Overcoming barriers to membrane protein structure determination

After decades of slow progress, the pace of research on membrane protein structures is beginning to quicken thanks to various improvements in technology, including protein engineering and microfocus X-ray diffraction. Here we review these developments and, where possible, highlight generic new approaches to solving membrane protein structures based on recent technological advances. Rational approaches to overcoming the bottlenecks in the field are urgently required as membrane proteins, which typically comprise ~30% of the proteomes of organisms, are dramatically under-represented in the structural database of the Protein Data Bank.

Novel strategies to improve recombinant membrane protein production in yeast

Approximately 60% of pharmaceuticals target membrane proteins; 30% of the human genome codes for membrane proteins yet they represent less than 1% of known unique crystal structures deposited in the Protein Data Bank (PDB), with 50% of structures derived from recombinant membrane proteins having been synthesized in yeasts. G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are an important class of membrane proteins that are not naturally abundant in their native membranes. Unfortunately their recombinant synthesis often suffers from low yields; moreover, function may be lost during extraction and purification from cell membranes, impeding research aimed at structural and functional determination. We therefore devised two novel strategies to improve functional yields of recombinant membrane proteins in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We used human adenosine A2A receptor (hA2AR) as a model GPRC since it is functionally and structurally well characterised.In the first strategy, we investigated whether it is possible to provide yeast cells with a selective advantage (SA) in producing the fusion protein hA2AR-Ura3p when grown in medium lacking uracil; Ura3p is a decarboxylase that catalyzes the sixth enzymatic step in the de novo biosynthesis of pyrimidines, generating uridine monophosphate. The first transformant (H1) selected using the SA strategy gave high total yields of hA2AR-Ura3p, but low functional yields as determined by radio-ligand binding, leading to the discovery that the majority of the hA2AR-Ura3p had been internalized to the vacuole. The yeast deletion strain spt3Δ is thought to have slower translation rates and improved folding capabilities compared to wild-type cells and was therefore utilised for the SA strategy to generate a second transformant, SU1, which gave higher functional yields than H1. Subsequently hA2AR-Ura3p from H1 was solubilised with n-dodecyl-β-D-maltoside and cholesteryl hemisuccinate, which yielded functional hA2AR-Ura3p at the highest yield of all approaches used. The second strategy involved using knowledge of translational processes to improve recombinant protein synthesis to increase functional yield. Modification of existing expression vectors with an internal ribosome entry site (IRES) inserted into the 5ˊ untranslated region (UTR) of the gene encoding hA2AR was employed to circumvent regulatory controls on recombinant synthesis in the yeast host cell. The mechanisms involved were investigated through the use of yeast deletion strains and drugs that cause translation inhibition, which is known to improve protein folding and yield. The data highlight the potential to use deletion strains to increase IRES-mediated expression of recombinant hA2AR. Overall, the data presented in this thesis provide mechanistic insights into two novel strategies that can increase functional membrane protein yields in the eukaryotic microbe, S. cerevisiae.

BPROMPT:a consensus server for membrane protein prediction

Protein structure prediction is a cornerstone of bioinformatics research. Membrane proteins require their own prediction methods due to their intrinsically different composition. A variety of tools exist for topology prediction of membrane proteins, many of them available on the Internet. The server described in this paper, BPROMPT (Bayesian PRediction Of Membrane Protein Topology), uses a Bayesian Belief Network to combine the results of other prediction methods, providing a more accurate consensus prediction. Topology predictions with accuracies of 70% for prokaryotes and 53% for eukaryotes were achieved. BPROMPT can be accessed at http://www.jenner.ac.uk/BPROMPT.

Hijacked then lost in translation:the plight of the recombinant host cell in membrane protein structural biology projects

Membrane protein structural biology is critically dependent upon the supply of high-quality protein. Over the last few years, the value of crystallising biochemically characterised, recombinant targets that incorporate stabilising mutations has been established. Nonetheless, obtaining sufficient yields of many recombinant membrane proteins is still a major challenge. Solutions are now emerging based on an improved understanding of recombinant host cells; as a 'cell factory' each cell is tasked with managing limited resources to simultaneously balance its own growth demands with those imposed by an expression plasmid. This review examines emerging insights into the role of translation and protein folding in defining high-yielding recombinant membrane protein production in a range of host cells.

Overcoming bottlenecks in the membrane protein structural biology pipeline

Membrane proteins account for a third of the eukaryotic proteome, but are greatly under-represented in the Protein Data Bank. Unfortunately, recent technological advances in X-ray crystallography and EM cannot account for the poor solubility and stability of membrane protein samples. A limitation of conventional detergent-based methods is that detergent molecules destabilize membrane proteins, leading to their aggregation. The use of orthologues, mutants and fusion tags has helped improve protein stability, but at the expense of not working with the sequence of interest. Novel detergents such as glucose neopentyl glycol (GNG), maltose neopentyl glycol (MNG) and calixarene-based detergents can improve protein stability without compromising their solubilizing properties. Styrene maleic acid lipid particles (SMALPs) focus on retaining the native lipid bilayer of a membrane protein during purification and biophysical analysis. Overcoming bottlenecks in the membrane protein structural biology pipeline, primarily by maintaining protein stability, will facilitate the elucidation of many more membrane protein structures in the near future.

Detergent-free membrane protein purification

Membrane proteins are localised within a lipid bilayer; in order to purify them for functional and structural studies the first step must involve solubilising or extracting the protein from these lipids. To date this has been achieved using detergents which disrupt the bilayer and bind to the protein in the transmembrane region. However finding conditions for optimal extraction, without destabilising protein structure is time consuming and expensive. Here we present a recently-developed method using a styrene maleic acid (SMA) co-polymer instead of detergents. The SMA co-polymer extracts membrane proteins in a small disc of lipid bilayer which can be used for affinity chromatography purification, thus enabling the purification of membrane proteins while maintaining their native lipid bilayer environment.

Membrane protein production in the Yeast, S. cerevisiae

The first crystal structures of recombinant mammalian membrane proteins were solved in 2005 using protein that had been produced in yeast cells. One of these, the rabbit Ca2+-ATPase SERCA1a, was synthesized in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. All host systems have their specific advantages and disadvantages, but yeast has remained a consistently popular choice in the eukaryotic membrane protein field because it is quick, easy and cheap to culture, whilst being able to post-translationally process eukaryotic membrane proteins. Very recent structures of recombinant membrane proteins produced in S. cerevisiae include those of the Arabidopsis thaliana NRT1.1 nitrate transporter and the fungal plant pathogen lipid scramblase, TMEM16. This chapter provides an overview of the methodological approaches underpinning these successes.

Membrane protein extraction and purification using styrene-maleic acid (SMA) co-polymer:effect of variations in polymer structure

The use of styrene maleic acid (SMA) co-polymers to extract and purify transmembrane proteins, whilst retaining their native bilayer environment, overcomes many of the disadvantages associated with conventional detergent based procedures. This approach has huge potential for the future of membrane protein structural and functional studies. In this investigation we have systematically tested a range of commercially available SMA polymers, varying in both the ratio of styrene to maleic acid and in total size, for the ability to extract, purify and stabilise transmembrane proteins. Three different membrane proteins (BmrA, LeuT and ZipA) which vary in size and shape were used. Our results show that several polymers can be used to extract membrane proteins comparably to conventional detergents. A styrene:maleic acid ratio of either 2:1 or 3:1, combined with a relatively small average molecular weight (7.5-10 kDa) is optimal for membrane extraction, and this appears to be independent of the protein size, shape or expression system. A subset of polymers were taken forward for purification, functional and stability tests. Following a one-step affinity purification SMA 2000 was found to be the best choice for yield, purity and function. However the other polymers offer subtle differences in size and sensitivity to divalent cations that may be useful for a variety of downstream applications.

Microfluidic platforms for the characterization of in meso membrane protein crystallization

Membrane proteins, which reside in the membranes of cells, play a critical role in many important biological processes including cellular signaling, immune response, and material and energy transduction. Because of their key role in maintaining the environment within cells and facilitating intercellular interactions, understanding the function of these proteins is of tremendous medical and biochemical significance. Indeed, the malfunction of membrane proteins has been linked to numerous diseases including diabetes, cirrhosis of the liver, cystic fibrosis, cancer, Alzheimer's disease, hypertension, epilepsy, cataracts, tubulopathy, leukodystrophy, Leigh syndrome, anemia, sensorineural deafness, and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.1-3 However, the structure of many of these proteins and the changes in their structure that lead to disease-related malfunctions are not well understood. Additionally, at least 60% of the pharmaceuticals currently available are thought to target membrane proteins, despite the fact that their exact mode of operation is not known.4-6 Developing a detailed understanding of the function of a protein is achieved by coupling biochemical experiments with knowledge of the structure of the protein. Currently the most common method for obtaining three-dimensional structure information is X-ray crystallography. However, no a priori methods are currently available to predict crystallization conditions for a given protein.7-14 This limitation is currently overcome by screening a large number of possible combinations of precipitants, buffer, salt, and pH conditions to identify conditions that are conducive to crystal nucleation and growth.7,9,11,15-24 Unfortunately, these screening efforts are often limited by difficulties associated with quantity and purity of available protein samples. While the two most significant bottlenecks for protein structure determination in general are the (i) obtaining sufficient quantities of high quality protein samples and (ii) growing high quality protein crystals that are suitable for X-ray structure determination,7,20,21,23,25-47 membrane proteins present additional challenges. For crystallization it is necessary to extract the membrane proteins from the cellular membrane. However, this process often leads to denaturation. In fact, membrane proteins have proven to be so difficult to crystallize that of the more than 66,000 structures deposited in the Protein Data Bank,48 less than 1% are for membrane proteins, with even fewer present at high resolution (< 2Å)4,6,49 and only a handful are human membrane proteins.49 A variety of strategies including detergent solubilization50-53 and the use of artificial membrane-like environments have been developed to circumvent this challenge.43,53-55 In recent years, the use of a lipidic mesophase as a medium for crystallizing membrane proteins has been demonstrated to increase success for a wide range of membrane proteins, including human receptor proteins.54,56-62 This in meso method for membrane protein crystallization, however, is still by no means routine due to challenges related to sample preparation at sub-microliter volumes and to crystal harvesting and X-ray data collection. This dissertation presents various aspects of the development of a microfluidic platform to enable high throughput in meso membrane protein crystallization at a level beyond the capabilities of current technologies. Microfluidic platforms for protein crystallization and other lab-on-a-chip applications have been well demonstrated.9,63-66 These integrated chips provide fine control over transport phenomena and the ability to perform high throughput analyses via highly integrated fluid networks. However, the development of microfluidic platforms for in meso protein crystallization required the development of strategies to cope with extremely viscous and non-Newtonian fluids. A theoretical treatment of highly viscous fluids in microfluidic devices is presented in Chapter 3, followed by the application of these strategies for the development of a microfluidic mixer capable of preparing a mesophase sample for in meso crystallization at a scale of less than 20 nL in Chapter 4. This approach was validated with the successful on chip in meso crystallization of the membrane protein bacteriorhodopsin. In summary, this is the first report of a microfluidic platform capable of performing in meso crystallization on-chip, representing a 1000x reduction in the scale at which mesophase trials can be prepared. Once protein crystals have formed, they are typically harvested from the droplet they were grown in and mounted for crystallographic analysis. Despite the high throughput automation present in nearly all other aspects of protein structure determination, the harvesting and mounting of crystals is still largely a manual process. Furthermore, during mounting the fragile protein crystals can potentially be damaged, both from physical and environmental shock. To circumvent these challenges an X-ray transparent microfluidic device architecture was developed to couple the benefits of scale, integration, and precise fluid control with the ability to perform in situ X-ray analysis (Chapter 5). This approach was validated successfully by crystallization and subsequent on-chip analysis of the soluble proteins lysozyme, thaumatin, and ribonuclease A and will be extended to microfluidic platforms for in meso membrane protein crystallization. The ability to perform in situ X-ray analysis was shown to provide extremely high quality diffraction data, in part as a result of not being affected by damage due to physical handling of the crystals. As part of the work described in this thesis, a variety of data collection strategies for in situ data analysis were also tested, including merging of small slices of data from a large number of crystals grown on a single chip, to allow for diffraction analysis at biologically relevant temperatures. While such strategies have been applied previously,57,59,61,67 they are potentially challenging when applied via traditional methods due to the need to grow and then mount a large number of crystals with minimal crystal-to-crystal variability. The integrated nature of microfluidic platforms easily enables the generation of a large number of reproducible crystallization trials. This, coupled with in situ analysis capabilities has the potential of being able to acquire high resolution structural data of proteins at biologically relevant conditions for which only small crystals, or crystals which are adversely affected by standard cryocooling techniques, could be obtained (Chapters 5 and 6). While the main focus of protein crystallography is to obtain three-dimensional protein structures, the results of typical experiments provide only a static picture of the protein. The use of polychromatic or Laue X-ray diffraction methods enables the collection of time resolved structural information. These experiments are very sensitive to crystal quality, however, and often suffer from severe radiation damage due to the intense polychromatic X-ray beams. Here, as before, the ability to perform in situ X-ray analysis on many small protein crystals within a microfluidic crystallization platform has the potential to overcome these challenges. An automated method for collecting a "single-shot" of data from a large number of crystals was developed in collaboration with the BioCARS team at the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Laboratory (Chapter 6). The work described in this thesis shows that, even more so than for traditional structure determination efforts, the ability to grow and analyze a large number of high quality crystals is critical to enable time resolved structural studies of novel proteins. In addition to enabling X-ray crystallography experiments, the development of X-ray transparent microfluidic platforms also has tremendous potential to answer other scientific questions, such as unraveling the mechanism of in meso crystallization. For instance, the lipidic mesophases utilized during in meso membrane protein crystallization can be characterized by small angle X-ray diffraction analysis. Coupling in situ analysis with microfluidic platforms capable of preparing these difficult mesophase samples at very small volumes has tremendous potential to enable the high throughput analysis of these systems on a scale that is not reasonably achievable using conventional sample preparation strategies (Chapter 7). In collaboration with the LS-CAT team at the Advanced Photon Source, an experimental station for small angle X-ray analysis coupled with the high quality visualization capabilities needed to target specific microfluidic samples on a highly integrated chip is under development. Characterizing the phase behavior of these mesophase systems and the effects of various additives present in crystallization trials is key for developing an understanding of how in meso crystallization occurs. A long term goal of these studies is to enable the rational design of in meso crystallization experiments so as to avoid or limit the need for high throughput screening efforts. In summary, this thesis describes the development of microfluidic platforms for protein crystallization with in situ analysis capabilities. Coupling the ability to perform in situ analysis with the small scale, fine control, and the high throughput nature of microfluidic platforms has tremendous potential to enable a new generation of crystallographic studies and facilitate the structure determination of important biological targets. The development of platforms for in meso membrane protein crystallization is particularly significant because they enable the preparation of highly viscous mixtures at a previously unachievable scale. Work in these areas is ongoing and has tremendous potential to improve not only current the methods of protein crystallization and crystallography, but also to enhance our knowledge of the structure and function of proteins which could have a significant scientific and medical impact on society as a whole. The microfluidic technology described in this thesis has the potential to significantly advance our understanding of the structure and function of membrane proteins, thereby aiding the elucidation of human biology, the development of pharmaceuticals with fewer side effects for a wide range of diseases. References (1) Quick, M.; Javitch, J. A. P Natl Acad Sci USA 2007, 104, 3603. (2) Trubetskoy, V. S.; Burke, T. J. Am Lab 2005, 37, 19. (3) Pecina, P.; Houstkova, H.; Hansikova, H.; Zeman, J.; Houstek, J. Physiol Res 2004, 53, S213. (4) Arinaminpathy, Y.; Khurana, E.; Engelman, D. M.; Gerstein, M. B. Drug Discovery Today 2009, 14, 1130. (5) Overington, J. P.; Al-Lazikani, B.; Hopkins, A. L. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2006, 5, 993. (6) Dauter, Z.; Lamzin, V. S.; Wilson, K. S. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 1997, 7, 681. (7) Hansen, C.; Quake, S. R. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 2003, 13, 538. (8) Govada, L.; Carpenter, L.; da Fonseca, P. C. A.; Helliwell, J. R.; Rizkallah, P.; Flashman, E.; Chayen, N. E.; Redwood, C.; Squire, J. M. J Mol Biol 2008, 378, 387. (9) Hansen, C. L.; Skordalakes, E.; Berger, J. M.; Quake, S. R. P Natl Acad Sci USA 2002, 99, 16531. (10) Leng, J.; Salmon, J.-B. Lab Chip 2009, 9, 24. (11) Zheng, B.; Gerdts, C. J.; Ismagilov, R. F. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 2005, 15, 548. (12) Lorber, B.; Delucas, L. J.; Bishop, J. B. J Cryst Growth 1991, 110, 103. (13) Talreja, S.; Perry, S. L.; Guha, S.; Bhamidi, V.; Zukoski, C. F.; Kenis, P. J. A. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2010, 114, 4432. (14) Chayen, N. E. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 2004, 14, 577. (15) He, G. W.; Bhamidi, V.; Tan, R. B. H.; Kenis, P. J. A.; Zukoski, C. F. Cryst Growth Des 2006, 6, 1175. (16) Zheng, B.; Tice, J. D.; Roach, L. S.; Ismagilov, R. F. Angew Chem Int Edit 2004, 43, 2508. (17) Li, L.; Mustafi, D.; Fu, Q.; Tereshko, V.; Chen, D. L. L.; Tice, J. D.; Ismagilov, R. F. P Natl Acad Sci USA 2006, 103, 19243. (18) Song, H.; Chen, D. L.; Ismagilov, R. F. Angew Chem Int Edit 2006, 45, 7336. (19) van der Woerd, M.; Ferree, D.; Pusey, M. Journal of Structural Biology 2003, 142, 180. (20) Ng, J. D.; Gavira, J. A.; Garcia-Ruiz, J. M. Journal of Structural Biology 2003, 142, 218. (21) Talreja, S.; Kenis, P. J. A.; Zukoski, C. F. Langmuir 2007, 23, 4516. (22) Hansen, C. L.; Quake, S. R.; Berger, J. M. US, 2007. (23) Newman, J.; Fazio, V. J.; Lawson, B.; Peat, T. S. Cryst Growth Des 2010, 10, 2785. (24) Newman, J.; Xu, J.; Willis, M. C. Acta Crystallographica Section D 2007, 63, 826. (25) Collingsworth, P. D.; Bray, T. L.; Christopher, G. K. J Cryst Growth 2000, 219, 283. (26) Durbin, S. D.; Feher, G. Annu Rev Phys Chem 1996, 47, 171. (27) Talreja, S.; Kim, D. Y.; Mirarefi, A. Y.; Zukoski, C. F.; Kenis, P. J. A. J Appl Crystallogr 2005, 38, 988. (28) Yoshizaki, I.; Nakamura, H.; Sato, T.; Igarashi, N.; Komatsu, H.; Yoda, S. J Cryst Growth 2002, 237, 295. (29) Anderson, M. J.; Hansen, C. L.; Quake, S. R. P Natl Acad Sci USA 2006, 103, 16746. (30) Hansen, C. L.; Sommer, M. O. A.; Quake, S. R. P Natl Acad Sci USA 2004, 101, 14431. (31) Lounaci, M.; Rigolet, P.; Abraham, C.; Le Berre, M.; Chen, Y. Microelectron Eng 2007, 84, 1758. (32) Zheng, B.; Roach, L. S.; Ismagilov, R. F. J Am Chem Soc 2003, 125, 11170. (33) Zhou, X.; Lau, L.; Lam, W. W. L.; Au, S. W. N.; Zheng, B. Anal. Chem. 2007. (34) Cherezov, V.; Caffrey, M. J Appl Crystallogr 2003, 36, 1372. (35) Qutub, Y.; Reviakine, I.; Maxwell, C.; Navarro, J.; Landau, E. M.; Vekilov, P. G. J Mol Biol 2004, 343, 1243. (36) Rummel, G.; Hardmeyer, A.; Widmer, C.; Chiu, M. L.; Nollert, P.; Locher, K. P.; Pedruzzi, I.; Landau, E. M.; Rosenbusch, J. P. Journal of Structural Biology 1998, 121, 82. (37) Gavira, J. A.; Toh, D.; Lopez-Jaramillo, J.; Garcia-Ruiz, J. M.; Ng, J. D. Acta Crystallogr D 2002, 58, 1147. (38) Stevens, R. C. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 2000, 10, 558. (39) Baker, M. Nat Methods 2010, 7, 429. (40) McPherson, A. In Current Topics in Membranes, Volume 63; Volume 63 ed.; DeLucas, L., Ed.; Academic Press: 2009, p 5. (41) Gabrielsen, M.; Gardiner, A. T.; Fromme, P.; Cogdell, R. J. In Current Topics in Membranes, Volume 63; Volume 63 ed.; DeLucas, L., Ed.; Academic Press: 2009, p 127. (42) Page, R. In Methods in Molecular Biology: Structural Proteomics - High Throughput Methods; Kobe, B., Guss, M., Huber, T., Eds.; Humana Press: Totowa, NJ, 2008; Vol. 426, p 345. (43) Caffrey, M. Ann Rev Biophys 2009, 38, 29. (44) Doerr, A. Nat Methods 2006, 3, 244. (45) Brostromer, E.; Nan, J.; Li, L.-F.; Su, X.-D. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 2009, 386, 634. (46) Li, G.; Chen, Q.; Li, J.; Hu, X.; Zhao, J. Anal Chem 2010, 82, 4362. (47) Jia, Y.; Liu, X.-Y. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2006, 110, 6949. (48) RCSB Protein Data Bank. http://www.rcsb.org/ (July 11, 2010). (49) Membrane Proteins of Known 3D Structure. http://blanco.biomol.uci.edu/Membrane_Proteins_xtal.html (July 11, 2010). (50) Michel, H. Trends Biochem Sci 1983, 8, 56. (51) Rosenbusch, J. P. Journal of Structural Biology 1990, 104, 134. (52) Garavito, R. M.; Picot, D. Methods 1990, 1, 57. (53) Kulkarni, C. V. 2010; Vol. 12, p 237. (54) Landau, E. M.; Rosenbusch, J. P. P Natl Acad Sci USA 1996, 93, 14532. (55) Pebay-Peyroula, E.; Rummel, G.; Rosenbusch, J. P.; Landau, E. M. Science 1997, 277, 1676. (56) Cherezov, V.; Liu, W.; Derrick, J. P.; Luan, B.; Aksimentiev, A.; Katritch, V.; Caffrey, M. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 2008, 71, 24. (57) Cherezov, V.; Rosenbaum, D. M.; Hanson, M. A.; Rasmussen, S. G. F.; Thian, F. S.; Kobilka, T. S.; Choi, H. J.; Kuhn, P.; Weis, W. I.; Kobilka, B. K.; Stevens, R. C. Science 2007, 318, 1258. (58) Cherezov, V.; Yamashita, E.; Liu, W.; Zhalnina, M.; Cramer, W. A.; Caffrey, M. J Mol Biol 2006, 364, 716. (59) Jaakola, V. P.; Griffith, M. T.; Hanson, M. A.; Cherezov, V.; Chien, E. Y. T.; Lane, J. R.; IJzerman, A. P.; Stevens, R. C. Science 2008, 322, 1211. (60) Rosenbaum, D. M.; Cherezov, V.; Hanson, M. A.; Rasmussen, S. G. F.; Thian, F. S.; Kobilka, T. S.; Choi, H. J.; Yao, X. J.; Weis, W. I.; Stevens, R. C.; Kobilka, B. K. Science 2007, 318, 1266. (61) Wacker, D.; Fenalti, G.; Brown, M. A.; Katritch, V.; Abagyan, R.; Cherezov, V.; Stevens, R. C. J Am Chem Soc 2010, 132, 11443. (62) Höfer, N.; Aragão, D.; Caffrey, M. Biophys J 2010, 99, L23. (63) Li, L.; Ismagilov, R. F. Ann Rev Biophys 2010. (64) Pal, R.; Yang, M.; Lin, R.; Johnson, B. N.; Srivastava, N.; Razzacki, S. Z.; Chomistek, K. J.; Heldsinger, D. C.; Haque, R. M.; Ugaz, V. M.; Thwar, P. K.; Chen, Z.; Alfano, K.; Yim, M. B.; Krishnan, M.; Fuller, A. O.; Larson, R. G.; Burke, D. T.; Burns, M. A. Lab Chip 2005, 5, 1024. (65) Jayashree, R. S.; Gancs, L.; Choban, E. R.; Primak, A.; Natarajan, D.; Markoski, L. J.; Kenis, P. J. A. J Am Chem Soc 2005, 127, 16758. (66) Wootton, R. C. R.; deMello, A. J. Chem Commun 2004, 266. (67) McPherson, A. J Appl Crystallogr 2000, 33, 397.

The periplasmic domain of the barrel assembly machinery protein A (BamA) from Escherichia coli assists folding of outer membrane protein A

The assembly of outer membranes of the cell wall of Gram-negative bacteria and of various organelles of eukaryotic cells requires the evolutionarily conserved β-barrel-assembly machinery (BAM) complex. This thesis describes the biochemical and biophysical properties of the periplasmic domain of the β-barrel assembly machinery protein A (PD-BamA) of the E. coli BAM complex, its effect on insertion and folding of the Outer membrane protein A (OmpA) into lipid bilayers and the identification of regions of PD-BamA that may be involved in protein-protein interactions. The secondary structure of PD-BamA in mixed lipid bilayers, analyzed by Circular dichroism (CD) spectroscopy, contained less β-sheet at an increased content of phosphatidylglycerol (PG) in the lipid membrane. This result showed membrane binding, albeit only in the presence of negatively charged lipids. Fluorescence spectroscopy demonstrated that PD-BamA only binds to lipid bilayers containing the negatively charged DOPG, confirming the results of CD spectroscopy. PD-BamA did not bind to zwitterionic but overall neutral lipid bilayers. PD-BamA bound to OmpA at a stoichiometry of 1:1. PD-BamA strongly facilitated insertion and folding of OmpA into lipid membranes. Kinetics of PD-BamA mediated folding of OmpA was well described by two parallel folding processes, a fast folding process and a slow folding process, differing by 2-3 orders of magnitude in their rate constants. The folding yields of OmpA depended on the concentration of lipid membranes and also on the lipid head groups. The presence of PD-BamA resulted in increased folding yields of OmpA in negatively charged DOPG, but PD-BamA did not affect the folding kinetics of OmpA into bilayers of zwitterionic but overall neutral lipids. The efficiency of folding and insertion of OmpA into lipid bilayers strongly depended on the ratio PD-BamA/OmpA and was optimal at equimolar concentrations of PD-BamA and OmpA. To examine complexes of unfolded OmpA with PD-BamA in more detail, site-directed spectroscopy was used to explore contact regions in both, PD-BamA and OmpA. Similarly, contact regions were also investigated for another protein complex formed by PD-BamA and the lipoprotein BamD. The obtained data suggest, that the site of interaction on PD-BamA for OmpA might be oriented towards the exterior environment away from the preceding POTRA domains, but that PD-BamA is oriented with its short α-helix α1 of POTRA domain 5 towards the C-terminal end of BamD.

Identification of a novel determinant for membrane association in hepatitis C virus nonstructural protein 4B.

Nonstructural protein 4B (NS4B) plays an essential role in the formation of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) replication complex. It is a relatively poorly characterized integral membrane protein predicted to comprise four transmembrane segments in its central portion. Here, we describe a novel determinant for membrane association represented by amino acids (aa) 40 to 69 in the N-terminal portion of NS4B. This segment was sufficient to target and tightly anchor the green fluorescent protein to cellular membranes, as assessed by fluorescence microscopy as well as membrane extraction and flotation analyses. Circular dichroism and nuclear magnetic resonance structural analyses showed that this segment comprises an amphipathic alpha-helix extending from aa 42 to 66. Attenuated total reflection infrared spectroscopy and glycosylation acceptor site tagging revealed that this amphipathic alpha-helix has the potential to traverse the phospholipid bilayer as a transmembrane segment, likely upon oligomerization. Alanine substitution of the fully conserved aromatic residues on the hydrophobic helix side abrogated membrane association of the segment comprising aa 40 to 69 and disrupted the formation of a functional replication complex. These results provide the first atomic resolution structure of an essential membrane-associated determinant of HCV NS4B.

An amphipathic alpha-helix at the C terminus of hepatitis C virus nonstructural protein 4B mediates membrane association.

Nonstructural protein 4B (NS4B) plays an essential role in the formation of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) replication complex. It is an integral membrane protein that has been only poorly characterized to date. It is believed to comprise a cytosolic N-terminal part, a central part harboring four transmembrane passages, and a cytosolic C-terminal part. Here, we describe an amphipathic alpha-helix at the C terminus of NS4B (amino acid residues 229 to 253) that mediates membrane association and is involved in the formation of a functional HCV replication complex.

Mapping the Membrane Topology of Hepatitis C Virus Nonstructural Protein 4B

BACKGROUND: Nonstructural protein 4B (NS4B) plays an essential role in the formation of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) replication complex. It is an integral membrane protein that has only poorly been characterized to date. In particular, a precise membrane topology is thus far elusive. Here, we explored a novel strategy to map the membrane topology of HCV NS4B. METHODS: Selective permeabilization of the plasma membrane, maleimide-polyethyleneglycol (mPEG) labeling of natural or engineered cysteine residues and immunoblot analyses were combined to map the membrane topology of NS4B. Cysteine substitutions were introduced at carefully selected positions within NS4B and their impact on HCV RNA replication and infectious virus production analyzed in cell culture. RESULTS: We established a panel of viable HCV mutants with cysteine substitutions at strategic positions within NS4B. These mutants are infectious and replicate to high levels in cell culture. In parallel, we adapted and optimized the selective permeabilization and mPEG labeling techniques to Huh-7 human hepatocellular carcinoma cells which can support HCV infection and replication. CONCLUSIONS: The newly established experimental tools and techniques should allow us to refine the membrane topology of HCV NS4B in a physiological context. The expected results should enhance our understanding of the functional architecture of the HCV replication complex and may provide new opportunities for antiviral intervention in the future.

Insertion of a malE B-Galactosidase fusion protein into the envelope of Escherichia coli disrupts biogenesis of outer membrane proteins and processing of inner membrane proteins

The synthesis of a membrane-bound MalE ,B-galactosidase hybrid protein, when induced by growth of Escherichia coli on maltose, leads to inhibition of cell division and eventually a reduced rate of mass increase. In addition, the relative rate of synthesis of outer membrane proteins, but not that of inner membrane proteins, was reduced by about 50%o. Kinetic experiments demonstrated that this reduction coincided with the period of maximum synthesis of the hybrid protein (and another maltose-inducible protein, LamB). The accumulation of this abnormal protein in the envelope therefore appeared specifically to inhibit the synthesis, the assembly of outer membrane proteins, or both, indicating that the hybrid protein blocks some export site or causes the sequestration of some limiting factor(s) involved in the export process. Since the MalE protein is normally located in the periplasm, the results also suggest that the synthesis of periplasmic and outer membrane proteins may involve some steps in common. The reduced rate of synthesis of outer membrane proteins was also accompanied by the accumulation in the envelope of at least one outer membrane protein and at least two inner membrane proteins as higher-molecular-weight forms, indicating that processing (removal of the N-terminal signal sequence) was also disrupted by the presence of the hybrid protein. These results may indicate that the assembly of these membrane proteins is blocked at a relatively late step rather than at the level of primary recognition of some site by the signal sequence. In addition, the results suggest that some step common to the biogenesis of quite different kinds of envelope protein is blocked by the presence of the hybrid protein.

Monitoring protein-protein interactions between the mammalian integral membrane transporters and PDZ-interacting partners using a modified split-ubiquitin membrane yeast two-hybrid system

PDZ-binding motifs are found in the C-terminal tails of numerous integral membrane proteins where they mediate specific protein-protein interactions by binding to PDZ-containing proteins. Conventional yeast two-hybrid screens have been used to probe protein-protein interactions of these soluble C termini. However, to date no in vivo technology has been available to study interactions between the full-length integral membrane proteins and their cognate PDZ-interacting partners. We previously developed a split-ubiquitin membrane yeast two-hybrid (MYTH) system to test interactions between such integral membrane proteins by using a transcriptional output based on cleavage of a transcription factor from the C terminus of membrane-inserted baits. Here we modified MYTH to permit detection of C-terminal PDZ domain interactions by redirecting the transcription factor moiety from the C to the N terminus of a given integral membrane protein thus liberating their native C termini. We successfully applied this "MYTH 2.0" system to five different mammalian full-length renal transporters and identified novel PDZ domain-containing partners of the phosphate (NaPi-IIa) and sulfate (NaS1) transporters that would have otherwise not been detectable. Furthermore this assay was applied to locate the PDZ-binding domain on the NaS1 protein. We showed that the PDZ-binding domain for PDZK1 on NaS1 is upstream of its C terminus, whereas the two interacting proteins, NHERF-1 and NHERF-2, bind at a location closer to the N terminus of NaS1. Moreover NHERF-1 and NHERF-2 increased functional sulfate uptake in Xenopus oocytes when co-expressed with NaS1. Finally we used MYTH 2.0 to demonstrate that the NaPi-IIa transporter homodimerizes via protein-protein interactions within the lipid bilayer. In summary, our study establishes the MYTH 2.0 system as a novel tool for interactive proteomics studies of membrane protein complexes.