Tyler R Lambeth1, Ryan R Julian1. 1. Department of Chemistry, University of California, Riverside, California 92521, United States.
Abstract
Aggregation of amyloid-β (Aβ) into extracellular plaques is a well-known hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Similarly, autophagic vacuoles, autophagosomes, and other residual bodies within dystrophic neurites, though more difficult to detect, are characteristic features of AD. To explore the potential intersection between these observations, we conducted experiments to assess whether Aβ fibril formation disrupts proteolysis by lysosomal enzymes. Fibrils constituted by either Aβ 1-40 or Aβ 1-42 were grown under both neutral and acidic pH. The extent of proteolysis by individual cathepsins (L, D, B, and H) was monitored by both thioflavin T fluorescence and liquid chromatography combined with mass spectrometry. The results show that all Aβ fibril morphologies are resistant to cathepsin digestion, with significant amounts of the undigested material remaining for samples grown in either neutral or acidic pH. Further analysis revealed that the neutral-grown fibrils are proteolytically resistant throughout the sequence, while the acid-grown fibrils prevented digestion primarily in the C-terminal portion of the sequence. Fibrils grown from Aβ 1-42 are generally more resistant to degradation compared to Aβ 1-40. Overall, the results indicate that Aβ fibrils formed in the neutral pH environments found in intracellular or extracellular spaces may pose the greatest difficulty for complete digestion by the lysosome, particularly when the fibrils are comprised of Aβ 1-42.
Aggregation of amyloid-β (Aβ) into extracellular plaques is a well-known hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Similarly, autophagic vacuoles, autophagosomes, and other residual bodies within dystrophic neurites, though more difficult to detect, are characteristic features of AD. To explore the potential intersection between these observations, we conducted experiments to assess whether Aβ fibril formation disrupts proteolysis by lysosomal enzymes. Fibrils constituted by either Aβ 1-40 or Aβ 1-42 were grown under both neutral and acidic pH. The extent of proteolysis by individual cathepsins (L, D, B, and H) was monitored by both thioflavin T fluorescence and liquid chromatography combined with mass spectrometry. The results show that all Aβ fibril morphologies are resistant to cathepsin digestion, with significant amounts of the undigested material remaining for samples grown in either neutral or acidic pH. Further analysis revealed that the neutral-grown fibrils are proteolytically resistant throughout the sequence, while the acid-grown fibrils prevented digestion primarily in the C-terminal portion of the sequence. Fibrils grown from Aβ 1-42 are generally more resistant to degradation compared to Aβ 1-40. Overall, the results indicate that Aβ fibrils formed in the neutral pH environments found in intracellular or extracellular spaces may pose the greatest difficulty for complete digestion by the lysosome, particularly when the fibrils are comprised of Aβ 1-42.
Autophagy is a critical
process needed to clear cellular waste
and free up resources for reuse or energy production. Within this
framework, autophagy delivers peptides and proteins to the lysosome
where they are digested into constituent amino acids, forming a crucial
cog in the gears that drive proteostasis.[1] Target substrates can be gathered from inside the cell or from the
extracellular space through endocytosis.[2] Due to a variety of pathways leading to the lysosome, substrates
can be subjected to many conditions and environments prior to fusion
with a lysosome. Additionally, the endo/lysosomal system utilizes
acidic compartments for the delivery and degradation of substrates,
further expanding the range of different environments that may be
experienced prior to degradation.[3] Failure
of the endo/lysosomal system can lead to a variety of complications,
including a class of diseases known as lysosomal storage disorders.
Lysosomal storage is most frequently caused by hydrolase dysfunction,
which leads to the accumulation of undigested substrates and eventual
failure of the organelle.[4] Autophagic disruption
has also been associated with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) due
to the hallmark observation of lysosomal storage.[5,6] Endosome
abnormality is one of the earliest features observed in an AD brain,
and further connections have been drawn between known pathological
mutations in presenilin 1 and 2, which play roles in lysosomal acidification
and clearance.[7] As Amyloid β (Aβ)
can be produced by proteolytic cleavage in late endosomes by β-secratase-1,
dysfunction of this system can also lead to accumulation of Aβ
fibrils in lysosomes.[8]Inside the
lysosome, hydrolases known as cathepsins degrade peptides
and proteins into the constituent amino acids, which are then released
by transporter proteins back into the cytosol.[9] While a few members of the cathepsin family are exopeptidases, which
cleave from the termini, the majority are endopeptidases, which cleave
somewhere in the middle of the sequence.[10] Among the endopeptidases, the most abundant and active are cathepsin
L (catL, all cathepsins will be abbreviated similarly) and catD.[11] Studies have demonstrated that knocking out
either catD or catL induces pathology and death in mice within 4 weeks.[12,13] The most abundant lysosomal exopeptidase, catB, recognizes and binds
to the C-terminus (as well as the C-terminal mimic L-isoAsp)[14] and removes two amino acids at a time as dipeptides.
The complementary aminopeptidase, catH, works from the N-terminus
to remove one amino acid at a time. Although catB and catH are primarily
exopeptidases, they both possess secondary endopeptidase activity.[15,16] Knockouts of catB also cause shortened lifespans,[10] while knockouts of catH lead to significantly reduced levels
of important neurotransmitter peptides.[17] These studies demonstrate that while the cathepsins perform similar
functions, each enzyme is individually vital to maintain proteostasis.Amyloid β (Aβ) is a peptide of typically 39–42
residues known to aggregate into fibrils,[18] similar to other amyloid proteins such as human islet amyloid polypeptide[19] and CsgA.[20] As the
target of autophagy, Aβ (including fibrils), can be trafficked
from both intracellular and extracellular spaces to the lysosome.[21] One method of extracellular Aβ clearance
involves internalization by astrocytes.[22] Oligomeric and fibrillar forms can be transferred to astrocytic
lysosomes for degradation, with oligomeric forms being removed at
a higher rate. Aβ fibrils have been shown to impede digestion
by proteases such as trypsin[23] and bovine
brain proteases.[24] In a related system,
α-synuclein aggregates were found to resist degradation by catL.[25] These previous experiments suggest that amyloid
fibrils are resistant in varying degrees to degradation by proteases.
Aβ spontaneously assembles into fibril structures in solution
via side chain and backbone interactions. Aβ fibrils are comprised
primarily of stacked β-sheet structures stabilized by hydrophobic
interactions along the middle and C-terminal regions of the sequence.[26,27] Additionally, Aβ fibrils are often polymorphic and comprised
of strands that vary in the molecular arrangement of constituent peptides.[28,29] NMR experiments have shown that accessible morphologies include
β sheet layers composed of dimeric or trimer assemblies of Aβ.[30−32] Notably for both of these morphologies, the β-sheet core remains
tightly bound, while the N-terminal residues from 1 to 14 are disordered.
Fibril formation is affected by a number of environmental conditions.
Increasing the solution ionic strength can accelerate aggregation
rates while favoring formation of a more stable fibril form.[33] Mutations in the sequence such as the Tottori
(D7N) and English (H6R) mutations produce higher-order oligomers with
more β-strand structure, resulting in higher toxicity for cultured
neuronal cells.[34] The Tottori and Iowa
(D23N) mutations additionally introduce the possibility of deamidation,
which generates aspartic acid isomers and enhances aggregation propensity
and toxicity.[35]The pH during fibril
formation also impacts fibril morphology.
For example, fibrils formed in acidic environments differ from those
formed at neutral pH and time course measurements of fibril formation
show that aggregation occurs faster at lower pH.[36] Importantly, acidic conditions present in the lysosome
could facilitate alternate morphologies for fibrils formed therein.[37] The structural difference caused by lower pH
is attributed to varying protonation states of histidine residues
in the sequence.[38] While other ionizable
groups are unaffected by a shift from cellular to lysosomal pH, the
pKa value for the imidazole group comprising
the side chain of histidine lies in the middle of the relevant pH
range. As a consequence, histidine is likely to become protonated
in acidic compartments. The formation of amyloid β fibrils is
driven by hydrophobic interactions between the peptide chains and
as such can potentially be altered by hydrophilic charges.[39] The resulting differences between fibrils due
to His protonation were observed using transmission electron microscopy,
revealing markedly different morphology distributions.[40] By substituting alanine for histidine residues,
it was then demonstrated that protonation of side chains for His6,
His13, and His14 significantly affects fibril structure by disfavoring
amyloid sheets in the N-terminal half of the sequence. The effect
of protonation on morphology is further evidenced by the changes seen
in the English (H6R) mutation.[34] In the
body, the majority of Aβ is located extracellularly; however,
it is known to accumulate in the lysosome of neuronal cells during
the process of autophagy.[37] Monomeric Aβ
trafficked in acidic environments of the lysosomal system would fibrilize
under different conditions than the extracellular space. Due to the
origination of fibrils in neutral and acidic cellular spaces, fibrils
with varied morphologies could be delivered to the lysosome, distinctly
affecting the interactions with cathepsin proteases.Herein,
we examine incubations of fibrils grown at cellular and
acidic pH with lysosomal cathepsins to evaluate their ability to degrade
these structures. Analysis was performed via thioflavin T (ThT) fluorescence
to measure the general extent of degradation, and proteolytic products
were also quantitatively assessed with liquid chromatography/mass
spectrometry (LC–MS). Significant differences were observed
in the amount of degradation as a function of the pH used to grow
the fibrils and whether the fibrils were composed of Aβ40 or
Aβ42. Further examination of these digestions with mass spectrometry
revealed differences in both the identified sequences and length of
peptides remaining after incubation. By plotting these products as
a function of intensity, we were able to map proteolytically resistant
regions as a function of fibril composition and pH during formation.
Results
and Discussion
Amyloid β 1–40 (Aβ40) and
1–42 (Aβ42)
were incubated at pH 5 and pH 7.2 to produce stable fibrils with varying
morphologies. Importantly, fibrils formed at different pH do not interconvert
if the pH is shifted after fibrils have formed.[41] These fibrils were then digested over an 18 h period in
separate experiments by cathepsin L, D, B, and H, which represent
two crucial endopeptidases, one carboxypeptidase, and one aminopeptidase.
Although the pH was varied to create fibrils with differing morphology,
the digestion experiments for both types of fibrils were conducted
at identical pH corresponding to the optimal value for each cathepsin.
The extent of digestion was coarsely measured by ThT fluorescence
intensity, as shown in Figure a for the digestion of neutral Aβ42 by catL. ThT is
a fluorescent dye used to measure the presence of protein and peptide
aggregates due to its ability to fluoresce intensely when bound to
β-sheet-rich structures.[42] The fractional
intensity of fluorescence remaining after digestion represents the
amount of remaining β-sheet-rich structures present in the sample
after proteolysis. The fluorescence data from all cathepsin digestions
are compiled in Figure b. For the endopeptidases, catL digested more fibril relative to
catD. For the acid-grown fibrils (in green), catL reduced the amount
of fluorescence by >80% from the initial level. However, for the
neutral-grown
fibrils less digestion was observed, particularly for Aβ42,
which only exhibited a ∼30% reduction in fluorescence intensity.
Similarly, catD reduced ThT fluorescence less for neutral-grown fibrils
less and yielded almost no change for the neutral Aβ42 fibrils.
Figure 1
(a) Three
replicates for ThT fluorescence following digestion of
Aβ42-Neutral by catL. (b) Compiled fluorescence data for all
cathepsin incubations. The dark blue peak for CatL derived from the
data in (a).
(a) Three
replicates for ThT fluorescence following digestion of
Aβ42-Neutral by catL. (b) Compiled fluorescence data for all
cathepsin incubations. The dark blue peak for CatL derived from the
data in (a).Endopeptidases operate by binding
to several amino acids on either
side of the peptide bond targeted for hydrolysis and as such are potentially
sensitive to differences in substrate backbone structure in either
direction of the surrounding sequence region. In contrast, catB and
catH act primarily as exopeptidases and have the strongest interactions
with residues to one side of the targeted peptide bond. For catH,
digestion of Aβ42 and Aβ40 yielded similar results and
reductions in ThT fluorescence were not significant for either acidic
or neutral fibrils. This suggests that catH was unable to access the
amyloid region lending ThT fluorescence, although it is unclear whether
any portion of the N-terminus was digested. For catB, which attacks
from the C-terminal side, significantly more ThT fluorescence was
retained by the Aβ42 fibrils for both acidic and neutral fibers.
Indeed, neutral or acidic conditions had little effect on the catB
results, suggesting that differences in fibril structure likely occur
near the N-terminus (as discussed in the introduction section). Although
there are clear differences in the ThT results for our various test
conditions, more detailed information would likely facilitate greater
understanding.To more precisely determine the outcome of each
cathepsin digestion,
the samples were analyzed with a combination of liquid chromatography
and mass spectrometry. These experiments were able to identify the
precise peptides remaining following proteolysis and defibrilization.
Since fibrils inhibit complete degradation, the surviving peptides
yield structural information about undigested regions similar to experiments
employing limited proteolysis.[43] Raw chromatograms
of the digestion of Aβ42 with catL are shown in Figure a,b for neutral and acidic
fibrils, respectively. Notable differences in retention times and
relative intensities are apparent, suggesting that the two experiments
generated considerably different peptide profiles. This possibility
is confirmed by MS analysis, which is illustrated schematically in Figure c. Each identified
sequence from the chromatograms in Figure a/b is displayed as an individual line in Figure c, where the length
of each line maps out the corresponding peptide sequence in relation
to the full sequence shown in the middle of the diagram. Peptide identifications
were made using CID fragmentation data, as demonstrated in Figure S1. The sequences are also ordered by
intensity, with more intense peptides displayed closer to the full
Aβ42 sequence. The full list of peptides can also be found in Tables S1 and S2 in the Supporting Information.
Peptides located in the C-terminal portion of Aβ42 were found
for both acidic and neutral fibrils, indicating resistance to catL
digestion in this region. However, for the neutral fibrils, a variety
of peptides were found from the N-terminal region, including many
peptides that contained the N-terminus itself. These results suggest
that the amyloid-forming region is resistant to digestion for both
acidic and neutral fibrils, but that the N-terminal region is accessible
and susceptible to digestion for acidic fibrils. The data from Figure c can be more succinctly
summarized with additional analysis, as shown in Figure d,e. In Figure d, histograms of residual peptide length
are shown for four different experiments: neutral Aβ40, acidic
Aβ40, neutral Aβ42, and acidic Aβ42. Aβ42
digestion products skew more toward the longer sequence lengths in
general, while Aβ40 digestion products are clustered in smaller
length peptides. Notably, the 26–30 length bin contains only
intensity from neutral-grown fibrils of Aβ40 and Aβ42.
When compared to the catL digestion of monomeric Aβ42 collected
in Table S3 and displayed as histograms
in Figure S2, a striking difference is
observed. In the monomeric digest, nearly 80% of the peptide products
are of lengths less than 5 amino acids long, and there are no peptides
observed greater than 15 residues long. This contrast in peptide lengths
demonstrates a substantial obstruction is occurring in the proteolysis
of Aβ fibrils. It is also possible that some amount of protofibrils
or other oligomeric forms may be present in our samples, reflecting
the heterogeneity typical of such experiments. However, the data illustrate
that large undigested portions remain in all samples compared to homogenous
monomeric digests, and differences between samples are notable in
every case.
Figure 2
(a) Raw chromatogram for the digestion of Aβ42-neutral and
(b) Aβ42-acidic by catL. The proteolytic product Aβ 16–42
is shown in both chromatograms as a reference. (c) Compiled line diagram
of the identified peptides from the chromatograms. Lines indicate
which part of the full sequence comprises the proteolytic product.
Products are ordered by intensity, with the most intense products
listed closer to the full sequence. (d) Bar plot showing the length
of the identified product peptides. (e) Plot of the residue intensity
among the total intensity of all peptides with a length greater than
10, representing areas resistant to proteolysis.
(a) Raw chromatogram for the digestion of Aβ42-neutral and
(b) Aβ42-acidic by catL. The proteolytic product Aβ 16–42
is shown in both chromatograms as a reference. (c) Compiled line diagram
of the identified peptides from the chromatograms. Lines indicate
which part of the full sequence comprises the proteolytic product.
Products are ordered by intensity, with the most intense products
listed closer to the full sequence. (d) Bar plot showing the length
of the identified product peptides. (e) Plot of the residue intensity
among the total intensity of all peptides with a length greater than
10, representing areas resistant to proteolysis.Proteolysis experiments may proceed in a stepwise manner leading
to accessibility for some previously blocked regions after initial
cleavages; however, the longest sequences represent lasting resistance
throughout the course of the digestion. To visually display a summary
of the regions with the most resistance to proteolysis, sequences
with a length of at least 11 amino acids were used to generate an
intensity map, as shown in Figure e. The fractional intensity value (y-axis) for each residue (x-axis) was calculated
by adding up the intensity of all peptides containing the residue
and then dividing by the intensity of all peptides. Only peptides
longer than 11 residues were included. Accordingly, a fractional intensity
value of 0.5 means that the residue is present in 50% of the total
peptide intensity that was observed. It should be noted that peptide
intensity is influenced by many factors including the number of acidic,
basic, and hydrophobic amino acids and does not correlate precisely
with concentration.[44,45] Therefore, the plot in Figure e should not be interpreted
to represent absolute quantitation but rather a semiquantitative evaluation
that is most meaningful when comparing relative abundances for differing
fibrils for which the intensity at each amino acid will be based on
the intensities of peptides with very similar (or identical) sequences.
Examination of the solid lines (derived from Aβ42 data) reveals
excellent agreement with the representation shown in Figure c. Again, differences in product
profiles between various digestions are apparent. The C-terminal region
is resistant to proteolysis in all cases. Interestingly, neutral Aβ42
fibrils are the most resistant in the N-terminal region. For Aβ40,
less difference is noted between digestion of acidic and neutral fibrils.
These results are consistent with the fluorescence data shown in Figure b, where the neutral-grown
fibrils display a higher amount of intensity after digestion in both
Aβ40 and Aβ42, demonstrating an increase in proteolytic
resistance.The same analysis was performed on digestions with
the endopeptidase
catD, as shown in Figure . The peptide lengths shown in Figure a consist of a tighter spread than those
seen with catL digestions. Interestingly, the neutral-grown Aβ42
products are almost entirely sequences with lengths of 16–20
residues. Although most of the intensity from Aβ40 digestions
is found in the 16–20 length as well, some peptides were also
identified with lengths greater than 20. The absence of shorter peptides
may suggest that fewer acceptable binding sites exist for catD or
that it is less capable of digesting fibrils in general. The catD
digestion of the monomeric Aβ42 is illustrated in Table S4 and displayed in Figure S3. The distribution of intensities suggests that catD
is able to more easily bind and degrade sequences in the monomer form,
populating the 6–10 and 11–15 bins with around 65% of
the product intensity. Additionally, the 1–5 length bin contains
a small portion of the intensity, while none is present in either
Aβ42 fibril digestion. The peptide intensity map shown in Figure b reveals some similar
trends to the previous catL digestions. All digestions showed a resistant
region in the C-terminal half of the sequence, extending from around
Lys16 to Met35. In the neutral-grown Aβ42, nearly half of the
peptides originating from the N-terminal half of the sequence survive
digestion. The Aβ40 digests for both acidic and neutral fibrils
also yielded more N-terminal peptide intensity. The fluorescence data
for these samples shown in Figure b is higher for both digestions of neutral-grown Aβ,
which indicates that the resistant residues in the N-terminal half
may be contributing to the formation of greater amounts of stacked
β-sheet content involved in ThT binding.
Figure 3
(a) Bar plot of the sequence
length of identified proteolytic products
from catD incubations. (b) Plot of the residue intensity among the
total intensity of all peptides with a length greater than 10.
(a) Bar plot of the sequence
length of identified proteolytic products
from catD incubations. (b) Plot of the residue intensity among the
total intensity of all peptides with a length greater than 10.Identical analyses for results from catB and catH
are shown in Figure . These enzymes act
primarily as exopeptidases, though both possess some endopeptidase
activity. Examining the data for the catB digests in Figure a reveals a wide spread of
peptide lengths. The Aβ42-neutral fibril distribution is skewed
toward longer lengths, while the Aβ40 neutral fibrils are distributed
more toward the center of the distribution. Acidic fibrils from both
Aβs populate bimodal distributions, favoring longer and shorter
peptides. The peptide intensity map is shown in Figure b. Although catB is a carboxypeptidase, which
cleaves from the C-terminus, it is unable to progress very far before
encountering resistance. Indeed, only the acidic fibrils from Aβ40
reveal any cleavage at the C-terminus that is nearly complete. Ironically,
most of the degradation for catB takes place due to secondary endopeptidase
activity in the N-terminal region.
Figure 4
(a) Bar plot of the sequence length of
identified proteolytic products
from exopeptidase catB incubations and (c) catH incubations. (b) Plot
of the residue intensity among the total intensity of all peptides
with a length greater than 10 for catB incubations and (d) catH incubations.
(a) Bar plot of the sequence length of
identified proteolytic products
from exopeptidase catB incubations and (c) catH incubations. (b) Plot
of the residue intensity among the total intensity of all peptides
with a length greater than 10 for catB incubations and (d) catH incubations.In the length histograms for catH shown in Figure c, the majority of
all peptide intensity
is observed in peptides of length 21–25. CatH is an aminopeptidase
that preferentially cleaves one amino acid at a time and is likely
to produce products that will not be retained by LC. Notably, peptides
of the longest observed length (26–30) were only recorded for
the neutral-grown fibrils. In the residue intensity plot for catH
shown in Figure d,
the N-terminal region is similarly digested for all four experiments.
The primary differences in Figure d relate to Aβ42. The acidic fibrils allow greater
penetration in the N-terminal region, while an unexpected cleavage
at the C-terminus is observed for the neutral fibrils. This C-terminal
cleavage goes essentially to completion as with the catD digests and
is more efficient than the C-terminal cleavage observed for catB.
The smaller differences between these digestion profiles are similarly
reflected in the smaller differences between the fluorescence intensity
shown in Figure b.Two commonly observed fibril morphologies for both Aβ40/42
are comprised of either dimeric layers (PDB: 2NAO) or trimeric layers
(PDB: 2M4J)
of β sheets, as shown in Figure . In the dimer form, the N-terminal region is a disordered
strand that extrudes from the fibril core. This morphology exposes
the N-terminus and is consistent with the high digestion levels that
we observed for all cathepsins. In particular, little resistance was
encountered in the N-terminal region for catH, although the acidic
fibrils appear to have greater exposure, particularly for Aβ42.
His13 and His14 bridge the transition between the N-terminal tail
and the more organized β-sheet. When protonated, the hydrophilic
side chains of His may lead to additional disorder. Additionally,
the C-terminal tail is exposed for the dimeric fibril, making it easier
for the cathepsins to cleave (as is observed in almost all of the
cathepsin incubations). The digestion results match the expected protection
afforded by the dimeric structure rather well, suggesting that a significant
fraction of the fibrils present in our digestion may be comprised
of similar dimeric sheets.
Figure 5
(a) Tube representation and (b) ribbon representation
of the Aβ
1–42 dimer fibril (PDB: 2NAO). The N-terminal region is shown by highlighting
residues 1–10 in red and protrudes in a disordered fashion
from the fibril core. The C-terminal region is shown by highlighting
residues 33–40/42 in purple with the exposed tail sticking
out from the hydrophobic core. Relevant histidine residues are shown
in green. (c) Tube representation and (d) ribbon representation of
the Aβ 1–40 trimer fibril (PDB: 2M4J). The N-terminal
region is exposed with some accessibility of the following residues
until the bend region.
(a) Tube representation and (b) ribbon representation
of the Aβ
1–42 dimer fibril (PDB: 2NAO). The N-terminal region is shown by highlighting
residues 1–10 in red and protrudes in a disordered fashion
from the fibril core. The C-terminal region is shown by highlighting
residues 33–40/42 in purple with the exposed tail sticking
out from the hydrophobic core. Relevant histidine residues are shown
in green. (c) Tube representation and (d) ribbon representation of
the Aβ 1–40 trimer fibril (PDB: 2M4J). The N-terminal
region is exposed with some accessibility of the following residues
until the bend region.In the trimeric form,
the N-terminal region is ordered but still
represents the most solvent-exposed region of the peptide, protecting
the β sheet and the C-terminus that are obscured with the core.
This structure would be more easily digested near the N-terminus as
well, and protonated histidine side chains would also contribute to
looser binding and more solvent exposure in the acid-grown fibril
samples. This structure would be less available for enzymatic binding
as it nears the bend region from residues 19–28, which is consistent
with the sloped increase of residue intensity observed for all cathepsin
incubations in the same region. However, the buried C-terminal tail
would be expected to make digestion difficult from this side of the
peptide. Given that we observe digestion of C-terminal residues, particularly
for catD, this morphology is not likely the dominant in form present
in our fibrils.
Conclusions
We have examined the
influence of fibril formation on the proteolysis
of both Aβ40 and Aβ42 in a detailed and quantitative fashion.
It is clear that fibril formation interferes with proteolysis by the
major lysosomal cathepsins in every case. The differential digestion
obtained for fibrils formed at either neutral or acidic pH confirms
the likelihood that such fibrils have distinct structures, mostly
related to the N-terminal portion of the sequence. Overall, our results
suggest that fibrils composed of Aβ42 and formed at neutral
pH will present the greatest difficulty for digestion within the lysosome.
In contrast, the monomeric Aβ is easily digested by cathepsins
and appears unlikely to contribute to lysosomal pathology. However,
our results suggest that it is possible for amyloid fibrils to contribute
to AD pathology and the lysosomal storage observed in the disease
by simply evading degradation.
Experimental Procedures
Fibril Formation
Lyophilized Aβ powder was purchased
from Anaspec. The samples were disentangled via ammonium hydroxide
treatment.[46] One hundred micrograms aliquots
of each peptide were dissolved in 50 μL of 0.1% ammonium hydroxide
solution (w/v) with sonication and the monomeric peptide was confirmed
by ThT, followed by dilution to 1 mL with either 50 mM tris pH 7.2
or acetate pH 5 buffer for fibril growth. Amyloid β 1–42
aliquots were fibrilized at 25 μM, while amyloid β 1–40
aliquots were fibrilized at 100 μM to start fibril growth after
brief agitation. Fibrils were grown for 5 days at 37 °C and checked
by ThT fluorescence to confirm fibril presence.
Cathepsin Incubations
Cathepsins were purchased from
Athens Research & Technology Inc. Enzyme activity and purity were
manufacturer-verified by SDS-PAGE and proteolysis of fluorescent substrates.
Aliquots containing Aβ were digested by cathepsins in acetate
buffer pH 5, with 1 mM ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and
500 μM dithiothreitol (DTT) to prevent active site oxidation.
For each digestion, 0.4 μg of the enzyme was incubated with
20 μg of amyloid β for a 1:50 enzyme:substrate ratio (w/w).
A control sample was set up for each digestion with no enzyme added.
Incubations occurred over an 18 h period at 37 °C to allow for
maximum digestion potential. Digestions were quenched by dilution
with 200 mM tris before immediate fluorescent measurements.
Fluorescence
Measurements
The presence of β-sheet-rich
aggregates was examined by ThT assay. Samples were diluted to 2 μM
in 200 mM tris buffer with 6 μM ThT. Emission scans were performed
on a QuantaMaster-400 fluorimeter using an excitation wavelength of
440 nm and an emission wavelength of 485 nm.
Samples were analyzed on a Thermo Fisher Ultimate
3000 RSLCnano System interfaced with a Thermo Fisher Velos Pro Orbitrap
using an electrospray ionization (ESI) source. Peptides were separated
on a capillary column packed in-house with C18 3 μm resin using
a Shotgun Proteomics Inc high pressure vessel. Mobile phase A was
water 0.1% formic acid and mobile phase B was 80% acetonitrile in
water with 0.1% formic acid. Nano-ESI was performed using a spray
voltage of 2.1 kV with an S-lens value of 65.
Authors: Michael T Colvin; Robert Silvers; Qing Zhe Ni; Thach V Can; Ivan Sergeyev; Melanie Rosay; Kevin J Donovan; Brian Michael; Joseph Wall; Sara Linse; Robert G Griffin Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2016-07-14 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: J Paul Luzio; Yvonne Hackmann; Nele M G Dieckmann; Gillian M Griffiths Journal: Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol Date: 2014-09-02 Impact factor: 10.005
Authors: Ute Felbor; Benedikt Kessler; Walther Mothes; Hans H Goebel; Hidde L Ploegh; Roderick T Bronson; Bjorn R Olsen Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2002-06-04 Impact factor: 11.205