Glycine acylation and trafficking of a new class of bacterial lipoprotein by a composite secretion system

  1. Christopher Icke
  2. Freya J Hodges
  3. Karthik Pullela
  4. Samantha A McKeand
  5. Jack Alfred Bryant
  6. Adam F Cunningham
  7. Jeff A Cole
  8. Ian R Henderson  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Birmingham, United Kingdom
  2. University of Queensland, Australia

Abstract

Protein acylation is critical for many cellular functions across all domains of life. In bacteria, lipoproteins have important roles in virulence and are targets for the development of antimicrobials and vaccines. Bacterial lipoproteins are secreted from the cytosol via the Sec pathway and acylated on an N-terminal cysteine residue through the action of three enzymes. In Gram-negative bacteria, the Lol pathway transports lipoproteins to the outer membrane. Here we demonstrate that the Aat secretion system is a composite system sharing similarity with elements of a type I secretion systems and the Lol pathway. During secretion, the AatD subunit acylates the substrate CexE on a highly conserved N-terminal glycine residue. Mutations disrupting glycine acylation interfere with membrane incorporation and trafficking. Our data reveal CexE as the first member of a new class of glycine-acylated lipoprotein, while Aat represents a new secretion system that displays the substrate lipoprotein on the cell surface.

Data availability

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

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Christopher Icke

    Institute of Microbiology and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7815-8591
  2. Freya J Hodges

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Karthik Pullela

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Samantha A McKeand

    Institute of Microbiology and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Jack Alfred Bryant

    Institute of Microbiology and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7912-2144
  6. Adam F Cunningham

    Institute of Microbiology and Infection, Institute of Inflammation and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Jeff A Cole

    Institute of Microbiology and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Ian R Henderson

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    For correspondence
    i.henderson@imb.uq.edu.au
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9954-4977

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (DTP)

  • Adam F Cunningham
  • Ian R Henderson

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

Copyright

© 2021, Icke 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

  • 1,954
    views
  • 248
    downloads
  • 9
    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. Christopher Icke
  2. Freya J Hodges
  3. Karthik Pullela
  4. Samantha A McKeand
  5. Jack Alfred Bryant
  6. Adam F Cunningham
  7. Jeff A Cole
  8. Ian R Henderson
(2021)
Glycine acylation and trafficking of a new class of bacterial lipoprotein by a composite secretion system
eLife 10:e63762.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63762

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63762

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. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Yamato Niitani, Kohei Matsuzaki ... Michio Tomishige
    Research Article

    The two identical motor domains (heads) of dimeric kinesin-1 move in a hand-over-hand process along a microtubule, coordinating their ATPase cycles such that each ATP hydrolysis is tightly coupled to a step and enabling the motor to take many steps without dissociating. The neck linker, a structural element that connects the two heads, has been shown to be essential for head–head coordination; however, which kinetic step(s) in the chemomechanical cycle is ‘gated’ by the neck linker remains unresolved. Here, we employed pre-steady-state kinetics and single-molecule assays to investigate how the neck-linker conformation affects kinesin’s motility cycle. We show that the backward-pointing configuration of the neck linker in the front kinesin head confers higher affinity for microtubule, but does not change ATP binding and dissociation rates. In contrast, the forward-pointing configuration of the neck linker in the rear kinesin head decreases the ATP dissociation rate but has little effect on microtubule dissociation. In combination, these conformation-specific effects of the neck linker favor ATP hydrolysis and dissociation of the rear head prior to microtubule detachment of the front head, thereby providing a kinetic explanation for the coordinated walking mechanism of dimeric kinesin.