Mimicking the regulatory state of a major facilitator superfamily sugar transporter

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary: The current study reports a cryo-EM structure of MFS transporter MelB trapped in an inward-facing state by a conformationally selective nanobody. The authors compare this structure to previously-resolved crystal structures of outward-facing MelB. Additionally, the authors report H/D exchange/ mass spec experiments that identify accessible residues in the protein.

Strengths:

The authors overcame very significant technical challenges to solve the first inward-facing structure of the small, model MFS transporter MelB by cryo-EM. The use of conformation-trapping nanobodies (which had been reported previously by this group) is particularly nice.

Weaknesses:

Maps and coordinates were not provided by the authors, which presents a gap in this assessment.

The authors highlight the use of HDX experiments as a measurement of protein conformational dynamics. However, this experiment does not measure the conformational dynamics of the transporter, since in these experiments exchange is not initiated by ligand addition or another trigger. The experiment instead measures the accessibility of different residues, and of course, a freely-exchanging sodium bound transporter would have more exchangeable positions than when a conformation-trapping nanobody is bound. It is not clear what new mechanistic information this provides, since this property of the nanobody has already been established.

Based on the evidence presented, it is somewhat speculative that the structure represents the EIIa-bound regulatory state.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

In this manuscript, Hariharan and colleagues present an elegant study regarding the mechanistic basis of sugar transport by the prototypical Na+-coupled transporter MelB. The authors identified a nanobody (Nb 725) that reduces melibiose binding but not Na+ binding. In vitro (ITC) experiments suggest that the conformation targeted by this nanobody is different from the published outward-open structures. They go on to solve the structure of this other conformational by cryo-EM using the Nanobody grafted with a fiducial marker and enhancer and, as predicted, capture a new conformation of MelB, namely the inward-open conformation. Through MD simulations and ITC measurements, they demonstrate that such state has a reduced affinity for sugar but that Na+ binding is mostly unaffected. A detailed observation and comparison between previously published structures in the outward-open conformation and this new conformational intermediate allows to strengthen and develop the mobile barrier hypothesis underpinning sugar transport. The conformational transition to the inward-facing state leads to the formation of a barrier on the extracellular side that directly affects the amino acid arrangement of the sugar binding site, leading to a decreased affinity that drives the direction of transport. In contrast, the Na+ binding remains the same. This structural data is complemented with dynamic insights from HDX-MS experiments conducted in the presence and absence of the Nb. These measurements highlight the overall protective effect of nanobody binding, consistent with the stabilization of one conformational intermediate.

Strengths:

The experimental strategy to isolate this elusive conformational intermediate is smart and well-executed. The biochemical and biophysical data were obtained in a lipid system (nanodiscs), which allows dismissing questions about detergent induced artefacts. The new conformation observed is of great interest and allows to have a better mechanistic understanding of ion-coupled sugar transport. The comparison between the two structures and the mobile barrier mechanism hypothesis is convincingly depicted and tested.

Weaknesses:

This is excellent experimental work. My recommendations stem mostly from concerns regarding the interpretation of the observed results. In particular, I am somewhat puzzled by the important role the authors give to the regulatory protein EIIa with little structural or biophysical data to back up their claims. The hypothesis that the conformation captured by the Nb is physiologically and functionally equivalent to that caused by EIIa binding is definitely a worthy hypothesis, but it is not an experimental result.

Evidence in support could include a structure with EIIa bound. Since it does not bind at the same location as the Nb, it seems feasible. Or, the authors could have performed HDX-MS in the presence of EIIa to determine if the effect is similar to that of Nb_725 binding. In the absence of these experiments, discussion about EIIa should be limited. Along the same lines, I find it misleading to put in the abstract a sentence such as "It is the first structure of a major facilitator superfamily (MFS) transporter with experimentally determined cation binding, and also a structure mimicking the physiological regulatory state of MelB under the global regulator EIIAGlc of the glucose-specific phosphoenolpyruvate:phosphotransferase system." None of this is supported by the experimental work presented in this article: the Na+ is modelled (with great confidence, but still) and whether this structure mimics the physiological state of MelB bound to EIIa is not known. The results of the paper are strong and interesting enough per se, and there is no need to inflate them with hypothesis that belongs to the discussion section.

I also note that the HDX-MS experiments do not distinguish between two conformational states, but rather an ensemble of states vs one state.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:

The manuscript authored by Lan Guan and colleagues reveals the structure of the cytosol-facing conformation of the MelB sodium/Li coupled permease using the nab-Fab approach and cryoEM for structure determination. The study reveals the conformational transitions in the melB transport cycle and allows understanding the role of sugar and ion specificities within this transporter.

Strengths:

The study employs a very exciting strategy of transferring the CDRS of a conformation specific nano body to the nab-fab system to determine the inward-open structure of MelB. The resolution of the structure is reasonable enough to support the major conclusions of the study. This is overall a well-executed study.

Weaknesses:

The authors seem to have mixed up the exothermic and endothermic aspects of ITC binding in their description. Positive heats correspond to endothermic heat changes in ITC and negative heat changes correspond to exothermic heats. The authors seem to suggest the opposite. This is consistently observed throughout the manuscript.

Author Response

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary: The current study reports a cryo-EM structure of MFS transporter MelB trapped in an inward-facing state by a conformationally selective nanobody. The authors compare this structure to previously-resolved crystal structures of outward-facing MelB. Additionally, the authors report H/D exchange/ mass spec experiments that identify accessible residues in the protein.

Strengths: The authors overcame very significant technical challenges to solve the first inward-facing structure of the small, model MFS transporter MelB by cryo-EM. The use of conformation-trapping nanobodies (which had been reported previously by this group) is particularly nice.

We appreciate reviewer #1’s positive comments.

Weaknesses: Maps and coordinates were not provided by the authors, which presents a gap in this assessment.

We didn’t know specific requests for maps & coordinates during the initial submission but will provide them per request.

The authors highlight the use of HDX experiments as a measurement of protein conformational dynamics. However, this experiment does not measure the conformational dynamics of the transporter, since in these experiments exchange is not initiated by ligand addition or another trigger. The experiment instead measures the accessibility of different residues, and of course, a freely-exchanging sodium bound transporter would have more exchangeable positions than when a conformation-trapping nanobody is bound. It is not clear what new mechanistic information this provides, since this property of the nanobody has already been established.

We thank you for your comment. We will address your and reviewer 2’s similar questions later.

Based on the evidence presented, it is somewhat speculative that the structure represents the EIIa-bound regulatory state.

We believe that have presented convincing evidence obtained by ITC and gel-filtration chromatography to support this statement. The effects of Nb725 or EIIAGlc on MelB functions are similar: little change in Na+ binding, little change in Nb725 or EIIAGlc binding in the absence or presence of the EIIAGlc or Nb725, but a great reduction in sugar-binding affinity (sFigs. 2&3; tables 1&2; published two papers in J. Biol. Chem. 2014; 289: 33012-33019 and 2023; 299:104967). To make it clear, we will add the related data from the two JBC papers into the table 2. Nb725 and EIIAGlc can concurrently bind to MelBSt (sFigs. 2&3; tables 1&2). Further, we will provide a new figure to show that a complex composed of all three proteins can be isolated by gel-filtration chromatography. We have also established this finding with another Nb733 from the same family (JBC, 2023; 299:104967). However, given the EIIAGlc-bound structure has not been resolved yet, we will tune down the related argument.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary: In this manuscript, Hariharan and colleagues present an elegant study regarding the mechanistic basis of sugar transport by the prototypical Na+-coupled transporter MelB. The authors identified a nanobody (Nb 725) that reduces melibiose binding but not Na+ binding. In vitro (ITC) experiments suggest that the conformation targeted by this nanobody is different from the published outward-open structures. They go on to solve the structure of this other conformational by cryo-EM using the Nanobody grafted with a fiducial marker and enhancer and, as predicted, capture a new conformation of MelB, namely the inward-open conformation. Through MD simulations and ITC measurements, they demonstrate that such state has a reduced affinity for sugar but that Na+ binding is mostly unaffected. A detailed observation and comparison between previously published structures in the outward-open conformation and this new conformational intermediate allows to strengthen and develop the mobile barrier hypothesis underpinning sugar transport. The conformational transition to the inward-facing state leads to the formation of a barrier on the extracellular side that directly affects the amino acid arrangement of the sugar binding site, leading to a decreased affinity that drives the direction of transport. In contrast, the Na+ binding remains the same. This structural data is complemented with dynamic insights from HDX-MS experiments conducted in the presence and absence of the Nb. These measurements highlight the overall protective effect of nanobody binding, consistent with the stabilization of one conformational intermediate.

Strengths: The experimental strategy to isolate this elusive conformational intermediate is smart and well-executed. The biochemical and biophysical data were obtained in a lipid system (nanodiscs), which allows dismissing questions about detergent induced artefacts. The new conformation observed is of great interest and allows to have a better mechanistic understanding of ion-coupled sugar transport. The comparison between the two structures and the mobile barrier mechanism hypothesis is convincingly depicted and tested.

We appreciate the reviewer’s insightful understanding of our novel findings and the associated explanations on the cation-coupled symport mechanisms.

Weaknesses: This is excellent experimental work. My recommendations stem mostly from concerns regarding the interpretation of the observed results. In particular, I am somewhat puzzled by the important role the authors give to the regulatory protein EIIa with little structural or biophysical data to back up their claims. The hypothesis that the conformation captured by the Nb is physiologically and functionally equivalent to that caused by EIIa binding is definitely a worthy hypothesis, but it is not an experimental result. Evidence in support could include a structure with EIIa bound. Since it does not bind at the same location as the Nb, it seems feasible. Or, the authors could have performed HDX-MS in the presence of EIIa to determine if the effect is similar to that of Nb_725 binding. In the absence of these experiments, discussion about EIIa should be limited. Along the same lines, I find it misleading to put in the abstract a sentence such as "It is the first structure of a major facilitator superfamily (MFS) transporter with experimentally determined cation binding, and also a structure mimicking the physiological regulatory state of MelB under the global regulator EIIAGlc of the glucose-specific phosphoenolpyruvate:phosphotransferase system." None of this is supported by the experimental work presented in this article: the Na+ is modelled (with great confidence, but still) and whether this structure mimics the physiological state of MelB bound to EIIa is not known. The results of the paper are strong and interesting enough per se, and there is no need to inflate them with hypothesis that belongs to the discussion section.

As stated in the response to reviewer 1, we believe that we presented strong data to argue for a structure mimicking the physiological regulatory state of MelB. The only missing data is the lack of the structure determination of the EIIA-bound state. We will change the title and tune down the related discussions in a new version.

Regarding our statement in our abstract that “It is the first structure of a major facilitator superfamily (MFS) transporter with experimentally determined cation binding”, we believe that our claim is supported by the resolved Na+ binding in the cryoEM structure. So far, to our knowledge, there was no experimentally determined cation on its canonical binding site reported yet.

I also note that the HDX-MS experiments do not distinguish between two conformational states, but rather an ensemble of states vs one state.

We will address both reviewers 1 and 2 together. We agree with your comments and we compared the one (inward) state and ensembles of (predominantly outward) states. A lot of published data have demonstrated that the WT MelBSt predominantly populates outward-facing states, especially in the presence of Na+. The major differences in HDX-MS between the inward-facing state in the presence of the Nb and the outward-facing ensembles in the absence of the Nb should be related to the conformational changes between the inward- and outward-facing states, but not quantitatively. The type of measurements we performed do not contain information on the rates of conformational changes, but this study identified the dynamics regions involved in this conformational switch.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary: The manuscript authored by Lan Guan and colleagues reveals the structure of the cytosol-facing conformation of the MelB sodium/Li coupled permease using the nab-Fab approach and cryoEM for structure determination. The study reveals the conformational transitions in the melB transport cycle and allows understanding the role of sugar and ion specificities within this transporter.

Strengths: The study employs a very exciting strategy of transferring the CDRS of a conformation specific nano body to the nab-fab system to determine the inward-open structure of MelB. The resolution of the structure is reasonable enough to support the major conclusions of the study. This is overall a well-executed study.

Thank you for your positive comments.

Weaknesses: The authors seem to have mixed up the exothermic and endothermic aspects of ITC binding in their description. Positive heats correspond to endothermic heat changes in ITC and negative heat changes correspond to exothermic heats. The authors seem to suggest the opposite.

This is consistently observed throughout the manuscript.

All of our ITC data are correctly presented. Our data were collected from the NanoITC (TA instruments, Inc), which directly measures the heat release/enthalpic changes and projects exotherm with positive values. This is in contrast to the MicroCal device, which detects heat changes through voltage compensation and exotherm is depicted with negative values. We will further emphasize this in related figure legends.