Jie Yang1,2, Alexander J Dear3, Thomas C T Michaels3,4, Christopher M Dobson3, Tuomas P J Knowles3,5, Si Wu1,2, Sarah Perrett1,2. 1. National Laboratory of Biomacromolecules, CAS Center for Excellence in Biomacromolecules, Institute of Biophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences , 15 Datun Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100101, China. 2. University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences , 19A Yuquan Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing 100049, China. 3. Centre for Misfolding Diseases, Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge , Lensfield Road, Cambridge CB2 1EW, United Kingdom. 4. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University , Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, United States. 5. Cavendish Laboratory , J J Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 1HE, United Kingdom.
Abstract
The self-assembly of polypeptides into amyloid structures is associated with a range of increasingly prevalent neurodegenerative diseases as well as with a select set of functional processes in biology. The phenomenon of self-assembly results in species with dramatically different sizes, from small oligomers to large fibrils; however, the kinetic relationship between these species is challenging to characterize. In the case of prion aggregates, these structures can self-replicate and act as infectious agents. Here we use single molecule spectroscopy to obtain quantitative information on the oligomer populations formed during aggregation of the yeast prion protein Ure2. Global analysis of the aggregation kinetics reveals the molecular mechanism underlying oligomer formation and depletion. Quantitative characterization indicates that the majority of Ure2 oligomers are relatively short-lived, and their rate of dissociation is much higher than their rate of conversion into growing fibrils. We identify an initial metastable oligomer, which can subsequently convert into a structurally distinct oligomer, which in turn converts into growing fibrils. We also show that fragmentation is responsible for the autocatalytic self-replication of Ure2 fibrils, but that preformed fibrils do not promote oligomer formation, indicating that secondary nucleation of the type observed for peptides and proteins associated with neurodegenerative disease does not occur at a significant rate for Ure2. These results establish a framework for elucidating the temporal and causal relationship between oligomers and larger fibrillar species in amyloid forming systems, and provide insights into why functional amyloid systems are not toxic to their host organisms.
The self-assembly of polypeptides into amyloid structures is associated with a range of increasingly prevalent neurodegenerative diseases as well as with a select set of functional processes in biology. The phenomenon of self-assembly results in species with dramatically different sizes, from small oligomers to large fibrils; however, the kinetic relationship between these species is challenging to characterize. In the case of prion aggregates, these structures can self-replicate and act as infectious agents. Here we use single molecule spectroscopy to obtain quantitative information on the oligomer populations formed during aggregation of the yeastprion protein Ure2. Global analysis of the aggregation kinetics reveals the molecular mechanism underlying oligomer formation and depletion. Quantitative characterization indicates that the majority of Ure2 oligomers are relatively short-lived, and their rate of dissociation is much higher than their rate of conversion into growing fibrils. We identify an initial metastable oligomer, which can subsequently convert into a structurally distinct oligomer, which in turn converts into growing fibrils. We also show that fragmentation is responsible for the autocatalytic self-replication of Ure2 fibrils, but that preformed fibrils do not promote oligomer formation, indicating that secondary nucleation of the type observed for peptides and proteins associated with neurodegenerative disease does not occur at a significant rate for Ure2. These results establish a framework for elucidating the temporal and causal relationship between oligomers and larger fibrillar species in amyloid forming systems, and provide insights into why functional amyloid systems are not toxic to their host organisms.
The self-assembly of
soluble proteins into insoluble and highly
structured amyloid fibrils rich in β-sheet structure is associated
with a variety of human disorders, including Alzheimer’s and
Parkinson’s diseases, type II diabetes, and the prion diseases.[1,2] In addition, the formation of amyloid fibrils has been found to
be a common or generic property of polypeptide molecules, and also
to be associated with a number of diverse biological functions in
living organisms.[1,3] Over the past decade, oligomeric
intermediates that form during the early stages of amyloid fibril
formation or dissociate from mature fibrils have become of increasing
interest[4] because such species, rather
than the fibrils, have been shown to be toxic to cells and are now
thought to be the major pathogenic agent in neurodegenerative disease.[1,2,5−7] Understanding
the nature and dynamics of the oligomers is not only of intrinsic
interest, but has the potential to provide a catalyst for the development
of therapeutic strategies for protein misfolding diseases.[2,8,9]Conventional biochemical
and biophysical methods, such as the thioflavin
T (ThT) fluorescence assay,[10] circular
dichroism spectroscopy (CD),[11] electron
microscopy (EM)[12] and atomic force microscopy
(AFM)[13] measurements, are able to provide
ensemble information about the aggregation kinetics of amyloidogenic
proteins as well as the conformation and morphology of amyloid fibrils
and the intermediate prefibrillar species populated during their formation.
The metastable and heterogeneous nature of protein oligomers, however,
limits the detailed characterization of such prefibrillar species.
Recently, a variety of novel approaches have been developed and applied
for this purpose. Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy, for example,
provides information about the nature and distribution of species
formed in the early stages of fibril formation.[14,15] Additionally, mass spectrometry and NMR spectroscopy have been applied
to detect and analyze the properties of oligomers with a range of
different structures.[16−18] Single molecule fluorescence spectroscopy, however,
offers a particularly powerful approach for exploring the formation
and properties of oligomers, as it has the ability to investigate
individual molecular species and to reveal conformational dynamics
that may be averaged in the ensemble experiment.[19,20] These techniques have been shown to be able to identify and characterize
the low-populated, heterogeneous and transient species formed during
fibril assembly of several amyloidogenic proteins.[21−25]Ure2 from Saccharomyces cerevisiae is the protein determinant of the yeastprion state [URE3][26] and provides an important system for
probing amyloid formation and prion propagation. The Ure2 protein
is a dimer in solution; each monomer contains 354 amino acids and
consists of two domains.[27,28] The unstructured and
flexible N-terminal domain (residues 1–93) is primarily responsible
for prion conversion and propagation in vivo and
for formation of amyloid fibrils in vitro.[29−31] The globular C-terminal domain (residues 94–354) is similar
to glutathione transferases in structure[32,33] and has both glutathione-dependent peroxidase activity[34] and glutaredoxin activity.[35] Ure2 is also a negative regulatory factor of nitrogen metabolism,
as in its native state the protein interacts with the transcription
factor Gln3 and represses the uptake of poor nitrogen sources.[36] Therefore, when Ure2 converts into the aggregated
prion state, Gln3 is released and activates the expression of the
genes related to the metabolism of less favorable nitrogen sources.While the aggregated prion form of Ure2 is tolerated by yeast cells,
precursor aggregates of Ure2 are toxic to mammalian cells,[37,38] as are amyloid aggregates of other proteins.[39] It is therefore interesting to study the oligomers formed
and the structural changes occurring during Ure2 fibril formation,
and to compare them to disease-related models. In a previous study
we identified by AFM prefibrillar intermediates of Ure2 with a range
of different sizes formed during the aggregation process.[31] A soluble oligomeric species formed during the
early stages of Ure2 aggregation was separated and characterized by
biochemical and spectroscopic methods.[40] Taken together, these results suggest a connection between the population
of oligomeric species and the course of Ure2 amyloid assembly into
mature fibrils. Theoretical modeling has previously enabled the kinetic
parameters that describe the growth and breakage of Ure2 fibrils to
be defined, allowing the contribution of individual molecular steps
to be correlated with prion propensity;[41] however, data on the oligomeric populations of Ure2, which would
allow this type of mechanistic analysis to be carried out, have not
previously been available. In the present study, we have applied single
molecule fluorescence resonance energy transfer (smFRET) to investigate
in detail the intermolecular assembly and aggregation process of Ure2.
This approach has enabled oligomerization during the initial lag phase
to be observed, and two types of Ure2 oligomers with different assembly
modes have been identified. Furthermore, using theoretical analysis
combined with single molecule and ensemble kinetic data, we describe
the formation and depletion pathway of oligomers, and propose a multistep
mechanism for Ure2 fibril formation, in which initial oligomerization
is followed by conformational conversion to β-sheet-containing
oligomers that are then able to grow to form mature amyloid fibrils.
Methods
Mutant Construction, Protein
Expression, Purification and Labeling
The single point cysteine
variants (V9C, S53C and S68C) of Ure2
were obtained by overlapping PCR using a synthetic wild-type URE2 gene as template[42] and ligated
into the mini-pRSETa vector. All the mutants constructed in this study
were confirmed by DNA sequencing. Full-length Ure2 was expressed in E. coli C41(DE3) cells with a His6-tag
and purified by nickel-affinity chromatography as described previously.[42,43] Purified Ure2 was dialyzed into 50 mM Tris–HCl (pH 8.4) buffer
containing 200 mM NaCl and 500 μM TCEP at 4 °C. Protein
purity was checked by SDS-PAGE, and the protein concentration was
determined by the absorbance at 280 nm for full-length Ure2 using
a molar extinction coefficient of 48,220 M–1 cm–1.[42] The details of fluorescence
labeling of Ure2 are described in the Supporting Information (SI) Methods.
Single-Molecule FRET Measurement
of Ure2 Oligomers
SmFRET experiments were carried out using
a home-built confocal microscope
or total internal reflection fluorescence (TIRF) microscope based
on a Nikon Ti-E inverted microscope similar to that described previously.[44] The details of the instrumentation, experimental
procedures and data analysis used for confocal smFRET and TIRF smFRET
are described in the SI Methods.
Developing
a Model for Kinetic Data Fitting
We set
out here to develop a quantitative model that describes the experimental
observables: the total fibril mass concentration M(t) and the total oligomer concentration O(t). In addition to M(t) and O(t),
the model explicitly considers the concentration of native state dimeric
Ure2 m(t), and of fibrils P(t). In particular, the model describes
explicitly the formation of oligomers through dimer association with
rate constant koligo, their conversion
to fibrils with rate constant kc, their
destruction (rate constant kd), and fibril
growth and fragmentation (rate constants k and k, respectively). Addition of further complexity to this coarse-grained
model is in principle readily possible within the master equation
formalism; such additional details, including differentiating between
multiple structural classes within the oligomer subpopulations, would,
however, require further experimental constraints than are currently
available, in order to avoid overfitting.[45] We used the Ure2 dimer concentration for m(t) rather than the monomer concentration, as evidence suggests
Ure2 remains in its dimeric form throughout the aggregation reaction
(see Results).The rate equations for
the model can be written as a master equation:where we have left
out terms with negligible
contributions to the overall kinetics, such as the effects of nonelongation
steps on monomer depletion.[46] Any larger
oligomers are expected to form from growth of smaller oligomers; all
oligomers ultimately grow from the initial interaction of a pair of
dimeric Ure2 molecules. The physically reasonable choice of overall
reaction order for oligomer formation is therefore 2.0. (For further
explanation, see SI Methods.)These
equations were solved for early times in the aggregation
process, and the solutions used to derive a first-order self-consistent
expression for M(t) (see also SI Methods):with A = αk+kc/κ2(kl + κ), kl = kc + kd, and
α = koligom(0)2.The time-dependent evolution of the oligomer population
depends
only on koligo, kl and m(t). In turn, m(t) depends only on κ and A, or κ, kl, and αkkc. Overall therefore, the dynamics of the dimer and oligomer populations
depend on the following four combinations of rate parameters: kk, k+kc, k, and koligo. Moreover the fitted values of koligo and kl are
approximately independent of the values chosen for kk and kkc, provided that these two parameter combinations
give a reasonable fit to the fibril mass concentration.
Relating Model
Rate Constants to Fundamental Reaction Steps
Experiments
indicate that we can resolve the observed oligomers
into two structurally distinct populations, with a low-FRET oligomer
formed initially and subsequently converting into a high-FRET oligomer,
which in turn converts to fibrils. The data are not, however, sufficiently
detailed to allow a full kinetic analysis to be carried out on both
populations individually. The avoidance of overfitting necessitates,
therefore, that we consider together the different structural classes
of oligomers, and examine the overall fluxes that lead to their generation
or depletion. We can, however, incorporate elements of our knowledge
of the oligomer subpopulations in the overall interpretation of the
results. We did so by determining how each species contributes to
the total oligomer formation, depletion and conversion rate constants
in our coarse-grained model. The concentration of the later high-FRET
oligomer species changes very little over the time course of the aggregation
reaction compared to that of the earlier low-FRET species, and is
present at significantly lower concentrations than the earlier low-FRET
species over the times most relevant to the fitting procedure. Moreover,
we show below that high-FRET oligomers are likely to be formed from
conversion of low-FRET oligomers. Therefore, the rate constants for
total oligomer formation and dissociation obtained from the fitting
process can be interpreted as approximately the rate constants for
low-FRET oligomer formation and dissociation. The rate constant kc gives the approximate proportionality between
the overall oligomer concentration and the rate of formation of fibrils
from oligomers, and so contains information on both the conversion
of low-FRET to high-FRET oligomers, as well as the conversion of high-FRET
oligomers to fibrils. The concentration data on high-FRET oligomers
indicated that the steady-state approximation is likely to be valid
here, in which case we can explicitly write kc in terms of the rate constants of a more detailed kinetic
model featuring two separate oligomeric species (see SI Methods). The “conversion” rate constant
would then be proportional to the rate constant for transformation
of low-FRET oligomers to high-FRET oligomers, as well as to the rate
constant for conversion of high-FRET oligomers to fibrillar species.
Fitting the Combined smFRET/ThT Data to the Model
The
ThT component of the data was fitted globally to the analytical expression
for the full time-course fibril concentration to obtain values for A and κ using the online fitting platform Amylofit.[47] Then, the smFRET component of the data was fitted
to our early time expression for O(t) using Mathematica to give approximate values for koligo and kl. Having established
that kd ≫ kc, we can set kd = kl. Combining these conclusions with A and κ yields approximate values for kk and kkc. The availability of these approximate rate
constants as trial parameters enabled a numerical fit of our combined
smFRET/ThT data to eqs –4 to be carried out, yielding robust
rate constants and verifying the consistency of our model with the
experimental data. For the fitting of the combined smFRET/ThT data,
a ratio of 1.5:1 was chosen for kk(S68C):kk(V9C) (see Results). For a full description of the kinetic model and fitting methods,
see SI Methods.
Results
Single Molecule
FRET Measurements Can Monitor the Formation
of Ure2 Oligomers
Since Ure2 has no intrinsic cysteine residues,
single cysteine mutations were introduced to specific sites within
the Ure2 N-terminal region to allow covalent linkages to maleimide-functionalized
dyes. In order to avoid perturbing the process of Ure2 fibril formation,
we chose mutation sites that are located near the turn of the β-strand
in the structural models of the Ure2 amyloid fibril core.[48] The residues selected were V9C, S53C and S68C,
of which V9C and S53C are near the N-terminal and C-terminal ends
of the fibril core (Figure A), respectively, and should be sensitive reporters of the
conformational changes associated with aggregation. The formation
of fibrils by these derivatives was then monitored using ThT fluorescence.
The results showed that both Ure2S53C and S68C formed fibrils at
essentially the same rate as that of wild-type Ure2, while V9C formed
fibrils more slowly, as reflected in a longer lag time than the wild
type (Figure S1A). A possible reason for
this change is that V9 is located in one of the regions of the prion
domain that have been shown to be important for formation of Ure2
amyloid[31] and may indeed participate in
the formation of the first β-strand in Ure2 fibrils;[49] the source of this difference in rate is addressed
further in the kinetic analysis below. For the case of the dye-labeled
proteins, ThT assays could not be used because of potential FRET effects
between ThT and the labeled fluorophores; the kinetics of fibril formation
by the labeled proteins were therefore monitored using turbidity measured
at OD400, which indicates that fluorescence labeling does
not significantly perturb the fibril formation rate of the mutants
(Figure S1B). Furthermore, the aggregates
formed by these unlabeled and labeled Ure2 proteins were imaged using
transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and each showed a similar fibrillar
morphology to that of wild-type Ure2 fibrils (Figure S1C).
Figure 1
Oligomerization of Ure2 monitored by confocal single molecule
FRET.
(A) Schematic figure to indicate the cysteine mutations and fluorescence
labeling sites that were used in this study, based on a previously
suggested structural model of Ure2 fibrils.[48] (B) Scheme for smFRET detection of Ure2 oligomers. (C) The concentration
of AF555/AF647 labeled Ure2-S68C oligomers throughout the aggregation
reaction. (D) Ensemble kinetics of the aggregation of 15 μM
(dimeric concentration) unlabeled Ure2-S68C monitored by ThT fluorescence.
All the aggregation reactions were carried out at 18 °C in an
Innova 4230 incubator with shaking at 150 rpm in 50 mM Tris–HCl
(pH 8.4) buffer containing 200 mM NaCl.
Oligomerization of Ure2 monitored by confocal single molecule
FRET.
(A) Schematic figure to indicate the cysteine mutations and fluorescence
labeling sites that were used in this study, based on a previously
suggested structural model of Ure2 fibrils.[48] (B) Scheme for smFRET detection of Ure2 oligomers. (C) The concentration
of AF555/AF647 labeled Ure2-S68C oligomers throughout the aggregation
reaction. (D) Ensemble kinetics of the aggregation of 15 μM
(dimeric concentration) unlabeled Ure2-S68C monitored by ThT fluorescence.
All the aggregation reactions were carried out at 18 °C in an
Innova 4230 incubator with shaking at 150 rpm in 50 mM Tris–HCl
(pH 8.4) buffer containing 200 mM NaCl.To check the efficiency of fibril formation, we also measured
the
fraction of labeled protein in the supernatant and the pellet by SDS-PAGE
after the aggregation reaction reached a plateau, and most of the
soluble protein was found to have converted into the insoluble fibrillar
form, with less than 10% of the protein remaining in the supernatant
(Figure S1D). Fluorophore attachment on
the sites selected here does not, therefore, alter the ability of
Ure2 to form fibrils or the nature of the fibrillar products. The
self-assembly process of the fluorophore-labeled Ure2, as monitored
by single molecule fluorescence experiments, can therefore be considered
to be the same as that of unlabeled Ure2. Note that since Ure2 is
a highly stable dimer in solution,[42,50] and the dimeric
unit of Ure2 seldom dissociates during fibril formation (Figure S2); we therefore refer to the dimer concentration
throughout this study, unless otherwise stated.Next we used
smFRET, which has been used in studies of other amyloidogenic
proteins[22−24] to detect the oligomeric species formed during the
Ure2 fibril formation process. The soluble oligomer formed between
AF555- and AF647-labeled Ure2 gave well-defined FRET signals and could
be detected at the single molecule level by monitoring coincident
bursts in both donor and acceptor channels when the oligomers diffused
across the diffraction-limited focus (Figure B). The numbers of selected FRET events were
converted to oligomer concentrations (see SI Methods) and plotted against time (Figure C). Meanwhile, the progress of fibril formation
of the unlabeled Ure2 in bulk solution was monitored by the ThT fluorescence
assay under the same incubation conditions (Figure D). As shown in the smFRET data (Figure C), the number of
oligomers rises to its highest level within 5 h, which occurs during
the lag phase of the ensemble ThT curve (Figure D), reflecting the assembly and increase
in the number of oligomers. After 5 h, the soluble oligomeric species
were observed to decrease in concentration as the Ure2 becomes sequestered
into mature fibrils that are not detected by the confocal smFRET technique.
The decrease in the number of oligomers corresponds well with the
onset of fibril formation reflected in the bulk ThT assay under the
same conditions (Figure D).We assessed the stability of the oligomers formed at different
time points by taking an aliquot from the aggregation reaction and
diluting it into buffer; we then monitored whether or not there was
any decrease in the smFRET burst rate corresponding to the detection
of individual oligomers during a 1 h window immediately after dilution.
Coverslips were pretreated with unlabeled protein to avoid adsorption
of the labeled sample onto the surface. We observed by TIRF imaging
that pretreatment of the surface with either BSA or unlabeled Ure2
was equally effective at suppressing the adsorption of the fluorescently
labeled sample (Figure S3A). However, when
the diluted sample was loaded onto BSA-coated coverslips, oligomer
dissociation was evident by confocal smFRET within 1 h (Figure S3B). In contrast, when we used coverslips
pretreated with unlabeled Ure2, the oligomers remained at a constant
level during the measurement time (Figure S3B–F), a finding that can be rationalized by the desorption of unlabeled
protein from the surface into solution, thus stabilizing the oligomers.
Therefore, in order to avoid underestimating oligomer concentrations,
we used coverslips coated with unlabeled Ure2 when performing smFRET
experiments.These results demonstrate the power of single molecule
techniques
for the observation of low populations of oligomers. It is evident
that aggregates of Ure2 form during the lag phase observed by ThT
fluorescence, in agreement with theoretical modeling.[51]
SmFRET Measurements Reveal the Absence of
Significant Oligomer
Formation via Secondary Nucleation During Ure2 Fibril Formation
The two generic mechanisms that lead to the formation of fibrils
are the primary nucleation pathway, during which new oligomers are
generated by the direct association of soluble protein or peptide
molecules, and secondary pathways, where existing fibrils have the
propensity to generate the formation of new fibrils, either through
fragmentation or through surface catalyzed secondary nucleation. In
the latter case, nucleation of new fibrils takes place on, and is
catalyzed by, the surface of existing fibrils,[46] the rate of which therefore depends on the mass concentration
of existing fibrils. In the case of Aβ42 aggregation,[52] whose kinetics are dominated by the surface-catalyzed
secondary nucleation pathway, it has been shown explicitly that the
majority of small oligomers present during the reaction are produced
during secondary nucleation.[52] In earlier
studies of Ure2, we have shown that fragmentation events are important
determinants of the rate of fibril formation under both quiescent
and shaking conditions[41,53,54] although the production of oligomers through surface-catalyzed secondary
nucleation in the case of Ure2 has not previously been discounted.We measured the generation of Ure2 oligomers directly using smFRET
in the presence of 1% preformed mature fibrils to provide a surface
for oligomer formation if secondary nucleation were to occur at a
significant rate for Ure2. The time course of oligomerization observed
by smFRET in the presence of the added fibrils shows a similar initial
rate to that of the unseeded system, and the quantity of oligomers
detected at each time point is not increased, indicating that the
rate of oligomer production during secondary nucleation is insignificant
compared to the rate of direct association of dimers to form oligomers
during primary nucleation. This was confirmed by explicit fitting
to kinetic models featuring oligomer formation during primary nucleation
(Figure A) and during
secondary nucleation (Figure B). The former yields a good fit; the latter a poor fit, a
result that is very different from the findings for Aβ42[52] (Figure C). The quantity of Ure2 oligomers under seeded conditions
appears to be lower than in the absence of preformed fibrils, which
is likely to be a result of the rapid depletion of native Ure2 by
association with, and elongation of, the pre-existing fibril ends.
Together with the kinetic analysis of the ensemble fibril formation
of Ure2 (SI Methods and Figure S4), this
observation confirms that the proliferation of Ure2 fibrils results
from fragmentation and not from secondary nucleation.
Figure 2
Absence of a fibril-catalyzed
secondary nucleation process for
Ure2. (A, B) Ensemble aggregation kinetics of 15 μM unlabeled
Ure2-S68C monitored by ThT fluorescence under unseeded (blue) or seeded
(red) conditions (upper panels). Ure2 oligomers were
then detected under unseeded (blue) or seeded (red) conditions by
confocal single molecule FRET (lower panels). The
incubation conditions were the same as in Figure . (A) The data fit well to a model that generates
oligomers during primary nucleation. (B) A model that generates oligomers
during secondary nucleation cannot fit the data. (C) The presence
of seeds (right-hand columns) drastically increases
the concentration of Aβ42 oligomers measured at a single time
point in the lag phase of an Aβ42 aggregation experiment[52] (right panel), but do not increase
the production of Ure2 oligomers in this study (left panel), indicating fundamentally different mechanisms of oligomer formation
for these two systems.
Absence of a fibril-catalyzed
secondary nucleation process for
Ure2. (A, B) Ensemble aggregation kinetics of 15 μM unlabeled
Ure2-S68C monitored by ThT fluorescence under unseeded (blue) or seeded
(red) conditions (upper panels). Ure2 oligomers were
then detected under unseeded (blue) or seeded (red) conditions by
confocal single molecule FRET (lower panels). The
incubation conditions were the same as in Figure . (A) The data fit well to a model that generates
oligomers during primary nucleation. (B) A model that generates oligomers
during secondary nucleation cannot fit the data. (C) The presence
of seeds (right-hand columns) drastically increases
the concentration of Aβ42 oligomers measured at a single time
point in the lag phase of an Aβ42 aggregation experiment[52] (right panel), but do not increase
the production of Ure2 oligomers in this study (left panel), indicating fundamentally different mechanisms of oligomer formation
for these two systems.
Analysis of Oligomer Populations Reveals the Existence of an
Oligomer Conformational Conversion Step
The results so far
have established that Ure2 oligomers are formed predominantly from
the free association of dimers during primary nucleation. We can demonstrate
using the following simple argument that only a minority of these
oligomers ultimately become fibrils, and that both an oligomer dissociation
pathway and a conformational conversion step are needed. Taking a
conservative estimate of the initial oligomer formation rate of 20
nM/h (Figure C), and
noting that minimal native Ure2 depletion occurs over the first 4
h of aggregation, a concentration of oligomers of at least 80 nM will
be formed in the first 4 h. The rate of oligomer formation declines
subsequently, but does not cease until all Ure2 is depleted from solution
at ∼10–12 h; we therefore estimate the lower bound on
the total concentration of oligomers that form during primary nucleation
to be 100 nM. Mature Ure2 fibrils are observed to have lengths typically
greater than 100 nm, and mostly on the micrometer scale. Given that
the interchain distance within an amyloid fibril is ca. 0.5 nm, fibrils
must typically contain at least 100 Ure2 dimers. In the smFRET experiments
the concentration of Ure2 dimers incorporated into fibrils is approximately
15 μM, so the final concentration of fibrils is at most 150
nM. Ure2 has also been shown to follow fragmentation-dominant kinetics,
so fibril formation through primary nucleation is insignificant compared
to the total formation of fibrils through fragmentation. The total
concentration of fibrils formed through primary nucleation must therefore
be at least an order of magnitude less than the total concentration
of fibrils formed, and so is significantly less than 15 nM. This value
is far lower than the concentration of oligomers formed during primary
nucleation observed in our smFRET experiments, and leads us to conclude
that most oligomers must dissociate rather than elongate. Given that
oligomers undergo faster dissociation than the fibrils, the oligomers
must be structurally distinct from fibrils. In the following two sections
we demonstrate that new fibrils are likely to originate from structural
conversion of these oligomers, although this must occur much more
slowly than dissociation. This result was confirmed by comparing fitted
values for the oligomer conversion and dissociation rate constants
(see kinetic analysis below).
Two Types of Oligomeric
Species with Different Structures Can
Be Observed
To investigate directly the possibility of structurally
distinct subpopulations of Ure2 oligomers, potentially related by
additional conformational conversion steps, we performed an smFRET
efficiency distribution analysis. Here we used S53C rather than S68CUre2, because both these variants show similar fibril formation kinetics
to the wild-type protein, but the S53 residue is closer to the fibril
core than is S68 and is thus expected to be more sensitive to structural
changes within the oligomers. The experiment was carried out in a
similar manner to that described above except that AF488 instead of
AF555 was used to label Ure2 in order to reduce cross talk between
the donor and acceptor fluorophore in the smFRET experiments, allowing
detection of population distributions not apparent when using the
AF555 dye as donor. We calculated the FRET efficiency of selected
oligomers at different time points during fibril formation to obtain
a FRET efficiency distribution histogram (Figure ). At the early stages within the lag time,
for example after 1 h of aggregation in the case of S53C, only one
broad, low FRET efficiency distribution with a maximum of 0.40 was
observed. As the aggregation reaction progressed, but before significant
fibril mass had formed, an additional higher FRET efficiency distribution
with a maximum of 0.68 appeared, suggesting these later oligomers
contain a more compact assembly of Ure2 molecules than the initial
low-FRET oligomers (Figure A). Despite the slow kinetics of fibril formation, the existence
of two different types of oligomers was also observed for the V9C
mutant (Figure B),
where the low and high FRET distributions peaked at 0.46 and 0.66,
respectively. High-FRET oligomers appear after low-FRET oligomers
but before fibrils, suggesting that they are formed by conversion
of the low-FRET oligomers. Additionally, the lack of an increase in
the later high-FRET oligomer population as the fibrils start to form
indicates that there is no significant production of surface-catalyzed
secondary nuclei (Figure C,D). It should be noted that FRET efficiency is not only
related to the distance between the donor and acceptor but also to
their dipole orientation. The similar change in the FRET efficiency
when dyes were introduced at different sites (i.e., S53C and V9C)
indicates that the signal reflects principally the change in the average
distances between dyes, and not the change of orientation of dyes,
as there is little probability of the latter occurring simultaneously
at two different residue sites.
Figure 3
Different types of Ure2 oligomers revealed
by confocal single molecule
FRET. (A,B) SmFRET efficiency distribution of selected oligomers of
AF488/AF647-labeled Ure2 at different incubation times. The FRET distributions
at different time points were fitted globally to double Gaussian functions
giving the average peak positions indicated. (C,D) Population of low-
and high-FRET oligomers of Ure2 at different incubation times. The
incubation conditions were the same as in Figure . (A,C) Ure2-S53C. (B,D) Ure2-V9C.
Different types of Ure2 oligomers revealed
by confocal single molecule
FRET. (A,B) SmFRET efficiency distribution of selected oligomers of
AF488/AF647-labeled Ure2 at different incubation times. The FRET distributions
at different time points were fitted globally to double Gaussian functions
giving the average peak positions indicated. (C,D) Population of low-
and high-FRET oligomers of Ure2 at different incubation times. The
incubation conditions were the same as in Figure . (A,C) Ure2-S53C. (B,D) Ure2-V9C.An interesting finding in our
smFRET study is the observation of
a lower FRET efficiency for the initially formed oligomers for S53C
than for V9C but a similar FRET efficiency of the late phase oligomers
for the two variants. This observation provides clues as to the structures
of the two types of oligomers. Since the V9 residue is located in
the hydrophobic region (residues 9–21) of the N-terminal domain
and the S53 residue is in the Q/N rich region (residues 44 to 80),
the closer intermolecular distances within the early stage oligomers
of V9C than S53C strongly suggests that the initial intermolecular
oligomerization involves hydrophobic interactions. After the reorganization
of the initial oligomers to β-sheet-containing oligomers, both
V9 and S53 sites would be included in the amyloid structure and should
have similar interchain distances between the same residues aligned
along the fibril axis, thus explaining the similarity of the intermolecular
FRET efficiency of the late phase oligomers (the high-FRET species)
of the two mutants.To obtain further evidence to support the
coexistence and interconversion
of two types of oligomers, we carried out a dot blot assay using the
conformation-specific antibodies A11 and OC that have been used previously
for identification of specific types of oligomers.[55,56] We first probed the two types of oligomers formed during aggregation
of full-length Ure2, but the signals obtained in the experiments were
very weak, probably caused by the blocking effect of the globular
C-terminal domain surrounding the N-terminal prion domain of Ure2.
Therefore, we used the N-terminal prion domain fragment (residues
1–93) to perform the dot blot assay (see SI Methods). The results (Figure S5) show that two types of oligomers exist during aggregation of the
Ure2prion domain and that the concentration of relatively disordered
oligomers (A11 reactive species) reaches a maximum earlier than the
β-sheet rich oligomers (OC reactive species), indicating a possible
conversion from the former to the latter, consistent with our conclusions
based on the smFRET results. Taken together, these results indicate
that the two oligomeric intermediates have distinct structural properties,
consistent with the existence of a conformational conversion step
between the earlier and later appearing oligomers.
Ure2 Oligomers
That Disaggregate from Mature Fibrils Have Structures
Similar to Those of the Oligomers Appearing Later in the Aggregation
Reaction
We next probed by smFRET the structures of the Ure2
species dissociated from fibrils. The mature fibrils formed from an
equimolar mixture of AF488-Ure2 and AF647-Ure2 were incubated in fresh
buffer for at least 1 h before detection by confocal smFRET, under
the same conditions as for the aggregation reaction. Upon incubation,
the oligomers dissociating from fibrils reached a concentration of
0.1–0.2% of the total Ure2 fibril mass concentration, the same
proportion as observed in the combined smFRET/ThT data set at the
end of the aggregation reaction. These oligomers showed a broad FRET
distribution, mainly between 0.2 and 0.8, and could not be precisely
fitted by a Gaussian function due to the extremely low occurrence
of such species. In order to detect large or insoluble species, which
may not be observed during the confocal smFRET experiment, we applied
TIRF with smFRET to probe the dissociated oligomers in order to increase
the detection efficiency for larger species (see SI Methods). In addition, in order to obtain a higher number
of disaggregated oligomers, we sonicated the AF488/AF647 fibrils before
carrying out the smFRET measurements. The resulting mixture of oligomers
and small fibrils in TIRF images showed coincident signals in both
AF488 and AF647 channels, and the FRET distribution of the samples
of Ure2S53C and V9C could be fitted by double Gaussian functions
(Figure ). Two major
populations centered at around 0.64 and around 0.8 were observed,
the lower of which was similar to the high-FRET distribution observed
during the aggregation reaction (Figure ), and can be attributed to disaggregated
oligomers. The species showing higher FRET values, with a maximum
at around 0.8, can be attributed to small fibrils, indicating the
more compact structure within amyloid fibrils. This observation is
remarkably similar to that in previous studies of α-synuclein.[22] The results of TIRF experiments, therefore,
demonstrate that the oligomers that disaggregate from Ure2 fibrils
have the same structural properties as the oligomeric species formed
in the later stages of the aggregation reaction. This finding strongly
suggests that the high-FRET oligomers contain β-sheet structure
similar to that found in mature amyloid fibrils, and that this type
of oligomeric species is able to convert to elongation-competent fibril-type
species.
Figure 4
Single molecule TIRF measurements of disaggregated fibrils. (A,B)
SmFRET distribution histogram of Ure2 oligomers disaggregated from
AF488/AF647-labeled fibrils. Data were fitted to a double Gaussian
function (continuous line) to obtain the FRET values of the two species.
(A) Ure2-S53C. (B) Ure2-V9C.
Single molecule TIRF measurements of disaggregated fibrils. (A,B)
SmFRET distribution histogram of Ure2 oligomers disaggregated from
AF488/AF647-labeled fibrils. Data were fitted to a double Gaussian
function (continuous line) to obtain the FRET values of the two species.
(A) Ure2-S53C. (B) Ure2-V9C.
Kinetic Analysis of Combined smFRET and ThT Data Yields a Quantitative
Understanding of Oligomer Formation, Dissociation and Conversion
Analysis of the kinetics of the aggregation reaction is a crucial
step in understanding the microscopic mechanism of amyloid formation.
Previous theoretical work has provided an analytical solution to the
kinetics of fibril formation involving fragmentation,[57] and by globally fitting the ThT curves over a range of
concentrations[58] to this expression, two
combined kinetic parameters, knk and kk can be obtained, where kn, k and k represent the amyloid nucleation,
elongation and fragmentation rates, respectively. To study how the
mutations affect these rates, and thus to gain further structural
and mechanistic insight into the nucleation process, we performed
smFRET experiments to compare the oligomer formation of the two Ure2
mutants, V9C and S68C.Previous kinetic modeling of amyloid
aggregation used a single coarse-grained reaction step to represent
the “primary nucleation” pathway by which new fibrils
are generated via an initial association step. Here, the availability
of accurate kinetic data on the total concentration of oligomeric
intermediates allows us to devise a less coarse-grained kinetic model
that explicitly includes intermediates in the nucleation step. The
model remains partly coarse-grained, however, as it makes no distinction
between different oligomer types; nevertheless, it provides additional
insights into the nature of the nucleation process. In this model,
oligomers are formed through an initial assembly process, occurring
with rate constant koligo, and subsequently
convert into growth-competent fibril-type species with a rate constant kc. These species can then elongate by dimer
addition with rate constant k, and fragment with rate constant k. The oligomers can also dissociate with rate
constant kd (that we have shown above
is much larger than kc). Note that we
can approximately interpret oligomerization and dissociation as fundamental
reaction steps; however, the conversion step is in fact a coarse-grained
step that contains information on the transformation of low-FRET to
high-FRET oligomers, as well as on the subsequent conversion of the
latter species to fibrils (see Methods and SI for full details). The accurate determination of reaction orders
with respect to dimers requires kinetic data for a range of initial
dimer concentrations. Given just one initial dimer concentration,
however, we can make the reasonable assumption of a reaction order
of 0 for conversion and 2 for oligomer formation. Any inaccuracy in
these reaction orders is effectively incorporated into our definitions
of kc and koligo, and does not significantly affect the quality of the fitting (see SI Methods).An accurate analytical solution
for the time dependence of the
fibril mass concentration in our model can be derived by extension
of previous approaches.[57,59] The solution is identical
to the analytical solution for the kinetics of a fragmenting system,
upon which the kinetic analysis of the bulk ThT experiments in the SI is based, except that the fibril nucleation
rate knm(0) is resolved in terms of the microscopic
processes introduced in our oligomer model. Specifically, we obtainwhere and α = koligom(0). This
result, combined with an analysis of the equation governing oligomer
kinetics, reveals that the kinetics of this system are controlled
by the parameter combinations koligo, kd, kkc, and kk. The combined rate parameters kkc and kk can be determined with order-of-magnitude accuracy.A numerical procedure was used to fit the combined smFRET and bulk
ThT data to this model (see Methods for further
details). The numerical fits are reasonable given the accuracy of
the data, and show that our coarse-grained model provides a good description
of the system (Figure ). The minor divergence between the fitted curve and the data for
S68C oligomers at the latest times is consistent with the fact that
disaggregation from fibrils yields a small population of oligomers
at equilibrium, yet to avoid overfitting there is no explicit fibril
disaggregation step in the model. Fitting gives a value for koligo of 1.6 × 10–3 μM–1 h–1 for both variants (Figure A,B), and a value
of kd of 0.60 h–1 for
S68C, and 0.45 h–1 for V9C. This result indicates
that the kinetics of oligomer formation by S68C and V9C are broadly
similar, but that the S68C oligomers dissociate more readily by a
factor of approximately 1.3. Given that the rates of oligomer formation
are very similar, it is likely that the reaction order of oligomerization
is approximately the same in the two mutants at this concentration
range.
Figure 5
Fitting of combined smFRET/ThT data to models indicates a probable
effect of mutations on the dissociation of oligomers, but not on their
formation. (A–C) The bulk aggregation kinetics of 15 μM
unlabeled Ure2-V9C (red) and Ure2-S68C (blue) monitored by ThT fluorescence
(left panels) and the concentration of AF555/AF647
labeled Ure2-V9C (red) and Ure2-S68C (blue) oligomers throughout the
aggregation reaction monitored by confocal smFRET (right panels) were globally fitted to a theoretical model (see Methods) including the formation, dissociation, and conversion
of oligomers, and the elongation and fragmentation of fibrils. The
incubation conditions were the same as in Figure . (A) Allowing both koligo and kd to differ for each
mutant gives good fits, with a mean squared error of 1.54. (B) If koligo is constrained to be the same for both
mutants, the model fits the data equally well, with a mean squared
error of 1.58. (C) If neither koligo nor kd is allowed to differ, the fit is less good,
especially around the time when the oligomer concentration is at a
maximum, with a mean squared error of 1.87. This result therefore
implies that koligo is the same for the
two variants, while the values of kd may
differ slightly.
Fitting of combined smFRET/ThT data to models indicates a probable
effect of mutations on the dissociation of oligomers, but not on their
formation. (A–C) The bulk aggregation kinetics of 15 μM
unlabeled Ure2-V9C (red) and Ure2-S68C (blue) monitored by ThT fluorescence
(left panels) and the concentration of AF555/AF647
labeled Ure2-V9C (red) and Ure2-S68C (blue) oligomers throughout the
aggregation reaction monitored by confocal smFRET (right panels) were globally fitted to a theoretical model (see Methods) including the formation, dissociation, and conversion
of oligomers, and the elongation and fragmentation of fibrils. The
incubation conditions were the same as in Figure . (A) Allowing both koligo and kd to differ for each
mutant gives good fits, with a mean squared error of 1.54. (B) If koligo is constrained to be the same for both
mutants, the model fits the data equally well, with a mean squared
error of 1.58. (C) If neither koligo nor kd is allowed to differ, the fit is less good,
especially around the time when the oligomer concentration is at a
maximum, with a mean squared error of 1.87. This result therefore
implies that koligo is the same for the
two variants, while the values of kd may
differ slightly.The differences in kkc and kk between the V9C and S68C variants
are less than an order of magnitude,
indicating that these parameters are similar for both variants. An
order-of-magnitude estimate for k of 40 μM–1 h–1 was
obtained from analysis of the seeded aggregation experiment monitored
by ThT fluorescence (see SI Methods and Figure S7 for details). This value allows us to calculate order-of-magnitude
estimates for k and kc, of 1 × 10–4 h–1 and 2 × 10–3 h–1 respectively. We note that kc is 2 orders of magnitude smaller than kd, as expected from our analysis of oligomer dissociation.
To estimate the differences in these parameters between each variant,
we used a ratio k(S68C):k(V9C) of 1.5:1, as indicated
by seeded bulk experiments (see SI Methods and Figure S7), and a ratio k(S68C):k(V9C) of 1:1 as indicated by fragmentation rate measurements (see
SI Methods and Figure S8). This series
of steps then allows us to calculate a ratio kc(S68C):kc(V9C) of 1.4:1. Although
this value is rather sensitive both to experimental error and to errors
in the parameter ratios that are used, it can be interpreted as demonstrating
that the conversion rates are similar, although possibly somewhat
larger in S68C. Taken together, these results indicate that the V9C
mutation decreases the fibril elongation rate and oligomer dissociation
rate, leaving the fibril fragmentation rate and oligomer formation
rate unaffected. Furthermore, they suggest that the oligomer conversion
rate may also be slightly decreased by the V9C mutation.
Discussion
We have applied single molecule FRET measurements to investigate
the aggregation behavior of the yeastprion protein Ure2 and to observe
the low populations of transient oligomers formed during the aggregation
reaction that are challenging to detect by ensemble methods. The single
molecule FRET observations indicate that the majority of the oligomers
formed during the initial step of the nucleation process dissociate
back to the native dimeric state, but a small population of oligomers
undergoes a conformational conversion step leading to formation of
elongation-competent species. Quantitative analysis of a combination
of bulk and single molecule data has provided detailed information
about the rates of the microscopic kinetic steps in the formation
of amyloid fibrils, and how these rates are altered by point mutations
in the prion domain. Based on our observations, a mechanism has been
proposed for the formation of Ure2 amyloid fibrils in which native
Ure2 forms relatively disordered oligomers, probably driven by hydrophobic
intermolecular interactions, only a small proportion of which then
rearrange to form structurally more compact β-sheet containing
oligomers that are able to convert further to elongation-competent
fibrillar species and grow by addition of native dimers to form mature
amyloid fibrils (Figure ).
Figure 6
Proposed model for the aggregation pathway of Ure2. Native dimeric
Ure2 forms relatively disordered oligomers driven by hydrophobic interactions
and either dissociates back to the native state or undergoes conformational
conversion to form more compact oligomers containing β-sheet
structure, which can in turn convert into growth-competent fibrillar
species. Fragmentation of fibrils then contributes to their proliferation.
Proposed model for the aggregation pathway of Ure2. Native dimeric
Ure2 forms relatively disordered oligomers driven by hydrophobic interactions
and either dissociates back to the native state or undergoes conformational
conversion to form more compact oligomers containing β-sheet
structure, which can in turn convert into growth-competent fibrillar
species. Fragmentation of fibrils then contributes to their proliferation.Primary nucleation of amyloidogenic
proteins, in which a native
protein converts into an elongation-competent species, is a crucial
step in fibril formation. Molecular simulations of the aggregation
of Aβ42 indicate that primary nucleation occurs via intermediate
disordered non-β oligomers, which not only facilitates encounters
between the monomeric proteins but also provides an environment that
facilitates their conversion to fibrillar β-structure.[60,61] Nonspecific intermolecular interactions, such as hydrophobic interactions,
play a crucial role in the formation of the initial disordered oligomers,[60] while the intra- and intermolecular hydrogen
bonding within β-sheets is considered to be the driving force
for the subsequent conformational conversion.[62] This formation of hydrogen bonds compensates for the disruption
of the hydrophobic interactions in the initial disordered oligomers,
thus favoring conformational reorganization to β-sheet structure
in order to reach the lowest energy state. The conformational reorganization
between early relatively disordered oligomers and β-rich elongation-competent
species during amyloid formation has also been suggested by experimental
studies of other amyloidogenic proteins such as α-synuclein,[22] Aβ40,[63] and
the yeastprion protein Sup35.[64] In agreement
with theoretical and experimental results for other amyloid proteins,
both theoretical analysis of oligomer concentrations and direct observation
of two types of Ure2 oligomers possessing different assembly and emergence
times (Figure ) provide
additional evidence for the oligomerization/conversion model as a
generic feature of amyloid nucleation.In order to obtain a
quantitative understanding of the fundamental
reaction steps that contribute to the amyloid formation process, analytical
methods have been used to describe fibril growth and to obtain the
microscopic kinetic parameters.[46,57] Since the advent of
single molecule techniques, it has become feasible to probe the nucleation
process directly in real time throughout the aggregation reaction.[22−25] However, the kinetic analysis in previous studies has either focused
on the early stage of oligomer formation[22,25] or made use of a highly coarse-grained nucleated polymerization
model in which secondary processes were not considered and in which
the fitted rate constants were difficult to relate to specific reaction
steps.[24] In this study, we provide a kinetic
analysis of the combined single molecule FRET and ensemble ThT data
(Figure and Figure ) that considers
not only the oligomer formation process but also the elongation and
fragmentation processes, providing quantitative information about
the complete aggregation pathway of an amyloid protein. Another advance
in the present study is the determination of an expression for the
bulk primary nucleation rate kn, which
is found to depend not only on the rate constants of oligomer formation,
dissociation and conversion, but also on the rate constants for fibril
elongation and fragmentation. Global analysis of the oligomer formation
kinetics, measured by smFRET, and the fibril formation kinetics, monitored
by the ensemble ThT assay, results in two independent parameters koligo and kd and
two combined parameters kck and kk−, where the
latter two can be decomposed by direct measurement of k or of k. Thus, the theoretical analysis of the smFRET
data provides detailed quantitative information about the fundamental
steps in the process of amyloid nucleation.Our study also provides
new structural insights into the aggregation
mechanism of Ure2. The disordered N-terminal domain consists of a
hydrophobic region (residues 15–42) and two Q/N repeat regions
(residues 1–14 and 43–89).[31] In a previous study, we have demonstrated that deletion of residues
1–42 eliminates the ability of Ure2 to form fibrils at measurable
rates, while deletion of either residues 1–14 or residues 15–42
increases the lag time significantly,[31] indicating the importance of this region in the aggregation reaction.
We observed that the V9C mutation causes an increase in the length
of the lag phase for fibril formation compared with that of wild-type
Ure2. Kinetic analysis of the bulk ThT variable-concentration data
under both unseeded and cross-seeded conditions reveals that this
effect is predominantly due to a decrease in the elongation rate caused
by the V9C mutation. We then investigated the effect of the mutation
on the nucleation process in detail by kinetic analysis of the combined
smFRET and bulk ThT data. The rates of both oligomer dissociation
and oligomer conversion are slightly decreased in the V9C mutant relative
to WT Ure2, while the rate of oligomer formation is unaffected, indicating
that V9C forms a more stable oligomer. However, the V9C mutation has
a negligible effect on the overall rate of formation of elongation-competent
oligomers (kn). Taken together, these
results show that the V9 residue plays an important role in the elongation
of Ure2 fibrils, consistent with a recent structural study using site-directed
spin labeling and electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR), which demonstrated
that the residues 8–12 form the first β-strand in the
fibrils.[49]The toxicity of amyloid
oligomers has been demonstrated to be correlated
with the degree of exposure of hydrophobic surface.[65,66] Since oligomers assembled by functional amyloidogenic proteins,
such as Ure2 in this study, and Sup35 in a previous study,[64] have similar conformational features (for example,
reactivity with A11 and OC antibodies) and a similar formation and
conversion pathway to that of toxic amyloidogenic proteins such as
α-synuclein[22] and Aβ,[60,63] the difference between functional and disease-related amyloid remains
to be elucidated. In this study, we observed a gradual decrease in
the concentration of oligomers accompanying the onset of ThT fluorescence.
Calculations and theoretical analysis of the smFRET data has led to
the conclusion that the majority of Ure2 oligomers formed do not ultimately
become fibrils but are depleted by dissociation. In contrast, the
populations of Aβ40 and α-synuclein oligomers have been
observed to follow a single exponential process and to remain at a
significant equilibrium concentration even after all the monomers
are depleted.[22,23,25] A possible explanation for the accumulation of Aβ40 and α-synuclein
oligomers is that they convert very slowly relative to their formation,
and become kinetically trapped once monomers are depleted, as the
residual population of oligomers can no longer grow through monomer
addition into fibrils. Another possible explanation for the difference
is that the fibrils of Aβ40 and α-synuclein may not be
as stable as the Ure2 fibrils, such that the equilibrium between oligomers
and fibrils favors oligomers to a much greater extent than is the
case with Ure2. In either of the above cases, Aβ40 and α-synuclein
oligomers should have higher stability relative to the native state
than Ure2 oligomers, and therefore would not be expected to dissociate
significantly. The accumulation of relatively high concentrations
of oligomers formed by disease-related amyloidogenic proteins could
therefore be the cause of their toxicity.A further potential
reason for the higher toxicity of disease-related
amyloidogenic proteins is that oligomers are generated not only during
primary nucleation but also during secondary nucleation. For the case
of Ure2, we have been able to demonstrate directly the lack of formation
of surface-catalyzed secondary nuclei using smFRET measurements (Figure ). Several structural
studies indicate that the N-terminal domain of Ure2 forms an in-register
parallel β-sheet structure with its C-terminal domain decorating
the fibril core.[67,68] Compared with other amyloidogenic
proteins which show monomer-dependent secondary nucleation, such as
Aβ42,[52] α-synuclein[69] and IAPP,[70] the surface
of Ure2 fibrils is likely to be blocked by the presence of its C-terminal
globular domain, thus restricting the access of native Ure2 to the
fibrillar structure and inhibiting the ability of the pre-existing
aggregates to catalyze the nucleation of the native protein. The absence
of surface-catalyzed secondary nucleation will greatly reduce the
generation of oligomers,[52] which is another
possible reason for the lower toxicity of functional amyloids. Taken
together, the low stability of Ure2 oligomers and the absence of secondary
nucleation suggests that the functional yeast prions may replicate
and propagate by fragmentation rather than secondary nucleation and
hence avoid significant populations of potentially toxic oligomers,
as occurs in the aggregation of neurodegenerative disease-related
proteins. This study paves the way for the detailed study and comparison
of further examples of both disease-related and functional amyloid
systems, particularly the variety of amyloidogenic proteins that play
structural and functional roles in bacteria.[71,72] The understanding gained from such studies will not only shed light
on the mechanisms by which amyloid structures are harnessed for functional
roles, but may also provide clues as to possible new therapeutic strategies
to combat amyloid disease.
Authors: Anđela Šarić; Thomas C T Michaels; Alessio Zaccone; Tuomas P J Knowles; Daan Frenkel Journal: J Chem Phys Date: 2016-12-07 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Beate Winner; Roberto Jappelli; Samir K Maji; Paula A Desplats; Leah Boyer; Stefan Aigner; Claudia Hetzer; Thomas Loher; Marçal Vilar; Silvia Campioni; Christos Tzitzilonis; Alice Soragni; Sebastian Jessberger; Helena Mira; Antonella Consiglio; Emiley Pham; Eliezer Masliah; Fred H Gage; Roland Riek Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2011-02-15 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Marija Iljina; Gonzalo A Garcia; Mathew H Horrocks; Laura Tosatto; Minee L Choi; Kristina A Ganzinger; Andrey Y Abramov; Sonia Gandhi; Nicholas W Wood; Nunilo Cremades; Christopher M Dobson; Tuomas P J Knowles; David Klenerman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2016-02-16 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Jose M Paredes; Salvador Casares; Maria J Ruedas-Rama; Elena Fernandez; Fabio Castello; Lorena Varela; Angel Orte Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 6.208
Authors: Samuel I A Cohen; Sara Linse; Leila M Luheshi; Erik Hellstrand; Duncan A White; Luke Rajah; Daniel E Otzen; Michele Vendruscolo; Christopher M Dobson; Tuomas P J Knowles Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2013-05-23 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Alexander J Dear; Thomas C T Michaels; Georg Meisl; David Klenerman; Si Wu; Sarah Perrett; Sara Linse; Christopher M Dobson; Tuomas P J Knowles Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2020-05-15 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Jason C Sang; Ji-Eun Lee; Alexander J Dear; Suman De; Georg Meisl; Alana M Thackray; Raymond Bujdoso; Tuomas P J Knowles; David Klenerman Journal: Chem Sci Date: 2019-03-25 Impact factor: 9.825
Authors: Xi Li; Chunhua Dong; Marion Hoffmann; Craig R Garen; Leonardo M Cortez; Nils O Petersen; Michael T Woodside Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-02-11 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Jason C Sang; Georg Meisl; Alana M Thackray; Liu Hong; Aleks Ponjavic; Tuomas P J Knowles; Raymond Bujdoso; David Klenerman Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 15.419