|
|
||||||||
Medical Biotechnology Center, University of Maryland Biotechnology Institute, Baltimore, Maryland 21201, USA
(RECEIVED December 6, 2005; FINAL REVISION February 22, 2006; ACCEPTED March 6, 2006)
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
core, amyloid fibrils are known to exhibit great variations in their morphologies. To date, the mechanism responsible for the polymorphism in amyloid fibrils is poorly understood. Here we report that two variants of mammalian full-length prion protein (PrP), hamster (Ha) and mouse (Mo) PrPs, produced morphologically distinguishable subsets of mature fibrils under identical solvent conditions. To gain insight into the origin of this morphological diversity we analyzed the early stages of polymerization. Unexpectedly, we found that despite a highly conserved amyloidogenic region (94% identity within the residues 90230), Ha and Mo PrPs followed two distinct pathways for lateral assembly of protofibrils into mature, higher order fibrils. The protofibrils of Ha PrP first formed irregular bundles characterized by a peculiar palm-type shape, which ultimately condensed into mature fibrils. The protofibrils of Mo PrP, on the other hand, associated in pairs in a pattern resembling dichotomous coalescence. These pathways are referred to here as the palm-type and dichotomous mechanisms. Two distinct mechanisms for lateral assembly explain striking differences in morphology of mature fibrils produced from closely related Mo and Ha PrPs. Remarkable similarities between subtypes of amyloid fibrils generated from different proteins and peptides suggest that the two mechanisms of lateral assembly may not be limited to prion proteins but may be a common characteristic of polymerization of amyloidogenic proteins and peptides in general. Keywords: conformational changes; prion; amyloid fibrils; electron microscopy; lateral assembly; protofibrils
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In recent studies, the differences in fibrillar morphologies were linked to strain- and species-specific properties of amyloid fibrils produced from the yeast prion [PSI] or from the fragment of mammalian prion protein encompassing residues 23144 (Diaz-Avalos et al. 2005; Jones and Surewicz 2005). While the link between prion strains and protein conformation has been well established in the past few years (Caughey et al. 1998; Safar et al. 1998; Chien et al. 2004; Krishnan and Lindquist 2005), the origin of conformational and morphological polymorphisms in amyloid fibrils is not well understood. Here we analyzed the early stages of nonseeded polymerization of full-length mouse (Mo) and Syrian hamster (Ha) prion proteins (PrP)1 and found striking differences in the mechanisms for their lateral assembly. The protofibrils of Ha PrP first formed irregular bundles characterized by a peculiar palm-type shape, which ultimately condensed into mature fibrils. The protofibrils of Mo PrP, on the other hand, associated in pairs in a pattern resembling dichotomous branching. These two distinct mechanisms for lateral assembly account for the differences in morphology of fibrils produced from Mo and Ha PrPs and may have important implications for providing insight into the molecular determinants of prion strains and species barriers.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
ordered structures can be produced even from the seven-residue peptide derived from the yeast prion protein Sup 35 (Diaz-Avalos et al. 2003).
|
|
What is the origin of fibrillar polymorphism? Why do Mo and Ha fibrils, produced under identical solvent conditions, have different morphologies and twisting patterns? To get insight into the mechanism responsible for high fibrillar polymorphism we decided to analyze the early stages of fibrillization.
As measured by ThT assay, polymerization of full-length PrPs displayed typical nucleationpolymerization kinetics with a lag phase followed by a substantial increase in the ThT signal (Fig. 3A). In previous studies, we found that mature fibrils were already formed by the end of lag phase (Fig. 3B; Baskakov and Bocharova 2005). However, only a small fraction of PrP molecules (<5%) was converted into the fibrillar form by the end of lag phase, while >95% remained in nonfibrillar, monomeric, or oligomeric states as judged by size-exclusion chromatography (Baskakov et al. 2002; Bocharova et al. 2005a). Several lines of evidence indicated that two processes occurred in parallel during the so-called elongation stage: fragmentation of fibrils and actual elongation of fibrils (Baskakov and Bocharova 2005). Fragmentation resulted in the exponential multiplication of fibrillar ends allowing for rapid recruitment of PrP molecules and rapid growth of ThT fluorescence. In the current study, we have specifically focused on the lag phase of the polymerization reaction.
|
|
Mo PrP follows a dichotomous mechanism for lateral assembly
In contrast to Ha PrP, protofibrils of Mo PrP were found to be assembled in pairs even at the earlier stages of polymerization. The protofibrils had flat, untwisted, ribbon-like morphologies (Fig. 5A, panels 24). Occasionally, single-filament structures were observed (Fig. 5A, panel 1). Over time, protofibrils elongated while maintaining ribbon-like morphologies (Fig. 5B). At this stage, fibrils had variable widths and exhibited some curvaturea characteristic of ribbon-like structures. Occasionally, early ribbons were observed splitting apart, either at their edges or at the middle, demonstrating that they were still composed of two individual protofibrils (Fig. 5B).
|
The striking differences between the mechanisms for lateral assembly of Ha and Mo fibrils were also seen using atomic force microscopy conducted in a liquid cell (Fig. 6A, B). The polymerization of Ha PrP was captured at a loosely packed bundle stage, where several single protofibrils had developed lateral interactions but had not yet condensed into mature fibrils (Fig. 6A). The polymerization of Mo PrP was captured at the stage of a "coalescence fork," when two laterally assembling ribbons were splayed apart (Fig. 6B).
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
In dichotomous assembly, on the other hand, only two ribbons were seen to bind to each other at any one time. Therefore, only a few alternative geometries would be available under these conditions for the most favorable type of packing. As judged from EM, after forming an initial complex, the lateral contact between a pair of interacting protofibrils propagates along the fibrillar axis toward one or both directions (Fig. 7). One can assume that the number of alternative possibilities for packing increases as the lateral assembly progresses to the upper level and higher order fibrils are formed. If it is true, the mechanism of dichotomous assembly predicts that an incremental change in the range of fibril morphologies at the higher level of the hierarchical assembly. Frequent switches in morphologies within individual fibrils suggest that alternative types of packing are interconvertible, thermodynamically equivalent, and separated by a very modest energetic barrier. Alterations in morphologies were previously observed in the paired helical filaments found in patients with Alzheimer disease (Crowther 1991). The factors that regulate the twisting pattern and its alterations remain to be determined. In our previous studies, Cu2+ was found to be one of the factors that favored twisted over flat morphologies (Bocharova et al. 2005b). Low levels of methionine oxidation could also influence the interactions between filaments and affect the modes of their lateral association (Breydo et al. 2005).
It is totally unexpected and not intuitive that that Ha and Mo PrPs follow distinct pathways of lateral assembly under identical solvent conditions and produce two morphologically distinguishable subsets of mature fibrils. Since the amyloidogenic regions of Mo and Ha PrPs (residues 90230) are 94% identical, minor variations in the primary sequence must determine the type of lateral assembly and result in the dramatic differences observed in fibril morphology. For example, using a series of Ha PrP-derived peptides, Petty et al. (2005) showed that the side chain of single residue could modulate the morphology of protofibrils. The question of great interest that needs to be addressed in future studies is whether the different pathways of lateral assembly arise due to formation of structurally different nuclei or to minor variations in the protofibrillar interface.
In the current studies, the morphological differences between Ha and Mo protofibrils appeared at very early stages of polymerization. Flexible and curvy protofibrils were commonly observed for Ha PrP, while straight flat ribbons composed of two filaments appeared as the earliest structures of Mo PrP grown under the same solvent conditions. Whether the earliest paired ribbons of Mo PrP emerged via an association of two preformed filaments, undetected by EM, or whether they appeared by an extension of a single nucleus with paired substructures remains to be clarified. Nevertheless, the difference between polymerization of Mo and Ha seems to arise already at the very early stages of polymerization, possibly as early as nucleation. These differences then promulgated through the higher levels of lateral assembly. Taken together, our studies suggest that morphological differences in early protofilaments determine two different types of the lateral assembly, each of which generates morphologically polymorphous subsets of higher order fibrils. Therefore, the polymorphism is regulated on both levels: First, it appears at the stage of early polymerization, and then, it is reinforced further throughout distinct mechanisms of lateral assembly.
Our current and former studies demonstrate that the formation of mature fibrils and fibril elongation already take place during the so-called "lag phase" (Baskakov and Bocharova 2005). However, only a small fraction of PrP molecules (
5%) converts into mature fibrils during the lag phase. The subsequent "elongation" phase is accompanied by a strong increase in the ThT signal reflecting the polymerization of the remaining PrP molecules. The elongation phase consists of two parallel processes: fibril fragmentation and the actual elongation of fibrillar fragments. Fragmentation results in a rapid multiplication of the active centers of polymerization permitting the fast recruitment of PrP molecules and a rapid increase in ThT fluorescence (Baskakov and Bocharova 2005). Noteworthily, fibril elongation by itself cannot be referred to as an autocatalytic reaction, unless fragmentation and multiplication of the active centers take place.
Other amyloidogenic proteins and peptides have been shown to produce fibrils morphologically similar to either the curvy twisted fibrils of Ha PrP or to the rigid ribbon-like fibrils of Mo PrP (Harper et al. 1999; Ionescu-Zanetti et al. 1999; Lashuel et al. 2000; Aggeli et al. 2001; Jimenez et al. 2001, 2002; Kad et al. 2001, 2003; Antzutkin et al. 2002; Gosal et al. 2005). Depending on the pH and ionic strength of solvent,
2-microglobulin was shown to polymerize via two competing pathways producing either semiflexible worm-like fibrils or straight and rigid ribbon-like fibrils (Kad et al. 2001, 2003; Gosal et al. 2005). Considering that two competing pathways may also coexist in polymerization of PrP, it is reasonable to speculate that the mechanism for lateral assembly may switch between the palm-like and dichotomous type depending on solvent conditions.
Uncovering two alternative pathways of lateral assembly provides new insight into the complex mechanism of prion polymerization. Morphological similarities observed between subtypes of mature fibrils produced from a variety of proteins and peptides suggest that the two mechanisms of lateral assembly may not be limited to prion proteins but may be a common characteristic of polymerization of amyloidogenic proteins and peptides in general.
| Materials and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Monitoring the kinetics of amyloid formation
The kinetics of the amyloid formation was monitored using ThT-binding assay as described earlier (Bocharova et al. 2005b). The data were analyzed by fitting time-dependent changes in fluorescence of ThT (F) versus time of the reaction (t) to the following equation (Cohlberg et al. 2002):
|
|
where A is the initial level of ThT fluorescence during the lag phase, B is the difference between final level of ThT fluorescence and the initial level during the lag phase, k is rate constant of amyloid formation (h1), tm is the midpoint of transition, and c is an empirical parameter describing changes in ThT fluorescence after transition. The length of the lag time (tl) of amyloid formation was calculated as tl = tm 2/k.
Negative stain electron microscopy (EM) and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy
EM and FTIR were performed as described earlier (Breydo et al. 2005). To prepare samples for EM, aliquots were taken during the early stages of fibril formation, and diluted 1:1 in 10 mM Na-acetate (pH 5.0). To prepare samples for FTIR, mature amyloid fibrils were dialyzed overnight against 10 mM sodium acetate (pH 5.0). The FTIR bands were resolved by Fourier self-deconvolution in the Opus 4.2 software package using a Lorentzian line shape and parameters equivalent to 20 cm1 bandwidth at half height and a noise suppression factor of 0.3.
Atomic force microscopy (AFM)
Fibrils were imaged with a PicoSPM LE AFM (Molecular Imaging), operating in MAC (alternating magnetic field) mode and using a MAC II silicon cantilever (tip radius <7 nm, spring constant 2.8 N/m) and a liquid cell (Molecular Imaging). Samples were deposited onto a glass coverslip (22 mm circumference; Fisherbrand), left to adhere for 3040 min and then washed three times with filtered ultrapure H2O. The slide was then placed in the fluid cell and immersed in 200 µL 10 mM Tris-HCl buffer (pH 7.5). All imaging was performed at a scan rate of 0.5 lines/sec at a drive frequency of 2530 kHz.
| Footnotes |
|---|
2 Kazan Institute of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kazan, 420111, Russia. ![]()
Reprint requests to: Ilia V. Baskakov, Medical Biotechnology Center, University of Maryland Biotechnology Institute, 725 W. Lombard Street, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA; e-mail: baskakov{at}umbi.umd.edu; fax: (410) 706-8184.
Article and publication are at http://www.proteinscience.org/cgi/doi/10.1110/ps.052013106.
Abbreviations:PrP, full-length recombinant prion protein; Mo, mouse; Ha, Syrian hamster; EM, electron microscopy; FTIR, Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy; ThT, Thioflavin T; GdnHCl, guanidine hydrochloride.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-sheet tapes, ribbons, fibrils, and fibers Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 98: 1185711862.Antzutkin O.N., Leapman R.D., Balbach J.J., Tycko R. 2002. Supramolecular structural constrains on Alzheimer's
-amyloid fibrils from electron microscopy and solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance Biochemistry 41: 1543615450.[CrossRef][Medline]
Baskakov I.V. and Bocharova O.V. 2005. In vitro conversion of mammalian prion protein into amyloid fibrils displays unusual features Biochemistry 44: 23392348.[CrossRef][Medline]
Baskakov I.V., Legname G., Baldwin M.A., Prusiner S.B., Cohen F.E. 2002. Pathway complexity of prion protein assembly into amyloid J. Biol. Chem. 277: 2114021148.
Baxa U., Taylor K.L., Wall J.S., Simon M.N., Cheng N., Wickner R.B., Steven A.C. 2003. Architecture of Ure2p prion filaments J. Biol. Chem. 278: 4371743727.
Berson J.F., Theos A.C., Harper D.C., Tenza D., Raposo G., Marks M.S. 2003. Proprotein convertase cleavage liberates a fibrillogenic fragment of a resident glycoprotein to initiate melanosome biogenesis J. Cell Biol. 161: 521533.
Bocharova O.V., Breydo L., Parfenov A.S., Salnikov V.V., Baskakov I.V. 2005a. In vitro conversion of full length mammalian prion protein produces amyloid form with physical property of PrPSc J. Mol. Biol. 346: 645659.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bocharova O.V., Breydo L., Salnikov V.V., Baskakov I.V. 2005b. Cu(II) inhibits in vitro conversion of prion protein into amyloid fibrils Biochemistry 44: 67766787.[CrossRef][Medline]
Breydo L., Bocharova O.V., Makarava N., Salnikov V.V., Anderson M., Baskakov I.V. 2005. Methionine oxidation interferes with conversion of the prion protein into the fibrillar proteinase K-resistant conformation Biochemistry 44: 1553415543.[CrossRef][Medline]
Carrell R.W. and Lomas D.A. 1997. Conformational disease Lancet 350: 134138.[CrossRef][Medline]
Caughey B., Raymond G.J., Bessen R.A. 1998. Strain-dependent differences in
-sheet conformations of abnormal prion protein J. Biol. Chem. 273: 3223032235.
Chapman M.R., Robinson L.S., Pinkner J.S., Roth R., Heuser J., Hammar M., Normark S., Hultgren S.J. 2002. Role of Escherichia coli curli operones in directing amyloid fiber formation Science 295: 851855.
Chien P., Weissman J.S., DePace A.H. 2004. Emerging principles of conformation-based prion inheritance Annu. Rev. Biochem. 73: 617656.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cohlberg J.A., Li J., Uversky V.N., Fink A.L. 2002. Heparin and other glycosaminoglycans stimulate the formation of amyloid fibrils from
-synuclein in vitro Biochemistry 41: 15021511.[CrossRef][Medline]
Crowther R.A. 1991. Straight and paired helical filaments in Alzheimer disease have a common structural unit Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 88: 22882292.
Diaz-Avalos R., Long C., Fontano E., Balbirnie M., Grothe R., Eisenberg D., Caspar D.L.D. 2003. Cross-
order and diversity in nanocrystals of an amyloid-forming peptide J. Mol. Biol. 330: 11651175.[CrossRef][Medline]
Diaz-Avalos R., King C.Y., Wall J., Simon M., Caspar D.L.D. 2005. Strain-specific morphologies of yeast prion amyloid fibrils Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 102: 1016510170.
Dobson C.M. 2002. Protein misfolding, evolution and disease Trends Biochem. Sci. 24: 329332.
Gosal W.S., Morten I.J., Hewitt E.W., Smith D.A., Thompson N.H., Radford S.E. 2005. Competing pathways determine fibril morphology in the self-assembly of
-microglobulin into amyloid J. Mol. Biol. 351: 850864.[CrossRef][Medline]
Harper J.D., Wong S.S., Lieber C.M., Lansbury P.T. 1999. Assembly of A
amyloid protofibrils: An in vitro model for a possible early event in Alzheimer's disease Biochemistry 38: 89728980.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ionescu-Zanetti C., Khurana R., Gillespie J.R., Petrick J.S., Trabachino L.C., Minert L.J., Carter S.A., Fink A.L. 1999. Monitoring the assembly of Ig light-chain amyloid fibrils by atomic force microscopy Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 96: 1317513179.
Jimenez J.L., Guijarro J.I., Orlova E., Zurdo J., Dobson C.M., Sunde M., Saibil H. 1999. Cryo-electron microscopy structure of an SH3 amyloid fibril and model of the molecular packing EMBO J. 18: 815821.[CrossRef][Medline]
Jimenez J.L., Tennent G., Pepys M., Saibil H.R. 2001. Structural diversity of ex vivo amyloid fibrils studied by cryo-electron microscopy J. Mol. Biol. 310: 241247.
Jimenez J.L., Nettleton E.J., Bouchard M., Robinson C.V., Dobson C.M., Saibil H. 2002. The protofilament structure of insulin amyloid fibrils Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99: 91969201.
Jones E.M. and Surewicz W.K. 2005. Fibril conformation as the basis of species and strain-dependent seeding specificity of mammalian prion amyloids Cell 121: 6372.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kad N.M., Thomson N.H., Smith D.P., Smith D.A., Radford S.E. 2001.
2-Microglobulin and its deamidated variant, N17D form amyloid fibrils with a range of morphologies in vitro J. Mol. Biol. 313: 559571.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kad N.M., Myers S.L., Smith D.P., Smith D.A., Radford S.E., Thomson N.H. 2003. Hierarchical assembly of
-microglobulin amyloid in vitro revealed by atomic force microscopy J. Mol. Biol. 330: 785797.[CrossRef][Medline]
Krishnan R. and Lindquist S. 2005. Structural insight into a yeast prion illuminate nucleation and strain diversity Nature 435: 765772.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lashuel H.A., LaBrenz S.R., Woo L., Serpell L.C., Kelly J.W. 2000. Protofilaments, filaments, ribbons, and fibrils from peptidomimetic self-assembly: Implications for amyloid fibril formation and materials science J. Am. Chem. Soc. 122: 52625277.
Legname G., Baskakov I.V., Nguyen H.-O.B., Riesner D., Cohen F.E., DeArmond S.J., Prusiner S.B. 2004. Synthetic mammalian prions Science 305: 673676.
Petty S.A., Adalsteinsson T., Decatur S.M. 2005. Correlations among morphology,
-sheet stability, and molecular structure in prion peptide aggregates Biochemistry 44: 47204726.[CrossRef][Medline]
Prusiner S.B. 2001. Shattuck lectureneurodegenerative diseases and prions N. Engl. J. Med. 344: 15161526.
Safar J., Wille H., Itri V., Groth D., Serban H., Torchia M., Cohen F.E., Prusiner S.B. 1998. Eight prion strains have PrPSc molecules with different conformations Nat. Med. 4: 11571165.[CrossRef][Medline]
Si K., Lindquist S., Kandel E.R. 2003. A nauronal isoform of the aplysia CPEB has prion-like properties Cell 115: 879891.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wickner R.B. 1994. [URE3] as an altered URE2 protein: Evidence for a prion analog in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Science 264: 566569.
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
N. Makarava and I. V. Baskakov The Same Primary Structure of the Prion Protein Yields Two Distinct Self-propagating States J. Biol. Chem., June 6, 2008; 283(23): 15988 - 15996. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |