Conformational and dynamical plasticity in substrate-binding proteins underlies selective transport in ABC importers

  1. Marijn de Boer
  2. Giorgos Gkouridis
  3. Ruslan Vietrov
  4. Stephanie L Begg
  5. Gea K Schuurman-Wolters
  6. Florence Husada
  7. Nikolaos Eleftheriadis
  8. Bert Poolman  Is a corresponding author
  9. Christopher A McDevitt  Is a corresponding author
  10. Thorben Cordes  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Groningen, Netherlands
  2. KU Leuven, Belgium
  3. University of Melbourne, Australia
  4. Ludwig Maximilians-Universität München, Germany

Abstract

Substrate-binding proteins (SBPs) are associated with ATP-binding cassette importers and switch from an open to a closed conformation upon substrate binding, providing specificity for transport. We investigated the effect of substrates on the conformational dynamics of six SBPs and the impact on transport. Using single-molecule FRET, we reveal an unrecognized diversity of plasticity in SBPs. We show that a unique closed SBP conformation does not exist for transported substrates. Instead, SBPs sample a range of conformations that activate transport. Certain non-transported ligands leave the structure largely unaltered or trigger a conformation distinct from that of transported substrates. Intriguingly, in some cases similar SBP conformations are formed by both transported and non-transported ligands. In this case, the inability for transport arises from slow opening of the SBP or the selectivity provided by the translocator. Our results reveal the complex interplay between ligand-SBP interactions, SBP conformational dynamics and substrate transport.

Data availability

Data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. Source data files are available for smFRET histogrammes, representative smFRET time-traces and smFRET dwell-time histogrammes as shown in the manuscript. Primer sequences for created protein mutants are included.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Marijn de Boer

    Molecular Microscopy Research Group, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Giorgos Gkouridis

    Department of Microbiology and Immunology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Ruslan Vietrov

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Stephanie L Begg

    Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Gea K Schuurman-Wolters

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Florence Husada

    Molecular Microscopy Research Group, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Nikolaos Eleftheriadis

    Molecular Microscopy Research Group, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Bert Poolman

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    For correspondence
    b.poolman@rug.nl
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1455-531X
  9. Christopher A McDevitt

    Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
    For correspondence
    christopher.mcdevitt@unimelb.edu.au
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1596-4841
  10. Thorben Cordes

    Faculty of Biology, Ludwig Maximilians-Universität München, Planegg Martinsried, Germany
    For correspondence
    cordes@bio.lmu.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8598-5499

Funding

European Commission (638536)

  • Thorben Cordes

European Molecular Biology Organization (ALF 47-2012)

  • Giorgos Gkouridis

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (GRK2062/1 (C03))

  • Thorben Cordes

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB863 (A13))

  • Thorben Cordes

National Health and Medical Research Council (1080784)

  • Christopher A McDevitt

National Health and Medical Research Council (1122582)

  • Christopher A McDevitt

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (722.012.012)

  • Giorgos Gkouridis

European Commission (670578)

  • Bert Poolman

Australian Research Council (DP170102102)

  • Christopher A McDevitt

Australian Research Council (FT170100006)

  • Christopher A McDevitt

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

Copyright

© 2019, de Boer 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

  • 4,783
    views
  • 727
    downloads
  • 113
    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. Marijn de Boer
  2. Giorgos Gkouridis
  3. Ruslan Vietrov
  4. Stephanie L Begg
  5. Gea K Schuurman-Wolters
  6. Florence Husada
  7. Nikolaos Eleftheriadis
  8. Bert Poolman
  9. Christopher A McDevitt
  10. Thorben Cordes
(2019)
Conformational and dynamical plasticity in substrate-binding proteins underlies selective transport in ABC importers
eLife 8:e44652.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44652

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44652

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.