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

  • 4,714
    views
  • 722
    downloads
  • 109
    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
    Parnian Arafi, Sujan Devkota ... Michael S Wolfe
    Research Article

    Missense mutations in the amyloid precursor protein (APP) and presenilin-1 (PSEN1) cause early-onset familial Alzheimer’s disease (FAD) and alter proteolytic production of secreted 38-to-43-residue amyloid β-peptides (Aβ) by the PSEN1-containing γ-secretase complex, ostensibly supporting the amyloid hypothesis of pathogenesis. However, proteolysis of APP substrate by γ-secretase is processive, involving initial endoproteolysis to produce long Aβ peptides of 48 or 49 residues followed by carboxypeptidase trimming in mostly tripeptide increments. We recently reported evidence that FAD mutations in APP and PSEN1 cause deficiencies in early steps in processive proteolysis of APP substrate C99 and that this results from stalled γ-secretase enzyme-substrate and/or enzyme-intermediate complexes. These stalled complexes triggered synaptic degeneration in a Caenorhabditis elegans model of FAD independently of Aβ production. Here, we conducted full quantitative analysis of all proteolytic events on APP substrate by γ-secretase with six additional PSEN1 FAD mutations and found that all six are deficient in multiple processing steps. However, only one of these (F386S) was deficient in certain trimming steps but not in endoproteolysis. Fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy in intact cells revealed that all six PSEN1 FAD mutations lead to stalled γ-secretase enzyme-substrate/intermediate complexes. The F386S mutation, however, does so only in Aβ-rich regions of the cells, not in C99-rich regions, consistent with the deficiencies of this mutant enzyme only in trimming of Aβ intermediates. These findings provide further evidence that FAD mutations lead to stalled and stabilized γ-secretase enzyme-substrate and/or enzyme-intermediate complexes and are consistent with the stalled process rather than the products of γ-secretase proteolysis as the pathogenic trigger.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Kira A Cozzolino, Lynn Sanford ... Dylan J Taatjes
    Research Article

    Hyperactive interferon (IFN) signaling is a hallmark of Down syndrome (DS), a condition caused by Trisomy 21 (T21); strategies that normalize IFN signaling could benefit this population. Mediator-associated kinases CDK8 and CDK19 drive inflammatory responses through incompletely understood mechanisms. Using sibling-matched cell lines with/without T21, we investigated Mediator kinase function in the context of hyperactive IFN in DS over a 75 min to 24 hr timeframe. Activation of IFN-response genes was suppressed in cells treated with the CDK8/CDK19 inhibitor cortistatin A (CA), via rapid suppression of IFN-responsive transcription factor (TF) activity. We also discovered that CDK8/CDK19 affect splicing, a novel means by which Mediator kinases control gene expression. To further probe Mediator kinase function, we completed cytokine screens and metabolomics experiments. Cytokines are master regulators of inflammatory responses; by screening 105 different cytokine proteins, we show that Mediator kinases help drive IFN-dependent cytokine responses at least in part through transcriptional regulation of cytokine genes and receptors. Metabolomics revealed that Mediator kinase inhibition altered core metabolic pathways in cell type-specific ways, and broad upregulation of anti-inflammatory lipid mediators occurred specifically in kinase-inhibited cells during hyperactive IFNγ signaling. A subset of these lipids (e.g. oleamide, desmosterol) serve as ligands for nuclear receptors PPAR and LXR, and activation of these receptors occurred specifically during hyperactive IFN signaling in CA-treated cells, revealing mechanistic links between Mediator kinases, lipid metabolism, and nuclear receptor function. Collectively, our results establish CDK8/CDK19 as context-specific metabolic regulators, and reveal that these kinases control gene expression not only via TFs, but also through metabolic changes and splicing. Moreover, we establish that Mediator kinase inhibition antagonizes IFN signaling through transcriptional, metabolic, and cytokine responses, with implications for DS and other chronic inflammatory conditions.