Literature DB >> 33436430

Functional Differences between E. coli and ESKAPE Pathogen GroES/GroEL.

Jared Sivinski1, Andrew J Ambrose1, Iliya Panfilenko1, Christopher J Zerio1, Jason M Machulis1, Niloufar Mollasalehi2,3,4, Lynn K Kaneko1, Mckayla Stevens5, Anne-Marie Ray5, Yangshin Park5,6,7, Chunxiang Wu5,6,7, Quyen Q Hoang5,6,7, Steven M Johnson5, Eli Chapman8.   

Abstract

As the GroES/GroEL chaperonin system is the only bacterial chaperone that is essential under all conditions, we have been interested in the development of GroES/GroEL inhibitors as potential antibiotics. Using Escherichia coli GroES/GroEL as a surrogate, we have discovered several classes of GroES/GroEL inhibitors that show potent antibacterial activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. However, it remains unknown if E. coli GroES/GroEL is functionally identical to other GroES/GroEL chaperonins and hence if our inhibitors will function against other chaperonins. Herein we report our initial efforts to characterize the GroES/GroEL chaperonins from clinically significant ESKAPE pathogens (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterobacter species). We used complementation experiments in GroES/GroEL-deficient and -null E. coli strains to report on exogenous ESKAPE chaperone function. In GroES/GroEL-deficient (but not knocked-out) E. coli, we found that only a subset of the ESKAPE GroES/GroEL chaperone systems could complement to produce a viable organism. Surprisingly, GroES/GroEL chaperone systems from two of the ESKAPE pathogens were found to complement in E. coli, but only in the strict absence of either E. coli GroEL (P. aeruginosa) or both E. coli GroES and GroEL (E. faecium). In addition, GroES/GroEL from S. aureus was unable to complement E. coli GroES/GroEL under all conditions. The resulting viable strains, in which E. coli groESL was replaced with ESKAPE groESL, demonstrated similar growth kinetics to wild-type E. coli, but displayed an elongated phenotype (potentially indicating compromised GroEL function) at some temperatures. These results suggest functional differences between GroES/GroEL chaperonins despite high conservation of amino acid identity.IMPORTANCE The GroES/GroEL chaperonin from E. coli has long served as the model system for other chaperonins. This assumption seemed valid because of the high conservation between the chaperonins. It was, therefore, shocking to discover ESKAPE pathogen GroES/GroEL formed mixed-complex chaperonins in the presence of E. coli GroES/GroEL, leading to loss of organism viability in some cases. Complete replacement of E. coli groESL with ESKAPE groESL restored organism viability, but produced an elongated phenotype, suggesting differences in chaperonin function, including client specificity and/or refolding cycle rates. These data offer important mechanistic insight into these remarkable machines, and the new strains developed allow for the synthesis of homogeneous chaperonins for biochemical studies and to further our efforts to develop chaperonin-targeted antibiotics.
Copyright © 2021 Sivinski et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ESKAPE; GroEL; GroES; HSP10; HSP60; antibiotic; antimicrobial; chaperone; chaperonin

Year:  2021        PMID: 33436430      PMCID: PMC7844535          DOI: 10.1128/mBio.02167-20

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  mBio            Impact factor:   7.867


  51 in total

1.  ATP induces large quaternary rearrangements in a cage-like chaperonin structure.

Authors:  H R Saibil; D Zheng; A M Roseman; A S Hunter; G M Watson; S Chen; A Auf Der Mauer; B P O'Hara; S P Wood; N H Mann; L K Barnett; R J Ellis
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  1993-05-01       Impact factor: 10.834

Review 2.  The universally conserved GroE (Hsp60) chaperonins.

Authors:  J Zeilstra-Ryalls; O Fayet; C Georgopoulos
Journal:  Annu Rev Microbiol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 15.500

3.  Structural and functional conservation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis GroEL paralogs suggests that GroEL1 Is a chaperonin.

Authors:  Bernhard Sielaff; Ki Seog Lee; Francis T F Tsai
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2010-11-19       Impact factor: 5.469

Review 4.  Two families of chaperonin: physiology and mechanism.

Authors:  Arthur L Horwich; Wayne A Fenton; Eli Chapman; George W Farr
Journal:  Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 13.827

5.  Functional Partition of Cpn60α and Cpn60β Subunits in Substrate Recognition and Cooperation with Co-chaperonins.

Authors:  Shijia Zhang; Huan Zhou; Feng Yu; Feng Gao; Jianhua He; Cuimin Liu
Journal:  Mol Plant       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 13.164

6.  Point mutation of bacterial artificial chromosomes by ET recombination.

Authors:  J P Muyrers; Y Zhang; V Benes; G Testa; W Ansorge; A F Stewart
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 8.807

7.  The groES and groEL heat shock gene products of Escherichia coli are essential for bacterial growth at all temperatures.

Authors:  O Fayet; T Ziegelhoffer; C Georgopoulos
Journal:  J Bacteriol       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 3.490

8.  Mycobacterium tuberculosis GroEL homologues unusually exist as lower oligomers and retain the ability to suppress aggregation of substrate proteins.

Authors:  Rohini Qamra; Volety Srinivas; Shekhar C Mande
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2004-09-10       Impact factor: 5.469

9.  Facilitated oligomerization of mycobacterial GroEL: evidence for phosphorylation-mediated oligomerization.

Authors:  C M Santosh Kumar; Garima Khare; C V Srikanth; Anil K Tyagi; Abhijit A Sardesai; Shekhar C Mande
Journal:  J Bacteriol       Date:  2009-08-28       Impact factor: 3.490

10.  Crystal structure of the 65-kilodalton heat shock protein, chaperonin 60.2, of Mycobacterium tuberculosis.

Authors:  Rohini Qamra; Shekhar C Mande
Journal:  J Bacteriol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 3.490

View more
  2 in total

1.  Allosteric differences dictate GroEL complementation of E. coli.

Authors:  Jared Sivinski; Duc Ngo; Christopher J Zerio; Andrew J Ambrose; Edmond R Watson; Lynn K Kaneko; Marius M Kostelic; Mckayla Stevens; Anne-Marie Ray; Yangshin Park; Chunxiang Wu; Michael T Marty; Quyen Q Hoang; Donna D Zhang; Gabriel C Lander; Steven M Johnson; Eli Chapman
Journal:  FASEB J       Date:  2022-03       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  The Functional Differences between the GroEL Chaperonin of Escherichia coli and the HtpB Chaperonin of Legionella pneumophila Can Be Mapped to Specific Amino Acid Residues.

Authors:  Karla N Valenzuela-Valderas; Gabriel Moreno-Hagelsieb; John R Rohde; Rafael A Garduño
Journal:  Biomolecules       Date:  2021-12-31
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.