The absence of high-resolution structures of amyloid oligomers constitutes a major gap in our understanding of amyloid diseases. A growing body of evidence indicates that oligomers of the β-amyloid peptide Aβ are especially important in the progression of Alzheimer's disease. In many Aβ oligomers, the Aβ monomer components are thought to adopt a β-hairpin conformation. This paper describes the design and study of a macrocyclic β-hairpin peptide derived from Aβ16-36. Sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and size exclusion chromatography studies show that the Aβ16-36 β-hairpin peptide assembles in solution to form hexamers, trimers, and dimers. X-ray crystallography reveals that the peptide assembles to form a hexamer in the crystal state and that the hexamer is composed of dimers and trimers. Lactate dehydrogenase release assays show that the oligomers formed by the Aβ16-36 β-hairpin peptide are toxic toward neuronally derived SH-SY5Y cells. Replica-exchange molecular dynamics demonstrates that the hexamer can accommodate full-length Aβ. These findings expand our understanding of the structure, solution-phase behavior, and biological activity of Aβ oligomers and may offer insights into the molecular basis of Alzheimer's disease.
The absence of high-resolution structures of amyloid oligomers constitutes a major gap in our understanding of amyloid diseases. A growing body of evidence indicates that oligomers of the β-amyloid peptide Aβ are especially important in the progression of Alzheimer's disease. In many Aβ oligomers, the Aβ monomer components are thought to adopt a β-hairpin conformation. This paper describes the design and study of a macrocyclic β-hairpin peptide derived from Aβ16-36. Sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and size exclusion chromatography studies show that the Aβ16-36 β-hairpin peptide assembles in solution to form hexamers, trimers, and dimers. X-ray crystallography reveals that the peptide assembles to form a hexamer in the crystal state and that the hexamer is composed of dimers and trimers. Lactate dehydrogenase release assays show that the oligomers formed by the Aβ16-36 β-hairpin peptide are toxic toward neuronally derived SH-SY5Y cells. Replica-exchange molecular dynamics demonstrates that the hexamer can accommodate full-length Aβ. These findings expand our understanding of the structure, solution-phase behavior, and biological activity of Aβ oligomers and may offer insights into the molecular basis of Alzheimer's disease.
Elucidating the structures of
oligomers formed by amyloidogenic peptides and proteins represents
a frontier in structural biology and constitutes a major challenge
in understanding the molecular basis of amyloid diseases. The heterogeneity
and metastability of amyloid oligomers hinder the isolation of homogeneous
amyloid oligomers that are suitable for structural elucidation by
nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy and X-ray crystallography.
More than 30 different amyloidogenic peptides and proteins have been
identified, yet only a few high-resolution structures have shed light
on amyloid oligomers thus far.X-ray crystallographic studies
of fragments of amyloidogenic peptides
and proteins have provided insights into the structures of amyloid
oligomers.[1−4] Eisenberg and co-workers determined the X-ray crystallographic structure
of a β-barrel-like oligomer, termed a cylindrin, formed by an
11-residue peptide fragment from αB crystallin.[1] The cylindrin oligomer is composed of six β-strands
that form a twisted antiparallel β-sheet that closes back on
itself to form a cylinder. Surewicz and co-workers determined the
X-ray crystallographic structure of a hexameric oligomer formed by
a disulfide-stabilized β-sheet fragment from humanprion protein
(hPrP).[2] The hPrP oligomer is composed
of three four-stranded antiparallel β-sheets that pack to form
a hydrophobic core. Our laboratory determined the X-ray crystallographic
structure of a tetramer formed by a macrocyclic peptide containing
a nine-residue fragment from β-amyloid peptide Aβ.[4] Although the peptide fragments in these three
different studies vary in sequence, the three structures share common
features of being discrete oligomers composed of antiparallel β-sheets
that form packed hydrophobic cores.Biological and solution-phase
studies have revealed that oligomers
formed by different amyloidogenic peptides and proteins share common
biological and structural properties.[5,6] Amyloid oligomers
are typically toxic toward cells, an important characteristic that
is thought to play a role in the pathogenesis of amyloid diseases.[1,7,8] Amyloid oligomers are typically
stable to sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), migrating as discrete assemblies
in SDS–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE) experiments.[9,10] Amyloid oligomers appear to be composed of antiparallel β-sheets,
while amyloid fibrils are generally composed of parallel β-sheets.[11−16] Furthermore, the monomer building blocks of many amyloid oligomers
are thought to adopt the simplest arrangement of an antiparallel β-sheet,
a β-hairpin.[17−25]Our laboratory has determined the X-ray crystallographic structures
of oligomers formed by macrocyclic β-sheet peptides designed
to mimic β-hairpins from amyloidogenic peptides and proteins.[26−30] These β-hairpin peptides contain two heptapeptide β-strand
fragments locked in an antiparallel β-sheet by two δ-linked
ornithine (δOrn) turn mimics and also contain an N-methyl group that blocks uncontrolled aggregation.[31−33] These design features permit crystallization of the β-hairpin
peptides and structural elucidation of the higher-order oligomers
they can form. The β-hairpin peptides have two surfaces: a major
surface that displays eight of the 14 side chains and a minor surface
that displays the six remaining side chains. Figure shows a generic structure of these β-hairpin
peptides and highlights the major and minor surfaces in red and blue.
Figure 1
Generic
chemical structure of a β-hairpin peptide. Two heptapeptide
β-strands, a top strand and a bottom strand, are connected by
two δOrn turns. The β-hairpin peptide has a
major surface that displays eight residues (red) and a minor surface
that displays six residues (blue).
Generic
chemical structure of a β-hairpin peptide. Two heptapeptide
β-strands, a top strand and a bottom strand, are connected by
two δOrn turns. The β-hairpin peptide has a
major surface that displays eight residues (red) and a minor surface
that displays six residues (blue).To date, our laboratory has elucidated the X-ray crystallographic
structures of oligomers formed by β-hairpin peptides derived
from Aβ,[26−28,34] α-synuclein,[29] and β2-microglobulin.[30] These structures revealed the propensity for
β-hairpin peptides to form oligomers in the crystal state, including
dimers, trimers, hexamers, octamers, nonamers, and dodecamers. The
different oligomers identified in these studies demonstrate the diversity
and polymorphism of the structures that different amyloid-derived
β-hairpin peptides can form.Previously, we reported the
X-ray crystallographic structures of
oligomers formed by β-hairpin peptide 1 (Figure A), which is derived
from an Aβ17–36 β-hairpin (Figure B).[26,35] Peptide 1 contains Aβ17–23 and
Aβ30–36 β-strands linked by two δOrn turn units; the δOrn turn that
links Asp23 and Ala30 replaces the Aβ24–29 loop of the Aβ17–36 β-hairpin.
Peptide 1 also contains an N-methyl
group on Phe20 and an α-linked ornithine at position
35 as a hydrophilic isostere of methionine. The X-ray crystallographic
structure reveals that peptide 1 assembles hierarchically
to form a triangular trimer that further assembles with a second triangular
trimer to form a sandwichlike hexamer (Figure ).[36]
Figure 2
Macrocyclic
β-sheet peptides designed to mimic two different
β-hairpin registrations of Aβ. (A) Chemical structure
of peptide 1. The δOrn turn that connects
Asp23 and Ala30 (blue) replaces Aβ24–29. (B) Chemical structure of an Aβ17–36 β-hairpin. (C) Chemical structure of peptide 2. The δOrn turn that connects Glu22 and
Ala30 (blue) replaces Aβ23–29.
(D) Chemical structure of an Aβ16–36 β-hairpin.
Figure 3
(A) X-ray crystallographic structure of the
trimer formed by peptide 1 (Protein Data Bank entry 4NW9). (B) Front view
and side view of the
X-ray crystallographic structure of the hexamer formed by two trimers
of peptide 1.
Macrocyclic
β-sheet peptides designed to mimic two different
β-hairpin registrations of Aβ. (A) Chemical structure
of peptide 1. The δOrn turn that connects
Asp23 and Ala30 (blue) replaces Aβ24–29. (B) Chemical structure of an Aβ17–36 β-hairpin. (C) Chemical structure of peptide 2. The δOrn turn that connects Glu22 and
Ala30 (blue) replaces Aβ23–29.
(D) Chemical structure of an Aβ16–36 β-hairpin.(A) X-ray crystallographic structure of the
trimer formed by peptide 1 (Protein Data Bank entry 4NW9). (B) Front view
and side view of the
X-ray crystallographic structure of the hexamer formed by two trimers
of peptide 1.In this study, we set out to explore how shifting registration
by one amino acid toward the N-terminus affects the structural and
biological properties of a β-hairpin peptide. Shifting the β-hairpin
registration is significant, because it changes both the pairings
of the residues within the β-hairpin and the surfaces upon which
the side chains are displayed. In the Aβ17–36 β-hairpin, from which peptide 1 is derived, Ile31 pairs with Glu22; in the shifted Aβ16–36 β-hairpin, Ile31 pairs with Ala21. In the Aβ17–36 β-hairpin,
the side chain of Glu22 shares the same surface as the
side chain of Ile31; in the Aβ16–36 β-hairpin, the side chain of Glu22 is on the opposite
surface. We find that the resulting shifted β-hairpin peptide
not only assembles in the crystal state to form oligomers but also
exhibits both solution-phase assembly and toxicity reminiscent of
amyloid oligomers.Here we describe the X-ray crystallographic,
solution-phase, and
biological studies of peptide 2 (Figure C), which is designed to mimic the Aβ16–36 β-hairpin (Figure D). Peptide 2 contains Aβ16–22 and Aβ30–36 β-strands
linked by two δOrn turn units, an N-methyl group on Phe19, and the native methionine residue
at position 35. Peptide 2 runs as a hexamer in SDS–PAGE
and appears to form dimers and trimers in size exclusion chromatography
(SEC). The oligomers formed by peptide 2 are toxic toward
humanneuroblastoma cell line SH-SY5Y. X-ray crystallography reveals
that peptide 2 also assembles to form a hexamer in the
crystal state. The hexamer may be considered as being composed of
either dimers or trimers. The hexamer formed by peptide 2 is significant because it shares key characteristics with the oligomers
formed by full-length amyloidogenic peptides and proteins and provides
a structural model for an oligomer of Aβ.
Materials and Methods
Synthesis of peptides 1–4, SDS–PAGE,
size exclusion chromatography (SEC), X-ray crystallography, lactate
dehydrogenase (LDH) release assays, and replica-exchange molecular
dynamics (REMD) were performed as described previously.[26−30] These procedures are restated in detail in the Materials and Methods
in the Supporting Information.
Results and Discussion
Oligomerization
of Peptide 2
Peptide 2 assembles
to form a hexamer in SDS–PAGE. Tricine
SDS–PAGE followed by silver staining shows that 1.8 kDa peptide 2 migrates just above the 10 kDa band of the ladder (Figure A).[37] The band from peptide 2 is comet-shaped and
streaks downward, suggesting that the hexamer is in equilibrium with
lower-molecular weight species. To further confirm the oligomerization
state of peptide 2, we compared it to covalent trimerpeptides 5 and 6 [Figures
S1 and S2, Protein Data Bank (PDB) entries 5SUT and 5SUR, respectively],
which we had previously determined to migrate as 10.6 kDa hexamers
and 21.2 kDa dodecamers, respectively, in equilibrium with the 5.3
kDa trimers.[28] Peptide 2 migrates
at the same molecular weight as the hexamer band of peptide 5, providing further evidence that peptide 2 assembles
to form a hexamer in SDS–PAGE. In contrast, peptide 1 does not assemble to form a hexamer in SDS–PAGE. Peptide 1 migrates well below the trimer band of peptide 6 and slightly below the 4.6 kDa band of the ladder, suggesting that
peptide 1 migrates as a monomer or dimer.
Figure 4
Peptide 2 assembles in solution to form oligomers.
(A) Silver-stained SDS–PAGE gel. SDS–PAGE was performed
on 0.15 mg/mL samples of peptides 1–4 and 0.05
mg/mL samples of peptides 5 and 6 in Tris
buffer (pH 6.8) with 2% (w/v) SDS. Molecular weights calculated for
the trimer, hexamer, and dodecamer are listed in parentheses. (B)
SEC chromatograms. SEC was performed on a 1.0 mg/mL solution of peptide
in 50 mM Tris buffer (pH 7.4) with 150 mM NaCl on a Superdex 75 10/300
column.
Peptide 2 assembles in solution to form oligomers.
(A) Silver-stained SDS–PAGE gel. SDS–PAGE was performed
on 0.15 mg/mL samples of peptides 1–4 and 0.05
mg/mL samples of peptides 5 and 6 in Tris
buffer (pH 6.8) with 2% (w/v) SDS. Molecular weights calculated for
the trimer, hexamer, and dodecamer are listed in parentheses. (B)
SEC chromatograms. SEC was performed on a 1.0 mg/mL solution of peptide
in 50 mM Tris buffer (pH 7.4) with 150 mM NaCl on a Superdex 75 10/300
column.Size exclusion chromatography
reveals that peptide 2 also assembles to form oligomers
in the absence of SDS. The elution
profile of peptide 2 was compared to those of the size
standards vitamin B12, aprotinin, and cytochrome c, as well as peptide 1. Peptide 2 elutes as a broad peak with three distinct humps (Figure B). The elution volumes of
the humps are consistent with the molecular weights of a monomer,
dimer, and trimer. The broadness of the humps suggests moderately
slow exchange among the trimer, dimer, and monomer. Peptide 1 elutes as two distinct peaks: a larger peak with an elution
volume consistent with the molecular weight of a dimer and a smaller
peak with an elution volume consistent with the molecular weight of
a trimer (Figure B). Table summarizes the SEC
data for peptides 1 and 2.
Table 1
Size Exclusion Chromatography Data
for Peptides 1–4
compound
molecular weight (kDa)
elution volume (mL)
oligomer
size
peptide 1
1.74
16.2, 15.1
dimer,
trimer
peptide 2
1.77
17.0, 16.1, 14.8
monomer,
dimer, trimer
peptide 3
1.79
17.6
monomer
peptide 4
1.72
17.0
monomer
vitamin B12
1.3
17.8
aprotinin
6.5
14.6
cytochrome c
12.4
12.4
These solution-phase studies
show that peptide 2 assembles
to form oligomers in solution. In SDS–PAGE, peptide 2 assembles to form a hexamer. In SEC in Tris buffer, peptide 2 assembles to form dimers and trimers. These results suggest
the intriguing hypothesis that the hexamer in SDS–PAGE may
be composed of dimers or trimers that further assemble to form a hexamer
in the lipophilic environment of SDS micelles. We turned to X-ray
crystallography to gain insights into the structures of these oligomers
and thus further explore this hypothesis.
X-ray Crystallographic
Structure of Peptide 2
Peptide 2 afforded crystals suitable for X-ray diffraction
from aqueous HEPES buffer with sodium citrate and isopropanol. To
determine the X-ray crystallographic phases of peptide 2, we soaked a crystal of the peptide in potassium iodide to incorporate
iodide ions into the crystal lattice and performed conventional single-wavelength
anomalous diffraction (SAD) phasing.[28,38,39] The X-ray crystallographic structure of KI-soaked
peptide 2 (PDB entry 5W4I) was then used as a search model for
molecular replacement to determine the X-ray crystallographic phases
of a higher-resolution data set of unsoaked peptide 2, which was collected using a synchrotron radiation source (PDB entry 5W4H).The X-ray
crystallographic structure of peptide 2 reveals that
the peptide folds to form a twisted β-hairpin. The side chains
displayed on the major and minor surfaces of peptide 2 differ from those displayed on the major and minor surfaces of peptide 1. The major surface of the peptide 2 β-hairpin
displays the side chains of Lys16, Val18, Phe20, Glu22, Ala30, Ile32, Leu34, and Val36, while the major surface of the peptide 1 β-hairpin displays the side chains of Leu17, Phe19, Ala21, Asp23, Ala30, Ile32, Leu34, and Val36 (Figure A). The minor surface
of the peptide 2 β-hairpin displays the side chains
of Leu17, Phe19, Ala21, Ile31, Gly33, and Met35, while the minor surface
of the peptide 1 β-hairpin displays the side chains
of Val18, Phe20, Glu22, Ile31, Gly33, and Orn35 (Figure B). Thus, the minor surface of peptide 2 is wholly hydrophobic, while the minor surface of peptide 1 is not.
Figure 5
X-ray crystallographic structures of peptide 1 (PDB
entry 4NW9)
and peptide 2 (PDB entry 5W4H). (A) Major surfaces of peptides 1 and 2. (B) Minor surfaces of peptides 1 and 2.
X-ray crystallographic structures of peptide 1 (PDB
entry 4NW9)
and peptide 2 (PDB entry 5W4H). (A) Major surfaces of peptides 1 and 2. (B) Minor surfaces of peptides 1 and 2.In the X-ray crystallographic structure of peptide 2, six β-hairpin monomers assemble to form a hexamer.
The hexamer
is composed of smaller oligomers and can be interpreted either as
a trimer of dimers or as a dimer of trimers. Figure shows the structure of the hexamer and illustrates
these two interpretations. In Figure B, one dimer subunit is colored green; in Figure C, one trimer subunit
is colored cyan. The following subsections detail the structure of
the hexamer as well as the structures of the component dimers or trimers.
Figure 6
Hexamer
formed by peptide 2 that can be interpreted
either as a trimer of dimers or as a dimer of trimers. (A) X-ray crystallographic
structure of the hexamer formed by peptide 2. (B) Interpretation
of the hexamer as a trimer of dimers. One dimer subunit is colored
green. (C) Interpretation of the hexamer as a dimer of trimers. One
trimer subunit is colored cyan.
Hexamer
formed by peptide 2 that can be interpreted
either as a trimer of dimers or as a dimer of trimers. (A) X-ray crystallographic
structure of the hexamer formed by peptide 2. (B) Interpretation
of the hexamer as a trimer of dimers. One dimer subunit is colored
green. (C) Interpretation of the hexamer as a dimer of trimers. One
trimer subunit is colored cyan.
Hexamer
The hexamer formed by peptide 2 resembles
a barrel with three openings (Figure ). The interior of the barrel is filled with
the side chains of residues on the minor surface of peptide 2 (Leu17, Phe19, Ala21, Ile31, Gly33, and Met35), creating a packed
hydrophobic core that stabilizes the hexamer (Figure C). A network of hydrogen bonds between the
main chains of the monomer subunits further stabilizes the hexamer.
The outer surface of the hexamer displays the side chains of residues
on the major surface of peptide 2 (Lys16,
Val18, Phe20, Glu22, Ala30, Ile32, Leu34, and Val36).
Figure 7
X-ray crystallographic
structure of the hexamer formed by peptide 2 (PDB entry 5W4H). (A) Cartoon and
stick model. (B) Cartoon model illustrating the
three barrel-like openings. The inset shows a schematic representation
of the general shape of the hexamer. (C) Three different views of
the hexamer. Side chains of residues that pack in the hydrophobic
core of the hexamer are shown as spheres. The top view looks inside
one of the three barrel-like openings.
X-ray crystallographic
structure of the hexamer formed by peptide 2 (PDB entry 5W4H). (A) Cartoon and
stick model. (B) Cartoon model illustrating the
three barrel-like openings. The inset shows a schematic representation
of the general shape of the hexamer. (C) Three different views of
the hexamer. Side chains of residues that pack in the hydrophobic
core of the hexamer are shown as spheres. The top view looks inside
one of the three barrel-like openings.The hexamer formed by peptide 2 is more hydrogen
bonded
and better packed than the hexamer formed by peptide 1 (Figure S3). The hexamer formed by peptide 2 forms a continuous hydrogen-bonding network containing 30
intermolecular hydrogen bonds, whereas the hexamer formed by peptide 1 does not form a continuous hydrogen-bonding network and
contains only 18 intermolecular hydrogen bonds. In the hexamer formed
by peptide 1, each β-hairpin monomer is hydrogen
bonded to only the two adjacent β-hairpin monomers within the
triangular trimer; in the hexamer formed by peptide 2, each β-hairpin monomer is hydrogen bonded not only to the
two adjacent monomers within the triangular trimer but also to the
adjacent monomer within the β-sheet dimer. For these reasons,
the hexamer formed by peptide 2 can be interpreted either
as a trimer of β-sheet dimers or as a dimer of triangular trimers,
whereas the hexamer formed by peptide 1 is unambiguously
a dimer of triangular trimers.Six sets of side chains from
Leu17, Phe19, Ala21, Ile31, and Met35 pack together
to form a hydrophobic core that stabilizes the hexamer formed by peptide 2. While the minor surface of peptide 2 displays
five hydrophobic side chains, that of peptide 1 displays
only three (Val18, Phe20, and Ile31). The hexamer formed by peptide 1 lacks the massive
hydrophobic core and is only loosely packed at the interface between
trimers. The buried surface area of the hexamer formed by peptide 2 is 5102 Å2, whereas the buried surface area
of the hexamer formed by peptide 1 is only 3514 Å2.
Dimer
Two peptide 2 β-hairpin monomers
assemble in an edge-to-edge manner to form a hydrogen-bonded dimer,
creating a four-stranded antiparallel β-sheet (Figure A). (Three such dimers make
up the hexamer.) The β-hairpin monomers are shifted out of registration
by two residues toward the N-termini, such that Ala30 on
one monomer is across from Leu34 on the adjacent monomer
(Figure B). Four intermolecular
hydrogen bonds between Ile31 and Gly33 of one
monomer and Gly33 and Ile31 of the adjacent
monomer help stabilize the dimer.
Figure 8
β-Sheet dimer formed by peptide 2. (A) X-ray
crystallographic structure (PDB entry 5W4H). (B) Chemical structure. The intermolecular
hydrogen bonds between Ile31 and Gly33 are colored
red. (C) View of the dimer illustrating the major and minor surfaces.
β-Sheet dimer formed by peptide 2. (A) X-ray
crystallographic structure (PDB entry 5W4H). (B) Chemical structure. The intermolecular
hydrogen bonds between Ile31 and Gly33 are colored
red. (C) View of the dimer illustrating the major and minor surfaces.The β-sheet dimer has two
surfaces: one surface displays
the side chains of residues on the major surface of peptide 2; the other surface displays the side chains of residues
on the minor surface of peptide 2 (Figure C). Hydrophobic packing between the side
chains of residues on the minor surface further stabilizes the dimer:
Leu17, Phe19, and Ile31 on one monomer
pack against Ile31, Phe19, and Leu17 on the adjacent monomer. There are no substantial intermolecular
contacts between the side chains of residues on the major surface
of the dimer.
Trimer
Three peptide 2 β-hairpin
monomers assemble to form a triangular trimer (Figure A). (Two such trimers make up the hexamer.)
The trimer is stabilized by intermolecular edge-to-edge hydrogen bonds
between monomers, which create four-stranded β-sheets at each
corner of the trimer. At each corner, the main chain of δOrn of one monomer hydrogen bonds with the main chain of Ala21 of the adjacent monomer, and the carbonyl of Phe19 of one monomer hydrogen bonds with the NH of Leu17 of
the adjacent monomer (Figure B).
Figure 9
X-ray crystallographic structure of the trimer formed by peptide 2 (PDB entry 5W4H). (A) Cartoon and stick model. (B) Detailed view of a corner of
the triangular trimer showing the intermolecular hydrogen bonding
between monomers, which creates a four-stranded β-sheet. (C)
View of the trimer illustrating the major and minor surfaces.
X-ray crystallographic structure of the trimer formed by peptide 2 (PDB entry 5W4H). (A) Cartoon and stick model. (B) Detailed view of a corner of
the triangular trimer showing the intermolecular hydrogen bonding
between monomers, which creates a four-stranded β-sheet. (C)
View of the trimer illustrating the major and minor surfaces.The triangular trimer has two
surfaces that display the amino acid
side chains of the major surfaces and the minor surfaces of the component
β-hairpin monomers (Figure C). Hydrophobic packing between the side chains of
residues on the minor surface further stabilizes the trimer: Met35, Leu17, and Phe19 on one monomer pack
against Ala21, Ile31, and Phe19 on
the adjacent monomer. There are no substantial intermolecular contacts
between side chains of residues on the major surface of the trimer.The hexamer, trimer, and dimer observed in the X-ray crystallographic
structure of peptide 2 recapitulate the oligomers observed
via SDS–PAGE and SEC. The assembly of the hexamer from either
dimers or trimers may explain how the peptide 2 dimers
and trimers observed in SEC come together to form the hexamer in SDS–PAGE.
The structure of the hexamer shows key stabilizing contacts, such
as edge-to-edge hydrogen bonding and hydrophobic packing. To better
understand the importance of these contacts in the solution-phase
oligomerization of peptide 2, we designed peptides 3 and 4. The following sections describe studies
of these peptides and also provide insights into why Aβ16–36-derived peptide 2 forms
a hexamer in SDS–PAGE but Aβ17–36-derived
peptide 1 does not.
N-Methylation of Peptide 2 Disrupts Oligomerization
To test whether the hexamer
observed in SDS–PAGE is similar
in structure to the hexamer observed crystallographically, we prepared
a homologue containing an additional N-methyl group
designed to disrupt hexamer formation. Peptide 3 is a
homologue of peptide 2 bearing an additional N-methyl group on Gly33 (Figure A). In the X-ray crystallographic structure
of the hexamer formed by peptide 2, the backbone of Gly33 on one monomer hydrogen bonds with the backbone of Ile31 on an adjacent monomer (Figure B). Introduction of an N-methyl group on Gly33 should prevent hydrogen bonding
and thus disrupt the hexamer. In SDS–PAGE, peptide 3 does not migrate as a hexamer (Figure A). Instead, peptide 3 migrates
like peptide 1 and thus appears to run as a monomer or
dimer. This result supports a model in which the hexamer formed by
peptide 2 in SDS–PAGE is similar in structure
to the hexamer observed crystallographically. In SEC, peptide 3 elutes at a volume consistent with the molecular weight
of a monomer (Table ), further demonstrating that N-methylation on Gly33 disrupts
oligomer formation.
Figure 10
(A) Chemical structure of peptide 3, a homologue
of
peptide 2 bearing an additional N-methyl
group. (B) Chemical structure of peptide 4, a triple
mutant of peptide 1. The mutated residues are colored
red.
(A) Chemical structure of peptide 3, a homologue
of
peptide 2 bearing an additional N-methyl
group. (B) Chemical structure of peptide 4, a triple
mutant of peptide 1. The mutated residues are colored
red.
Mutation of Peptide 1 Induces Oligomerization
The SDS–PAGE and
X-ray crystallographic studies of peptides 1 and 2 demonstrate that shifting the registration
of a β-hairpin peptide affects its oligomerization. In the X-ray
crystallographic structures, the hexamer formed by peptide 2 is better packed and has more hydrogen bonds than the hexamer formed
by peptide 1. In SDS–PAGE, peptide 2 assembles to form a hexamer, whereas peptide 1 does
not. The difference in the hydrophobicity and charge of the minor
surfaces of peptides 1 and 2 may explain
this difference in oligomerization. The minor surface of peptide 1 displays two charged hydrophilic side chains and three hydrophobic
side chains, whereas the minor surface of peptide 2 displays
five hydrophobic side chains (Figure ).
Figure 11
X-ray crystallographic structures of peptides 1, 2, and 4, highlighting the minor surfaces
of
the peptides (PDB entries 4NW9, 5W4H, and 5W4J,
respectively).
X-ray crystallographic structures of peptides 1, 2, and 4, highlighting the minor surfaces
of
the peptides (PDB entries 4NW9, 5W4H, and 5W4J,
respectively).To explore the importance
of charge and hydrophobicity in oligomerization,
we prepared peptide 4 (Figure B). Peptide 4 is a triple mutant
of peptide 1, with L17K, E22A, and Orn35M mutations.
Peptide 4 may be considered as a chimera in which three
residues of peptide 2 are grafted onto peptide 1 to eliminate charge on the minor surface. In peptide 4, Ala22 and Met35 occupy the same sites
on the minor surface as Ala21 and Met35 in peptide 2. The Lys17 residue in peptide 4 sits
on the major surface, occupying the same site as Lys16 in
peptide 2 and providing charge to enhance solubility.
The 11 remaining residues of peptide 4 are identical
to those of peptide 1.SDS–PAGE reveals
that peptide 4 assembles to
form an oligomer that migrates at a molecular weight slightly higher
than that of the hexamer formed by peptide 2 (Figure A). Replacement of
the charged residues with hydrophobic residues on the minor surface
of peptide 1 converts a peptide that does not form oligomers
in aqueous SDS to a peptide that oligomerizes. This experiment confirms
the importance of an uncharged, hydrophobic surface in the oligomerization
of β-hairpin peptides. In SEC, peptide 4 elutes
at a volume consistent with the molecular weight of a monomer (Table ), suggesting that
SDS promotes oligomerization of peptide 4 in the SDS–PAGE
experiment.The slightly higher position of the peptide 4 oligomer
band in SDS–PAGE suggests that the oligomer formed by peptide 4 may differ in structure from the hexamer formed by peptide 2. To gain insights into the structure of the oligomer formed
by peptide 4, we turned to X-ray crystallography. Peptide 4 afforded crystals suitable for X-ray diffraction in aqueous
HEPES buffer with potassium chloride and pentaerythritol propoxylate.
We determined the X-ray crystallographic phases of peptide 4 by sulfur single-wavelength anomalous diffraction (S-SAD) using
the anomalous signal from the sulfur in methionine.[40,41]X-ray crystallography reveals that peptide 4 folds
to form β-hairpins similar to those formed by peptides 1 and 2 (Figure ). The minor surface of peptide 4 is nearly
identical to that of peptide 2, except that Val18 takes the place of Leu17. Peptide 4 assembles
differently than peptides 1 and 2, forming
packed columns in the crystal lattice rather than discrete oligomers
(Figure B). The
columns are composed of antiparallel β-sheet dimers that are
laminated on both faces through hydrophobic interactions. Each dimer
consists of an antiparallel β-sheet formed by two peptide 4 β-hairpins (Figure A). The dimer is shifted out of registration by two
residues toward the C-termini, such that Met35 pairs with
Gly33. The oligomer formed by peptide 4 in
SDS–PAGE might be composed of three or four of these dimers
packing through hydrophobic interactions.
Figure 12
X-ray crystallographic
structure of peptide 4 (PDB
entry 5W4J).
(A) Structure of the antiparallel β-sheet dimer formed by peptide 4. (B) Column of laminated antiparallel β-sheet dimers.
The right panel shows a detailed view of the hydrophobic packing that
occurs at the interfaces of the dimers.
X-ray crystallographic
structure of peptide 4 (PDB
entry 5W4J).
(A) Structure of the antiparallel β-sheet dimer formed by peptide 4. (B) Column of laminated antiparallel β-sheet dimers.
The right panel shows a detailed view of the hydrophobic packing that
occurs at the interfaces of the dimers.
Biological Studies of Peptides 1–4
Many oligomers
formed by full-length Aβ
are toxic toward cells.[7,8] To test whether the oligomers
formed by peptide 2 are also toxic, we evaluated the
toxicity of peptide 2 toward neuronally derived SH-SY5Y
cells using a LDH release assay. We compared peptide 2 to peptide 3 to investigate how the hexamer-forming
Aβ16–36-derived peptide compares to a non-oligomerizing
homologue. We also evaluated the toxicity of peptides 1 and 4 to better understand the relationship between
oligomerization and toxicity.Peptide 2 shows an
increase in LDH release at concentrations as low as 50 μM, indicating
toxicity toward SH-SY5Y cells (Figure ). Peptide 3, the non-oligomerizing
homologue of peptide 2, is not toxic toward SH-SH5Y cells
at concentrations as high as 200 μM, suggesting that oligomerization
of peptide 2 to form a hexamer is important for toxicity.
No dose dependence is observed in the LDH release induced by peptide 2 at concentrations of 50, 100, and 200 μM, suggesting
that oligomerization is cooperative and toxicity occurs above a critical
concentration. Peptide 1 is toxic toward SH-SY5Y cells
at concentrations as low as 100 μM, and peptide 4 is toxic toward SH-SY5Y cells at concentrations as low as 50 μM.
Figure 13
LDH
release assay of peptides 1–4. Data represent
the mean of five replicate wells ± the standard deviation. Deionized
water (vehicle) was used as a negative control.
LDH
release assay of peptides 1–4. Data represent
the mean of five replicate wells ± the standard deviation. Deionized
water (vehicle) was used as a negative control.We envision that the onset of toxicity of peptides 1, 2, and 4 between 25 and 100 μM
reflects the propensity of the hydrophobic peptides to form oligomers
in the presence of the lipophilic cell membranes. In this model, none
of the peptides are oligomeric in cell membranes at 25 μM. As
the concentration is increased, oligomerization occurs, the oligomers
disrupt the integrity of the cell membranes, and cell damage or death
occurs.
Crystallographically Based Model of an Aβ12–40 Hexamer
We envision that the full-length Aβ peptide
can assemble in the same fashion as peptide 2 to form
a barrel-like hexamer composed of β-sheet dimers or triangular
trimers. To better understand what a hexamer containing the Aβ23–29 loop and additional N- and C-terminal residues
might look like, we modeled Aβ12–40 into the
crystallographic coordinates of the hexamer. We built residues 23–29
(DVGSNKG), 12–15 (VHHQ), and 37–40
(GGVV) into the crystallographic coordinates of the six peptide 2 monomers that comprise the hexamer, and we performed REMD
to generate realistic conformations of the loops and the N- and C-terminal
regions of the β-hairpins (Figure ).[42,43]
Figure 14
Crystallographically
based model of an Aβ12–40 barrel-like hexamer.
Superposition of 31 structures generated by
REMD.
Crystallographically
based model of an Aβ12–40 barrel-like hexamer.
Superposition of 31 structures generated by
REMD.The REMD simulation shows that
full-length Aβ could form
a barrel-like hexamer. The hexamer can accommodate the Aβ23–29 loop and the remaining N- and C-terminal residues
without steric clashes. In a hexamer formed by full-length Aβ,
the loops from two monomers and the N- and C-termini from two other
monomers would extend past the barrel-like openings. The loops might
fold over the barrel-like openings and shield the hydrophobic core
of the hexamer, which would otherwise be exposed to solvent.
Summary
and Conclusion
These X-ray crystallographic, biophysical,
and biological studies
of β-hairpins derived from Aβ provide insights into amyloid
oligomers. X-ray crystallography revealed that β-hairpin peptide 2 assembles to form a hexamer composed of dimers and trimers.
SDS–PAGE and SEC revealed that peptide 2 assembles
to form oligomers in solution that recapitulate the oligomers observed
crystallographically. In the SDS–PAGE experiment, peptide 2 assembles to form a hexamer, which recapitulates the barrel-like
hexamer observed crystallographically. In the SEC experiment, peptide 2 assembles to form a dimer and trimer, which recapitulate
the β-sheet dimer and triangular trimer observed crystallographically.
The difference between the assemblies observed in the SEC and SDS–PAGE
experiments may be explained by the membranelike environment of SDS
micelles, which appears to promote the assembly of the dimers and
trimers into the hexamer.The differing propensities of peptides 1 and 2 to oligomerize in SDS–PAGE may
result from differences
in hydrophobicity and charge on the minor surfaces of each peptide.
The oligomerization of chimera peptide 4 in SDS–PAGE
supports the importance of a hydrophobic minor surface in solution-phase
assembly. We recently demonstrated that stabilizing the trimer formed
by peptide 1 through covalent cross-linking allows solution-phase
assembly to form higher-order oligomers, such as hexamers and dodecamers.[28] The study presented here demonstrates that hydrophobic
interactions between monomers that are not covalently cross-linked
can stabilize higher-order oligomers in the same fashion. This finding
is significant, because it shows that suitably folded β-hairpin
peptides containing amyloidogenic sequences can form stable oligomers.The X-ray crystallographic structure of the hexamer formed by peptide 2 shares structural features with the αB crystallin
cylindrin oligomer reported by Eisenberg and co-workers[1] and the hPrP oligomer reported by Surewicz and
co-workers.[2] Like these oligomers, the
hexamer formed by peptide 2 is a discrete oligomer composed
of antiparallel β-sheets that form a continuous hydrogen-bonding
network and a hydrophobic core. These features have emerged as common
structural motifs among oligomers formed by amyloidogenic peptides
and proteins. We have also seen this motif in a barrel-like hexamer
formed by a β-hairpin peptide derived from β2-microglobulin that assembles in a fashion similar to that of the
hexamer formed by peptide 2.[30]Hexamers of Aβ have been isolated from the brains of
Tg2576
transgenic mice as well as from human brains and are thought to play
a role in the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease.[9,44] The barrel-like hexamer formed by peptide 2 exhibits
many of the biological and solution-phase characteristics of oligomers
formed by full-length Aβ. Like Aβ oligomers, the hexamer
assembles in the presence of SDS and is toxic toward cells. Despite
these similarities, the significance of the barrel-like hexamer in
Alzheimer’s disease remains to be determined and is a current
area of investigation in our laboratory.
Authors: Rakez Kayed; Elizabeth Head; Jennifer L Thompson; Theresa M McIntire; Saskia C Milton; Carl W Cotman; Charles G Glabe Journal: Science Date: 2003-04-18 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: 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: Cong Liu; Minglei Zhao; Lin Jiang; Pin-Nan Cheng; Jiyong Park; Michael R Sawaya; Anna Pensalfini; Dawei Gou; Arnold J Berk; Charles G Glabe; James Nowick; David Eisenberg Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-12-03 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Ganesh M Shankar; Shaomin Li; Tapan H Mehta; Amaya Garcia-Munoz; Nina E Shepardson; Imelda Smith; Francesca M Brett; Michael A Farrell; Michael J Rowan; Cynthia A Lemere; Ciaran M Regan; Dominic M Walsh; Bernardo L Sabatini; Dennis J Selkoe Journal: Nat Med Date: 2008-06-22 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Jun-Xia Lu; Wei Qiang; Wai-Ming Yau; Charles D Schwieters; Stephen C Meredith; Robert Tycko Journal: Cell Date: 2013-09-12 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Sylvain E Lesné; Mathew A Sherman; Marianne Grant; Michael Kuskowski; Julie A Schneider; David A Bennett; Karen H Ashe Journal: Brain Date: 2013-04-09 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Patrick J Salveson; Sepehr Haerianardakani; Alexander Thuy-Boun; Adam G Kreutzer; James S Nowick Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2018-04-20 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Tuan D Samdin; Michał Wierzbicki; Adam G Kreutzer; William J Howitz; Mike Valenzuela; Alberto Smith; Victoria Sahrai; Nicholas L Truex; Matthew Klun; James S Nowick Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2020-06-22 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Sepehr Haerianardakani; Adam G Kreutzer; Patrick J Salveson; Tuan D Samdin; Gretchen E Guaglianone; James S Nowick Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2020-11-25 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Adam G Kreutzer; Tuan D Samdin; Gretchen Guaglianone; Ryan K Spencer; James S Nowick Journal: ACS Chem Neurosci Date: 2020-07-14 Impact factor: 4.418