NMR analysis of a 900K GroEL–GroES complex

Biomacromolecular structures with a relative molecular mass (Mr) of 50,000 to 100,000 (50K–100K) have been generally considered to be inaccessible to analysis by solution NMR spectroscopy. Here we report spectra recorded from bacterial chaperonin complexes ten times this size limit (up to Mr 900K) using the techniques of transverse relaxation-optimized spectroscopy and cross-correlated relaxation-enhanced polarization transfer. These techniques prevent deterioration of the NMR spectra by the rapid transverse relaxation of the magnetization to which large, slowly tumbling molecules are otherwise subject. We tested the resolving power of these techniques by examining the isotope-labelled homoheptameric co-chaperonin GroES (Mr 72K), either free in solution or in complex with the homotetradecameric chaperonin GroEL (Mr 800K) or with the single-ring GroEL variant SR1 (Mr 400K). Most amino acids of GroES show the same resonances whether free in solution or in complex with chaperonin; however, residues 17–32 show large chemical shift changes on binding. These amino acids belong to a mobile loop region of GroES that forms contacts with GroEL. This establishes the utility of these techniques for solution NMR studies that should permit the exploration of structure, dynamics and interactions in large macromolecular complexes.

[1]  K. Wüthrich.  NMR of proteins and nucleic acids , 1988 .

[2]  Zbyszek Otwinowski,et al.  The crystal structure of the bacterial chaperonln GroEL at 2.8 Å , 1994, Nature.

[3]  K Wüthrich,et al.  TROSY in triple-resonance experiments: new perspectives for sequential NMR assignment of large proteins. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  J. Deisenhofer,et al.  The crystal structure of the GroES co-chaperonin at 2.8 Å resolution , 1996, Nature.

[5]  K. Wüthrich,et al.  Digital filtering with a sinusoidal window function: An alternative technique for resolution enhancement in FT NMR , 1976 .

[6]  Geoffrey I. Webb,et al.  NMR of proteins and nucleic acids , 2005 .

[7]  F. Dahlquist,et al.  Large modular proteins by NMR , 1997, Nature Structural Biology.

[8]  R. Riek,et al.  Polarization transfer by cross-correlated relaxation in solution NMR with very large molecules. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  R. Glockshuber,et al.  Pilus chaperone FimC–adhesin FimH interactions mapped by TROSY-NMR , 1999, Nature Structural Biology.

[10]  K Wüthrich,et al.  NMR spectroscopy of large molecules and multimolecular assemblies in solution. , 1999, Current opinion in structural biology.

[11]  K Wüthrich,et al.  The program XEASY for computer-supported NMR spectral analysis of biological macromolecules , 1995, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[12]  J. Weissman,et al.  Construction of single-ring and two-ring hybrid versions of bacterial chaperonin GroEL. , 1998, Methods in Enzymology.

[13]  J. Weissman,et al.  Mechanism of GroEL action: Productive release of polypeptide from a sequestered position under groes , 1995, Cell.

[14]  A. Horwich,et al.  Structure and function in GroEL-mediated protein folding. , 1998, Annual review of biochemistry.

[15]  D. J. Naylor,et al.  Dual Function of Protein Confinement in Chaperonin-Assisted Protein Folding , 2001, Cell.

[16]  Helen R Saibil,et al.  The Chaperonin ATPase Cycle: Mechanism of Allosteric Switching and Movements of Substrate-Binding Domains in GroEL , 1996, Cell.

[17]  J. Weissman,et al.  Characterization of the Active Intermediate of a GroEL–GroES-Mediated Protein Folding Reaction , 1996, Cell.

[18]  G. Roberts,et al.  Mobility of polypeptide chain in the pyruvate dehydrogenase complex revealed by proton NMR , 1981, Nature.

[19]  Gareth A. Morris,et al.  Enhancement of nuclear magnetic resonance signals by polarization transfer , 1979 .

[20]  Lila M. Gierasch,et al.  Characterization of a functionally important mobile domain of GroES , 1993, Nature.

[21]  R. Riek,et al.  Attenuated T2 relaxation by mutual cancellation of dipole-dipole coupling and chemical shift anisotropy indicates an avenue to NMR structures of very large biological macromolecules in solution. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  M. Goldman,et al.  Interference effects in the relaxation of a pair of unlike spin-1/2 nuclei , 1984 .

[23]  F. Shewmaker,et al.  The Disordered Mobile Loop of GroES Folds into a Defined β-Hairpin upon Binding GroEL* , 2001, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[24]  NMR Assignment and Secondary Structure Determination of an Octameric 110 kDa Protein Using TROSY in Triple Resonance Experiments , 2000 .

[25]  Kurt Wüthrich,et al.  Processing of multi-dimensional NMR data with the new software PROSA , 1992 .

[26]  F. Hartl,et al.  Protein folding in the central cavity of the GroEL–GroES chaperonin complex , 1996, Nature.

[27]  R. Riek,et al.  TROSY and CRINEPT: NMR with large molecular and supramolecular structures in solution. , 2000, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[28]  Kurt Wüthrich,et al.  TROSY-TYPE TRIPLE-RESONANCE EXPERIMENTS FOR SEQUENTIAL NMR ASSIGNMENTS OF LARGE PROTEINS , 1999 .

[29]  A. Horwich,et al.  The crystal structure of the asymmetric GroEL–GroES–(ADP)7 chaperonin complex , 1997, Nature.

[30]  C. Georgopoulos,et al.  Interplay of structure and disorder in cochaperonin mobile loops. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[31]  I. Shimada,et al.  Nuclear magnetic resonance study of antibodies: a multinuclear approach. , 1994, Methods in enzymology.