1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
Download icon

Structures of the ATP-fueled ClpXP proteolytic machine bound to protein substrate

  1. Xue Fei
  2. Tristan A Bell
  3. Simon Jenni
  4. Benjamin M Stinson
  5. Tania A Baker
  6. Stephen C Harrison
  7. Robert T Sauer  Is a corresponding author
  1. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, United States
  2. Harvard Medical School, United States
  3. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Harvard Medical School, United States
Research Article
  • Cited 28
  • Views 3,163
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2020;9:e52774 doi: 10.7554/eLife.52774

Abstract

ClpXP is an ATP-dependent protease in which the ClpX AAA+ motor binds, unfolds, and translocates specific protein substrates into the degradation chamber of ClpP. We present cryo-EM studies of the E. coli enzyme that show how asymmetric hexameric rings of ClpX bind symmetric heptameric rings of ClpP and interact with protein substrates. Subunits in the ClpX hexamer assume a spiral conformation and interact with two-residue segments of substrate in the axial channel, as observed for other AAA+ proteases and protein-remodeling machines. Strictly sequential models of ATP hydrolysis and a power stroke that moves two residues of the substrate per translocation step have been inferred from these structural features for other AAA+ unfoldases, but biochemical and single-molecule biophysical studies indicate that ClpXP operates by a probabilistic mechanism in which five to eight residues are translocated for each ATP hydrolyzed. We propose structure-based models that could account for the functional results.

Data availability

PDB files for the structures determined here have been deposited in the PDB under accession codes 6PPE, 6PP8, 6PP7, 6PP6, 6PP5, 6POS, 6POD, 6PO3, and 6PO1.

The following data sets were generated
    1. Fei et al
    (2020) 6PPE
    RCSB Protein Data Bank, 6PPE.
    http://www.rcsb.org/structure/6PPE
    1. Fei et al
    (2020) 6PP8
    RCSB Protein Data Bank, 6PP8.
    http://www.rcsb.org/structure/6PP8
    1. Fei et al
    (2020) 6PP7
    RCSB Protein Data Bank, 6PP7.
    http://www.rcsb.org/structure/6PP7
    1. Fei et al
    (2020) 6PP6
    RCSB Protein Data Bank, 6PP6.
    http://www.rcsb.org/structure/6PP6
    1. Fei et al
    (2020) 6PP5
    RCSB Protein Data Bank, 6PP5.
    http://www.rcsb.org/structure/6PP5
    1. Fei et al
    (2020) 6POS
    RCSB Protein Data Bank, 6POS.
    http://www.rcsb.org/structure/6POS
    1. Fei et al
    (2020) 6POD
    RCSB Protein Data Bank, 6POD.
    http://www.rcsb.org/structure/6POD
    1. Fei et al
    (2020) 6PO3
    RCSB Protein Data Bank, 6PO3.
    http://www.rcsb.org/structure/6PO3
    1. Fei et al
    (2020) 6PO1
    RCSB Protein Data Bank, 6PO1.
    http://www.rcsb.org/structure/6PO1

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Xue Fei

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  2. Tristan A Bell

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3668-8412

  3. Simon Jenni

    Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  4. Benjamin M Stinson

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  5. Tania A Baker

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0737-3411

  6. Stephen C Harrison

    Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7215-9393

  7. Robert T Sauer

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    For correspondence
    bobsauer@mit.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1719-5399

Funding

National Institutes of Health (GM-101988)

  • Robert T Sauer

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Tania A Baker
  • Stephen C Harrison

National Institutes of Health (5T32GM-007287)

  • Tristan A Bell

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. James M Berger, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: October 16, 2019
  2. Accepted: February 27, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: February 28, 2020 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: April 1, 2020 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2020, Fei 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

  • 3,163
    Page views
  • 589
    Downloads
  • 28
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Categories and tags

Research organism

    1. Related to

    Protein Unfolding: Same structure, different mechanisms?

    Francis TF Tsai, Christopher P Hill
  2. Further reading

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics

    Protein Unfolding: Same structure, different mechanisms?

    Francis TF Tsai, Christopher P Hill
    Insight

    Two interpretations of similar structures for the same molecular machine illustrate the limits of inferring biochemical mechanism from protein structure.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics

    N501Y mutation of spike protein in SARS-CoV-2 strengthens its binding to receptor ACE2

    Fang Tian et al.
    Research Article Updated

    SARS-CoV-2 has been spreading around the world for the past year. Recently, several variants such as B.1.1.7 (alpha), B.1.351 (beta), and P.1 (gamma), which share a key mutation N501Y on the receptor-binding domain (RBD), appear to be more infectious to humans. To understand the underlying mechanism, we used a cell surface-binding assay, a kinetics study, a single-molecule technique, and a computational method to investigate the interaction between these RBD (mutations) and ACE2. Remarkably, RBD with the N501Y mutation exhibited a considerably stronger interaction, with a faster association rate and a slower dissociation rate. Atomic force microscopy (AFM)-based single-molecule force microscopy (SMFS) consistently quantified the interaction strength of RBD with the mutation as having increased binding probability and requiring increased unbinding force. Molecular dynamics simulations of RBD–ACE2 complexes indicated that the N501Y mutation introduced additional π-π and π-cation interactions that could explain the changes observed by force microscopy. Taken together, these results suggest that the reinforced RBD–ACE2 interaction that results from the N501Y mutation in the RBD should play an essential role in the higher rate of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 variants, and that future mutations in the RBD of the virus should be under surveillance.

    1. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics

    Structural characterization of NrnC identifies unifying features of dinucleotidases

    Justin D Lormand et al.
    Research Advance

    RNA degradation is fundamental for cellular homeostasis. The process is carried out by various classes of endolytic and exolytic enzymes that together degrade an RNA polymer to mono-ribonucleotides. Within the exoribonucleases, nano-RNases play a unique role as they act on the smallest breakdown products and hence catalyze the final steps in the process. We recently showed that oligoribonuclease (Orn) acts as a dedicated diribonucleotidase, defining the ultimate step in RNA degradation that is crucial for cellular fitness (Kim et al., 2019). Whether such a specific activity exists in organisms that lack Orn-type exoribonucleases remained unclear. Through quantitative structure-function analyses we show here that NrnC-type RNases share this narrow substrate length preference with Orn. Although NrnC employs similar structural features that distinguish these two classes as dinucleotidases from other exonucleases, the key determinants for dinucleotidase activity are realized through distinct structural scaffolds. The structures together with comparative genomic analyses of the phylogeny of DEDD-type exoribonucleases indicates convergent evolution as the mechanism of how dinucleotidase activity emerged repeatedly in various organisms. The evolutionary pressure to maintain dinucleotidase activity further underlines the important role these analogous proteins play for cell growth.