Abstract

Staphylococcus aureus (SA) leukocidin LukED belongs to a family of bicomponent pore forming toxins that play important roles in SA immune evasion and nutrient acquisition. LukED targets specific G protein-coupled chemokine receptors to lyse human erythrocytes (red blood cells) and leukocytes (white blood cells). The first recognition step of receptors is critical for specific cell targeting and lysis. The structural and molecular bases for this mechanism are not well understood but could constitute essential information to guide antibiotic development. Here, we characterized the interaction of LukE with chemokine receptors ACKR1, CCR2 and CCR5 using a combination of structural, pharmacological and computational approaches. First, crystal structures of LukE in complex with a small molecule mimicking sulfotyrosine side chain (p-cresyl sulfate) and with peptides containing sulfotyrosines issued from receptor sequences revealed the location of receptor sulfotyrosine binding sites in the toxins. Then, by combining previous and novel experimental data with protein docking, classical and accelerated weight histogram (AWH) molecular dynamics we propose models of the ACKR1-LukE and CCR5-LukE complexes. This work provides novel insights into chemokine receptor recognition by leukotoxins and suggests that the conserved sulfotyrosine binding pocket could be a target of choice for future drug development.

Data availability

Diffraction data have been deposited in PDB under the accession codes 7P8T, 7P8S, 7P8U, 7P8X and 7P93. Source Data files containing the computational models of the ACKR1-LukE and CCR5-LukE complexes in Figures 6 and 7 have been provided as pdb files. Figure 2 - Source Data 1 contain the numerical data used to generate the figure.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Paul Lambey

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Omolade Otun

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Xiaojing Cong

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. François Hoh

    Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Luc Brunel

    Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Pascal Verdié

    Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5807-0293
  7. Claire M Grison

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Fanny Peysson

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Sylvain Jeannot

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Thierry Durroux

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Cherine Bechara

    Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Sébastien Granier

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    For correspondence
    sebastien.granier@igf.cnrs.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Cédric Leyrat

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    For correspondence
    cedric.leyrat@igf.cnrs.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0189-0562

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-17-CE15-0002-01)

  • Cédric Leyrat

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Aaron Frank, University of Michigan, United States

Version history

  1. Received: July 27, 2021
  2. Preprint posted: August 6, 2021 (view preprint)
  3. Accepted: March 19, 2022
  4. Accepted Manuscript published: March 21, 2022 (version 1)
  5. Accepted Manuscript updated: March 22, 2022 (version 2)
  6. Accepted Manuscript updated: March 23, 2022 (version 3)
  7. Version of Record published: April 12, 2022 (version 4)

Copyright

© 2022, Lambey 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

  • 1,196
    views
  • 214
    downloads
  • 6
    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. Paul Lambey
  2. Omolade Otun
  3. Xiaojing Cong
  4. François Hoh
  5. Luc Brunel
  6. Pascal Verdié
  7. Claire M Grison
  8. Fanny Peysson
  9. Sylvain Jeannot
  10. Thierry Durroux
  11. Cherine Bechara
  12. Sébastien Granier
  13. Cédric Leyrat
(2022)
Structural insights into recognition of chemokine receptors by Staphylococcus aureus leukotoxins
eLife 11:e72555.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72555

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72555

Further reading

    1. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Hideo Fukuhara, Kohei Yumoto ... Katsumi Maenaka
    Research Article

    Canine distemper virus (CDV) belongs to morbillivirus, including measles virus (MeV) and rinderpest virus, which causes serious immunological and neurological disorders in carnivores, including dogs and rhesus monkeys, as recently reported, but their vaccines are highly effective. The attachment glycoprotein hemagglutinin (CDV-H) at the CDV surface utilizes signaling lymphocyte activation molecule (SLAM) and Nectin-4 (also called poliovirus-receptor-like-4; PVRL4) as entry receptors. Although fusion models have been proposed, the molecular mechanism of morbillivirus fusion entry is poorly understood. Here, we determined the crystal structure of the globular head domain of CDV-H vaccine strain at 3.2 Å resolution, revealing that CDV-H exhibits a highly tilted homodimeric form with a six-bladed β-propeller fold. While the predicted Nectin-4-binding site is well conserved with that of MeV-H, that of SLAM is similar but partially different, which is expected to contribute to host specificity. Five N-linked sugars covered a broad area of the CDV-H surface to expose receptor-binding sites only, supporting the effective production of neutralizing antibodies. These features are common to MeV-H, although the glycosylation sites are completely different. Furthermore, real-time observation using high-speed atomic force microscopy revealed highly mobile features of the CDV-H dimeric head via the connector region. These results suggest that sugar-shielded tilted homodimeric structure and dynamic conformational changes are common characteristics of morbilliviruses and ensure effective fusion entry and vaccination.

    1. Evolutionary Biology
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Zachary H Williams, Alvaro Dafonte Imedio ... Welkin E Johnson
    Research Article

    HERV-K(HML-2), the youngest clade of human endogenous retroviruses (HERVs), includes many intact or nearly intact proviruses, but no replication competent HML-2 proviruses have been identified in humans. HML-2-related proviruses are present in other primates, including rhesus macaques, but the extent and timing of HML-2 activity in macaques remains unclear. We have identified 145 HML-2-like proviruses in rhesus macaques, including a clade of young, rhesus-specific insertions. Age estimates, intact ORFs, and insertional polymorphism of these insertions are consistent with recent or ongoing infectious activity in macaques. 106 of the proviruses form a clade characterized by an ~750 bp sequence between env and the 3' LTR, derived from an ancient recombination with a HERV-K(HML-8)-related virus. This clade is found in Old World monkeys (OWM), but not great apes, suggesting it originated after the ape/OWM split. We identified similar proviruses in white-cheeked gibbons; the gibbon insertions cluster within the OWM recombinant clade, suggesting interspecies transmission from OWM to gibbons. The LTRs of the youngest proviruses have deletions in U3, which disrupt the Rec Response Element (RcRE), required for nuclear export of unspliced viral RNA. We show that the HML-8 derived region functions as a Rec-independent constitutive transport element (CTE), indicating the ancestral Rec-RcRE export system was replaced by a CTE mechanism.