Local frustration determines loop opening during the catalytic cycle of an oxidoreductase

  1. Lukas L Stelzl
  2. Despoina A I Mavridou
  3. Emmanuel Saridakis
  4. Diego Gonzalez
  5. Andrew J Baldwin
  6. Stuart J Ferguson
  7. Mark SP Sansom  Is a corresponding author
  8. Christina Redfield  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Oxford, United Kingdom
  2. University of Texas at Austin, United States
  3. NCSR Demokritos, Greece
  4. University of Neuchatel, Switzerland

Abstract

Local structural frustration, the existence of mutually exclusive competing interactions, may explain why some proteins are dynamic while others are rigid. Frustration is thought to underpin biomolecular recognition and the flexibility of protein binding sites. Here we show how a small chemical modification, the oxidation of two cysteine thiols to a disulfide bond, during the catalytic cycle of the N-terminal domain of the key bacterial oxidoreductase DsbD (nDsbD), introduces frustration ultimately influencing protein function. In oxidized nDsbD, local frustration disrupts the packing of the protective cap-loop region against the active site allowing loop opening. By contrast, in reduced nDsbD the cap loop is rigid, always protecting the active-site thiols from the oxidizing environment of the periplasm. Our results point towards an intricate coupling between the dynamics of the active-site cysteines and of the cap loop which modulates the association reactions of nDsbD with its partners resulting in optimized protein function.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Lukas L Stelzl

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Despoina A I Mavridou

    Department of Molecular Biosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Emmanuel Saridakis

    Institute of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, NCSR Demokritos, Athens, Greece
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Diego Gonzalez

    Department of Biology, University of Neuchatel, Neuchatel, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Andrew J Baldwin

    Physical and Theoretical Chemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7579-8844
  6. Stuart J Ferguson

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Mark SP Sansom

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    mark.sansom@bioch.ox.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6360-7959
  8. Christina Redfield

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    christina.redfield@bioch.ox.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7297-7708

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/F01709X/1)

  • Lukas L Stelzl

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/R00126X/1)

  • Mark SP Sansom

Wellcome (208361/Z/17/Z)

  • Mark SP Sansom

Wellcome (079440)

  • Christina Redfield

Wellcome (092532/Z/10/Z)

  • Stuart J Ferguson
  • Christina Redfield

Swiss National Science Foundation (P300PA_167703)

  • Diego Gonzalez

Swiss National Science Foundation (PZ00P3_180142)

  • Diego Gonzalez

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

Copyright

© 2020, Stelzl 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

  • 1,886
    views
  • 253
    downloads
  • 16
    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. Lukas L Stelzl
  2. Despoina A I Mavridou
  3. Emmanuel Saridakis
  4. Diego Gonzalez
  5. Andrew J Baldwin
  6. Stuart J Ferguson
  7. Mark SP Sansom
  8. Christina Redfield
(2020)
Local frustration determines loop opening during the catalytic cycle of an oxidoreductase
eLife 9:e54661.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.54661

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.54661

Further reading

    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.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Brian DePasquale, Carlos D Brody, Jonathan W Pillow
    Research Article Updated

    Accumulating evidence to make decisions is a core cognitive function. Previous studies have tended to estimate accumulation using either neural or behavioral data alone. Here, we develop a unified framework for modeling stimulus-driven behavior and multi-neuron activity simultaneously. We applied our method to choices and neural recordings from three rat brain regions—the posterior parietal cortex (PPC), the frontal orienting fields (FOF), and the anterior-dorsal striatum (ADS)—while subjects performed a pulse-based accumulation task. Each region was best described by a distinct accumulation model, which all differed from the model that best described the animal’s choices. FOF activity was consistent with an accumulator where early evidence was favored while the ADS reflected near perfect accumulation. Neural responses within an accumulation framework unveiled a distinct association between each brain region and choice. Choices were better predicted from all regions using a comprehensive, accumulation-based framework and different brain regions were found to differentially reflect choice-related accumulation signals: FOF and ADS both reflected choice but ADS showed more instances of decision vacillation. Previous studies relating neural data to behaviorally inferred accumulation dynamics have implicitly assumed that individual brain regions reflect the whole-animal level accumulator. Our results suggest that different brain regions represent accumulated evidence in dramatically different ways and that accumulation at the whole-animal level may be constructed from a variety of neural-level accumulators.