Common intermediates and kinetics, but different energetics, in the assembly of SNARE proteins

  1. Sylvain Zorman
  2. Aleksander A Rebane
  3. Lu Ma
  4. Guangcan Yang
  5. Matthew A Molski
  6. Jeff Coleman
  7. Frederic Pincet
  8. James E Rothman
  9. Yongli Zhang  Is a corresponding author
  1. Yale University School of Medicine, United States
  2. Yale University, United States
  3. UMR CNRS 8550 Associée aux Universités Paris 6 et Paris 7, Ecole Normale Supérieure, France

Abstract

Soluble N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor attachment protein receptors (SNAREs) are evolutionarily conserved machines that couple their folding/assembly to membrane fusion. However, it is unclear how these processes are regulated and function. To determine these mechanisms, we characterized the folding energy and kinetics of four representative SNARE complexes at a single-molecule level using high-resolution optical tweezers. We found that all SNARE complexes assemble by the same step-wise zippering mechanism: slow N-terminal domain (NTD) association, a pause in a force-dependent half-zippered intermediate and fast C-terminal domain (CTD) zippering. The energy release from CTD zippering differs for yeast (13 kBT) and neuronal SNARE complexes (27 kBT), and is concentrated at the C-terminal part of CTD zippering. Thus, SNARE complexes share a conserved zippering pathway and polarized energy release to efficiently drive membrane fusion, but generate different amounts of zippering energy to regulate fusion kinetics.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Sylvain Zorman

    Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Aleksander A Rebane

    Yale University, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Lu Ma

    Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Guangcan Yang

    Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Matthew A Molski

    Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Jeff Coleman

    Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Frederic Pincet

    UMR CNRS 8550 Associée aux Universités Paris 6 et Paris 7, Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. James E Rothman

    Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Yongli Zhang

    Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    For correspondence
    yongli.zhang@yale.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Axel T Brunger, Stanford University, United States

Version history

  1. Received: May 13, 2014
  2. Accepted: August 29, 2014
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: September 1, 2014 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: September 18, 2014 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2014, Zorman et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,674
    views
  • 360
    downloads
  • 79
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Sylvain Zorman
  2. Aleksander A Rebane
  3. Lu Ma
  4. Guangcan Yang
  5. Matthew A Molski
  6. Jeff Coleman
  7. Frederic Pincet
  8. James E Rothman
  9. Yongli Zhang
(2014)
Common intermediates and kinetics, but different energetics, in the assembly of SNARE proteins
eLife 3:e03348.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.03348

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.03348

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Hitendra Negi, Aravind Ravichandran ... Ranabir Das
    Research Article

    The proteasome controls levels of most cellular proteins, and its activity is regulated under stress, quiescence, and inflammation. However, factors determining the proteasomal degradation rate remain poorly understood. Proteasome substrates are conjugated with small proteins (tags) like ubiquitin and Fat10 to target them to the proteasome. It is unclear if the structural plasticity of proteasome-targeting tags can influence substrate degradation. Fat10 is upregulated during inflammation, and its substrates undergo rapid proteasomal degradation. We report that the degradation rate of Fat10 substrates critically depends on the structural plasticity of Fat10. While the ubiquitin tag is recycled at the proteasome, Fat10 is degraded with the substrate. Our results suggest significantly lower thermodynamic stability and faster mechanical unfolding in Fat10 compared to ubiquitin. Long-range salt bridges are absent in the Fat10 structure, creating a plastic protein with partially unstructured regions suitable for proteasome engagement. Fat10 plasticity destabilizes substrates significantly and creates partially unstructured regions in the substrate to enhance degradation. NMR-relaxation-derived order parameters and temperature dependence of chemical shifts identify the Fat10-induced partially unstructured regions in the substrate, which correlated excellently to Fat10-substrate contacts, suggesting that the tag-substrate collision destabilizes the substrate. These results highlight a strong dependence of proteasomal degradation on the structural plasticity and thermodynamic properties of the proteasome-targeting tags.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Amy H Andreotti, Volker Dötsch
    Editorial

    The articles in this special issue highlight how modern cellular, biochemical, biophysical and computational techniques are allowing deeper and more detailed studies of allosteric kinase regulation.