Protein Overexpression: Reaching the limit

How many copies of a protein can be made before it becomes toxic to the cell?
  1. Benedetta Bolognesi  Is a corresponding author
  2. Ben Lehner  Is a corresponding author
  1. Centre for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Spain
  2. Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Spain
  3. Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain
  4. Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Spain

Cells can be pictured as factories that build proteins, the molecules essential for nearly all of life’s processes. The body tightly controls production levels, because creating too many proteins – also known as protein overexpression – can be harmful to the cell. Yet, it is difficult to know how much of any given protein will be harmful, or why.

Indeed, high concentrations of enzymes and other proteins can harm cells in several ways, for example by activating or overloading specific biological pathways, disrupting regulation, or by aggregating together (Vavouri et al., 2009; Tang and Amon, 2013; Makanae et al., 2013). They can also upset the balance in protein complexes or make the different liquid phases separate in the cell (Birchler and Veitia, 2012; Bolognesi et al., 2016). Ultimately, overexpressing any protein will be destructive because it exhausts the resources of the cell to make and transport proteins (Stoebel et al., 2008). However, we did not know how much of a specific protein must be produced to cause this ‘protein burden’ and hinder cell growth.

Now, in eLife, Hisao Moriya and colleagues at the universities of Okayama, Kobe and Meiji – including Yuichi Eguchi as first author – report that many members of a group of enzymes can be overexpressed until they form 15% of the total proteins in a yeast cell (Eguchi et al., 2018). Only then do they start to cause damage because of protein burden. This matches the results of previous experiments from the same laboratory, which only focused on a single fluorescent protein that did not interfere with any components of the cell (Kintaka et al., 2016).

To discover this limit, Eguchi et al. relied on a method the lab developed in 2006. The technique involves inserting a small portion of DNA, called a plasmid, into the yeast cells. The plasmid carries two genes: the first is essential for growth, and the other codes for one of the enzymes studied. The cell increasingly needs to make new plasmids in order to grow, but this also creates more enzymes. In this ‘tug-of-war’ system, the yeast generates more and more plasmids until the expression of the enzyme of interest becomes harmful; at this point, plasmid production decreases. The number of plasmids in the cell thus reflects the quantity of protein that can be made before it turns toxic.

The experiments focused on a set of 29 glycolytic enzymes, which break down sugar in yeast. These enzymes are normally highly expressed in a cell, and their roles are well understood.

Out of the 29 proteins, three were not harmful in the experiment and could not be produced in high enough amounts to reach the burden limit. This was because the genes that encoded these enzymes contained sequences that were not optimal for protein production.

Another 19 enzymes could be expressed until they formed close to 15% of the total protein content of the cell, which suggests that protein burden is the cause of their toxicity. The fact that even large essential yeast enzymes could be produced up to this limit is unexpected, and it suggests that in many cases the toxicity created by protein overexpression does not depend on the specific characteristics of the proteins.

The cost of overexpression may come from the burden it puts on the machinery that assembles proteins in the cell, which requires particularly high levels of energy (Shah et al., 2013). Putting this apparatus under pressure could impair or slow it down; in turn, this may hinder the creation of other proteins and decrease the fitness of the cell. The other steps of protein production, such as ‘reading’ the genes, helping the protein to mature, bringing it to its right location in the cell, and degrading it, also use significant amounts of energy (Rice and McLysaght, 2017).

Seven proteins caused harm at concentrations far below the 15% limit, which means that they must damage the cell in other ways than by causing a protein burden. Eguchi et al. identified three mechanisms for this toxicity: the proteins aggregated together, they overloaded a transport system that takes them to a specific cell compartment, or the overexpressed enzymes produced too much catalytic activity (Figure 1). One might have expected this last process to drive the toxic effects of this group of proteins. Yet, killing catalytic activity in the enzymes (by introducing specific mutations) only relieved the toxicity caused by overexpression for two of the 18 proteins that were tested.

Different mechanisms of toxicity induced by protein overexpression.

Many enzymes involved in glycolysis such as GFP or Pgk1 do not cause any harm until they are overexpressed up to or close to the protein burden limit, which corresponds to 15% of the total proteins in the cell. Proteins that are toxic before reaching this limit cause harm via mechanisms other than the exhaustion of cellular resources. For example, while Tpi1 can still be expressed at relatively high levels (close to 15%), it causes protein aggregation. Enzymes such as Pfk1 or Adh3 can only be expressed at lower levels before they are toxic: Pfk1 causes too much catalytic activity while Adh3 overloads transport systems. Some proteins, for example Glk1, Pyk2 and Pdc1, are not harmful when overexpressed because they simply cannot reach the protein burden limit. Expression of these genes is lower because they use rare codons (sequences that are less optimal for protein production).

In many cases, removing one mechanism of toxicity increased the level to which an enzyme could be overexpressed, but it still did not allow expression up to the 15% limit. Proteins could therefore be damaging through a range of mechanisms, each of which gets triggered when the concentration in the cell reaches a particular level.

While the glycolytic enzymes belong to the same pathway and share extremely similar roles, their overexpression affects cell growth via diverse mechanisms. In other words, the biological role of a protein cannot be used to predict how it will harm the cell. Altogether, these results stimulate important lines of enquiry, such as looking into which of the above mechanisms damage cells when gene expression changes during disease. They also encourage further research so that we could predict at which concentration the expression of every human gene will be harmful in any tissue. And finally, they raise the question: is protein burden what has stopped increased gene expression during evolution?

References

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Benedetta Bolognesi

    Benedetta Bolognesi is in the Systems Biology Program at the Centre for Genomic Regulation, and the Institute of Bioengineering of Catalonia, Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain

    For correspondence
    bbolognesi@ibecbarcelona.eu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6632-947X
  2. Ben Lehner

    Ben Lehner is in the Systems Biology Program at the Centre for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra and at the Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona, Spain

    For correspondence
    ben.lehner@crg.eu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8817-1124

Publication history

  1. Version of Record published:

Copyright

© 2018, Bolognesi et al.

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

Metrics

  • 22,188
    views
  • 980
    downloads
  • 50
    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. Benedetta Bolognesi
  2. Ben Lehner
(2018)
Protein Overexpression: Reaching the limit
eLife 7:e39804.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.39804

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Computational and Systems Biology
    A Sofia F Oliveira, Fiona L Kearns ... Adrian J Mulholland
    Short Report

    The spike protein is essential to the SARS-CoV-2 virus life cycle, facilitating virus entry and mediating viral-host membrane fusion. The spike contains a fatty acid (FA) binding site between every two neighbouring receptor-binding domains. This site is coupled to key regions in the protein, but the impact of glycans on these allosteric effects has not been investigated. Using dynamical nonequilibrium molecular dynamics (D-NEMD) simulations, we explore the allosteric effects of the FA site in the fully glycosylated spike of the SARS-CoV-2 ancestral variant. Our results identify the allosteric networks connecting the FA site to functionally important regions in the protein, including the receptor-binding motif, an antigenic supersite in the N-terminal domain, the fusion peptide region, and another allosteric site known to bind heme and biliverdin. The networks identified here highlight the complexity of the allosteric modulation in this protein and reveal a striking and unexpected link between different allosteric sites. Comparison of the FA site connections from D-NEMD in the glycosylated and non-glycosylated spike revealed that glycans do not qualitatively change the internal allosteric pathways but can facilitate the transmission of the structural changes within and between subunits.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    George N Bendzunas, Dominic P Byrne ... Natarajan Kannan
    Research Article

    In eukaryotes, protein kinase signaling is regulated by a diverse array of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation of Ser/Thr residues and oxidation of cysteine (Cys) residues. While regulation by activation segment phosphorylation of Ser/Thr residues is well understood, relatively little is known about how oxidation of cysteine residues modulate catalysis. In this study, we investigate redox regulation of the AMPK-related brain-selective kinases (BRSK) 1 and 2, and detail how broad catalytic activity is directly regulated through reversible oxidation and reduction of evolutionarily conserved Cys residues within the catalytic domain. We show that redox-dependent control of BRSKs is a dynamic and multilayered process involving oxidative modifications of several Cys residues, including the formation of intramolecular disulfide bonds involving a pair of Cys residues near the catalytic HRD motif and a highly conserved T-loop Cys with a BRSK-specific Cys within an unusual CPE motif at the end of the activation segment. Consistently, mutation of the CPE-Cys increases catalytic activity in vitro and drives phosphorylation of the BRSK substrate Tau in cells. Molecular modeling and molecular dynamics simulations indicate that oxidation of the CPE-Cys destabilizes a conserved salt bridge network critical for allosteric activation. The occurrence of spatially proximal Cys amino acids in diverse Ser/Thr protein kinase families suggests that disulfide-mediated control of catalytic activity may be a prevalent mechanism for regulation within the broader AMPK family.