|
|
||||||||
Department of Biology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21218, USA
(RECEIVED May 3, 2006; FINAL REVISION September 12, 2006; ACCEPTED September 25, 2006)
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Keywords: entropic bristle; ubiquitin; velocity sedimentation; fluorescence; trypsin cleavage; AraC; regulation
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
We envision three potential explanations for how the N-terminal arms of AraC inhibit aggregation of dimerization domain. First, the arms may act as entropic bristles to resist the approach of other macromolecules in solution. Second, the arms may not be completely free in the absence of ligand and may bind to the core of the dimerization domain, obscuring contacts necessary for self-association. Third, the arms may not interfere with the specific interactions that lead to indefinite self-association but may act as a "solubility tag" to enhance the solubility of the dimerization domain by virtue of the arms intrinsic solubility.
Entropic bristles are flexible polypeptide regions in which thermal motion generates a time-averaged "domain" that tends to exclude other macromolecules because restricting the movement of the bristle is entropically unfavorable (Hoh 1998). The intrusion of another macromolecule into a bristle domain essentially requires compression of the bristle "gas," and hence is resisted by the bristle's thermal motion. The arms of AraC are attached to the cores of the dimerization domain immediately adjacent to the ligand-binding pockets and the interface involved in self-association (Soisson et al. 1997a). Thus their location is compatible with the arms acting as entropic bristles.
We developed a real-time fluorescence-based assay suitable for measuring the ability of a peptide similar in size to the arm of AraC to exclude another macromolecule from its vicinity. The assay measures the rate of trypsin cleavage near the base of a polypeptide arm introduced at the C terminus of a ubiquitin protein core (Fig. 2). While the results of this assay show a small decrease in the cleavage rate as the length of the flexible polypeptide arm is increased from two to 18 residues, the change is insufficient to explain the difference in solubility between dimerization domain containing the N-terminal arm and dimerization domain lacking the arm.
|
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
(214). Deletions beyond residue 14 yield a protein that is too poorly soluble to purify and concentrate to useful concentrations. Velocity sedimentation experiments have previously shown that the wild-type dimerization domain sediments as a single species in the presence of L-arabinose and as a distribution of higher-order species in the absence of L-arabinose (Soisson et al. 1997a). We expected that the deletion of residues 214 would enhance self-association of the dimerization domain, which would lead to the formation of larger dimerization domain assemblies in the absence of L-arabinose. We also expected that the addition of L-arabinose would decrease the extent of self-association for both proteins.
Figure 3 presents the results of an analysis of velocity sedimentation data of both wild-type and
(214) AraC dimerization domain in the presence and absence of L-arabinose. A homogeneous noninteracting species will sediment with a single sedimentation coefficient S, whereas an indefinitely self-associating species will sediment with a distribution of S values. As expected, the protein with the deletion of residues 214, sediments with a considerably broader range of S values than wild-type protein, both in the presence and in the absence of arabinose, and arabinose decreases the range of S values for both proteins (Fig. 3). This demonstrates that the deletion of residues 214 allows the dimerization domain to self-associate with a greater affinity than wild-type protein. These results are consistent with the indefinite self-association as described (Soisson et al. 1997a), in which tyrosine competes with L-arabinose for access to the ligand-binding pocket of AraC. Although L-arabinose reduces the formation of higher-order species of the
(214) construct, it does not entirely eliminate their formation. This behavior is as expected for competition between arabinose binding and self-association if the
(214) construct has both an increased propensity to oligomerize and a decreased affinity for L-arabinose. Indeed, we found that arabinose binds more weakly to the
(214) protein, K D
2.2 ± 0.1 mM, than to wild-type protein, K D
0.6 ± 0.1 mM, as measured by the fluorescence assay described in the Materials and Methods section.
|
Design and construction of an entropic bristle test system
We designed and constructed a system to evaluate entropic bristle behavior of short polypeptide arms. A short polypeptide chain extending from a protein might act like an entropic bristle and restrict macromolecular access to a nearby binding site. Our entropic bristle test system (Fig. 2) utilizes ubiquitin, a 76-residue compact, tryptophan-free, globular protein that is used physiologically as a signal for protein degradation (for review, see Hershko 2005). When folded, ubiquitin contains a single naturally occurring trypsin cleavage site near the C terminus, just after Arg74, which is followed by a Gly-Gly sequence. We monitored cleavage at this site by measuring the fluorescence of a tryptophan residue introduced immediately before Arg74. Cleavage at the arginine changes the environment of the only tryptophan in the construct and hence changes its intrinsic fluorescence, thus allowing a real-time measurement of the kinetics of cleavage. We introduced additional residues at the C terminus of the protein to form an arm that is likely to be unstructured and flexible. We then measured the rate of trypsin cleavage as the arm was incrementally extended from two to 10 to 18 residues.
It is important that the residues added to the protein be flexible and preferably unstructured. To maximize the chances that the arm be flexible, an eight-residue sequence was chosen based on the repeated unit of the entropic bristle in neurofilaments (Brown and Hoh 1997). Subsequent analysis of these proteins using programs designed to predict disordered regions of polypeptide chains (VL2, VL3, VL3H, and VL3E accessed through DisProt [Vucetic et al. 2005], http://www.disprot.org) predict that, indeed, the added residues are unstructured (Obradovic et al. 2003; Vucetic et al. 2003; Peng et al. 2005).
Real-time observation of trypsin cleavage
A time course of cleavage for ubiquitin constructs with two-residue, 10-residue, and 18-residue arms was observed by monitoring the increase in intrinsic tryptophan fluorescence following the addition of trypsin. A typical time course is shown in Figure 4. Rate constants from an exponential rate function fitted to the data are presented in Table 1. We see a modest decrease of
16% in the rate constant of the cleavage reaction as the arm is lengthened from two to 18 residues. This result suggests the presence of a very small entropic bristle effect. Although a quantitative relationship between an entropic bristle effect and self-association is likely to be somewhat obscure, it seems highly unlikely that the small bristle effects we measured for short bristles could be the major reason why deleting the N-terminal arm of AraC so dramatically decreases its solubility. We therefore concluded that some other effect is a more likely explanation for the reduction in self-association promoted by the arms on the AraC dimerization domain.
|
|
(214) dimerization domain construct with the properties of a dimerization domain construct deleted of residues 814,
(814), and a construct that replaced residues 814 with a peptide sequence different from wild-type protein, Mut(814). The arm sequences of these constructs are described in Table 2.
|
(214) and
(814) with the construct whose arm is altered in sequence, but not in length, Mut(814) (Fig. 5). All three proteins behave in a similar manner, which indicates that a property of specific residues in positions 814 of the arm must reduce self-association. In addition, these results indicate that altering residues 814 is equivalent to deleting them. Thus, the identity of residues 814, not just the presence of any residue at those positions, affects the extent of oligomerization.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
By engineering an arm system onto the compact, tryptophan-free, and easily purified protein ubiquitin, it proved relatively simple to measure directly the effect of short arms on the exclusion of other proteins from the arm's vicinity. We added a tryptophan residue to the arm engineered onto ubiquitin in such a position that cleavage of the arm with trypsin would change the environment, and hence the fluorescence, of the tryptophan. Because the fluorescence could be accurately measured in real time, it was possible to make precise measurements of the rate of cleavage of the arm as a function of the arm length.
Although we did observe a decrease in the cleavage rate as the arm increased in length from two to 10 to 18 residues, the decrease in cleavage rate was rather modest, only 16% overall. Thus, while it was possible to detect an entropic bristle effect for the short arms we studied, its magnitude is insufficient to explain the strong effect of the 18-residue arm on AraC protein in inhibiting indefinite self-association of the dimerization domain. Even though we took precautions to reduce the possibility that the arms all possessed stable, rigid, and compact structures, that possibility cannot be excluded. Overall, we consider entropic bristle effect to be an unlikely explanation for the self-association properties of AraC.
When residues eight through 14 of the N-terminal arm on the dimerization domain of AraC were altered, the protein formed higher-order species as extensively as when residues two through 14 were deleted. Because altering residues eight to 14 does not significantly alter the charge density or the hydrophilicity of the arms, or the protein as a whole, it seems unlikely that N-terminal arms on the dimerization domain act to keep the protein soluble by functioning as a "solubility tag." Instead, it seems that the native sequence of the N-terminal arm binds specifically, that is, in a residue-dependent manner, to the dimerization domain and it blocks formation of the interaction through the ligand-binding pocket that leads to indefinite polymerization of the protein.
An interaction between the arm and dimerization domain that inhibits self-association could easily be similar to the one that forms in the presence of arabinose (Soisson et al. 1997a). Arabinose may simply provide additional interactions necessary to strengthen the contact between the arm and dimerization domain to the level needed to shift the equilibrium position of the arm from predominantly bound to DNA-binding domain to largely bound to dimerization domain.
In principle, structural studies could determine the arm's position in the absence of arabinose, but in practice, this has not yet been possible. The crystal structure of the dimerization domain in the absence of ligand shows the tyrosine-mediated indefinite self-association (Soisson et al. 1997a) that necessitates displacement of the arm from its arabinose-bound position. The high concentration of dimerization domain required for crystallization could easily have shifted the equilibrium between arm binding and self-association to favor indefinite self-association. In addition, crystallization of this form was possible only at pH 9. Since structural evidence suggests that low pH strengthens binding between the arm and the core of the protein by protonating a histidine (Soisson et al. 1997b), the use of a high pH may have sufficiently weakened arm binding that displacement of the arm and crystallization became possible. Due to the relatively high molecular weight of the dimerization domain, NMR characterization of the freedom of the N-terminal arm would also be a technically challenging problem.
In summary, we have demonstrated that the repulsive effects of peptide arms acting as entropic bristles can be observed, but arms of the length and sequences we studied, two to 18 residues, did not produce dramatic entropic exclusion. Our measurements of self-association, evaluation of entropic exclusion, and the effects of deleting or altering arm sequence, as well as structures of the arabinose-bound and apo-AraC dimerization domain, all indicate that the presence of the arms directly interferes with self-association of the dimerization domain. This likely results from specific interactions between the arm and the core of the dimerization domain that exists even in the absence of arabinose.
| Materials and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We deleted DNA coding for the N-terminal 10-His tag and the linker containing the Factor Xa cleavage site from the pET16b-ubiquitin expression vector. The resulting plasmid, termed pUb, expresses only the full-length ubiquitin construct (residues 176). Next, a codon for a single tryptophan residue was inserted immediately prior to the codon for residue R74. The resulting construct, pUbW74-A0, expresses ubiquitin that contains a two-residue (GG) arm following residues W74 and R75. Three DNA sequences coding for eight-residue segments were then added in succession to the end of the gene on pUbW74 to generate expression vectors that produce ubiquitin constructs with a 10-residue (pUbW74-A1; GGASAPTSPA), an 18-residue (pUbW74-A2; GGASAPTSPAPSTAPASA), or a 26-residue (pUbW74-A3; GGASAPTSPAPSTAPASAGGTAPGSA) flexible arm immediately subsequent to R75. The sequence of the eight-residue inserts was based on the repeated unit of the entropic bristle in neurofilaments (Brown and Hoh 1997), but with lysine residues removed. Subsequent analysis of these proteins using programs designed to predict disordered regions of polypeptide chains (VL2, VL3, VL3H, and VL3E accessed through DisProt [Vucetic et al. 2005], www.disprot.org) indicates that the added residues are unstructured (Obradovic et al. 2003; Vucetic et al. 2003; Peng et al. 2005).
Mutant constructs derived from ubiquitin were expressed using the pET16b-ubiquitin plasmid in the expression-optimized E. coli strain BL21 (DE3) from Stratagene and purified as follows. Cells were grown with shaking at 37°C in YT medium (Schleif and Wensink 1981) to
1 x 108 cells/mL, induced by the addition of IPTG to 1 mM, and grown for an additional 3 h; then they were harvested by sedimentation at 6000g for 10 min at 4°C. The cell pellet was resuspended in 20 mM HEPES (pH 7.5), 0.1 M NaCl, 5% glycerol, 10 mM MgCl2, 1 mM PMSF, with 10 µg/mL each DNase I and RNase A added immediately before use, and lysed by a French press. Debris was removed by centrifugation at 10,000g for 15 min at 4°C. Acetic acid (50%) was added drop-wise until the pH dropped to
4.55.0. The extract was then centrifuged at 10,000g for 20 min at 4°C, and the pH of the supernatant was raised to >5 with one small pellet of NaOH. The solution was then dialyzed against 10- to 100-fold excess of 20 mM NH4-acetate (pH 5.1) at 4°C. The dialyzed sample was filtered through a 0.22-µm PVDF low-protein-binding syringe filter from Millipore; bound to an Amersham Pharmacia Biotech HiTrap SP HP, 1 mL volume, cation exchange column; and eluted at 100200 mM in a 40-mL gradient from 20 to 500 mM NH4-acetate (pH 5.1) and 0.1 mM NaN3. Fractions containing ubiquitin (the only major elution peak) were dialyzed against buffer containing 20 mM HEPES (pH 7.7) and 100 mM NaCl.
Generation and purification of AraC dimerization domain constructs
Plasmid AraCTF (LaRonde-LeBlanc and Wolberger 2000), encoding the arm and dimerization domain of AraC, was derived from a pET21b (ampr ) expression vector by inserting nucleotides 1546 of AraC between the NdeI and AdeI sites of the plasmid. The resulting vector expresses residues 1182 of AraC followed by a C-terminal Leu-Glu linker and a 6-His tag. Mutations were introduced and verified as above. Wild-type dimerization domain protein and mutant constructs were expressed as above and purified by methods modified from those previously described (LaRonde-LeBlanc and Wolberger 2000). Cells grown, induced, and harvested as above were resuspended in 15 mM Tris-Cl (pH 8.0), 0.1 M NaCl, 5% glycerol, 10 mM MgCl2, and 50 mM L-arabinose with 10 µg/mL each DNase I and RNase A added immediately before use, lysed by a French press, and centrifuged at 10,000g for 15 min at 4°C. The supernatant was incubated at 4°C, rocking gently for a minimum of 2 h with 1 mL Ni-NTA agarose beads from QIAGEN per estimated 10 mg target protein. Typically, 5 mL of beads were incubated with the material from 1 L of cell growth medium. The beads were rinsed once in bulk and then packed into a column and washed with 15 mM Tris-Cl (pH 8.0), 0.1 M NaCl, 50 mM L-arabinose, and 10 mM imidazole until the OD280nm of the flow-through was <0.05. Bound protein was eluted with two column volumes of buffer containing 15 mM Tris-Cl (pH 8.0), 10 mM NaCl, 50 mM L-arabinose, and 1 M imidazole. Trypsin cleavage was performed overnight at 4°C using 1 µg trypsin per 1 mg estimated protein to remove the 6-His tag, followed by binding to a Pharmacia Mono-Q HR 5/5, 1 mL volume, anion exchange column and elution in 15 mM Tris-Cl (pH 8.0) and 50 mM L-arabinose using a 40 mL gradient from 10 mM to 1 M NaCl.
Fluorescence assay of trypsin cleavage rate
A 2.5-mL sample of protein at a concentration of 13.5 µM was stirred continuously in a 10-mm quartz fluorescence cuvette. Samples were excited at 295 nm with slit widths adjusted for a 1-nm spectral bandwidth. Emission was detected at 340 nm with slit widths adjusted for a 5-nm spectral bandwidth. After establishing an initial baseline, 1 µL of trypsin at a concentration of 3.5 mg/mL was added to the sample, and data were collected until the cleavage reaction was essentially completed. As the kinetics of trypsin cleave should be first order, we fit the fluorescence data to a standard exponential increase rate equation. Preliminary experiments showed that the amplitude of the fluorescence change of the ubiquitin construct with a 26-residue arm (UbW74-A3) was only one quarter the change of the other three constructs. We did not further use this protein because of the discrepancy.
Velocity sedimentation
Samples of purified dimerization domain were dialyzed overnight into 75 mM KCl and 15 mM Tris-Cl (pH 8.0), with or without 0.2% (w/v) L-arabinose,
13 mM. Samples were loaded into ultracentrifugation cells with 12-mm path length double-sector charcoal-filled Epon centerpieces and sapphire windows. A loading concentration of 0.5 mg/mL, corresponding to an OD280nm of
0.8 for a 12-mm cell, was used for all samples. Cells were centrifuged at 20°C in a Beckman XLI analytical ultracentrifuge at 50,000 rpm in an An-50Ti rotor. Absorbance scans at 280 nm were taken in continuous scan mode at
2.5-min intervals without replicates. A nominal radial step size of 0.003 cm was used. Data were analyzed by the van Holde-Weischet method (Van Holde and Weischet 1978), as implemented in the Ultrascan v6.0 software (Demeler et al. 1997). The partial specific volume of each construct was calculated from amino acid composition by the program Sednterp v1.07 (Laue et al. 1992). Because the Sednterp database lacked an entry for arabinose, the same molar concentration of glucose was used in place of arabinose to calculate the density of the buffer from its composition. Density was taken to be 1.00221 g/cm3 without L-arabinose and 1.00309 g/cm3 with 0.2% (w/v) L-arabinose.
Fluorescence measurements of arabinose binding
Purified wild-type and
(214) AraC dimerization domain were dialyzed extensively into 15 mM Tris-Cl (pH 8.0) and 75 mM KCl and then diluted into the final dialysis buffer to reach a concentration of 10 µg/mL,
475 nM. Samples were measured in triplicate as above with excitation at 295 nm and emission data collected from 320 to 370 nm. L-Arabinose stock solutions, dissolved in the final dialysis buffer at concentrations of 1 M, 0.1 M, and 10 mM, were added to the sample to produce final concentrations from 0 to 50 mM. Data were collected at 1 point/sec at 1-nm intervals. Equilibrium appeared to be reached by 1 min. An average emission wavelength at each arabinose concentration was calculated with a spreadsheet and plotted with KaleidaGraph. The resulting curve was fit to a standard ligand-binding isotherm to extract ligand affinity.
| Footnotes |
|---|
Article and publication are at http://www.proteinscience.org/cgi/doi/10.1110/ps.062327506.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Demeler, B., Saber, H., and Hansen, J.C. 1997. Identification and interpretation of complexity in sedimentation velocity boundaries. Biophys. J. 72: 397407.
Ghosh, M. and Schleif, R.F. 2001. Biophysical evidence of arm-domain interactions in AraC. Anal. Biochem. 295: 107112.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gryczynski, U. and Schleif, R. 2004. A portable allosteric mechanism. Proteins. 57: 911.[CrossRef][Medline]
Harmer, T., Wu, M., and Schleif, R. 2001. Role of rigidity in DNA looping-unlooping by AraC. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 98: 427431.
Hershko, A. 2005. The ubiquitin system for protein degradation and some of its roles in the control of cell division cycle. Cell Death Differ. 12: 11911197.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hoh, J.H. 1998. Functional protein domains from the thermally driven motion of polypeptide chains: A proposal. Proteins. 32: 223228.[CrossRef][Medline]
LaRonde-LeBlanc, N. and Wolberger, C. 2000. Characterization of the oligomeric states of wild type and mutant AraC. Biochemistry. 39: 1159311601.[CrossRef][Medline]
Laue, T.M., Shah, B.D., Ridgeway, T.M., and Pelletier, S.L. 1992. Computer aided interpretation of analytical sedimentation data for proteins. In Analytical ultracentrifugation in biochemistry and polymer sciene (eds. S.E. Harding et al.), pp. 90125. The Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, UK.
Obradovic, Z., Peng, K., Vucetic, S., Radivojac, P., Brown, C., and Dunker, A.K. 2003. Predicting intrinsic disorder from amino acid sequence. Proteins. 53: 566572.
Peng, K., Vucetic, S., Radivojac, P., Brown, C., Dunker, A.K., and Obradovic, Z. 2005. Optimizing intrinsic disorder predictors with protein evolutionary information. J. Bioinform. Comput. Biol. 3: 3560.[CrossRef][Medline]
Reed, W.L. and Schleif, R.F. 1999. Hemiplegic mutations in AraC protein. J. Mol. Biol. 294: 417425.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ross, J.J., Gryczynski, U., and Schleif, R. 2003. Mutational analysis of residue roles in AraC function. J. Mol. Biol. 328: 8593.[CrossRef][Medline]
Saviola, B., Seabold, R., and Schleif, R.F. 1998. Arm-domain interactions in AraC. J. Mol. Biol. 278: 539548.[CrossRef][Medline]
Schleif, R.F. and Wensink, P.C. 1981. Practical methods in molecular bioloy. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Seabold, R.R. and Schleif, R.F. 1998. Apo-AraC actively seeks to loop. J. Mol. Biol. 278: 529538.[CrossRef][Medline]
Soisson, S.M., MacDougall-Shackleton, B., Schleif, R., and Wolberger, C. 1997a. Structural basis for ligand-regulated oligomerization of AraC. Science. 276: 421425.
Soisson, S.M., MacDougall-Shackleton, B., Schleif, R., and Wolberger, C. 1997b. The 1.6 Å crystal structure of the AraC sugar-binding and dimerization domain complexed with D-fucose. J. Mol. Biol. 273: 226237.[CrossRef][Medline]
Van Holde, K.E. and Weischet, W.O. 1978. Boundary analysis of sedimentation velocity experiments with monodisperse and paucidisperse solutes. Biopolymers. 17: 13871403.[CrossRef]
Vucetic, S., Brown, C.J., Dunker, A.K., and Obradovic, Z. 2003. Flavors of protein disorder. Proteins. 52: 573584.[CrossRef][Medline]
Vucetic, S., Obradovic, Z., Vacic, V., Radivojac, P., Peng, K., Iakoucheva, L.M., Cortese, M.S., Lawson, J.D., Brown, C.J., and Sikes, J.G., et al. 2005. DisProt: A database of protein disorder. Bioinformatics. 21: 137140.
Wu, M. and Schleif, R. 2001a. Mapping arm-DNA-binding domain interactions in AraC. J. Mol. Biol. 307: 10011009.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wu, M. and Schleif, R.F. 2001b. Strengthened arm-dimerization domain interactions in AraC. J. Biol. Chem. 276: 25622564.
You, J., Cohen, R.E., and Pickart, C.M. 1999. Construct for high-level expression and low misincorporation of lysine for arginine during expression of pET-encoded eukaryotic proteins in Escherichia coli . Biotechniques. 27: 950954.[Medline]
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |