Alexander K Buell1, Georg Meisl2, Anđela Šarić2,3, Thomas C T Michaels2, Christopher M Dobson2, Sara Linse4, Tuomas P J Knowles2, Daan Frenkel2. 1. Institute of Physical Biology, University of Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf Germany. 2. Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. 3. Department of Physics and Astronomy, Institute for the Physics of Living Systems, University College London, London, UK. 4. Department of Biochemistry and Structural Biology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Abstract
The ability of biological molecules to replicate themselves, achieved with the aid of a complex cellular machinery, is the foundation of life. However, a range of aberrant processes involve the self-replication of pathological protein structures without any additional factors. A dramatic example is the autocatalytic replication of pathological protein aggregates, including amyloid fibrils and prions, involved in neurodegenerative disorders. Here, we use computer simulations to identify the necessary requirements for the self-replication of fibrillar assemblies of proteins. We establish that a key physical determinant for this process is the affinity of proteins for the surfaces of fibrils. We find that self-replication can only take place in a very narrow regime of inter-protein interactions, implying a high level of sensitivity to system parameters and experimental conditions. We then compare our theoretical predictions with kinetic and biosensor measurements of fibrils formed from the Aβ peptide associated with Alzheimer's disease. Our results show a quantitative connection between the kinetics of self-replication and the surface coverage of fibrils by monomeric proteins. These findings reveal the fundamental physical requirements for the formation of supra-molecular structures able to replicate themselves, and shed light on mechanisms in play in the proliferation of protein aggregates in nature.
The ability of biological molecules to replicate themselves, achieved with the aid of a complex cellular machinery, is the foundation of life. However, a range of aberrant processes involve the self-replication of pathological protein structures without any additional factors. A dramatic example is the autocatalytic replication of pathological protein aggregates, including amyloid fibrils and prions, involved in neurodegenerative disorders. Here, we use computer simulations to identify the necessary requirements for the self-replication of fibrillar assemblies of proteins. We establish that a key physical determinant for this process is the affinity of proteins for the surfaces of fibrils. We find that self-replication can only take place in a very narrow regime of inter-protein interactions, implying a high level of sensitivity to system parameters and experimental conditions. We then compare our theoretical predictions with kinetic and biosensor measurements of fibrils formed from the Aβ peptide associated with Alzheimer's disease. Our results show a quantitative connection between the kinetics of self-replication and the surface coverage of fibrils by monomeric proteins. These findings reveal the fundamental physical requirements for the formation of supra-molecular structures able to replicate themselves, and shed light on mechanisms in play in the proliferation of protein aggregates in nature.
The molecular machinery of life is largely generated through the assembly of
proteins into functional complexes. A particularly common form of protein selfassembly
is that leading to linear filaments. These structures are widely used in nature, for
instance as the basis of the cytoskeleton. Once formed, the vast majority of functional
protein assemblies typically fulfil their biological function but do not directly
catalyse the formation of further “daughter” complexes. However, certain
protein structures possess the intriguing ability to promote their own replication. This
phenomenon first came to prominence in the context of prions, where specific
supra-molecular protein assemblies were observed to be able to effectively multiply once
taken up into a variety of organisms, ranging from humans to yeast [1-3].
Such propensity to self-replicate has emerged as a more general feature of pathological
protein self-assembly, observed in the context of sickle cell anemia [4, 5] as well
as for amyloid fibrils implicated in medical disorders [6-8], such as
Alzheimer’s disease (Aβ peptide) [9, 10], type II diabetes
(islet amyloid peptide, IAPP) [11-13], and Parkinson’s disease
(α-synudein) [14,
15]. Strikingly, all of these structures are
able to catalyse the formation of their own copies under certain conditions. The initial
fibrils are produced spontaneously from solution through primary nucleation, followed by
proliferation via heterogeneous, fibril-dependent, secondary nucleation [12]. In this type of self-replication the
information about the protein conformation is transferred to the replicas, but they are
not necessarily exactly identical to the parent aggregates. Spontaneous fibril formation
is inherently slow, while fibril self-replication is usually many orders of magnitude
faster [10]; yet a detailed microscopic
understanding of either processes is currently lacking. Autocatalytic replication
intrinsically introduces positive feedback into the self-assembly process that renders
it challenging to control once assembly has started. As such, most functional protein
complexes and fibrils do not have self-replicating properties. This finding therefore
motivates the question about the fundamental ingredients necessary for fibril
self-replication to occur, or indeed to be avoided.Here, we develop a minimal computer model that is able to capture both
spontaneous fibril formation in solution, and fibril-self replication. We study the
necessary conditions required for self-replication to dominate over spontaneous
formation, and find that strong bounds on inter-protein interactions exist for efficient
self-replication that result in the high sensitivity of self-replication to
environmental conditions. Indeed, it has been reported experimentally that the existence
of secondary nucleation in α-synuclein, insulin, and
Aβ peptide strongly depends on pH [14, 16, 17], while secondary nucleation in
Aβ also varies dramatically with salt concentration [18]. The emergence of a narrow regime that supports
self-replication sheds light on why it is relatively a rare property of protein
self-assembly in vivo, and possibly provides a physical criterion to distinguish
functional from pathological assembly. Moreover, these results suggest that even
pathological self-assembly, in principle, can be suppressed by moderate changes to the
system to move it from the narrow parameter space supporting self-replication. Our
results further infer that the secondary nucleus has to be energetically different from
the primary one, pointing to two distinctive pathways.Taking the aggregation of the Alzheimer’s Aβ
peptide into amyloid fibrils as a model for experimental comparison, in combination with
kinetic and biosensing experiments, we show that the major characteristics of secondary
nucleation can be explained by the adsorption of monomeric peptides onto the surface of
fibrils, and the level of surface coverage. We then demonstrate, in simulations and in
experiments, that self-replication can be modulated by controlling the fibril surface
coverage. Through the powerful combination of coarse-grained simulations and physical
measurements, our results offer microscopic insights into the mechanism of the
autocatalytic replication of protein fibrils.
Computer model
As the basis for our model we take the aggregation of peptides and proteins
into amyloid fibrils, which have a common structure enriched in
β-sheet content. A minimal model that reproduces
homogeneous fibril nucleation allows an amyloidogenic protein to exist in two
states: a soluble state (denoted “s”) that can form
finite oligomers, and a higher free-energy state that can form the
β-sheet enriched fibrils (denoted
“β”) [19, 20]. Simply considering the
interaction of soluble proteins with the surface of existing fibrils captures the
binding of monomers to the fibrils, but does not lower the free energy barrier for
nucleation, thus does not result in catalysis. To achieve a self-replication rate
that is significantly faster than spontaneous formation, the structure and energy of
the involved species necessarily have to differ from those observed in the absence
of fibrils (Supplementary Section
SI.C). The self-replication cycle in the Aβ
system has been shown to predominately generate small prefibrillar oligomers, whose
structures differ from that of the mature fibrils (Methods, [10, 21]). Although an ensemble of such intermediate
structures could exist in reality, here we consider the simplest possible case: we
include one additional, intermediate (“i”),
conformation, which can take place on the fibril surface. This conformation is
in-between the soluble and the β-state, and its
selfinteraction is stronger than its interaction with the fibril, which leads to
detachment of oligomers from the parent fibril, as observed in experiments.Amyloidogenic protein in our model are represented as hard spherocylinders
with attractive patches (Fig. 1). The
attractive interactions account for generic features of inter-protein interactions,
such as hydrophobic interactions, hydrogen bonding, and screened electrostatic
interactions. The soluble state of the protein is modelled as a spherocylinder with
an attractive tip (Fig. 1a), whose
self-attraction is given by the parameter
ϵ. Such particles are
able to make finite oligomers (Fig. 1b) [20]. The attractive tip can also adsorb onto
the outer surface of the fibril, with interaction strength
ϵ (Supplementary Fig. S1). The
intermediate conformation i is modelled with the same potential as
the soluble state, but possesses a stronger self-association parameter
ϵ and a vanishing
adsorption onto the fibril (Supplementary Fig. S1). The fibril forming,
β-sheet prone, configuration is a hard spherocylinder with
an attractive side-patch (Fig. 1a). The
β-prone proteins pack parallel to one another with the
maximal interaction strength
ϵ,
leading to fibril-like aggregates (Fig. 1b). We
performed dynamic Monte Carlo (MC) simulations, allowing for the interconversion
between the three protein conformations with a small probability at every MC step.
The s → i →
β conversion is thermodynamically unfavourable,
reflecting the loss of the conformational entropy [22]. Further details are given in the Methods Section.
Fig. 1
The coarse-grained model and the nucleation processes in the system.
(a) The protein is allowed to exist in three conformations. From top to bottom:
soluble state (“s”), intermediate conformation
(“i”), and the
β-sheet prone state
(“β”), (b) Aggregated proteins. From top
to bottom: oligomer made of soluble proteins, oligomer made of proteins in the
intermediate state, and the fibril made of proteins in the
β-sheet prone state, (c) Primary nucleation takes
place in two steps. Soluble peptides form finite oligomers
(top), which can convert into a nucleus of
β-sheets (bottom), that continues
growing, (d) Fibril self-replication (secondary nucleation). From top to bottom:
Soluble protein monomers adsorb onto the surface of the preformed fibril,
locally forming oligomers. Once peptides within an oligomer convert into the
intermediate conformation (depicted with red attractive tips, accentuated with
the red arrow), they become more prone to self-aggregation, which in turn leads
to oligomer detachment. Finally, the detached oligomer converts into a nucleus
of β-sheets, and continues growing. Snapshots were taken
at ϵ =
4kT,
ϵ =
8kT, and c =
50μM.
Spontaneous formation versus self-replication
The first question we address involves the identification of those conditions
that lead to secondary nucleation being dramatically dominant over spontaneous,
primary, nucleation. We have performed a series of computer experiments, in which a
capped preformed fibril (incapable of further growth) was inserted into a solution
of monomeric proteins, and nucleation processes were monitored. Primary nucleation
takes place in two steps, whereby protein oligomers first form in solution, and then
convert into β-sheet nuclei, which continue growing by
monomer addition (Fig. 1c) [20, 23].
In the secondary nucleation process, proteins first adsorb onto the surface of the
fibril, forming local clusters that keep growing and shrinking while still being
attached to the fibril surface, as depicted in Fig.
1d. Once the oligomer of a critical size is formed, the proteins within
change their conformation into the intermediate form. The oligomer then detaches
into the solution, converts into the β-sheet protofibril,
and grows further by monomer addition (Fig.
1d).To investigate possible scenarios for different aggregating proteins, under
various solution conditions, we measured the rates of primary and secondary
nucleation at different protein concentrations and inter-protein interactions. From
these measurements we calculated the fraction of self-replication events in the
system for a given set of external conditions (Supplementary Sections SI.A and
SI.B), Fig. 2a. Clearly,
self-replication dominates over spontaneous fibril formation at low protein
concentrations and low inter-protein interactions. Indeed, proteins are typically
below their critical micelle concentration at physiological conditions, which
corresponds to the regime of low inter-protein interactions and low protein
concentrations, where self-replication can dominate.
Fig. 2
Conditions supporting fibril self-replication.
(a) The fraction of self-replication events,
ηself-replication, in the total number of
nucleation events, as a function of the peptide concentration c
and the interaction between soluble peptides
ϵ. Peptide-fibril
interaction is kept constant at
ϵ =
8kT. (b) Fraction of self-replication events as a function
of the peptide concentration c and the difference between the peptide-fibril
interaction and the peptide self-interaction
(ϵ −
ϵ), exhibiting a
narrow regime where self-replication can be a dominant mechanism of formation.
Data collected at ϵ =
5kT.
The reason for the dramatic dominance of self-replication in this regime is
two-fold. The first contribution arises from the aided collocation of proteins on
the one-dimensional surface of the fibril. This contribution is particularly
important at low protein concentrations, where the probability of proteins meeting
in solution and forming oligomers is very low. The second contribution lies in the
decreased barrier for the secondary nuclei formation on the fibril surface, via the
intermediate state (Supplementary
Section SI.C). Essentially, for self-replication to dominate, the
secondary nucleus has to be different from the primary one.
Strong environmental bounds for self-replication
Modulating environmental conditions and introducing protein mutations not
only changes the properties of proteins interacting in solution, but also the
strength of the adsorption of proteins onto the surface of fibrils, given by
ϵ in our simulations. We
find that changing the protein-fibril affinity only by a few kT,
the fraction of self-replication events changes non-monotonically, exhibiting a
distinct region of optimal self-replication, Fig.
2b. This result is in agreement with the high sensitivity of fibril
self-replication to solution composition, and can explain why it is to date observed
only in few systems. Comparably, in a recent simulation, secondary nucleation of
Lennard-Jones particles at a crystalline surface, when exposed to mechanical
agitation, was reported to take place only in the regime of intermediate
supersaturation [24].Fig. 3a. analyses this effect in depth,
at constant protein concentration. At low protein-fibril interaction strengths,
proteins cover only a small fraction of the fibril surface, and the protein
adsorption and oligomer formation on the fibril surface determine the reaction rate.
Fig. 3b depicts the Langmuir-type isotherm
for the fibril surface coverage, θ, as a function of
ϵ (Supplementary Section SI.D),
indicating that the increase in the surface coverage follows the increase in the
rate of self-replication in Fig. 3a. At high
ϵ, the fibril is
substantially covered by proteins, however, the oligomer detachment becomes
unfavourable. Nucleation will happen only after the oligomer has reached a certain
size, N*, when the energy gain due to the stronger inter-protein
interactions after the conformational change overcomes the loss in the
protein-fibril adsorption energy. Stronger binding to the surface hence requires
larger oligomers in order to overcome the loss in the favourable adsorption energy.
For very large oligomers, due to the geometric constraints, this requirement cannot
be satisfied. Therefore, the conformational change will become unfavourable as the
binding to the surface increases further (inset in Fig. 3b, Supplementary
Section SI.E). In reality, in the regime of high adsorption, proteins are
likely to distribute themselves evenly on fibrils in order to increase their contact
area with the surface, and could form multiple layers, additionally hampering
secondary nucleation. The narrow region of inter-protein interactions supporting
self-replication is therefore the outcome of the balance between sufficient fibril
coverage, and unhindered conformational change.
Fig. 3
Strong bounds for self-replication.
(a) Dependence of the rate of self-replication, r, on the
peptide-fibril affinity,
ϵ. (b) Coverage of the
surface of the preformed fibril (θ) as a function of
ϵ. Red arrows in (a)
and (b) point to the area of the fastest self-replication, when the fibril is
well covered with monomers. Inset: the free energy cost
(ΔF) for the conversion
of an oligomer of size N from the
“s” conformation, that is attached onto the
fibril, into the “i” conformation that detaches
from the fibril surface. ΔF
increases with the increase in the peptide-fibril affinity. All data are
collected at ϵ =
4kT and c = 0.15mM.
Kinetics of self-replication and comparison with experimental
measurements
Our model makes a range of predictions that can be directly experimentally
tested. Here, we seek to relate our simulations to kinetic measurements of
self-replication of Aβ40 amyloid fibrils, one of the two
major isoforms of the Aβ peptide associated with
Alzheimer’s disease. Kinetic experiments usually determine the dependence of
the reaction rate on monomer concentration, r ∼
c, where the scaling
exponent γ is the reaction order. It reflects the monomer
dependence of the dominant aggregation processes, and is typically believed to be
determined by the number of molecules reacting in the rate-limiting step, therefore
carrying information about the reaction mechanism.Fig. 4a depicts double logarithmic plot
of the rate of secondary nucleation for the Aβ40 system,
versus the initial monomer concentration, where the slope corresponds to the scaling
exponent. Curiously, the scaling exponent is highly dependent on the concentration
of the monomeric peptide in solution, suggesting a possible change in the nucleation
mechanism over the concentration range [25].
Fig. 4b shows the same quantities,
collected in simulations, at a moderate peptide-fibril affinity. The reaction order
varies with the protein concentration, with a high value at low monomer
concentrations (γ ≈ 3.3), and low value at high
monomer concentrations (γ ≈ 0.5), as with the
Aβ40 experimental data.
Fig. 4
Kinetics of fibril self-replication.
(a) Experimental results: The rate of secondary nucleation for the
Aβ40 system versus the initial concentration of
soluble monomers, from Ref. [25]. (b)
Simulation results: The rate of secondary nucleation of fibrils
with a moderate affinity for soluble monomers
(ϵ =
6kT) as a function of the concentration of the monomeric
proteins in solution. Inset: the average critical oligomer size stays constant
over the entire concentration range; the solid line plots the linear fit over
the concentration range, (c) Experimental results: Fraction of the
peptides bound to the surface of Aβ40 fibrils,
θ, under the same conditions as the kinetic
experiments in (a), versus the concentration of the monomers. The dashed line is
the fit to the Langmuir isotherm with K−1 =
15μM. Inset: schematic representation of the
adsorption of monomeric peptides (coloured in blue) to the surface of fibrils
(coloured in magenta), measured via SPR. (d) Simulation results:
Surface coverage θ versus the concentration of free
monomers at ϵ =
6kT. Inter-peptide interaction is kept constant at
ϵ =
4kT for all simulation data.
Due to our microscopic modelling we are able to pinpoint the processes
underlying the switch in kinetic behaviour. Fig.
4d shows that the change in the reaction order follows the trend in the
change of fibril coverage. Hence, the non-linear increase in surface coverage, due
to surface saturation, appears to be the cause of the continuous decrease in
reaction order. It is beneficial to establish what controls the absolute value of
the apparent reaction order (see Methods and
Supplementary Section
SI.F for details). We find that the rate of self-replication follows the
surface saturation as ln(r) ∼
N*ln(Kc/(1 + Kc)), where
K is the monomer-surface binding constant (K
∼ ϵ) and
N* is the size of the nucleating oligomer (found to be constant
over the concentration range in our simulations, inset in Fig. 4b). The reaction order then continuously changes between
γ → N*, at infinite dilution,
and γ → 0 at full saturation. Since nucleation is
possible within a finite time only when the surface coverage is non-negligible,
observable values of γ will be necessarily smaller than
N*.
Experimental verification of surface saturation
To test experimentally the prediction that the change in the apparent
reaction order is governed by the change in the surface coverage, and not by a
change in the nucleation mechanism, we designed a series of surface plasmon
resonance (SPR) biosensing experiments that allow direct measurement of the binding
of monomeric peptide molecules to the surface of amyloid fibrils, under the same
conditions as the kinetic experiments. This enabled us to obtain the Langmuir
absorption isotherm of Aβ40 peptides onto their own fibrils
(Fig. 4c and Supplementary Fig. S6).
Indeed, the surface saturation takes place in the micromolar regime (with an
equilibrium binding constant of K−1 =
15μM), which is exactly the regime where the change in
the apparent reaction order takes place in aggregation experiments (Fig. 4a). Furthermore, this value of
K is of the same order of magnitude as the value obtained from
the kinetic fit to the experimental aggregation data (Methods and Supplementary Section SII), and therefore strongly supports the
hypothesis that the change in exponent is due to surface saturation.
Surface saturation controls the apparent reaction order
Finally, we show that by controlling the surface coverage via varying the
strength of the inter-protein interactions, at constant monomer concentration, one
can further modulate the kinetics of fibril self-replication. At constant protein
concentration, the surface coverage is determined by the magnitude of protein-fibril
affinity and inter-protein interactions. It is likely that both of these interaction
strengths will be affected when altering experimental conditions, due to their
similar physical origins. We observe that the surface coverage increases when both
of these interactions are strengthened in simulations, resulting in a weaker
dependence of self-replication on monomer concentration. The average scaling
exponent γ from the simulations, as a function of
ϵ and
ϵ, is shown in Fig. 5a and Fig. 5b. We compare this behaviour to
the aggregation of the Aβ42 at a range of NaCl salt
concentrations [18], Fig. 5c. In the context of our physical model, two isoforms of
Aβ peptide, Aβ40 and
Aβ42, share mechanistic similarities. An increase in
ionic strength shields the electrostatic interactions and leads to an increased
attraction between the negatively charged Aβ42 monomers and
fibrils, as well as the monomers to each other. Hence a variation of ionic strength
offers an experimental way to vary in a controlled way the value of
ϵ and
ϵ. Indeed, the trend in
the behaviour of the scaling exponents for the aggregation of
Aβ42 with increasing salt concentration agrees well with
that found in our simulations. Therefore the large effect of ionic strength on the
aggregation behaviour is in agreement with a variation of the adsorption of peptides
onto their fibrils, offering a direct way to influence the self-replication process
in a controlled manner.
Fig. 5
The apparent reaction order is controlled by the surface saturation.
Simulation results: (a) Scaling exponent for the kinetics of fibril
self-replication, averaged over the range of concentrations
(20μM ≤ c ≤ 1mM), as
a function of the interpeptide interaction between soluble monomers at constant
peptide-fibril affinity ϵ
= 8kT, and (b) as a function of the peptide-fibril affinity at
constant inter-peptide affinity
ϵ =
4kT. An increase in
ϵ and
ϵ increases the
surface coverage, as shown by the representative snapshots in insets, taken at a
monomer concentration c = 0.15mM.
Experimental results: (c) The average scaling exponent for
self-replication of Aβ42 fibrils at a range of NaCl
concentrations, whose increase is expected to increase both
ϵ and
ϵ from Ref. [18].
Discussion and conclusions
By developing a minimal model of protein self-replication, we have
identified its dominant physical determinant to be the adsorption of monomeric
proteins onto the surface of protein fibrils. Strong limits on interprotein
interactions are found for efficient self-replication, originating from the fact
that changes in the interaction strength have opposing effects on the two parts of
the nucleation mechanism: oligomer formation and oligomer detachment. A narrow
region of “ideal” interaction values supporting self-replication
(Fig. 2b) results in its high specificity
and sensitivity to environmental conditions.An additional conformational change taking place on the fibril surface is a
minimal requirement for the catalysis and detachment of oligomers from the parent
fibril, which, in the context of many amyloid diseases, is a crucial step in the
proliferation of pathological species [26-28]. The conformational
change is at the origin of the formation of amyloid fibrils; the aggregating protein
necessarily undergoes a change from the soluble form into the characteristic
β-hairpin conformation. Models which attempt to achieve
self-replication in (nearly) minimal colloidal systems, require an external
dynamical change to permit detachment of the replicas from the parents [29, 30].
Amyloidogenic proteins naturally possess this dynamic characteristic.A direct practical contribution from our analysis is the ability to relate
the reaction order measured in experiments to the underlying microscopic mechanism.
We have found that the changes in the reaction order can be related to the change in
the fibril surface coverage byproteins, which we have confirmed by directly
measuring the binding isotherm of monomers to the fibril surface. The characteristic
concentration-dependence of the reaction order, observed in experiments, is
consistent with a scheme where the rate-limiting step takes place on the surface,
further confirming that primary and secondary nucleation are indeed different
processes. Whether the change in the apparent reaction order will be experimentally
measured will depend on the concentration range that can be explored, as the
experiments might be limited to a concentration range where it appears locally
constant. By measuring the fibril coverage and the apparent kinetic reaction order
separately, the information about the critical size of oligomers produced via
secondary nucleation becomes directly accessible, for any protein system which
exhibits this behaviour.As a proof of principle, we have shown that by varying in a controlled
manner the fibril surface coverage, by modulating the inter-protein interactions
with ionic strength, one can control the kinetics of fibril self-replication. Hence
the adsorption of monomeric proteins onto the surface of protein fibrils may pose a
central target in limiting the proliferation of protein aggregates in a disease
context.
Methods
The coarse-grained model and the choice of parameters
We use the model developed in Ref. [20], extended to capture secondary nucleation. In spirit, this model
is similar to the multistate Potts model of Zhang and Muthukumar [31], and the recent model of Ilie, Otter
and Brils [32]. Recently, more rigorous
schemes have been developed to map coarse-grained inter-peptide interactions
onto patchy-colloids for the purpose of studying protein aggregation by Ruff et
al. [33, 34].In our model each spherocylinder is σ =
2nm wide and L =
4σ = 8nm long. The hard core
repulsion forbids for any distance between any two spherocylinders to be smaller
than σ. The interaction between two peptides in the
soluble “s” form is implemented as:
where r is the distance between the centers of the attractive
tips located at the spherocylinders’ ends. An attractive patch is added
only at one spherocylinder pole to ensure formation of finite aggregates like
those observed in experiments. This potential drives the formation of
micellar-like oligomers, where tips of participating peptides are in contact in
the oligomer center (Fig. 1B). The
parameter ϵ controls the
strength of the non-specific interactions between the soluble peptides. Using
atomistic simulations we estimated
ϵ to be relatively
small, on the order of 5kT [20]. To explore the influence of different solution conditions, we
varied it between 3kT and 8kT, as indicated in
the text.The interaction between two peptides in the intermediate conformation
“i”, and between the soluble and the
intermediate conformation is implemented using the same potential as in Eq. (1), with
ϵ →
ϵ and
ϵ →
ϵ, respectively. The
intermediate state is designed to be between the soluble and the
β-sheet forming state, corresponding to a
conformation with more β-content than the soluble state,
but not yet a fully folded β-hairpin. Hence, the
relative strength of interactions was always preserved, with
ϵ <
ϵ <
ϵ. Their values were
chosen such that nucleation is achieved within a reasonable computer time (see
Supplementary Fig.
S2), while preserving their relative strength;
ϵ is kept constant at
ϵ =
16kT, and
ϵ is kept constant at
ϵ =
8kT. Throughout the article k denotes the
Boltzmann’s constant and T is the temperature.The attractive side-patch of the β-sheet forming
configuration is L =
0.6L long and spans an angle of 180°. If two patches
face each other their interaction is:
where ϕ is the angle between the axes of the particles,
d is the shortest distance between the axes of the patches,
and r is distance between the centers of the patches. The first
term controls that peptides in the β-forms pack parallel
to each other, mimicking the hydrogen-bond interactions between
β-sheets, while the second term ensures compactness
of the fibrils [22, 35, 36]. To drive
the formation fo thermodynamically stable fibrils,
ϵ
has to be the strongest of all the interactions in the system. In this study we
choose ϵ =
60kT [37, 38]. General aggregation of
patchy-spherocylinders has been studied in details in our previous work [39].The cross-interaction between the soluble and the
β-sheet-forming configuration is designed as:
where d is the shortest distance between the centre of the
attractive tip and the axis of the β-patch, and
ϵ =
ϵ +
1kT. The i-β
interaction is described in the same way, with
ϵ →
ϵ, and
ϵ =
ϵ +
1kT.Peptide adsorption onto the preformed fibril is given by:
where d is the shortest distance between the centre of the
attractive tip of the soluble peptide and the body of the
β-peptide (there is no other angular dependence).
Adsorption of the intermediate “i” conformation
onto the fibril is described in the same way (Eq. (4)), with
ϵ →
ϵ, and
ϵ =
1kT. The β-peptide interacts with
the preformed fibril only via volume exclusion. The model parameters are
summarized in Supplementary
Figure S1.
MC Scheme
MC simulations were performed with small translational and rotational
moves, to approach the realistic dynamics of the system. The interconversion
between the three states was carried out with a small probability
P = 0.0002, which mimics the slow conversion of the soluble
peptide into fibril-forming β-sheet prone configuration.
Every conversion from the soluble to the β-state is
penalized with a change in the excess chemical potential of magnitude
Δμ = 20kT, and the
s → i and the i
→ β with 0.5Δμ
(Fig. 1a). These values are chosen to
reflect the fact that amyloidogenic proteins with small-to
mid-β-propensity, such as
Aβ, are typically not found in the
β-sheet prone conformation in solution [40, 41].Simulations were performed in a periodic cubic box in a grand-canonical
ensemble, where the chemical potential of non-adsorbed soluble peptides was kept
constant. This scheme was chosen to avoid the depletion of monomers from the
solution due to the adsorption onto the surface of the preformed fibril. For
this purpose, we do not distinguish between the monomeric soluble species, and
the soluble species that are part of an oligomer in solution. The number of
soluble peptides in the beginning of each simulation was set to ∼ 600,
and the box size was adjusted to match the targeted peptide concentration.
Soluble peptides are added or removed from anywhere in the simulation box,
according to the grand-canonical scheme [42], excluding the r = 5σ
region around the capped preformed fibril. All simulations were performed with
the same size of the preformed fibril, which consists of N = 92
β-peptides and is unable to grow further. We were
monitoring only the first generation of replicas, and have allowed the soluble
peptides to adsorb only onto the preformed fibril, and not onto its
replicas.
Kinetics of self-replication
In bulk experimental systems, the overall kinetics are determined by the
processes of spontaneous nucleation in solution, elongation and
self-replication, that all alter the fibril population. To compare bulk kinetic
measurements to the modelling of nucleation on a single, growth-incompetent
fibril used in simulations, it is necessary to dissect the macroscopic behaviour
into its constituent processes. This can be achieved by developing a theoretical
kinetic model and global fitting to the experimental kinetic data. We have
adapted a theoretical kinetic model for the aggregation of
Aβ40 [25] to
include the Langmuir-like adsorption of peptides onto the growing fibril, and
fit it to bulk experimental kinetic data to obtain the rate of secondary
nucleation at various peptide concentrations. The details of the kinetic model
as well as the global fits used to obtain this rate of secondary nucleation are
shown in the Supplementary
Section SII and Fig. S4.
Experimental exploration of intermediate oligomers in self-replication of
Aβ42
If the oligomers generated through secondary nucleation were of the same
structure as the fibrils, their concentration, [O], could be
estimated from the known rate parameters for the fibrillar growth as
where k2 is the rate constant for secondary
nucleation, k+ is the fibril elongation rate
constant and mtot is the total protein concentration
[43]. Using the values for the rate
constants extracted from kinetic measurements of Aβ42
aggregation (k2 ≈ 104
M−2s−1, k+
≈ 3 × 106 M−1s−1
and mtot = 5μM) [10], we find this concentration to be
[O] ≈ 0.01 pM. This value is at least 5 orders of
magnitude smaller than the experimentally measured concentration of oligomers in
the same system (nanomolar range [10]),
indicating that the structure of oligomers generated via such secondary pathway
is necessarily different from that of the fibrils.
Scaling of the rate of self-replication with surface coverage
We recall that the conformational change, and subsequent fibril
nucleation, is favourable only for oligomers above a certain critical size
N*. The free energy of formation of such an oligomer on a
finite surface scales as ΔF(N*)
∼ −N*ln(Kc/(1 +
Kc)) where K is the monomer-surface
binding constant (K ∼
ϵ) and
c is the free monomer concentration (Supplementary Section
SI.G). Since the rate of the process depends exponentially on the
negative magnitude of the free energy change for the critical oligomer
formation, we obtain:Supplementary Fig.
S3 shows the free energy for oligomer formation on the fibril
surface, ΔF(N), measured from the
size-distribution of oligomers on the fibril in our simulations (Supplementary Section
SI.F). As predicted, it decreases with increasing peptide
concentration, reaching a plateau at high concentrations. An arrow in the Supplementary Fig. S3
marks the lowest concentration range at which we observe nucleation (−9
< ln(c) < −8). The slope at that point
(≈ 0.6), multiplied by the average critical oligomer size
(N* ≈ 6, inset in Fig.
4b), should give us the expected apparent reaction order in the
kinetic plot γ ≈ 3.6. The measured reaction order
at the same concentration range in Fig. 4b
is γ ≈ 3.3, which agrees well with the predicted
value within the error of our scaling theory and measurements.
SPR Experiments
Aβ40 amyloid fibrils were attached to the
surface of an SPR biosensor and exposed to a solution containing monomeric
Aβ40. In this case, monomers simulta neously attach
both to the fibril ends and to their surfaces. However, due to their very
different kinetics and thermodynamics, the two processes can readily be
distinguished (Supplementary
Section SIII). The elongation of fibrils will lead to a linear
increase in mass, while the rate of attachment of peptide to the surface of
fibrils is expected to decrease exponentially with time as the available binding
sites become occupied. Conversely, upon washing the fibrils, the surface-bound
peptide molecules are expected to show an exponential detachment behaviour, at
high rates due to their relatively low binding free energy, while the rate of
loss from the fibril ends by monomer dissociation is expected to be linear and
very slow due to the high thermodynamic stability of the
β-sheet rich fibrils [44]. By following the kinetic data of monomer detachment,
we can distinguish the fast exponential from the slow linear dissociation (Supplementary Fig. S5),
and obtain the amplitude of the exponential signal resulting from attachment to
the surface of the fibrils, at various concentrations of the free monomers.
Authors: Dominic M Walsh; Igor Klyubin; Julia V Fadeeva; William K Cullen; Roger Anwyl; Michael S Wolfe; Michael J Rowan; Dennis J Selkoe Journal: Nature Date: 2002-04-04 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Peter Hortschansky; Volker Schroeckh; Tony Christopeit; Giorgia Zandomeneghi; Marcus Fändrich Journal: Protein Sci Date: 2005-06-03 Impact factor: 6.725
Authors: T R Serio; A G Cashikar; A S Kowal; G J Sawicki; J J Moslehi; L Serpell; M F Arnsdorf; S L Lindquist Journal: Science Date: 2000-08-25 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Thomas C T Michaels; Andela Šarić; Georg Meisl; Gabriella T Heller; Samo Curk; Paolo Arosio; Sara Linse; Christopher M Dobson; Michele Vendruscolo; Tuomas P J Knowles Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2020-09-14 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: Zenon Toprakcioglu; Ayaka Kamada; Thomas C T Michaels; Mengqi Xie; Johannes Krausser; Jiapeng Wei; Andela Saric; Michele Vendruscolo; Tuomas P J Knowles Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2022-07-28 Impact factor: 12.779
Authors: Phuong H Nguyen; Ayyalusamy Ramamoorthy; Bikash R Sahoo; Jie Zheng; Peter Faller; John E Straub; Laura Dominguez; Joan-Emma Shea; Nikolay V Dokholyan; Alfonso De Simone; Buyong Ma; Ruth Nussinov; Saeed Najafi; Son Tung Ngo; Antoine Loquet; Mara Chiricotto; Pritam Ganguly; James McCarty; Mai Suan Li; Carol Hall; Yiming Wang; Yifat Miller; Simone Melchionna; Birgit Habenstein; Stepan Timr; Jiaxing Chen; Brianna Hnath; Birgit Strodel; Rakez Kayed; Sylvain Lesné; Guanghong Wei; Fabio Sterpone; Andrew J Doig; Philippe Derreumaux Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 60.622