Resolving dual binding conformations of cellulosome cohesin-dockerin complexes using single-molecule force spectroscopy

  1. Markus A Jobst
  2. Lukas F Milles
  3. Constantin Schoeler
  4. Wolfgang Ott
  5. Daniel B Fried
  6. Edward A Bayer
  7. Hermann E Gaub
  8. Michael A Nash  Is a corresponding author
  1. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany
  2. Kean University, United States
  3. Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel

Abstract

Receptor-ligand pairs are ordinarily thought to interact through a lock and key mechanism, where a unique molecular conformation is formed upon binding. Contrary to this paradigm, cellulosomal cohesin-dockerin (Coh-Doc) pairs are believed to interact through redundant dual binding modes consisting of two distinct conformations. Here, we combined site-directed mutagenesis and single-molecule force spectroscopy (SMFS) to study the unbinding of Coh:Doc complexes under force. We designed Doc mutations to knock out each binding mode, and compared their single-molecule unfolding patterns as they were dissociated from Coh using an atomic force microscope (AFM) cantilever. Although average bulk measurements were unable to resolve the differences in Doc binding modes due to the similarity of the interactions, with a single-molecule method we were able to discriminate the two modes based on distinct differences in their mechanical properties. We conclude that wild-type Doc from Clostridium thermocellum exocellulase Cel48S populates each binding mode with equal probability.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Markus A Jobst

    Lehrstuhl für Angewandte Physik, Center for Nanoscience, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Lukas F Milles

    Lehrstuhl für Angewandte Physik, Center for Nanoscience, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Constantin Schoeler

    Lehrstuhl für Angewandte Physik, Center for Nanoscience, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Wolfgang Ott

    Lehrstuhl für Angewandte Physik, Center for Nanoscience, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Daniel B Fried

    Kean University, Union, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Edward A Bayer

    Department of Biological Chemistry, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Hermann E Gaub

    Lehrstuhl für Angewandte Physik, Center for Nanoscience, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Michael A Nash

    Lehrstuhl für Angewandte Physik, Center for Nanoscience, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany
    For correspondence
    michael.nash@lmu.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Copyright

© 2015, Jobst 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

  • 1,551
    views
  • 410
    downloads
  • 41
    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. Markus A Jobst
  2. Lukas F Milles
  3. Constantin Schoeler
  4. Wolfgang Ott
  5. Daniel B Fried
  6. Edward A Bayer
  7. Hermann E Gaub
  8. Michael A Nash
(2015)
Resolving dual binding conformations of cellulosome cohesin-dockerin complexes using single-molecule force spectroscopy
eLife 4:e10319.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10319

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10319

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Mai Nguyen, Elda Bauda ... Cecile Morlot
    Research Article

    Teichoic acids (TA) are linear phospho-saccharidic polymers and important constituents of the cell envelope of Gram-positive bacteria, either bound to the peptidoglycan as wall teichoic acids (WTA) or to the membrane as lipoteichoic acids (LTA). The composition of TA varies greatly but the presence of both WTA and LTA is highly conserved, hinting at an underlying fundamental function that is distinct from their specific roles in diverse organisms. We report the observation of a periplasmic space in Streptococcus pneumoniae by cryo-electron microscopy of vitreous sections. The thickness and appearance of this region change upon deletion of genes involved in the attachment of TA, supporting their role in the maintenance of a periplasmic space in Gram-positive bacteria as a possible universal function. Consequences of these mutations were further examined by super-resolved microscopy, following metabolic labeling and fluorophore coupling by click chemistry. This novel labeling method also enabled in-gel analysis of cell fractions. With this approach, we were able to titrate the actual amount of TA per cell and to determine the ratio of WTA to LTA. In addition, we followed the change of TA length during growth phases, and discovered that a mutant devoid of LTA accumulates the membrane-bound polymerized TA precursor.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Computational and Systems Biology
    Shinichi Kawaguchi, Xin Xu ... Toshie Kai
    Research Article

    Protein–protein interactions are fundamental to understanding the molecular functions and regulation of proteins. Despite the availability of extensive databases, many interactions remain uncharacterized due to the labor-intensive nature of experimental validation. In this study, we utilized the AlphaFold2 program to predict interactions among proteins localized in the nuage, a germline-specific non-membrane organelle essential for piRNA biogenesis in Drosophila. We screened 20 nuage proteins for 1:1 interactions and predicted dimer structures. Among these, five represented novel interaction candidates. Three pairs, including Spn-E_Squ, were verified by co-immunoprecipitation. Disruption of the salt bridges at the Spn-E_Squ interface confirmed their functional importance, underscoring the predictive model’s accuracy. We extended our analysis to include interactions between three representative nuage components—Vas, Squ, and Tej—and approximately 430 oogenesis-related proteins. Co-immunoprecipitation verified interactions for three pairs: Mei-W68_Squ, CSN3_Squ, and Pka-C1_Tej. Furthermore, we screened the majority of Drosophila proteins (~12,000) for potential interaction with the Piwi protein, a central player in the piRNA pathway, identifying 164 pairs as potential binding partners. This in silico approach not only efficiently identifies potential interaction partners but also significantly bridges the gap by facilitating the integration of bioinformatics and experimental biology.