Coupling between protein folding and allostery in the GroE chaperonin system

GroEL is an allosteric protein that facilitates protein folding in an ATP-dependent manner. Herein, the relationship between cooperative ATP binding by GroEL and the kinetics of GroE-assisted folding of two substrates with different GroES dependence, mouse dihydrofolate reductase (mDHFR) and mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase, is examined by using cooperativity mutants of GroEL. Strong intra-ring positive cooperativity in ATP binding by GroEL decreases the rate of GroEL-assisted mDHFR folding owing to a slow rate of the ATP-induced transition from the protein-acceptor state to the protein-release state. Inter-ring negative cooperativity in ATP binding by GroEL is found to affect the kinetic partitioning of mDHFR, but not of mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase, between folding in solution and folding in the cavity underneath GroES. Our results show that protein folding by this “two-stroke motor” is coupled to cooperative ATP binding.

Minimal and optimal mechanisms for GroE-mediated protein folding

We have analyzed the effects of different components of the GroE chaperonin system on protein folding by using a nonpermissive substrate (i.e., one that has very low spontaneous refolding yield) for which rate data can be acquired. In the absence of GroES and nucleotides, the rate of GroEL-mediated refolding of heat- and DTT-denatured mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase was extremely low, but some three times higher than the spontaneous rate. This GroEL-mediated rate was increased 17-fold by saturating concentrations of ATP, 11-fold by ADP and GroES, and 465-fold by ATP and GroES. Optimal refolding activity was observed when the dissociation of GroES from the chaperonin complex was dramatically reduced. Although GroEL minichaperones were able to bind denatured mitochondrial malate dehydrogenase, they were ineffective in enhancing the refolding rate. The spectrum of mechanisms for GroE-mediated protein folding depends on the nature of the substrate. The minimal mechanism for permissive substrates (i.e., having significant yields of spontaneous refolding), requires only binding to the apical domain of GroEL. Slow folding rates of nonpermissive substrates are limited by the transitions between high- and low-affinity states of GroEL alone. The optimal mechanism, which requires holoGroEL, physiological amounts of GroES, and ATP hydrolysis, is necessary for the chaperonin-mediated folding of nonpermissive substrates at physiologically relevant rates under conditions in which retention of bound GroES prevents the premature release of aggregation-prone folding intermediates from the chaperonin complex. The different mechanisms are described in terms of the structural features of mini- and holo-chaperones.

GroEL-GroES-mediated protein folding requires an intact central cavity

The chaperonin GroEL is an oligomeric double ring structure that, together with the cochaperonin GroES, assists protein folding. Biochemical analyses indicate that folding occurs in a cis ternary complex in which substrate is sequestered within the GroEL central cavity underneath GroES. Recently, however, studies of GroEL “minichaperones” containing only the apical substrate binding subdomain have questioned the functional importance of substrate encapsulation within GroEL-GroES complexes. Minichaperones were reported to assist folding despite the fact that they are monomeric and therefore cannot form a central cavity. Here we compare directly the folding activity of minichaperones with that of the full GroEL-GroES system. In agreement with earlier studies, minichaperones assist folding of some proteins. However, this effect is observed only under conditions where substantial spontaneous folding is also observed and is indistinguishable from that resulting from addition of the nonchaperone protein α-casein. By contrast, the full GroE system efficiently promotes folding of several substrates under conditions where essentially no spontaneous folding is observed. These data argue that the full GroEL folding activity requires the intact GroEL-GroES complex, and in light of previous studies, underscore the importance of substrate encapsulation for providing a folding environment distinct from the bulk solution.

Interaction of GroEL with a highly structured folding intermediate: iterative binding cycles do not involve unfolding.

The GroE proteins are molecular chaperones involved in protein folding. The general mechanism by which they facilitate folding is still enigmatic. One of the central open questions is the conformation of the GroEL-bound nonnative protein. Several suggestions have been made concerning the folding stage at which a protein can interact with GroEL. Furthermore, the possibility exists that binding of the nonnative protein to GroEL results in its unfolding. We have addressed these issues that are basic for understanding the GroE-mediated folding cycle by using folding intermediates of an Fab antibody fragment as molecular probes to define the binding properties of GroEL. We show that, in addition to binding to an early folding intermediate, GroEL is able to recognize and interact with a late quaternary-structured folding intermediate (Dc) without measurably unfolding it. Thus, the prerequisite for binding is not a certain folding stage of a nonnative protein. In contrast, general surface properties of nonnative proteins seem to be crucial for binding. Furthermore, unfolding of a highly structured intermediate does not necessarily occur upon binding to GroEL. Folding of Dc in the presence of GroEL and ATP involves cycles of binding and release. Because in this system no off-pathway reactions or kinetic traps are involved, a quantitative analysis of the reactivation kinetics observed is possible. Our results indicate that the association reaction of Dc and GroEL in the presence of ATP is rather slow, whereas in the absence of ATP association is several orders of magnitude more efficient. Therefore, it seems that ATP functions by inhibiting reassociation rather than promoting release of the bound substrate.