Proteins are dynamic entities and populate ensembles of conformations. Transitions between states within a conformational ensemble occur over a broad spectrum of amplitude and time scales, and are often related to biological function. Whereas solid-state NMR (SSNMR) spectroscopy has recently been used to characterize conformational ensembles of proteins in the microcrystalline states, its applications to membrane proteins remain limited. Here we use SSNMR to study conformational dynamics of a seven-helical transmembrane (TM) protein, Anabaena Sensory Rhodopsin (ASR) reconstituted in lipids. We report on site-specific measurements of the 15N longitudinal R1 and rotating frame R1ρ relaxation rates at two fields of 600 and 800 MHz and at two temperatures of 7 and 30 °C. Quantitative analysis of the R1 and R1ρ values and of their field and temperature dependencies provides evidence of motions on at least two time scales. We modeled these motions as fast local motions and slower collective motions of TM helices and of structured loops, and used the simple model-free and extended model-free analyses to fit the data and estimate the amplitudes, time scales and activation energies. Faster picosecond (tens to hundreds of picoseconds) local motions occur throughout the protein and are dominant in the middle portions of the TM helices. In contrast, the amplitudes of the slower collective motions occurring on the nanosecond (tens to hundreds of nanoseconds) time scales, are smaller in the central parts of helices, but increase toward their cytoplasmic sides as well as in the interhelical loops. ASR interacts with a soluble transducer protein on its cytoplasmic surface, and its binding affinity is modulated by light. The larger amplitude of motions on the cytoplasmic side of the TM helices correlates with the ability of ASR to undergo large conformational changes in the process of binding/unbinding the transducer.
Proteins are dynamic entities and populate ensembles of conformations. Transitions between states within a conformational ensemble occur over a broad spectrum of amplitude and time scales, and are often related to biological function. Whereas solid-state NMR (SSNMR) spectroscopy has recently been used to characterize conformational ensembles of proteins in the microcrystalline states, its applications to membrane proteins remain limited. Here we use SSNMR to study conformational dynamics of a seven-helical transmembrane (TM) protein, Anabaena Sensory Rhodopsin (ASR) reconstituted in lipids. We report on site-specific measurements of the 15N longitudinal R1 and rotating frame R1ρ relaxation rates at two fields of 600 and 800 MHz and at two temperatures of 7 and 30 °C. Quantitative analysis of the R1 and R1ρ values and of their field and temperature dependencies provides evidence of motions on at least two time scales. We modeled these motions as fast local motions and slower collective motions of TM helices and of structured loops, and used the simple model-free and extended model-free analyses to fit the data and estimate the amplitudes, time scales and activation energies. Faster picosecond (tens to hundreds of picoseconds) local motions occur throughout the protein and are dominant in the middle portions of the TM helices. In contrast, the amplitudes of the slower collective motions occurring on the nanosecond (tens to hundreds of nanoseconds) time scales, are smaller in the central parts of helices, but increase toward their cytoplasmic sides as well as in the interhelical loops. ASR interacts with a soluble transducer protein on its cytoplasmic surface, and its binding affinity is modulated by light. The larger amplitude of motions on the cytoplasmic side of the TM helices correlates with the ability of ASR to undergo large conformational changes in the process of binding/unbinding the transducer.
While three-dimensional
structures of proteins provide important
basic insights into their internal organization, it has been long
recognized that internal dynamics play a critical role in protein
function. A variety of biological processes such as conformational
transitions, allostery, enzymatic activity depend on the proteins’
internal plasticity[1−4] on the time scales that span many orders of magnitude.[1,5,6] Because of its functional significance,
protein dynamics have attracted considerable attention in recent years.
A wide range of experimental methodologies is required in order to
capture the dynamic richness of proteins’ internal motions.[7−10] In particular, solution nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) methods
have been used extensively to probe dynamics of globular proteins,
as described in a number of recently published review articles.[1,3,5,6,11,12]In systems
in which an applicability of solution NMR is limited
by slow molecular tumbling, solid-state NMR (SSNMR) is becoming an
increasingly popular approach for the characterization of protein
dynamics.[13−23] Membrane proteins represent one such class where the study of structure[24−27] and dynamics[23,28−33] remain a challenge. Recent methodological and technological advances
in SSNMR, in particular the availability of ultrafast magic angle
spinning (MAS) probes capable of achieving spinning rates of 50 kHz
and higher,[34,35] and an extensive use of deuteration
techniques have paved the way for measuring relaxation rates which
are sensitive probes of motions.[13,15,16,36−39] Whereas under moderate spinning frequencies[15]N longitudinal and especially transverse relaxation rates, more accurately
dubbed coherence lifetimes,[40] are in large
part defined by incomplete averaging of coherent interactions, these
interactions are effectively suppressed under ultrafast MAS.[35] Specifically, coherent contributions to the R1ρ relaxation rates of 15N[35] and 13C[34] are greatly attenuated at MAS rates greater than 50–60 kHz.
Similarly, ultrafast spinning helps suppress rate-averaging effects
from proton-driven spin diffusion on the longitudinal R1 relaxation times measurements (20 kHz for 15N R1,[41,42] 60 kHz for 13C′ R1(43,44)).Our main focus in this manuscript is on internal dynamics
of a
lipid-embedded seven transmembrane helical (7TM) receptor Anabaena
Sensory Rhodopsin (ASR) from the cyanobacterium Anabaena sp. PCC 7120.[45] We have previously used
SSNMR order parameter measurements and transverse 15N R1ρ measurements at ultrafast MAS rates
of 50 kHz to study internal motions in ASR.[23] We used Simple Model Free and Gaussian Axial Fluctuation[46] analyses to interpret the observed order parameters
and elevated R1ρ relaxation rates
to estimate time scales of collective motions of the well-defined
structural elements such as TM helices and structured loops. TM helices
were estimated to move on a time scale on the order of ∼10
ns, whereas two extracellular BC and FG loops were subjected to motions
on a time scale of 10–100 ns. The model assumed the collective
motions as the dominant relaxation mechanisms, and neglected the contribution
from fast local motions to the R1ρ relaxation rates and the dipolar order parameters.In this
report, we expand our measurements to include 15N R1 measurements at two different fields
of 600 and 800 MHz performed at two temperatures of 7 and 30 °C,
as well as additional 15N R1ρ data at 30 °C. We interpret the data by modeling ASR dynamics
as a combination of fast local (ps) and slower collective (ns) motions.
We show that motions in the center and on the extracellular side of
helices are dominated by the fast picosecond motions (e.g., they have
larger contribution to the overall amplitude), whereas contribution
from the nanosecond motions is greater on the cytoplasmic side of
helices and in interhelical loop regions.
Materials
and Methods
Samples
ASR samples were prepared as described previously.[47] Briefly, C-terminally truncated His6-tagged ASR was expressed in BL21 Codonplus RIL E. coli cells grown on M9 minimal medium at 30 °C using 1 g of 15N-labeled ammonium chloride as the sole nitrogen source,
and 4 g of either [2-13C]-labeled glycerol, [1,3-13C]-labeled glycerol, or [U–13C]-labeled glucose
as carbon sources for alternately (below referred to as 2-ASR and
1,3-ASR, respectively) or uniformly [13C,15N]-labeled
ASR samples (UCN ASR), respectively. Protein expression was induced
by the addition of IPTG to a final concentration of 1 mM when the
cell density reached A600 = 0.4 OD. Retinal
was added exogenously at a concentration of 7.5 μM at the time
of induction. The cells were collected by centrifugation and then
treated with lysozyme (0.2 mg/mL) and DNase I (2 μg/mL) before
being broken by sonication. The membrane fraction was solubilized
in 1% DDM (n-dodecyl β-d-maltoside)
at 4 °C and purified following the batch procedure described
in the Qiagen Ni2+-NTA resin manual. The purified protein
was concentrated to approximately 3 mL in a pH 8 buffer containing
5 mM NaCl, 10 mM Tris Base and 0.05% DDM. Liposomes were prepared
by hydrating dried DMPC and DMPA mixed in 9:1 ratio (w/w), and mixed
with the solubilized ASR at a protein:lipid ratio of 2:1 (w/w) at
pH = 8 and stirred at 5 °C for 6 h. The detergent was removed
by adding 0.6 mg/mL of Biobeads (SM-II, Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.,
Hercules, CA, USA) and mixing for 24 h. Proteoliposomes were removed
from Biobeads by a 27G syringe needle and collected by ultracentrifugation
at 150 000g for 50 min. The buffer was changed
to a pH = 9 (10 mM NaCl and 24 mM CHES), and the sample was further
ultracentrifuged into a small pellet at 900 000g for 3 h and packed into either thin-walled 3.2 mm or 1.3 mm Bruker
rotors.Site-specific 15N R1 relaxation measurements were carried out on 1,3-ASR and 2-ASR
at two temperatures of 7 and 30 °C. 15N R1ρ relaxation rate measurements were carried out
on a UCN ASR at 30 °C. We analyze these results along with previously
reported measurements of backbone 15N–1H dipolar order parameters and transverse R1ρ relaxation rates measured at 7 °C,[23] as summarized in Table .
Table 1
List of Experiments
Used in the Data
Analysis
parameter
temperature (°C)
magnetic field strength (MHz)
Dipolar Order Parameter, SNH2a
7
600
15N R1
7
600
15N R1
7
800
15N R1
30
800
15N R1ρa
7
800
15N R1ρ
30
800
Previously reported
data from ref (23).
Previously reported
data from ref (23).
NMR Spectroscopy
Reassignment
of Chemical Shifts at 30 °C
Three-dimensional
CANCO and NCACX chemical shift correlation experiments at 30 °C
were collected on a Bruker Avance III spectrometer operating at 800
MHz 1H Larmor frequency on a 3.2 mm Efree MAS probe at
a spinning rate of 14.3 kHz, using previously published pulse sequences.[48] Sample temperature was calibrated with external
references of methanol[49] and KBr,[50] and was maintained at 30 °C.1H/15N cross-polarization (CP)[51] of 2 ms duration with an 15N field strength
of 35 kHz and with the proton field ramped 10% around the n = 2 Hartmann–Hahn (HH)[52] matching condition was used in the NCACX experiment. 15N/13Cα band-selective CP[53] was performed with a 5 ms contact time with a spinlock
field on 15N at ∼36 kHz, and with the carbon field
intensity ramped linearly (10%) around 22 kHz. DARR (dipolar assisted
rotational resonance) recoupling[54,55] of 50 ms was
used for 13C–13C mixing.1H/13C cross-polarization (CP) of 2 ms duration
with a 13C field strength of 55 kHz and with the proton
field strength ramped linearly (10%) around the n = 2 HH matching condition was used in the CANCO experiment. 15N/13Cα band-selective CP[53] was performed with a 5 ms contact time with
a spinlock field on 15N at ∼36 kHz, and with the
carbon field ramped linearly (10%) around 22 kHz. The 15N/13C′ band-selective CP was performed using the
same 15N lock field with the 13C field ramped
linearly around 50 kHz, and with the 13C carrier frequency
placed at 175 ppm. SPINAL-64 decoupling[56] with a field strength of 84 kHz was used during both the direct
and indirect chemical shift evolution periods in all experiments.
Dipolar Order Parameter Measurements at 30 °C
We used
TMREV recoupling[57] for 1H–15N order parameter measurements. TMREV recoupling
was implemented in a constant time manner with four TMREV elements
per rotor cycle (TMREV-4) as shown in Figure S1A, which required proton radio frequency (RF) field strength of ∼96
kHz (90° pulse duration of 2.6 μs). TPPM[58] decoupling of 96 kHz was used during the remainder of the
echo period. The total echo period was set to 12 rotor cycles.TMREV dipolar order parameter measurements require high RF fields,
and were carried out using a 3.2 mm MAS TL2 (solenoid) HCN Bruker
probe. Because of the sample heating caused by high 1H
RF power applied during the dipolar recoupling/decoupling periods,
our ASR samples were not sufficiently stable at 30 °C on a time
scale of a typical three-dimensional DIPSHIFT experiment (e.g., a
series of NCA/NCO 2D planes measured as a function of the dipolar
dephasing takes about 6–7 days). We therefore conducted two-dimensional
TMREV experiments (e.g., a series of 1D spectra as a function of TMREV
dipolar dephasing takes about 1 h) to probe overall dynamics in the
protein. These measurements were performed at 30 °C and repeated
at 7 °C on a Bruker Avance III 600 MHz spectrometer, at a spinning
rate of 8 kHz.
Longitudinal 15N Relaxation Measurements
at 7 and
30 °C
15N R1 relaxation
rate measurements were carried out using Bruker 3.2 mm MAS Efree triple
resonance probes at two fields corresponding to 1H Larmor
frequencies of 600 and 800 MHz, and at two temperatures of 7 and 30
°C. For each of the fields and temperatures, a series of 2D NCA
and NCO afterglow[59] correlation spectra
were recorded as a function of recovery delays of 1, 5, 10, 20, and
30 s using a pulse sequence shown in Figure S1B. Samples were spun at a MAS rate of 19 kHz to minimize the rate-averaging
effects from 15N–15N proton driven spin
diffusion.[41,42]
15N R1ρ Relaxation
Measurements at 30 °C
15N R1ρ relaxation rate measurements at 30 °C were
performed at 800 MHz 1H Larmor frequency using a Bruker
1.3 mm MAS triple resonance probe, with 15N spin lock of
12 kHz, and at a spinning rate of 55 kHz. A series of 2D NCACB correlation
spectra were recorded as a function of spinlock times of 0.02, 50,
100, 200, and 300 ms using a pulse sequence shown in Figure S1C. TPPM48 decoupling[60] at a power set to approximately a quarter of the spinning frequency
was used in the direct and indirect chemical shift evolution dimensions.
DREAM mixing[61,62] was used to induce 13Cα/13Cβ transfer by
applying a 3.5 ms (pulse length was optimized experimentally) pulse
of a tangential shape centered at 27.5 kHz, with 13C carrier
frequency set at 45 ppm.
Data Analysis
All 2D and 3D chemical shift correlation
spectra were processed with NMRPipe[63] using
Lorentzian-to-Gaussian apodization functions. Peak amplitudes were
extracted using the CARA software.[64] Overlapping
peaks were fit to multiple Gaussian functions and linear deconvolution
was performed to estimate the amplitude of each peak.In all
relaxation experiments, peak amplitudes were fit to a single exponential
decay function, where the fit parameters were the relaxation rate
and an overall amplitude scaling factor.Peak amplitudes extracted
from TMREV experiments were fit to the
theoretical three-spin model of the TMREV dipolar recoupling which
takes into account couplings to the directly bonded and one remote
protons.[57,65] The fit parameters were the dipolar coupling
constant to the directly bonded proton, effective relaxation constant
and an overall amplitude scaling factor. The dipolar order parameters
were determined by comparing the best fit dipolar coupling constant
with the known dipolar coupling constant in the static limit using
1.02 Å N–H bond length.[66]The effects of random noise on the best fit R1, R1ρ, and order parameters
results were assessed with Monte Carlo simulations using an in-house
written program. Gaussian-distributed random noise with a width determined
by the experimental root-mean-square noise was added to the best fit
theoretical signal to produce an array of 5000 simulated signals.
The simulated signals were refit to theoretical models to determine
the distribution of the fit parameters that result from random spectral
noise. Errors are reported at the 95% confidence level.
Results
Spectroscopic
Assignments and Structural Perturbations at 30
°C
We have previously shown that ASR forms stable trimers,[67−69] which arrange into 2D crystalline domains with a characteristic
domain size of ∼50 nm.[69] ASR remains
in a trimeric state at 30 °C (as evident for example, from the
characteristic bilobe CD spectra in the visible range[67]), and this prevents the protein from rapid axial diffusion
in the bilayer. Accordingly, the analysis of the 15N sideband
patterns indicate full strengths of the CSA tensors for these nuclei
(Figure S2).We have previously reported
spectroscopic assignments of ASR at 5 °C (the amino acid sequence,
secondary structure and assignments are summarized in Figure S3),[47,70] and they remain
unchanged at 7 °C. We observed, however, that at a higher temperature
of 30 °C the intensities of cross peaks decrease, and many cross
peaks show small but noticeable shifts. To confidently reassign peaks
and track any possible structural changes, we have carried out three-dimensional
CANCO and NCACX experiments at 30 °C, and were able to reassign
the majority of peaks using chemical shift mapping. Temperature dependent
chemical shift perturbations occur throughout the protein but remain
within 0.9 and 1.5 ppm for carbon atoms (Cα, Cβ, C′) and 15N, respectively (Figure S4). Overall, the changes in chemical
shifts do not correspond to any large changes in secondary structure,
with the extents of helices and local structural deviations from helicity
remaining essentially at the same positions. Specifically, the structure
of the BC loop remains β-hairpin, and the FG loop shows some
β-secondary structure albeit not as well-defined as in the BC
loop.The elevated temperature has much more pronounced effect
on signal
intensities than it does on chemical shifts. The efficiency of 1H/15N and 1H/13C CP excitation
decreases by about 10–15%, whereas the efficiency of 15N/13C CP decreases by ∼20%, overall resulting in
about 40% attenuation of the signal in the CANCO experiment (see Figure S4A). This signal attenuation occurs because
of the overall significant reduction of coherence lifetimes for 1H, 15N, and 13C as evident from the
bulk R1ρ measurements at a spinning
rate of 14.3 kHz. R1ρ relaxation
rates of 1H, 15N, and 13C increase,
respectively, from 133, 27, and 36 s–1 at 7 °C
to 157, 39 to 60 s–1 at 30 °C (see Figure S5).
Conformational Dynamics
of ASR at 7 °C
Our previous
measurements of conformational dynamics of ASR at 7 °C included
dipolar order parameters for 1H–15N, 13C–1H, 15N–13C′ and 15N–13Cα bonds to
probe amplitudes of submicrosecond motions, as well as 15N R1ρ measurements at a spinning
rate of 50 kHz to probe the time scale of slower conformational motions
on the nanosecond-microsecond time scale.[23] The site-specific SCH2 and SNH2 order parameters varied between
0.7 and 0.9 along the protein sequence, and were generally consistent
with the rigid backbone (e.g., subjected to submicrosecond motions
of small amplitudes) for both TM and loop regions. The 15N R1ρ relaxation rates values indicated
the presence of slower motions for the extracellular BC and FG loops,
and suggested that slow motions can also contribute to the R1ρ relaxation of the TM backbone. However,
the limited scope of experimental data precluded us from accurately
quantifying the extent of slow motions, whereas the effect of fast
motions was completely neglected. Here, we conducted additional measurements
of 15N R1 relaxation rates
which report on the motions occurring on the fast picosecond to nanosecond
time scale, and combine the order parameters, R1 and R1ρ rates to model
the motions.The general trends in relaxation discussed below
can be qualitatively rationalized in a framework of the Simple Model
Free (SMF) model. We use the theoretical description for R1 and R1ρ derived by
Kurbanov et al.,[71] in which an 15N spin relaxes due to its chemical shift anisotropy, and due to the
through-space couping to a single proton 1H under magic
angle spinning conditions. These expressions for R1ρ are generally accurate for most time scales except
when the correlation time approaches the time scale defined by the
inverse of the rotor fequency. In the latter case, the theoretical
expression below result in somewhat overestimated R1ρ values compared to the exact numerical simulations.[13] These deviations are negligible for the time
scales estimated for ASR.[13,19] We therefore use the
expressions below without any corrections:Here R1CSA and R1NH are contributions
to the longitudinal relaxation rates resulting from the anisotropic
chemical shift and dipolar coupling, and R1ρCSA and R1ρNH are the CSA and dipolar contributions to the R1ρ relaxation. We approximate the CSA tensor as
axially symmetric, and these contributions can be written asHere, ω1 is the spinlock
field amplitude expressed in rad/s (small off-resonance effects are
neglected), ω/2π is the spinning
frequency, and ωH and ωN are the
Larmor frequencies of 1H and 15N, respectively;
δCSA is the reduced chemical shift anisotropy (−109
ppm) for backbone amide15N,[72] and δNH is the dipolar coupling constant of 11.478
kHz for the 15N–1H spin pair corresponding
to the N–H bond length of 1.02 Å. Systematic errors related
to small site-specific variation in 15N chemical shift
anisotropy were found to result in small R1/R1ρ variations,[73] which are well within the confidence intervals.In
the SMF approach, the motions are modeled as isotropic using
a single time scale and order parameter. Assuming exponential autocorrelation
function, the spectral density can be written as[74,75]where SNH2 is the order
parameter that
was determined experimentally using DIPSHIFT spectroscopy,[23] and τ is the effective correlation time. R1 and R1ρ relaxation rates calculated
according to eq –7 as a function of motional correlation time and field
strength for a typical SNH2 of 0.9 are shown in Figure A. Similar expression (with
the dipolar order parameter replaced by the CSA order parameter) was
used to calculate curves in Figure B for deprotonated moieties.
Figure 1
15N R1 and R1ρ theoretical
curves calculated using Simple Model
Free approach (eqs –7) as a function of correlation time at two fields
corresponding to 1H Larmor frequencies of 800 and 600 MHz
for a typical SNH2 order parameter of 0.9. (A) R1 and R1ρ are calculated
for 15N–1H moieties and taking into account 15N chemical shift anisotropy. In this case, dipolar interaction
is the dominant relaxation mechanism. (B) R1 and R1ρ are calculated for deprotonated
moieties (e.g., prolines) taking into account only 15N
chemical shift anisotropy, using eq for the spectral density function, and assuming the
same order parameter SCSA2 of 0.9. Note that the field dependent
region of the R1 is shifted toward the
faster time scales.
15N R1 and R1ρ theoretical
curves calculated using Simple Model
Free approach (eqs –7) as a function of correlation time at two fields
corresponding to 1H Larmor frequencies of 800 and 600 MHz
for a typical SNH2 order parameter of 0.9. (A) R1 and R1ρ are calculated
for 15N–1H moieties and taking into account 15N chemical shift anisotropy. In this case, dipolar interaction
is the dominant relaxation mechanism. (B) R1 and R1ρ are calculated for deprotonated
moieties (e.g., prolines) taking into account only 15N
chemical shift anisotropy, using eq for the spectral density function, and assuming the
same order parameter SCSA2 of 0.9. Note that the field dependent
region of the R1 is shifted toward the
faster time scales.First, we anticipate
that significant nanosecond motions will result
in the field-dependent dipolar-driven longitudinal relaxation for
nonproline residues, with faster relaxation at a lower field. No such
dependence is expected to result from fast picosecond motions (Figure A). Second, we anticipate
different trend for prolines, whose 15N amide relaxation
is primarily governed by the CSA effects. In this case, strong field
dependence is anticipated from motions on a time scale shorter than
∼10 ns, whereas motions in the slower regime (>10 ns) would
be field-independent (Figure B).It was pointed out before that proton driven spin
diffusion can
lead to averaging of the 15N longitudinal nuclear relaxation
rates at slow to moderate spinning rates. To minimize these effects,
the 15N R1 measurements were
carried out at a spinning rate of 19 kHz.[42]R1’s were measured at two field
strengths of 600 and 800 MHz in two samples of 1,3-ASR and 2-ASR.
101 and 108 cross peaks could be cumulatively resolved in the 2D spectra
at 600 and 800 MHz field strengths, respectively. Typical relaxation
trajectories are shown in Figure A–C.
Figure 2
15N R1 and R1ρ relaxation measurements
and the corresponding
best fits at 600 and 800 MHz and at two temperatures of 7 and 30 °C.
Solid circles represent experimental point whereas solid lines are
best fit simulations. (A) R1 relaxation
trajectories for D75 in helix C, and for E62 and A64 of the BC loop.
(B) R1 trajectories for S158 in the EF
loop and A71 in helix C as a function of the magnetic field. (C) R1 relaxation trajectories for residues V112
in helix C and E62 in the BC loop measured at two temperatures. (D) R1ρ relaxation trajectories for residues
A13 in helix A and A64 in the BC loop measured at two temperatures.
15N R1 and R1ρ relaxation measurements
and the corresponding
best fits at 600 and 800 MHz and at two temperatures of 7 and 30 °C.
Solid circles represent experimental point whereas solid lines are
best fit simulations. (A) R1 relaxation
trajectories for D75 in helix C, and for E62 and A64 of the BC loop.
(B) R1 trajectories for S158 in the EF
loop and A71 in helix C as a function of the magnetic field. (C) R1 relaxation trajectories for residues V112
in helix C and E62 in the BC loop measured at two temperatures. (D) R1ρ relaxation trajectories for residues
A13 in helix A and A64 in the BC loop measured at two temperatures.In Figure A,B we
show site-specific 15N R1 values
of ASR measured at two different fields corresponding to 1H Larmor frequencies of 600 and 800 MHz, and R1ρ values which were measured at 800 MHz. These values
are also summarized in Table S2. The extracted R1 values share common features at both fields.
First, they vary significantly between the transmembrane and exposed
regions. Typical average values calculated for each of the seven helices
are in the range of 0.010–0.015 s–1 indicating
a rigid TM protein backbone with limited motions. These values are
considerably smaller than those reported for the rigid backbone of
microcrystalline GB1 under similar conditions,[34] suggesting that motions in the TM domain of ASR are more
restricted, which could be due to the different environment of helices
in tightly coupled ASR trimers, which are packed into a hexagonal
lattice.[68]
Figure 3
(A) Site-specific R1 relaxation rates
on 600 and 800 MHz spectrometers at 7 °C. R1 rates of nonprolyl residues are shown on the main graph,
whereas R1’s of prolines are shown
separately as an inset. (B) Site-specific R1ρ relaxation rates determined at 7 °C, using 15N lock
field of 12 kHz at a spinning rate of 50 kHz. Reprinted with permission
from D. Good, et al. J. Am. Chem. Soc.2014, 136, 2833. Copyright 2014, American Chemical Society.
(C) A comparison of cross peak intensities in the 2D NCA and 3D NCACX
experiments on ASR incubated in H2O (gray) and D2O (red) buffers. NCA and NCACX experiments were recorded with short
HN CP excitation of 300 μs to ensure that the cross peaks primarily
originate from amide protons. Additional details can be found in refs (47, 68).
(A) Site-specific R1 relaxation rates
on 600 and 800 MHz spectrometers at 7 °C. R1 rates of nonprolyl residues are shown on the main graph,
whereas R1’s of prolines are shown
separately as an inset. (B) Site-specific R1ρ relaxation rates determined at 7 °C, using 15N lock
field of 12 kHz at a spinning rate of 50 kHz. Reprinted with permission
from D. Good, et al. J. Am. Chem. Soc.2014, 136, 2833. Copyright 2014, American Chemical Society.
(C) A comparison of cross peak intensities in the 2D NCA and 3D NCACX
experiments on ASR incubated in H2O (gray) and D2O (red) buffers. NCA and NCACX experiments were recorded with short
HN CP excitation of 300 μs to ensure that the cross peaks primarily
originate from amide protons. Additional details can be found in refs (47, 68).Second, the R1 values in the
central
portions of TM helices are similar at 600 MHz and at 800 MHz, indicating
that the rates are dominated by fast motions in the picosecond range.
In this case picosecond motions account for the majority of the measured
dipolar order parameters, and any nanosecond motions if present, are
likely characterized by small amplitudes. In contrast, the R1 values in the loop regions show some field
dependence, and are generally higher at the lower 600 MHz field strength,
suggesting, according to the SMF predictions (Figure A), that slower nanosecond motions contribute
significantly to the longitudinal relaxation in loops.Third, R1 rates are consistently higher
toward the water exposed ends of helices and in the loop regions,
varying at 600 MHz from 0.019 s–1 for the cytoplasmic
CD loop (residues 91–100), to 0.030 s–1 for
the short extracellular DE loop (residues 121–124), to 0.039
s–1 for the extracellular beta-hairpin in the BC
loop (residues 56–70) (Table S3).
This enhancement of relaxation rates shows good correlation with the
hydrogen/deuterium (H/D) exchange data which were presented by us
previously,[47,68] and are shown in Figure C. The reduction of cross peak
intensities in the H/D exchange experiments occurs because amide protons
are replaced with deuterons, and is primarily observed for the loop
regions and exposed flanks of helices. This enhanced exchangeability
is associated with solvent accessibility (e.g., exposure of the loops
or transient local structural opening of the protein core), and in
addition requires the breakage of hydrogen bonds.[2,8] The
latter event is likely to be correlated with enhanced local mobility
of the NH bonds.This expected increase in fast local mobility
is accompanied by
the increase of nanosecond motions amplitude, as evident from the
elevated 15N R1ρ relaxation
rates (representative relaxation trajectories are shown in Figure D) which are sensitive
to slower motions on the nanosecond to microsecond time scale (data
available only for the BC and FG loops and for residues in the flanks
of helices A and F, see Figure B), as well as from the apparent dependence of the R1 rates on the magnetic field, with generally
greater rates at a lower field as expected for residues with contributions
from slower motions (Figure A, Table S2).Interestingly,
a different trend in the R1 field dependence
is observed for prolines (Figure A, inset) whose 15N relaxation is dominated
by the 15NCSA. Elevated R1’s with pronounced field dependence
(greater values at the higher field of 800 MHz) are observed for P29,
P33, P149 in the loop regions indicating the presence of fast motions
(τc < 10 ns). Similar trend was previously observed
for the R1 relaxation rates of the carbonyl
atoms in GB1.[34]R1 of P187 in the FG loop is high and field-independent, suggesting
that the slow motion is much more pronounced for this loop. Finally, R1 rates of the TM prolines P44, P81 and P180
are very small, which is consistent with motions of small amplitudes,
whereas the field dependence cannot be stated because of the large
experimental uncertainty.In summary, qualitative analysis of R1 and R1ρ relaxation
rates provides
evidence of both slow nanosecond and fast picosecond time scale motions:
elevated R1 values and the field dependence
of the proline R1’s in the loop
regions suggest the presence of fast picosecond motions, whereas elevated R1ρ rates and the field dependence of R1 relaxation rates of nonproline residues in
the loops suggest contributions of slower nanosecond motions. In contrast,
lower relaxation R1 and R1ρ rates and lack of field dependence for both proline
and nonproline residues in the TM helices indicate that the amplitudes
of slow nanosecond motions are small in TM regions.
Dynamics at
30 °C
To gain further insights into
ASR dynamics and solidify our preliminary conclusions regarding the
presence of the nanosecond motions, we now proceed to the discussion
of temperature dependence of relaxation rates. In Figure C,D we show representative R1 and R1ρ relaxation
trajectories at 7 and 30 °C, and in Figures , S9 we compare
site-specific R1 and R1ρ rates at the two temperatures. Representative
NMR spectra are shown in Figure S8.
Figure 4
Backbone 15N R1 (A) and R1ρ (B) relaxation rates measured on a
800 MHz spectrometer, and at 7 °C (red squares) and 30 °C
(black circles). R1 relaxation rates for
prolines are shown in the inset of panel A.
Backbone 15N R1 (A) and R1ρ (B) relaxation rates measured on a
800 MHz spectrometer, and at 7 °C (red squares) and 30 °C
(black circles). R1 relaxation rates for
prolines are shown in the inset of panel A.At higher temperatures relaxation rates can be affected by
both
changes in the order parameters, as well as by the changes in the
time scale of motions. We first investigated the change in the order
parameters using TMREV dipolar recoupling. Because of the power limitations
of the 3.2 mm Bruker Efree probe, TMREV measurements had to be carried
out on a TL2 solenoid probe. Our attempts to record site-specific
TMREV data at 30 °C using NCA/NCO spectroscopies were unsuccessful
due to significantly reduced lifetime of samples at the elevated temperature
and under high power RF irradiation (measurements on two ASR samples
were attempted, and both resulted in sample degradation).To
evaluate the general trend of the order parameter changes as
a function of temperature, we used 1D 15N detected and 13Cα-detected (e.g., TMREV dephasing followed by an 15N/13Cα polarization transfer) 15N–1H dipolar recoupling TMREV measurements at 7
°C and at 30 °C. We observed similar TMREV dephasing for
the bulk signals at 7 and 30 °C (Figure S7, Table S1), which suggests only small changes in motional amplitudes.
Additional discussion is given in the Supporting Information.Although similar bulk TMREV behavior at
7 and 30 °C cannot
serve as hard evidence that the site-specific amplitudes of motions
do not change as a function of temperature, it does suggest that the
main effect of temperature on the motions is through changes in the
time scale of motions as expected from the Arrhenius relation:Here, τ(303 K) and τ(280
K) are the correlation
times at 30 °C (303 K) and 7 °C (280 K), respectively, E is the activation energy,
and R is the universal gas constant. According to eq , we thus expect that correlation
times would become shorter at higher temperatures. Whereas the reduction
of both the nanosecond and picosecond correlation times would result
in a decrease of R1ρ rates (Figure ), the behavior of R1 is expected to be dependent on the motional
regime: if picosecond time scale motion dominates the R1 relaxation pathway, a shorter correlation time would
result in a decrease of R1. To the contrary,
for residues with relaxation dominated by slower nanosecond motions
with correlation times beyond the T1 minimum
(e.g., correlation times on the order of 10 ns or longer in Figure A), shortening of
the correlation time would cause an increase of R1.We observe a small decrease of R1 rates
at higher temperature in the middle portions of TM helices (e.g.,
for helices C, D and F) (Figures , S9). In contrast, R1 rates increase significantly with temperature
in the cytoplasmic ends of helices A, B, C, D and F, and in most interhelical
loops, suggesting an increased contribution from slower motions. This
is further supported by the observed decrease of R1ρ rates, especially pronounced for the BC and FG
loops (Figures , S9). The short CD loop (see Table S4), is the only exception from this trend, and this
may be due to it being more sterically constrained.There are
a small number of residues in both the TM helical regions
and in the interhelical loop regions which do not follow these general
trends. The most likely reasons for this to occur are related to either
a large uncertainty in the experimental data or the presence of additional
slower (e.g., microsecond) time scale motions, which are not present
at 7 °C, but get activated at the higher temperature. For example,
such activation processes may be related to changes in the state of
lipids, since the DMPClipid phase transition temperature is 24 °C.
Modeling of Relaxation Rates Using Simple Model Free Approach
For SMF analysis we only consider residues for which at least five
out of the six measurements summarized in Table are available (41 residues only, primarily
due to the signal-to-noise limitations of the 13C-detection
in a small 1.3 mm rotor[76]). We assume that
the order parameters Seff2 remain the same at 7 and 30 °C,
and that the correlation times at 7 and 30 °C are related through
the Arrhenius relation of eq . By minimizing the χ2 (eq S1, Supporting Information) we simultaneously fit
the order parameter Seff2, correlation time τ and activation energy E for each residue.In evaluating whether
the SMF model can satisfactorily explain the observed data, we used
the following two criteria: first, back-calculated best fit values
should agree with the experimentally measured values (i.e., the reduced
χ2 value corresponding to the root mean squared difference
between back-calculated and experimental values should be close to
or less than 1); second, the predicted time scale should be consistent
within a given secondary structure element (i.e., TM helices or BC
and FG loops), as inconsistent results among neighboring residues
that experience a similar physical environment are likely an indication
of multiple motional time scales which cannot be accounted for accurately
by the SMF.In Figures A–C, S11 we show experimental
and back-calculated
relaxation rates and order parameters, whereas the dominant time scales
extracted from Monte Carlo simulations are shown in Figure D. Details of the Monte Carlo
fitting procedure is given in the Supporting Information with typical representative histograms of the Monte Carlo fits shown
in Figure S10. Overall, the back calculated
relaxation rates and the order parameters do not precisely reproduce
the observed experimental data for residues located in the transmembrane
regions of the protein with reduced χ2 values (Table S6, Figure S12) for most residues being
greater than 5. The large values of the reduced χ2 reflect the fact that the experimental data are not well described
by the SMF with a single motion, and that the backbone amides undergo
motions on two or more time scales; the SMF fit returns the time scale
which most significantly contributes to the experimental data.
Figure 5
Simple Model
Free fit results showing back calculated 15N R1, R1ρ and SNH2 order parameter
vs experimentally measured R1 at 800 MHz
(A), R1ρ at 800 MHz (B), and the SNH2 order parameters (C). Best fit correlation
times (D) are shown with uncertainties determined from Monte Carlo
fitting analysis. For residues with two possible solutions on two
distinct time scales, the best fit solution is shown as black circles,
and the second best fit result is shown in gray. The second best fit
solution is only shown if its population is greater than 10% of the
total number of Monte Carlo fits performed.
Simple Model
Free fit results showing back calculated 15N R1, R1ρ and SNH2 order parameter
vs experimentally measured R1 at 800 MHz
(A), R1ρ at 800 MHz (B), and the SNH2 order parameters (C). Best fit correlation
times (D) are shown with uncertainties determined from Monte Carlo
fitting analysis. For residues with two possible solutions on two
distinct time scales, the best fit solution is shown as black circles,
and the second best fit result is shown in gray. The second best fit
solution is only shown if its population is greater than 10% of the
total number of Monte Carlo fits performed.The best fit time scales for the TM regions are in the 10
to 100
ps regime for all but seven intrahelical residues, E36, I56, A91,
I146, N148, G178 and G212. Four of them (E36, A91, I146, N148) are
located on the cytoplasmic sides of helices B, C, E. The best fit
time scales for these residues are in the 10 to 100 ns regime, which
is in agreement with the observed field- and temperature dependencies
of the R1 and R1ρ relaxation rates discussed
above (Figures and 4). I56 is on the extracellular edge of helix B near
the structured BC loop region, and may be affected by the slower motion
of that loop. Residues G178 and G212 are near the retinal binding
pocket in the center of helices F and G, respectively. Their best
fit time scales are in the 10 to 100 ns range, and may reflect the
presence of complicated motional processes occurring on multiple time
scales.Relaxation rates and order parameters for most residues
in the
BC loop (I56–H69) are best fit with the 10 to 100 ns time scale
motions, with the exception of residues E62 and A63 which are best
fit by motions in the 10 to 100 ps regime (Tables S5–S6, Figure ). The FG loop (I185–N194) is the only region where
the SMF fit gives reasonable results with reduced χ2 in the range of 0.3 to 2.8 (Table S6, Figure ) with the dominant
time scale in the 10 to 100 ns regime, which is consistent with the
previously discussed R1 and R1ρ field- and temperature dependent trends (Figures , 4; Figure S9 for I185 and G189 representative
Monte Carlo histograms).
Modeling of Relaxation Rates Using a Local-Collective
Extended
Model Free Approach
High reduced χ2 values
and inconsistent time scales obtained using SMF fit for residues located
within the same structurally defined elements suggest that one needs
to consider more than one motional degree of freedom in order to correctly
interpret the experimental data. Consequently, we resorted to a version
of Extended Model Free (EMF) approach,[77,78] in which the
spectral density function J(ω) is modeled assuming
the presence of fast and slow motions. In contrast to the typical
implementation where both fast and slow motions are considered to
be local,[39] we assume the fast component
to be local and the slow component to correspond to collective motions
extending over an entire secondary structure element:Each motion is characterized by its
own order parameter and the time scale: τ and τ correlation
times describe slow and fast time scales, respectively, whereas S2 and S2 are order
parameters describing the amplitudes of slow and fast motions, respectively.
The S2 and S2 order parameters
are related to the experimentally determined effective order parameter
as SNH2 = S2S2.Among the considered secondary structure elements we include
seven
helices which are stabilized by intrahelical hydrogen bonds, as well
as the BC and FG loops (Table S8). The
BC loop is partially structured and contains an antiparallel beta-hairpin
formed by two short beta strands involving residues V61-E62-A63 and
Q66-I67-A68.[47,68] We expect that the slower time
scale would correspond to a collective motion of this loop (discussed
in the following). The FG loop, although not as well structurally
defined as the BC loop, contains some beta structure acording to the
CSI analysis, whereas the presence of a few nonexchangeble amides
of G186, G189, G191, W192, I193 suggests strong stabilizing hydrogen
bonds within the loop (Figure C).[47,68]Elevated 15N R1ρ rates
for residues in the BC and FG loops provide a direct evidence for
slow nanosecond to microsecond motions. Motions of other loops appear
to also have a slow nanosecond component, as evident from the dependence
of R1 rates on the magnetic field strength
(Figure ), but they
are less correlated between neighboring residues because of the lack
of defined secondary structure. Thus, we do not apply the collective
motion approximation to these loops, and exclude them from the EMF
analysis.Within each of the nine considered elements each residue
was assigned
the same slow time scale, order parameter and activation energy characterizing
the common collective motion of the element, whereas the time scale,
order parameter and activation energy characterizing the fast motions
were
kept residue-specific. The use of a common order parameter for a fragment
implies that this fragment undergoes isotropic motion. In the case
of a TM helix, this isotropic motion can be pictured as a combination
of rotations about the helical axis and a random wobbling motion of
the enitre helix. We note that because of the steric interhelical
restraints anisotropic collecitve motions appear to be more likely.
Such a possibility is explicitely taken into account in the 3D Gaussian
Axian Fluctuation[46] simulation discussed
below.In our EMF fit we only consider data from residues for
which all
six experimentally measured parameters defined in Table are available. We fit all parameters
by minimizing reduced χ2 defined in eq S6 using a
proceedure detailed in the Supporting Information.In general this model provides a better fit of the experimental
data in the TM helical regions with an average reduced χ2 ranging from 1.7 to 6.3 (Table S8). There is good agreement between the experimentally measured and
back-calculated relaxation rates and dipolar order parameters for
TM helices, as shown in Figures , S14, thus suggesting that
the collective motion approximation is justified for the TM regions.
Local fast motions occur on the 10–100 ps time scales for the
majority of residues, have consistently lower corresponding order
parameters (larger amplitudes) (Figure E, Tables S9–S10),
and mostly higher activation energies (Tables S9–S10).
Figure 6
Local-collective Extended Model Free (EMF) fit results
showing
back calculated 15N R1, R1ρ and order parameter vs experimentally
measured R1 at 800 MHz (A), R1ρ at 800 MHz (B), and 15N–1H dipolar order parameters (C). Best fit local and collective
motion correlation times (D) and order parameters (E) are shown with
error bars determined from Monte Carlo fitting analysis (see Figure S13 for representative histograms).
Local-collective Extended Model Free (EMF) fit results
showing
back calculated 15N R1, R1ρ and order parameter vs experimentally
measured R1 at 800 MHz (A), R1ρ at 800 MHz (B), and 15N–1H dipolar order parameters (C). Best fit local and collective
motion correlation times (D) and order parameters (E) are shown with
error bars determined from Monte Carlo fitting analysis (see Figure S13 for representative histograms).Whereas these motions make the
dominant contributions to the back-calculated R1 and SNH2 values, the slower motional
components (tens to hundreds of nanoseconds) of small amplitudes are
required to adequately explain the relaxation and order parameter
data for all seven helices (S2 order parameters
vary from 0.984 ± 0.007 for helix A to 0.995 ± 0.002 for
helix C, Tables S9–S10). These order
parameters correspond to small amplitudes of collective motions. However,
we can not rule out a possibility of large structural rearragements
between a highly populated state and a lowly populated state, as was
shown by Zinkevich et al.[39]While
better reduced χ2 of 4 is obtained for the
BC loop, the collective slow motion approximation does not provide
good quality fits for two residues A64 and G65 (Figure B), one of which, A64, represents the unstructured
β-hairpin turn in the BC loop, suggesting that the rigid approximation
is not entirely valid, and either additional motional degrees of freedom
are present, or that the motion is anisotropic. Similarly, while an
overall better fit is obtained for the FG loop (reduced χ2 of 3.3, Table S8) the R1ρ relaxation rate for residue I185 is
not reproduced by our model (Figure B).
Modeling of Relaxation Rates Using a Local-Collective
Model
Free-3D GAF Approach
As shown above, the modified EMF formalism
with the slow motions modeled as isotropic collective motions of ordered
domains, provides a better description of the data compared to the
SMF formalism. In this last section, we consider whether an inclusion
of anisotropy of slow motions is necessary to adequately model the
data.[46,79]To include the effects of anisotropy
of the slow collective motions we make a simple change to the modified
EMF. We keep the isotropic order parameter for the fast motions, S2, but replace the isotropic order parameter S2 with a 3D Gaussian Axial Fluctuations variant S2, which parametrizes the slow collective
motion as Gaussian fluctuations against three orthogonal axes α,
β and γ:Here, Y2 are the second
spherical harmonics, eμ = (θμ,φμ) and eν = (θν,φν) are the spherical coordinates of interactions
μ and ν in the 3D GAF motion reference frame rigidly attached
to molecular fragment (for autorelaxation μ = ν, and in
our case these are the coordinates of the NH vector), are the reduced Wigner matrix
elements,
and σα, σβ and σγ are amplitudes of fluctuations/rotations (expressed
in radians) against the three respective axes of motion.For
the analysis we consider the same secondary structure fragments
as in the local-collective EMF treatment. Since the orientation of
the 3D GAF motion reference frame is not known a priori, we express
the initial coordinates of NH vectors in the molecular frame and treat
the two angles defining the orientation of the motional frame as fit
parameters. Other than the modifications to the form of the spectral
density the fitting procedure remains the same as for the local-collective
EMF. We use the same data set as we did for the local-collective EMF,
which gives enough data points to perform local-collective Model Free-3D
GAF (MF-3D GAF) fit for helices B, C, D and F and for the BC loop.As expected for a model containing more fit parameters the χ2 is generally lower for the MF-3D GAF. In order to establish
whether the improvement of the fit is statistically significant, we
utilize Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC), which can be
used for comparison of the non-nested models. In addition, since AIC
is valid for infinite samples size, we also calculate Bayesian Information
Criterion (BIC) and AIC with correction for the finate sample sizes
(AICc), which contain progressively larger penatly for the finate
sample size (see Supporting Information, eqs S3–S5).Overall, based on AIC, including anisotropy
of slow motion results
in statistically significant improvement of the fit for helices B
and D, and for the BC loop. Based on BIC, which contains a larger
penalty for the finate sample size, lower χ2 from
anisotropic model is statistically significant for helix D and for
the BC loop. For helices C and F the improvement in fit is not statistically
significant compared to the isotropic model of motion. On the basis
of AICc the local-collective MF-3DGAF fit is not statistically significant
for any of the secondary structure elements, which is not really surprising
considering that AICc have the largest penalty for finate sample size
and the number of available data points is rather low.In order
to fit other secondary elements we have also included
previously published NCO dipolar order parameters[23] as restraints. With this additional data the AIC criterion
suggests that the improvement from including anisotropy of slow motion
is statistically significant for helix A, but not for the FG loop.
The slow anisotropic motions obtained as a result of fitting the data
to MF-3DGAF are summarized in Figure for one of the monomers. Note that the motions are
the same for all the monomers and the motional axes in different monomers
are related by the C3 symmetry.
Figure 7
Amplitudes and time scales of anisotropic
slow collective motions
obtained from local-collective Model Free-3D GAF (MF-3DGAF) analysis
of 15N R1, R1ρ and NH order parameters, as well as NCO order
parameters published previously.[23] Approximate
rotations against different axes are indicated in a font of the same
color. Time scales are indicated in yellow. Motions are illustrated
for only one of the three monomers with the motions in the other monomers
being related by C3 symmetry. The origins of the frames of reference
for the motions are arbitrary.
Amplitudes and time scales of anisotropic
slow collective motions
obtained from local-collective Model Free-3D GAF (MF-3DGAF) analysis
of 15N R1, R1ρ and NH order parameters, as well as NCO order
parameters published previously.[23] Approximate
rotations against different axes are indicated in a font of the same
color. Time scales are indicated in yellow. Motions are illustrated
for only one of the three monomers with the motions in the other monomers
being related by C3 symmetry. The origins of the frames of reference
for the motions are arbitrary.As expected, the amplitudes of the slow anisotropic motions
are
smaller compared to our previously published analysis[23] which explicitly neglected contribution from the fast motions.
On the other hand, the directions of the anisotropic collective motions
from the MF-3D GAF in the current analysis are similar to the ones
from 3D GAF analysis in the previous study. The only exception is
helix D where the overall motion is detected as a rotation around
an axis appromixately perpendicular to the long axis of helix. Since
the amide vectors are approximately aligned with the long axis of
helix, the direction of the axis of rotation can not be determined
precisely without additional data such as, for example, 13C relaxation rates.[15]
Conclusions
In summary, we used solid-state NMR relaxation and dipolar coupling
measurements to characterize internal dynamics of a seven-helical
membrane protein Anabaena Sensory Rhodopsin. We showed that at least
two motional processes occurring on the picosecond and nanosecond
time scales are required in order to correctly interpret the field-
and temperature-dependent relaxation behavior. The relative contributions
of these motional processes to the overall dynamics vary between the
buried TM and solvent exposed regions of the receptor.The inclusion
of longitudinal relaxation rates into data analysis
allowed estimating the fast local dynamics which contribute significantly
to nuclear spin relaxation within TM helices (local order parameters S2 range between 0.89 and 0.99). The refined
time scales and order parameters for the slower nanosecond collective
motions appear to be slower and more restrticted than what had been
estimated by us earlier[23] (refined collective
motion order parameter S2 is greater than
0.98 on a time scale of hundreds of nanoseconds). Such limited collective
dynamics can be attributed to the tightly packed and highly constrained
(2D crystalline) transmembrane environment.In contrast, nanosecond
motions (∼100 ns) of two extracellular
BC and FG loops are much less restricted (S2 of ∼0.95 and 0.94, respectively), with their amplitudes approaching
the amplitudes of fast local motions (S2 ranging between 0.84 and 0.97, ∼10 ps time scale). The collective
motions contribute significantly to the R1ρ rates and accordingly, the time scales of the slower motional components
are in agreement with our previous estimates.[23]The inclusion of anisotropy of motion for the collective motions
of ordered elements leads to statistically significant improvement
of fit for helices A, B, C, D and the BC loop. The extracted directions
of motions are generally consistent with the general directions of
motions for secondary structure elements obtained from the Normal
Mode Analysis of ASR trimer (Figure S15). Interestingly, the collective motion of the BC loop modulates
the size of the extracellular opening for the “channel”
in the center of the ASR trimer, and in this context, is reminiscent
of a motion of a camera shutter. We note, however, that the role of
the opening in the center of the ASR trimer is not known, nor does
it play functional role in a structurally similar trimer formed by
bacteriorhodopsin.Although there was no sufficient R1ρ data to draw quantitative conclusions
about the dynamics of the
cytoplasmic side of ASR, qualitative analysis of the temperature dependence
of the longitudinal R1 rates indicate
that the amplitudes of slower nanosecond motions increase toward the
cytoplasmic ends of helices and in cytoplasmic loops. ASR interacts
with its soluble transducer
(ASRT) in the dark.[45,80] In the process of its function,
ASR undergoes a series of conformational changes, including between
the ASRT-bound and unbound states.[80] The
cytoplasmic interface of ASR is likely involved in the interaction
with the soluble cytoplasmic transducer. An increased plasticity of
the cytoplasmic sides of helices and loops may play role in the mechanism
of structural transition between ASRT-bound and unbound states.Among microbial rhodopsins, bacteriorhodopsin (BR) is one of the
best-characterized homologues of ASR. Neutron diffraction studies
of site-specifically deuterated BR demonstrated that the extracellular
sides of BR helices are more rigid than the rest of the protein,[81] whereas MD simulations specifically showed that
the distributions of atomic coordinates on the extracellular side
are more localized than those on the cytoplasmic side.[82] This apparent plasticity of the cytoplasmic
face of BR was proposed to facilitate photoexcited transition to the
Mo intermediate state, which has more open conformation
on the intracellular side. An increased plasticity of the cytoplasmic
side of ASR may play similar role and be related to the transition
to the active M-intermediate state responsible for the release of
the cytoplasmic transducer upon photoactivation.
Authors: Józef R Lewandowski; Julien Sein; Hans Jürgen Sass; Stephan Grzesiek; Martin Blackledge; Lyndon Emsley Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2010-06-23 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Benjamin J Wylie; Lindsay J Sperling; Heather L Frericks; Gautam J Shah; W Trent Franks; Chad M Rienstra Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2007-04-11 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: K Wood; S Grudinin; B Kessler; M Weik; M Johnson; G R Kneller; D Oesterhelt; G Zaccai Journal: J Mol Biol Date: 2008-05-11 Impact factor: 5.469
Authors: Carl Öster; Kitty Hendriks; Wojciech Kopec; Veniamin Chevelkov; Chaowei Shi; Dagmar Michl; Sascha Lange; Han Sun; Bert L de Groot; Adam Lange Journal: Sci Adv Date: 2019-07-31 Impact factor: 14.136
Authors: Carl Öster; Kumar Tekwani Movellan; Benjamin Goold; Kitty Hendriks; Sascha Lange; Stefan Becker; Bert L de Groot; Wojciech Kopec; Loren B Andreas; Adam Lange Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2022-02-24 Impact factor: 15.419