Cryo-EM structures of the autoinhibited <em>E. coli</em> ATP synthase in three rotational states

  1. Meghna Sobti
  2. Callum Smits
  3. Andrew SW Wong
  4. Robert Ishmukhametov
  5. Daniela Stock
  6. Sara Sandin
  7. Alastair G Stewart  Is a corresponding author
  1. The Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute, Australia
  2. Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
  3. University of Oxford, United Kingdom

Abstract

A molecular model that provides a framework for interpreting the wealth of functional information obtained on the <em>E. coli</em> F-ATP synthase has been generated using cryo-electron microscopy. Three different states that relate to rotation of the enzyme were observed, with the central stalk's &epsilon; subunit in an extended autoinhibitory conformation in all three states. The Fo motor comprises of seven transmembrane helices and a decameric c-ring and invaginations on either side of the membrane indicate the entry and exit channels for protons. The proton translocating subunit contains near parallel helices inclined by ~30&ordm; to the membrane, a feature now synonymous with rotary ATPases. For the first time in this rotary ATPase subtype, the peripheral stalk is resolved over its entire length of the complex, revealing the F1 attachment points and a coiled-coil that bifurcates towards the membrane with its helices separating to embrace subunit a from two sides.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Meghna Sobti

    Molecular, Structural and Computational Biology Division, The Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute, Darlinghurst, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Callum Smits

    Molecular, Structural and Computational Biology Division, The Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute, Darlinghurst, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Andrew SW Wong

    NTU Institute of Structural Biology, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Robert Ishmukhametov

    Department of Physics, Clarendon Laboratory, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Daniela Stock

    Molecular, Structural and Computational Biology Division, The Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute, Darlinghurst, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Sara Sandin

    NTU Institute of Structural Biology, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Alastair G Stewart

    Molecular, Structural and Computational Biology Division, The Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute, Darlinghurst, Australia
    For correspondence
    a.stewart@victorchang.edu.au
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2070-6030

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council (1004620)

  • Daniela Stock

National Health and Medical Research Council (1109961)

  • Daniela Stock

National Health and Medical Research Council (1090408)

  • Alastair G Stewart

National Health and Medical Research Council (1022143)

  • Daniela Stock

National Health and Medical Research Council (1047004)

  • Daniela Stock

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2016, Sobti 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

  • 6,970
    views
  • 972
    downloads
  • 124
    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. Meghna Sobti
  2. Callum Smits
  3. Andrew SW Wong
  4. Robert Ishmukhametov
  5. Daniela Stock
  6. Sara Sandin
  7. Alastair G Stewart
(2016)
Cryo-EM structures of the autoinhibited <em>E. coli</em> ATP synthase in three rotational states
eLife 5:e21598.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21598

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21598

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Yamato Niitani, Kohei Matsuzaki ... Michio Tomishige
    Research Article

    The two identical motor domains (heads) of dimeric kinesin-1 move in a hand-over-hand process along a microtubule, coordinating their ATPase cycles such that each ATP hydrolysis is tightly coupled to a step and enabling the motor to take many steps without dissociating. The neck linker, a structural element that connects the two heads, has been shown to be essential for head–head coordination; however, which kinetic step(s) in the chemomechanical cycle is ‘gated’ by the neck linker remains unresolved. Here, we employed pre-steady-state kinetics and single-molecule assays to investigate how the neck-linker conformation affects kinesin’s motility cycle. We show that the backward-pointing configuration of the neck linker in the front kinesin head confers higher affinity for microtubule, but does not change ATP binding and dissociation rates. In contrast, the forward-pointing configuration of the neck linker in the rear kinesin head decreases the ATP dissociation rate but has little effect on microtubule dissociation. In combination, these conformation-specific effects of the neck linker favor ATP hydrolysis and dissociation of the rear head prior to microtubule detachment of the front head, thereby providing a kinetic explanation for the coordinated walking mechanism of dimeric kinesin.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Christopher T Schafer, Raymond F Pauszek III ... David P Millar
    Research Article

    The canonical chemokine receptor CXCR4 and atypical receptor ACKR3 both respond to CXCL12 but induce different effector responses to regulate cell migration. While CXCR4 couples to G proteins and directly promotes cell migration, ACKR3 is G-protein-independent and scavenges CXCL12 to regulate extracellular chemokine levels and maintain CXCR4 responsiveness, thereby indirectly influencing migration. The receptors also have distinct activation requirements. CXCR4 only responds to wild-type CXCL12 and is sensitive to mutation of the chemokine. By contrast, ACKR3 recruits GPCR kinases (GRKs) and β-arrestins and promiscuously responds to CXCL12, CXCL12 variants, other peptides and proteins, and is relatively insensitive to mutation. To investigate the role of conformational dynamics in the distinct pharmacological behaviors of CXCR4 and ACKR3, we employed single-molecule FRET to track discrete conformational states of the receptors in real-time. The data revealed that apo-CXCR4 preferentially populates a high-FRET inactive state, while apo-ACKR3 shows little conformational preference and high transition probabilities among multiple inactive, intermediate and active conformations, consistent with its propensity for activation. Multiple active-like ACKR3 conformations are populated in response to agonists, compared to the single CXCR4 active-state. This and the markedly different conformational landscapes of the receptors suggest that activation of ACKR3 may be achieved by a broader distribution of conformational states than CXCR4. Much of the conformational heterogeneity of ACKR3 is linked to a single residue that differs between ACKR3 and CXCR4. The dynamic properties of ACKR3 may underly its inability to form productive interactions with G proteins that would drive canonical GPCR signaling.