| Literature DB >> 30155007 |
Steven Daly1,2, Alexander Kulesza1,2, Frederic Poussigue1,3, Anne-Laure Simon1,2, Chang Min Choi1,2, Geoffrey Knight1,2, Fabien Chirot1,3, Luke MacAleese1,2, Rodolphe Antoine1,2, Philippe Dugourd1,2.
Abstract
Small oligomers of the amyloid beta protein (Aβ) have been implicated as the neurotoxic agent leading to Alzheimer's disease, and in particular mutations in the hydrophobic core region comprising amino acids L17 to A21 have a large influence on the propensity for aggregate formation. It has been shown that the F19P alloform of Aβ forms small aggregates, but does not proceed to form large fibrils and plaques. In order to understand the origin of this behavior, the gas phase conformations for the different charge states of the wild-type 12-28 fragment of the amyloid beta and its F19P alloform were studied by a combination of action-FRET, ion-mobility spectrometry (IMS) and molecular dynamics simulations. Comparison of the experimental and theoretical action-FRET efficiencies and collision cross sections allowed the determination of the lowest energy conformational family for each alloform and charge state. For both alloforms, it was found that there is a change from globular to helical structure between the 3+ and 4+ charge states. Additional protonation to give 5+ and 6+ charge states caused unfolding of this helical motif, with the wild alloform showing β-turn like motifs and the F19P alloform random coil motifs. The presence of the helical to β-turn structural transition in the wild, but not the F19P, alloform may help to elucidate the origin of the large difference in aggregation behavior of the two alloforms.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 30155007 PMCID: PMC6088554 DOI: 10.1039/c5sc01463h
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Sci ISSN: 2041-6520 Impact factor: 9.825
Fig. 1CCS versus FRET-efficiency for the 4 charge states of the WT (top) and F19P (bottom) alloforms of Aβ12–28. The black squares show the experimental data points, whilst the red circles show the average values of the conformational ensemble calculated by REMD.
Fig. 2Representative structures simulated at 292 K of the dominant conformational family of the different charge states of the wild (top) and F19P (bottom) alloforms of Aβ12–28. Here, the donor chromophore (grafted to the C-terminal residue) is shown in red, the acceptor chromophore in blue, and the peptide backbone in green. The inset on the top panel shows the NMR structure (pdb database file ; 1LFM) for the full amyloid beta protein, with the 12–28 region highlighted in green. The corresponding figure of the ensembles with the alternative chromophore grafting location is shown in Fig. S2.†
Fig. 3Ramachandran plots for the hydrophobic core region (residues 17–21) of the different charge states of the wild (top) and F19P (bottom) alloforms of Aβ12–28 (donor chromophore is grafted to the C-terminal residue). Black squares correspond to the 5 dihedral angle (Φ,Ψ) pairs of residues 17–21 for all the structures computed at 292 K. Red dots indicate the corresponding dihedral angles of the partially folded solution structure from the pdb file ; 1LFM. Blue dots indicate the dihedral angles of the A-chains in the pdb file ; 2BEG. The corresponding figure of the ensembles with the alternative chromophore grafting location is given in Fig. S3.†
Scheme 1Summary of monomer structural transition with charge state (a) and proposed aggregation scheme (b) for the wild and F19P alloforms.