 20 kHz. τmix = 80 ms, with a 83 kHz 1H decoupling field applied
during acquisition.
The residues
that have been assigned include both the backbone
and side chains with the methods used summarized as follows: we were
able to identify residues M0-F4 through the J-based 2D TOBSY, and
residues S8 and G9 and K16-A42 through the NCOCX, CONCA, and NCACX.
Additionally, we have assigned R5, Y10, E11 and V12 from 2D DARR spectra,
but were unable to identify five residues, H6, D7, H13, H14 and Q15,
that are likely in an intermediate motional regime, shown schematically
in Figure 7.
Figure 7
Schematic showing the amino acids and
side chains with the side
chains filled in. Red circles correspond to assigned 13C’s, blue circles correspond to assigned 15N’s,
and gray circles correspond to resonances that are not observed.
The chemical shifts of assigned
residues were then used as input
to TALOS+[109] to estimate the backbone torsion
angles (ψ, φ) (Figure 8), which
were in turn utilized to predict the secondary structures within AβM01–42 fibrils (Table S2).
The dihedral angles predict that four β-strands are present
within each monomer in the secondary structure of the fibrils (Figure 8). The location of the four predicted β-strands
is similar but slightly different from other Aβ fibrils that
have been reported in the literature (see Figure 9 and S1), and consistent with the
intensity of the cross-polarization based spectra, in which the signal
intensity is an indicator of rigidity. These β-strands are expected
to be within the core of the fibrils and therefore rigid. We note
that G37 and G38 are potential locations for a loop or turn but these
residues could also be part of a longer β-strand between M35
and I41. Elucidating further structural details will determine which
of these options is correct. The chemical shifts of the AβM01–42 fibrils we have studied here do not seem to correlate
with those reported by Bertini et al., who had characterized AβM01–40 fibrils prepared from recombinant protein expressed
by a similar method to the one we have employed. This suggests that
there may be significant structural differences between AβM01–42 fibrils and AβM01–40 fibrils,
which may be a result of their different hydrophobicities and steric
constraints related to accommodating two extra residues within the
fibril.[71] Furthermore, we note that the
location of the β-strands in this work are in slightly different
locations compared to many of those reported for Aβ1–40 fibrils. Currently it is unclear what impact this has on the intra-
and intermolecular structure of AβM01–42.
Efforts to address this important question are ongoing. This suggestion
is consistent with the cryo-EM images reported by Fandrich et al.
and Schmidt et al. where the electron density can be mapped into a
long strand and a N-terminus whose structure was not well resolved.[65,110]
Figure 8
Predicted ψ and φ angles using TALOS.
Shaded blue regions
indicate predicted β-strands. On the top of the figure the black
boxes indicate the location of the beta strands, the solid black line
indicate regions that are in loop or random coil conformations and
the dashed line indicates regions which have not yet been assigned.
Figure 9
Comparison
of the locations of predicted β-strands in various
Aβ fibrils. Here, the comparison is limited to NMR chemical
shift data (see Figure S1).
Comparison
of the locations of predicted β-strands in various
Aβ fibrils. Here, the comparison is limited to NMR chemical
shift data (see Figure S1).We also note that aggregation of Aβ monomers
has been found
to produce polymorphic fibrils, with the fibrilization conditions
(i.e., pH, temperature, salt concentration, monomer concentration,
etc.) as some of the variables that affects the polymorphs observed.[111] The polymorphism is believed to be responsible
for broad lines observed in many Aβ MAS spectra and has limited
the structural constraints that can be gleaned from the spectra. Recently,
Lu et al. and Pravastu et al. have provided evidence that the differences
in morphologies may be linked to disease symptoms by structurally
characterizing fibrils prepared by seeding fibrils with material extracted
from the brains of patients exhibiting varying presentations of the
disease.[47,48] This surprising result provides impetus
to characterize the structure of fibrils with many different morphologies
that can be prepared under varying fibrilization conditions.
Conclusions
We have prepared uniformly 13C/15N labeled
AβM01–42 fibrils consisting of a single polymorph
and have structurally characterized them with chemical shift assignments
obtained from MAS NMR spectra. The backbone and side chains resonances
have been assigned for 38 of the 43 residues through a series of 2D
and 3D CP and J-based transfer experiments. TALOS+ prediction of ψ
and φ angles resulting from the chemical shifts indicate the
presence of four β-strands within the fibril structure.These results also indicate that the residues within the protein
have significantly different mobilities. The first five residues are
the most dynamic and are most easily detected in J-based TOBSY transfers.
In contrast residues 16–42 are relatively rigid, are detected
with CP based transfers and likely form the core of the AβM01–42 fibrils. Connecting those two sections is a region
of intermediate flexibility, where we observe weak signals in CP-based
experiments for R5, S8, G9, Y10, E11, and V12, with their intensity
being inversely correlated with temperature. In contrast we do not
observe signals from either CP-based and J-based experiments for H6,
D7, H13, H14 amd-Q15. However, preliminary experiments at 150 K indicate
that the His resonances are modulated by H+ exchange. It
seems likely that additional low temperature experiments will permit
observation and assignment of these residues.Figure 9 shows a comparison of the location
of β-strands in various Aβ fibrils that have been studied
with NMR.[35,45,49,55] Many show that the residues from 15 to 40/42 are
most likely to possess β-strand character. Although several
studies predict that β-strands can occur in the first 15 residues,
it has only been proposed to be true for Aβ40 fibrils.
Experimental Section
Sample Preparation
The AβM01–42 peptide was expressed and purified
as previously reported.[73] Briefly, AβM01–42 was
expressed in 12 L of M9 minimal medium containing 2 g of U–13C glucose and 1 g of 15NH4Cl per liter.
Cells were grown at 37 °C, induced at an OD600 = 0.7–1.0
and harvested 5 h later by centrifugation at 6000g for 8 min. The cells were stored at −20 °C. Upon purification,
the pellet was thawed and resuspended in 100 mL buffer containing
10 mM Tris, 1 mM EDTA, pH 7.5 (buffer A), sonicated for 1.5 min (half
horn, max output, 50% duty cycle, 50 mL at a time) and centrifuged
(18000g for 7 min) to pellet the inclusion bodies.
The inclusion bodies were sonicated two more times (15 s) in 50 mL
buffer A and pelleted as above. The inclusion bodies were then dissolved
in buffer containing 10 mM Tris, 1 mM EDTA, pH 8.5 (buffer B) with
8 M urea, diluted with three volumes of buffer B and added to 100
mL DEAE cellulose resin equilibrated in buffer B with 2 M urea added,
and purified via ion exchange chromatography in batch format, followed
by two size exclusion chromatography steps in 20 mM sodium phosphate,
0.2 mM EDTA, 0.02% NaN3, pH 8.0, using a 26 × 600
mm Superdex 75 column, which ensured that only monomeric AβM01–42 was present when fibrilization began. AβM01–42 fibrils were prepared by incubating 10–50
μM (0.05–0.25 mg/mL) solutions of AβM01–42 in 15 mL Falcon tubes at room temperature overnight, and the formation
of fibrils confirmed by withdrawing a small aliquot for fluorescence
spectroscopy in the presence of thioflavin-T (ThT). The first fibril
sample was lyophylized, and resuspended in a smaller volume of water
(milli-Q) before packing into the rotor. Aliquots of this first fibril
sample were set aside prior to lyophilization and were added as seeds
to subsequent monomer samples, to ensure formation of fibrils of the
same morphology in all tubes. Subsequent samples were always kept
hydrated and we find that the chemical shifts are identical to samples
that had been lyophilized. Thus, in the case of AβM1–42 the lyophilization and rehydrations steps do not significantly alter
the fibril structure. 13C–13C and 13C–15N spectra demonstrating this are shown
in Figure S2. Typically, ∼30 mg
of hydrated AβM01–42 fibrils were packed into
a 3.2 mm Bruker rotor (Bruker Biospin, Billerica, MA) using a home-built
centrifugal packing tool.
Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM)
TEM images were
acquired using a Philips CM120 BioTWIN electron microscope equipped
with a postcolumn energy filter (Gatam GIF100) and a CCD camera. The
acceleration voltage was 120 kV. 300 mesh carbon-coated Formvar grids
(Electron Microscopy Sciences, Hatfield, PA) were placed up-side down
on a buffer droplet for 2 min, then on a droplet of the fibril samples
for 3 min, followed by a quick (20 s) rinse on a droplet of water
(Milli-Q). The grid was then placed on a droplet of 1.5% uranyl acetate
(Merck) for another 3 min to provide the negative stain.
MAS NMR Spectroscopy
Spectra were acquired on either
a Cambridge Instruments 750 MHz spectrometer operating under RNMR
(courtesy of Dr. David Ruben) or a Bruker 800 MHz AVANCE III spectrometer
equipped with a 3.2 mm triple channel HCN Bruker probe (Bruker Biospin,
Billerica, MA). Spectra were recorded at ωr/2π
= 20 kHz and regulated to ±10 Hz using a Bruker spinning frequency
controller for INEPT-TOBSY,[112,113] DARR,[114] RFDR,[74,115] and ZF-TEDOR,[75] and 12.5 kHz ± 10 Hz for 3D NCOCX, NCACX,
CONCA experiments. All experiments were conducted at 277 K. Spectra
recorded at ω0H/2π = 750 MHz (3D NCOCX and
CONCA) were processed, displayed and assigned using the NMRPipe software
package,[116] while spectra recorded at ω0H/2π = 800 MHz (all other) were processed using TopSpin
3.1, and all spectra were analyzed in Sparky.[117]1D 15N spectra were recorded with a CP
contact time of 2 ms and 1H/15N fields of 62.5
kHz, respectively, and a recycle delay of 3 s. During acquisition,
a TPPM[118]1H decoupling field
of 83.3 kHz was applied. The FID containing 2048 points was averaged
over 512 transients. Subsequently, a Gaussian window function with
10 Hz line broadening was applied and the FID was zero filled to 8192
points and Fourier transformed. A 1D refocused carbon insensitive
nuclei enhanced by polarization transfer (INEPT) spectrum was recorded
with an INEPT delay of 1.92 ms (equals a 1JHC coupling of 130 Hz), and a recycle delay of 2.5 s. The refocusing
delay was set to 1.28 ms (= 1/61JHC) selecting
all multiplicities (CH, CH2, and CH3). During
acquisition, a WALTZ-16 proton decoupling field of 2.5 kHz was applied.
The FID containing 2048 points was averaged over 1024 transients.
Subsequently, a Gaussian window function with 10 Hz line broadening
was applied and the FID was zero filled to 8192 points and Fourier
transformed. 13C and 15N chemical shifts were
referenced using the published shifts of adamantine relative to DSS
for 13C referencing and the IUPAC relative frequency ratios
between DSS (13C) and liquid ammonia (15N).2D DARR spectra were recorded with a CP contact time of 1.2 ms
and 1H/13C fields of 62.5 kHz, respectively,
and a recycle delay of 2.5 s. For DARR mixing, an 80 ms proton field
at 20 kHz was applied. During acquisition, a TPPM 1H decoupling
field of 83.3 kHz was applied. The FID matrix containing 2048 ×
1024 points was averaged over 16 transients. Subsequently, a squared
sine window function with a sine bell shift of 3.5 was applied and
the FID matrix was zero filled to 4096 × 2048 points and Fourier
transformed.2D RFDR spectra were recorded with a CP contact
time of 1.2 ms
and 1H/13C fields of 62.5 kHz, respectively,
and a recycle delay of 2.5 s. For RFDR mixing, a 1.6 ms 13C RFDR recoupling field was applied using rotor synchronized π
pulses at 83 kHz with 100 kHz 1H decoupling. During acquisition,
a TPPM 1H decoupling field of 83.3 kHz was applied. The
FID matrix containing 2048 × 1024 points was averaged over 16
transients. Subsequently, a squared sine window function with a sine
bell shift of 3.5 was applied and the FID matrix was zero filled to
4096 × 2048 points and Fourier transformed.Z-filtered
transferred echo double resonance (ZF-TEDOR) were acquired
using 3.2 ms mixing with 50 kHz 13C and 15N
π-pulses with 83 kHz 1H TPPM decoupling during acquisition
and a 3 s recycle delay. The FID matrix of 1024 × 512 points
were averaged for 32 scans.3D NCOCX used 62.5 kHz and 50 kHz
fields respectively for 1H to 15N transfer (2
ms contact time) with 50 kHz
and 62.5 kHz fields for 15N to 13C magnetization
transfer (4 ms contact) with 100 kHz decoupling during double cross
polarization (DCP) transfer and a carrier frequency of 165 ppm, followed
by DARR mixing for 80 ms with a 12.5 ms 1H DARR field and
83 kHz 1H decoupling during acquisition all with a recycle
delay of 3s. The FID acquired had 1024 points, with 240 and 260 points
in the second and third dimension, respectively. Similarly, the CONCA
3D began with cross-polarization from 1H to 13C with fields of 71 kHz and 83 kHz respectively, with 100 kHz decoupling
during the DCP transfer and 4 ms contact time during the DCP with
160 and 240 points in the second and third dimension. The 3D NCACX
spectrum was recorded with an initial CP contact time of 1.2 ms and 1H/13C fields of 62.5 kHz, respectively, and a recycle
delay of 2.5 s. For DARR mixing, an 80 ms proton field at 20 kHz was
applied. During acquisition, a TPPM 1H decoupling field
of 83.3 kHz was applied. The FID matrix containing 2048 × 1024
points was averaged over 16 transients. Subsequently, a squared sine
window function with a sine bell shift of 3.5 was applied and the
FID matrix was zero filled to 4096 × 2048 points and Fourier
transformed.Detailed acquisition and processing parameters
can be found in Table S4 and S5, respectively.
Authors: Aneta T Petkova; Yoshitaka Ishii; John J Balbach; Oleg N Antzutkin; Richard D Leapman; Frank Delaglio; Robert Tycko Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2002-12-12 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Ovidiu C Andronesi; Stefan Becker; Karsten Seidel; Henrike Heise; Howard S Young; Marc Baldus Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2005-09-21 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Thorsten Lührs; Christiane Ritter; Marc Adrian; Dominique Riek-Loher; Bernd Bohrmann; Heinz Döbeli; David Schubert; Roland Riek Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-11-17 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Henrike Heise; Wolfgang Hoyer; Stefan Becker; Ovidiu C Andronesi; Dietmar Riedel; Marc Baldus Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-10-24 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: John J Balbach; Aneta T Petkova; Nathan A Oyler; Oleg N Antzutkin; David J Gordon; Stephen C Meredith; Robert Tycko Journal: Biophys J Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 4.033
Authors: Christine C Lee; Mark C Julian; Kathryn E Tiller; Fanling Meng; Sarah E DuConge; Rehana Akter; Daniel P Raleigh; Peter M Tessier Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2015-11-24 Impact factor: 5.157
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: Marielle Aulikki Wälti; Francesco Ravotti; Hiromi Arai; Charles G Glabe; Joseph S Wall; Anja Böckmann; Peter Güntert; Beat H Meier; Roland Riek Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2016-07-28 Impact factor: 11.205