A study of protein targeting reveals insights into mitigating protein aggregation

A unique chloroplast Signal Recognition Particle (SRP) in green plants is primarily dedicated to the post-translational targeting of light harvesting chlorophyll-a/b binding (LHC) proteins. Our study of the thermodynamics and kinetics of the GTPases of the system demonstrates that GTPase complex assembly and activation are highly coupled in the chloroplast GTPases, suggesting they may forego the GTPase activation step as a key regulatory point. This reflects adaptations of the chloroplast SRP to the delivery of their unique substrate protein. Devotion to one highly hydrophobic family of proteins also may have allowed the chloroplast SRP system to evolve an efficient chaperone in the cpSRP43 subunit. To understand the mechanism of disaggregation, we showed that LHC proteins form micellar, disc-shaped aggregates that present a recognition motif (L18) on the aggregate surface. Further molecular genetic and structure-activity analyses reveal that the action of cpSRP43 can be dissected into two steps: (i) initial recognition of L18 on the aggregate surface; and (ii) aggregate remodeling, during which highly adaptable binding interactions of cpSRP43 with hydrophobic transmembrane domains of the substrate protein compete with the packing interactions within the aggregate. We also tested the adaptability of cpSRP43 for alternative substrates, specifically in attempts to improve membrane protein expression and inhibition of amyloid beta fibrillization. These preliminary results attest to cpSRP43’s potential as a molecular chaperone and provides the impetus for further engineering endeavors to address problems that stem from protein aggregation.

Mechanisms of substrate selection by the signal recognition particle

The signal recognition particle (SRP) targets membrane and secretory proteins to their correct cellular destination with remarkably high fidelity. Previous studies have shown that multiple checkpoints exist within this targeting pathway that allows ‘correct cargo’ to be quickly and efficiently targeted and for ‘incorrect cargo’ to be promptly rejected. In this work, we delved further into understanding the mechanisms of how substrates are selected or discarded by the SRP. First, we discovered the role of the SRP fingerloop and how it activates the SRP and SRP receptor (SR) GTPases to target and unload cargo in response to signal sequence binding. Second, we learned how an ‘avoidance signal’ found in the bacterial autotransporter, EspP, allows this protein to escape the SRP pathway by causing the SRP and SR to form a ‘distorted’ complex that is inefficient in delivering the cargo to the membrane. Lastly, we determined how Trigger Factor, a co-translational chaperone, helps SRP discriminate against ‘incorrect cargo’ at three distinct stages: SRP binding to RNC; targeting of RNC to the membrane via SRP-FtsY assembly; and stronger antagonism of SRP targeting of ribosomes bearing nascent polypeptides that exceed a critical length. Overall, results delineate the rich underlying mechanisms by which SRP recognizes its substrates, which in turn activates the targeting pathway and provides a conceptual foundation to understand how timely and accurate selection of substrates is achieved by this protein targeting machinery.

Investigating the Role of the GET3-GET4/GET5 Interaction During Tail-Anchor Protein Targeting

The proper targeting of membrane proteins is essential to the viability of all cells. Tail-anchored (TA) proteins, defined as having a single transmembrane helix at their C-terminus, are post-translationally targeted to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane by the GET pathway (Guided Entry of TA proteins). In the yeast pathway, the handover of TA substrates is mediated by the heterotetrameric Get4/Get5 (Get4/5) complex, which tethers the co-chaperone Sgt2 to the central targeting factor, the Get3 ATPase. Although binding of Get4/5 to Get3 is critical for efficient TA targeting, the mechanisms by which Get4 regulates Get3 are unknown. To understand the molecular basis of Get4 function, we used a combination of structural biology, biochemistry, and cell biology. Get4/5 binds across the Get3 dimer interface, in an orientation only compatible with a closed Get3, providing insight into the role of nucleotide in complex formation. Additionally, this structure reveals two functionally distinct binding interfaces for anchoring and ATPase regulation, and loss of the regulatory interface leads to strong defects in vitro and in vivo. Additional crystal structures of the Get3-Get4/5 complex give rise to an alternate conformation, which represents an initial binding interaction mediated by electrostatics that facilitates the rate of subsequent inhibited complex formation. This interface is supported by an in-depth kinetic analysis of the Get3-Get4/5 interaction confirming the two-step complex formation. These results allow us to generate a refined model for Get4/5 function in TA targeting.