Abstract

Cholera toxin (CT) enters and intoxicates host cells after binding cell surface receptors using its B subunit (CTB). The ganglioside (glycolipid) GM1 is thought to be the sole CT receptor; however, the mechanism by which CTB binding to GM1 mediates internalization of CT remains enigmatic. Here we report that CTB binds cell surface glycoproteins. Relative contributions of gangliosides and glycoproteins to CTB binding depend on cell type, and CTB binds primarily to glycoproteins in colonic epithelial cell lines. Using a metabolically incorporated photocrosslinking sugar, we identified one CTB-binding glycoprotein and demonstrated that the glycan portion of the molecule, not the protein, provides the CTB interaction motif. We further show that fucosylated structures promote CTB entry into a colonic epithelial cell line and subsequent host cell intoxication. CTB-binding fucosylated glycoproteins are present in normal human intestinal epithelia and could play a role in cholera.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Amberlyn M Wands

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Akiko Fujita

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Janet E McCombs

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Jakob Cervin

    Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Mucosal Immunobiology and Vaccine Center, Institute of Biomedicine, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Benjamin Dedic

    Department of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Andrea C Rodriguez

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Nicole Nischan

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Michelle R Bond

    National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Marcel Mettlen

    Department of Cell Biology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. David C Trudgian

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Andrew Lemoff

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Marianne Quiding-Järbrink

    Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Mucosal Immunobiology and Vaccine Center, Institute of Biomedicine, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Bengt Gustavsson

    Department of Surgery, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Catharina Steentoft

    Copenhagen Center for Glycomics, Departments of Cellular and Molecular Medicine and School of Dentistry, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Henrik Clausen

    Copenhagen Center for Glycomics, Departments of Cellular and Molecular Medicine and School of Dentistry, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Hamid Mirzaei

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Susann Teneberg

    Department of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenberg, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Ulf Yrlid

    Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Mucosal Immunobiology and Vaccine Center, Institute of Biomedicine, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Jennifer J Kohler

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    For correspondence
    jennifer.kohler@utsouthwestern.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Ethics

Human subjects: This study was performed according to the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Regional Board of Ethics in Medical Research in West Sweden, approval no 249-15. Patients received oral and written information about the study by the study nurse the day before surgery, and if they agreed to participate, they signed a consent form stating permission to use the tissue and publish the results in a way that did not reveal the identity of the donor.

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 5,520
    views
  • 989
    downloads
  • 84
    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. Amberlyn M Wands
  2. Akiko Fujita
  3. Janet E McCombs
  4. Jakob Cervin
  5. Benjamin Dedic
  6. Andrea C Rodriguez
  7. Nicole Nischan
  8. Michelle R Bond
  9. Marcel Mettlen
  10. David C Trudgian
  11. Andrew Lemoff
  12. Marianne Quiding-Järbrink
  13. Bengt Gustavsson
  14. Catharina Steentoft
  15. Henrik Clausen
  16. Hamid Mirzaei
  17. Susann Teneberg
  18. Ulf Yrlid
  19. Jennifer J Kohler
(2015)
Fucosylation and protein glycosylation create functional receptors for cholera toxin
eLife 4:e09545.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.09545

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.09545

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Yingjie Sun, Changheng Li ... Youngnam N Jin
    Research Article

    Identifying target proteins for bioactive molecules is essential for understanding their mechanisms, developing improved derivatives, and minimizing off-target effects. Despite advances in target identification (target-ID) technologies, significant challenges remain, impeding drug development. Most target-ID methods use cell lysates, but maintaining an intact cellular context is vital for capturing specific drug–protein interactions, such as those with transient protein complexes and membrane-associated proteins. To address these limitations, we developed POST-IT (Pup-On-target for Small molecule Target Identification Technology), a non-diffusive proximity tagging system for live cells, orthogonal to the eukaryotic system. POST-IT utilizes an engineered fusion of proteasomal accessory factor A and HaloTag to transfer Pup to proximal proteins upon directly binding to the small molecule. After significant optimization to eliminate self-pupylation and polypupylation, minimize depupylation, and optimize chemical linkers, POST-IT successfully identified known targets and discovered a new binder, SEPHS2, for dasatinib, and VPS37C as a new target for hydroxychloroquine, enhancing our understanding these drugs’ mechanisms of action. Furthermore, we demonstrated the application of POST-IT in live zebrafish embryos, highlighting its potential for broad biological research and drug development.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Raji E Joseph, Thomas E Wales ... Amy H Andreotti
    Research Advance

    Inhibition of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) has proven to be highly effective in the treatment of B-cell malignancies such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), autoimmune disorders, and multiple sclerosis. Since the approval of the first BTK inhibitor (BTKi), Ibrutinib, several other inhibitors including Acalabrutinib, Zanubrutinib, Tirabrutinib, and Pirtobrutinib have been clinically approved. All are covalent active site inhibitors, with the exception of the reversible active site inhibitor Pirtobrutinib. The large number of available inhibitors for the BTK target creates challenges in choosing the most appropriate BTKi for treatment. Side-by-side comparisons in CLL have shown that different inhibitors may differ in their treatment efficacy. Moreover, the nature of the resistance mutations that arise in patients appears to depend on the specific BTKi administered. We have previously shown that Ibrutinib binding to the kinase active site causes unanticipated long-range effects on the global conformation of BTK (Joseph et al., 2020). Here, we show that binding of each of the five approved BTKi to the kinase active site brings about distinct allosteric changes that alter the conformational equilibrium of full-length BTK. Additionally, we provide an explanation for the resistance mutation bias observed in CLL patients treated with different BTKi and characterize the mechanism of action of two common resistance mutations: BTK T474I and L528W.