![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 31, 23602-23607, August 4, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Department of Biological Chemistry, The Weizmann Institute
of Science, Rehovot 76100, Israel
Received for publication, March 27, 2000, and in revised form, April 16, 2000
The pore-forming domain of Bacillus
thuringiensis Cry1Ac insecticidal protein comprises of a seven
The major defensive and offensive strategies chosen by bacteria
are based on the interaction of toxins with cellular membranes (1-3).
This interaction frequently results in membrane permeation or
translocation into the cytoplasm (1, 4-6). Consequently, toxins need
to be soluble to reach their target cells. However, once the target is
reached, the toxins are transformed into membrane proteins (highly
insoluble by definition). Accumulating data reveal that the domain that
interacts with the membrane uses one of two structural strategies (5,
3). In the first and best known group of toxins, the
membrane-interacting domain contains hydrophobic and amphipathic
Bacillus thuringiensis, a ubiquitous Gram-positive
bacterium, produces parasporal crystals (10). Within these crystals lie the A major part of the current knowledge concerning the mechanism of
Currently, the umbrella model best explains the Cry mechanism of
toxicity. Briefly, the protein goes through a metamorphosis upon
membrane binding in which structural rearrangement occurs (7, 15, 16).
Presumably, this is followed by a hydrophobic hairpin insertion into
the phospholipid bilayer, whereas the amphipathic helices are spread on
the surface. Later, oligomerization occurs, and a channel or pore is
formed. Two highly hydrophobic helices of the Cry3A domain I, namely
To directly support this hypothesis, we have synthesized and
characterized the corresponding peptides derived from Cry1Ac, namely,
Membrane permeation studies, binding experiments, and competition
assays between the Materials--
Butyloxycarbonyl amino acids were obtained from
Bachem (Bubendorf, Switzerland), and t-
butyloxycarbonyl-Leu-OCH2 peptidylglycine Peptide Synthesis, Fluorescent Labeling, and
Purification--
The peptides were synthesized by a standard solid
phase method on peptidylglycine Preparation of Lipid Vesicles--
Small unilamellar vesicles
(SUV) were prepared from PC/PS (1:1 w/w) or from PC by sonication as
described previously in detail (32).
Membrane Permeation Induced by the Peptides--
Membrane
permeation was assessed utilizing the calcein release assay (33) as
described previously (34). Briefly, SUV (7 mg/ml) were prepared in a 60 mM calcein and a 10 mM HEPES solution, pH 7.4. Liposomes were then passed through a Sephadex G-50 column (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech) in order to separate the free calcein. A final
concentration of 2.5 µM SUV was used. Trapped inside
vesicles, the calcein dye is self-quenched. Thus, membrane permeation
can be detected by an increase in fluorescence as peptides are added. The percentage of fluorescence recovery, Ft, was
defined as Ft = (ft Rhodamine Fluorescence Dequenching Measurements--
Rhodamine
fluorescence is highly sensitive to self-quenching but poorly affected
by the dielectric constant of its environment. Therefore, the tendency
of the peptides to oligomerize in aqueous solution was tested using
Rho-labeled peptides. Changes in the fluorescence were measured after
adding proteinase K (10 mg/ml final concentration) to Rho-labeled
peptides (0.1 µM) previously dissolved in PBS. More
proteinase K was added until there was no further change in the
fluorescence emission. Excitation was set at 530 nm, and emission was
set at 580 nm. All the fluorescence measurements in the present study
were done on an Aminco Bowman Series 2 SLM spectrofluorometer
(SLM-Aminco Spectronic Instruments).
Binding Experiments--
The degree of peptide association with
PC or PC/PS SUV was measured by adding increasing amounts of vesicles
to 0.1 µM NBD-labeled peptides dissolved in PBS. The
fluorescence intensity was measured as a function of the lipid/peptide
molar ratio, with excitation set at 467 nm, and emission set at 530 nm.
The fluorescence values were corrected by subtracting the corresponding
blank (PBS with the same amount of vesicles). The binding isotherms
were analyzed as partition equilibria (31, 35-38) using the formula
Xb* = Kp* Cf,
where Xb* is defined as the molar ratio of bound
peptide per 60% of the total lipid, assuming that the peptides were
initially partitioned only over the outer leaflet of the SUV, as has
been previously suggested (38); Kp* corresponds to
the partition coefficient; and Cf represents the
equilibrium concentration of the free peptide in the solution. The
value Xb was calculated by extrapolating
F
Having calculated the value of fb, it is then
possible to calculate Cf as well as the extent of
peptide binding, Xb*. The curves that result from
plotting Xb* versus free peptide,
Cf, are referred to as the conventional binding isotherms.
Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer (FRET)
Measurements--
FRET experiments were performed by using NBD-labeled
peptides serving as energy donors and Rho-labeled peptides serving as energy acceptors (39). Fluorescence spectra were obtained at room
temperature, with excitation set at 467 nm (8-mm slit). In a typical
experiment, a donor peptide (final concentration, 0.05 µM) was added to a dispersion of SUV (350 µM) in PBS followed by the addition of an acceptor
peptide in several sequential doses. Fluorescence spectra were obtained
before and after adding the acceptor. The efficiency of energy transfer
(E) was determined by measuring the decrease in the quantum
yield of the donor as a result of the presence of the acceptor. The
value E was determined experimentally from the ratio of the
fluorescence intensities of the donor in the presence
(Ida) and in the absence (Id) of
the acceptor at the wavelengths of the maximal donor emission. The
percentage of transfer efficiency (E) is given by
%E = (1 Peptide-induced Pore/Channel Formation--
Previous studies have
indicated that the Peptides Binding to Membranes--
Characterization of vesicle
binding by WT, I7S, Q8R, and F9L Peptide Oligomerization in Solution--
To test whether helices
Inhibition of the Peptide-Peptide Interaction within the Membrane Milieu--
The
ability of the peptides to oligomerize in their membrane-bound state
was investigated using FRET. The experiments were performed both with
PC and PS/PC vesicles at a molar ratio where 100% binding was expected
(Fig. 2) using NBD-labeled peptides as energy donors and Rho-labeled
peptides as energy acceptors. Fig. 6
depicts the curves of the experimentally derived percentage of energy
transfer versus the bound acceptor/lipid molar ratio. When
Rho-labeled Cry1Ac
The interaction of helices In the current study we show that the Cry1Ac segment
Recently, Schwartz and co-workers (16) used site-directed mutagenesis
studies and suggested a more detailed organization for the inserted
hairpin. According to their findings, domain I drifts away from domain
II and III after initial binding. A hairpin inserts into the membrane
with Our results show that F9L Surprisingly, we found F9L In conclusion, our results give direct support to the umbrella model
(7, 15, 16). After the initial binding to the receptor, the protein
undergoes a transformation. Domain I binds the membrane, and as its
helices are spread around on the surface, the Further investigation of specific molecular recognition within the
membrane is of great importance, since this seems to be a very general
phenomenon. For instance, the ability of the T cell receptor to
assemble is encoded by their transmembrane domains (48). Likewise, the
dimerization of glycophorin A (49-51) is through its transmembrane
domains. Thus, understanding the molecular organization of the
*
This research was supported by the U. S. A.-Israel
Binational Agriculture Research and Development Fund (BARD)
Foundation.The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, May 15, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M002596200
The abbreviations used are:
PC, phosphatidylcholine;
PS, and phosphatidylserine;
NBD-Cl, N-[7-nitrobenz-2-oxa-1,3-diazole-4-yl chloride;
Rho, carboxytetramethylrhodamine;
HPLC, high performance liquid
chromatography;
SUV, small unilamellar vesicles;
PBS, phosphate-buffered saline;
FRET, fluorescence resonance energy
transfer;
WT, wild type.
Insertion and Organization within Membranes of the
-Endotoxin
Pore-forming Domain, Helix 4-Loop-Helix 5, and Inhibition of Its
Activity by a Mutant Helix 4 Peptide*
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-helix bundle (
1-
7). According to the "umbrella model,"
4 and
5 helices form a hairpin structure thought to be inserted
into the membrane upon binding. Here, we have synthesized and
characterized the hairpin domain,
4-loop-
5, its
4 and
5
helices, as well as mutant
4 peptides based on mutations that
increased or decreased toxin toxicity. Membrane permeation studies
revealed that the
4-loop-
5 hairpin is extremely active compared
with the isolated helices or their mixtures, indicating the
complementary role of the two helices and the need for the loop for
efficient insertion into membranes. Together with spectrofluorometric
studies, we provide direct evidence for the role of
4-loop-
5 as
the membrane-inserted pore-forming hairpin in which
4 and
5 line
the lumen of the channel and
5 also participates in the
oligomerization of the toxin. Strikingly, the addition of the active
4 mutant peptide completely inhibits
4-loop-
5 pore formation,
thus providing, to our knowledge, the first example that a mutated
helix within a pore can function as an "immunity protein" by
directly interacting with the segments that form the pore. This
presents a potential means of interfering with the assembly and
function of other membrane proteins as well.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-helices (1, 7, 8). In the soluble stage, the hydrophobic helices
are sheltered from the solvent by a barrel of amphipathic helices. The
second group of toxins is intrinsically soluble, and its structure is
mainly composed of a
-barrel fold (9). These toxins depend on
oligomerization to produce sufficient hydrophobicity for membrane
insertion to occur.
-endotoxins, which are specific insect toxins. The
-endotoxins are digested by the insects in the midgut and are
enzymatically modified into their active form (6), after which the
toxins bind to target cells through a two-stage process to form
channels/pores (11, 12). The first step involves reversible binding to
a receptor followed by an irreversible step in which membrane insertion occurs (3, 6, 13, 14). The irreversible step is also implicated with
toxicity; however, the mode of action of the toxin is not yet clearly
understood. Biophysical and structural studies of the
-endotoxins as
a paradigm for membrane toxins may help elucidate the specific
interactions, mechanism of insertion, and organization within the
membrane of toxins and channel proteins.
-endotoxin toxicity is through experience with three major proteins
of the Cry family: Cry3A, Cry1Aa, and Cry1Ac. The Cry proteins are an
extensive toxin family found within the
-endotoxin crystals. Their
pore-forming domain comprises both amphipathic and hydrophobic
-helices. The Cry3A and Cry1Aa structures were resolved in aqueous
solution; Cry1Ac protein is highly homologous to Cry1Aa (7, 8).
Furthermore, many mutations were done on the full-length proteins,
including specific mutations in the
4 and
5 regions.
4 and
5, were each shown to form homo- and hetero-oligomers in
the membrane milieu (17-19). Helix
5 of Cry3A (17) and Cry1Ac (20)
were shown also to have membrane permeation capabilities. These data
suggest that
4 and
5 might be the region that is inserted into
the membrane and actually participates in pore formation. This model is
supported by mutagenesis analysis done on full-length proteins, where
loss of toxicity is a common characteristic of most
4 and
5
mutations (16, 21-23). Previous studies indicate that although
mutations in
4 usually cause loss of toxicity, they do not change
the aggregation capabilities of the toxin (23). On the other hand, a
strong correlation was found between toxicity and
5 oligomerization. Specifically, for mutations that did not affect toxicity, the protein
retained its oligomerization ability, excluding one known exception
H168R (23). Recent results based on site-directed mutagenesis place
4 in the aqueous interface of the pore, whereas the more hydrophobic
5 is located at the back of the oligomer and interacts mainly with
4 and the lipid bilayer (16). Furthermore, it was shown that
mutations I132S and Q133R, located on the polar surface of
4,
substantially decrease the pore-forming activity, whereas F134L results
in a 3-fold increase in activity (23). However, there is still no
direct evidence that
4 inserts together with
5 as a hairpin into
the membrane to form a pore.
5,
4, and its active and non-active mutants and the full-length
membrane-inserted domain
4-loop-
5 (Table
I). Note that the benefits of studying
the membrane-inserted segment of a protein were clearly demonstrated by
revealing the crystal structure of the KcsA potassium channel, which
was done using only the membrane-inserted segments, helix M1-pore
region-helix M2, of the channel (24). Importantly, the structure and
the organization of this region were in agreement with studies carried
out with the isolated helix M1, the pore region H5, and the helix M2
(25, 26).
Sequences, designations and molecular weights of the synthetic peptides
derived from Cry1Ac protein
4-loop-
5 and the
4 and
5 peptides provide direct evidence of the role of
4-loop-
5 as the
membrane-inserted pore-forming hairpin in which
4 and
5 lines the
lumen of the channel, and
5 participates also in the oligomerization
of the toxin. Furthermore, the striking finding that an
4 mutant can inhibit
4-loop-
5 pore formation provides, to our knowledge, the
first example that a mutated helix of a pore-forming toxin can function
as an immunity protein by directly interacting with the segments that
form the pore, similar to what has been proposed for the immunity
proteins of colicin E1 (27). This presents a potential means of
interfering with the assembly and function of other membrane proteins
as well. These results are discussed also with regard to the importance
of understanding protein-protein interaction within the membrane milieu
(28, 29).
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-amidating
monooxygenase resin was purchased from Applied Biosystems (Foster City,
CA). Other reagents used for peptide synthesis included trifluoroacetic
acid (Sigma), N,N-diisopropylethylamine (Aldrich; distilled over ninhydrin),
benzotriazol-N-oxytris(dimethylamino)phosphonium hexafluorophosphate (Sigma), N-methylmorpholine (Aldrich),
and dimethylformamide (peptide synthesis grade, Biolab). Egg
phosphatidylcholine (PC)1 and
phosphatidylserine (PS) from bovine spinal cord (sodium salt, grade I)
was purchased from Lipid Products (South Nutfield, UK). 3-3'-Dipropylthiadicarbocyanine iodide (5),
N-[7-nitrobenz-2-oxa-1,3-diazole-4-yl] chloride (NBD-Cl),
and 5- (and 6-)-carboxytetramethylrhodamine (Rho) and calcein were
purchased from Molecular Probes (Junction City, OR). All other reagents
were of analytical grade. Buffers were prepared in double distilled water.
-amidating monooxygenase resin as
described (30). NBD and Rho labeling of the N terminus of the
resin-bound peptides was achieved as described previously (31). The
peptides were cleaved from the resin by HF treatment and purified by
reverse transcription-HPLC. Purity (~99%) was confirmed by
analytical HPLC. The peptides were subjected to amino acid analysis and
to Platform LCZ micromass electrospray to confirm their composition.
Io)/(Imax
Io) × 100, where I0 = initial fluorescence, Imax = the total fluorescence observed after the addition of paradaxin, and
ft = the fluorescence observed after adding
the peptide, at time t. Paradaxin was used at a
concentration of 0.6 µM, which caused 100% calcein leakage from the vesicles.
(the fluorescence signal obtained when all
the peptide is bound to lipid) from a double-reciprocal plot of
F (total peptide fluorescence) versus
CL (total concentration of lipids) (35). Knowing the
fluorescence intensities of unbound peptide, F0, as
well as the bound peptide, F, the fraction of membrane-bound peptide, fb, could be calculated using the formula
fb = (F
F0)/(
F
F0).
Ida/
Id) × 100. Subtracting the signal produced by
the acceptor-labeled analogue alone made correction for the
contribution of acceptor emission as a result of direct excitation. The
contribution of buffer and vesicles was subtracted from all measurements.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
4 and
5 helices of domain I are important for
toxicity and pore formation (15, 17, 20-23, 40, 41). We have
investigated whether helices
4,
5, and
4-loop-
5 can cause
membrane leakage of encapsulated calcein from vesicles. Fig.
1 shows the dose response of
peptide-induced calcein release from PS/PC vesicles. Clearly the
results show that
4 and its mutants are incapable of causing any
appreciable calcein release on PS/PC vesicles. Compared with
4
peptides,
5 had low activity (Fig. 1). These results are in accord
with published data on a homologue Cry3A
5 peptide (18) and single channel experiments with an elongated version of Cry1Ac
5. Among the
mutated
4 peptides, F9L showed activity, albeit low, on PC vesicles,
which is more relevant to the midgut membranes. This result is
in agreement with a mutation done on the full-length protein, where the
F9L mutation was found to exhibit hyperactivity compared with the WT
protein (23). Interestingly, we found
4-loop-
5 to be much more
active than
4 and
5 alone or together. For example, the
4-loop-
5 reached 70% activity on PS/PC vesicles at a
peptide/lipid molar ratio of 0.04, whereas
4 and
5 were
practically inactive at the same ratio (Fig. 1). A mixture of
4 or
its mutants with
5 did not exhibit any synergism, implying that a
linkage of the two helices with the loop is necessary for activity
(Fig. 1). All other peptides showed similar activities on PC vesicles,
and therefore, only
5 is shown as an example. These results support the umbrella model, where
4-loop-
5 hairpin is inserted into the
membrane in an anti-parallel manner to form the active pore/channel (7,
41, 15). To test whether the inability of
4 peptides to cause
calcein release is a result of their inability to bind phospholipid
membranes, we performed additional binding experiments.

View larger version (15K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Calecein release induced by the
peptides. Peptides were added to calcein containing SUV PC and
PS/PC. Increase in the fluorescence versus molar ratio of
peptide/lipid was recorded. Filled triangles,
4-loop-
5
(PS/PC); filled circles, WT
5 (PS/PC); empty
circles, WT
5 (PC); crossed circles, WT
5 +
4
(PS/PC); crossed squares, F9L
4 (PC); filled
squares, WT
4 (PS/PC). The peptides I7S and Q8R were inactive
and therefore not shown.
4 was facilitated through the
attachment of an NBD moiety to the peptides. NBD is very sensitive to
the dielectric constant of the environment. Therefore, membrane binding
can be detected as a substantial increase in NBD fluorescence. The
attachment of the NBD did not alter the membrane-permeating activity of
the peptides, which has also been shown in other studies (19). A constant concentration of peptide (0.1 µM) was titrated
with the desired vesicles (e.g. PC, PS/PC). Increases in the
fluorescence intensities of NBD-labeled peptides as a function of the
lipid/peptide molar ratio yielded the conventional binding curves (see
Fig. 2, panels A,
B, C, and D for
4, Q8R, I7S, and
F9L, respectively, for PC/PS vesicles). Similar curves were obtained
with PC vesicles and, therefore, are not shown. The light scattering of
the vesicles was subtracted by repeating the experiments with unlabeled
peptides. Since all peptides apart from
5 are monomeric in aqueous
solution, as revealed by rhodamine dequenching experiments (see next
paragraph), we were able to analyze their binding isotherms as
partition equilibria. The surface partition coefficients were estimated
from the initial slopes of the curves shown in the insets of
all panels in Fig. 2 (for PC/PS) (38). Table
II shows the calculated partition coefficients (and the free energy of binding, 
G) for both PC and
PC/PS phospholipid membranes. F9L shows positive cooperativity as the
binding isotherm curves upward. The wild type and the rest of the
4
mutants give linear binding isotherm curves. WT-
5 binding to
vesicles was also facilitated through NBD-labeled peptides (Fig.
3). The binding isotherm was not
extrapolated for
5, since it is an oligomer in solution (see next
paragraph and Fig. 4). However, the
saturation level of the
5 binding isotherm is similar to that of the
4 peptides, and therefore it is reasonable to assume a partition
coefficient of the same scale (10
4
M
1). Qualitatively, since the
fluorescence of NBD-labeled
5 did not dequench upon binding, we
qualitatively plotted the binding isotherm, which displayed strong
positive cooperativity (Fig. 3, inset), similar to that
previously shown for Cry3A
5 (15).

View larger version (28K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Binding curves of the
4 peptides. Increase in fluorescence of
NBD-labeled
4 peptides upon titration with SUV (PS/PC 1:10).
Panel A, WT; panel B, I7S; panel C,
Q8R; panel D, F9L. All experiments were performed at room
temperature in PBS. Excitation was set to 467 nm, emission was recorded
at 530 nm, and 4-nm slits were used. Insets, binding
isotherms, derived from the respective binding curve by plotting
Xb*, the molar ratio between bound peptide and
lipids in the outer leaflet, versus Cf,
the equilibrium concentration of free peptide in solution.
Partition coefficients and free energies of membrane binding

View larger version (18K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Binding curve of
5
peptide. Increase in fluorescence of NBD-labeled WT
5 upon
titration with SUV (PS/PC 1:10). The experiment was performed at room
temperature in PBS. Excitation was set to 467 nm, emission was recorded
at 530 nm, and 4-nm slits were used. Inset, binding isotherm
of WT
5 derived as described in the legend of Fig. 2.

View larger version (120K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Oligomerization of the peptides in
solution. Rho-labeled peptides were added to PBS at a final
concentration of 1 µM. Fluorescence was measured before
and after digestion with proteinase K. Gray bars represent
peptides before cleavage with proteinase K. Shaded
bars represent peptides after cleavage with proteinase
K.
5 and
4 and its mutants are monomers or oligomers in aqueous
solution, we used Rho-labeled peptides. The fluorescence of rhodamine
is quenched when several Rho-labeled molecules are in proximity, and
the increase in fluorescence after enzymatic cleavage is a result of
dissociation of these aggregates. A final concentration of 0.1-1
µM Rho-labeled peptide was added to PBS, and fluorescence
levels were measured at 580 nm. After equilibrium was reached,
proteinase K was added, and the change in the fluorescence was
recorded. Peptide
5 exhibited a strong decrease in fluorescence in
PBS at all peptide concentrations, after which the addition of
proteinase K caused an increase of almost 3-fold in fluorescence level.
The difference in fluorescence before and after proteinase K was added
indicates that
5 oligomerizes in aqueous solution. Rho-labeled
4
and its mutants did not show a significant change in fluorescence
levels before or after adding proteinase K. Thus,
4 and its mutants
seem to be monomers in solution. Fig. 4 shows, for example, the results
obtained at a peptide concentration of 1 µM.
4-Loop-
5 Hairpin Activity--
We further
tested whether
4 and its mutants or
5 can interfere with the
functional assembly of the
4-loop-
5. In these experiments, the
4-loop-
5 was used at a concentration in which it has ~50%
calcein release activity (0.015 µM), and
5 has ~10% activity. The peptides
4 and all mutants were used at the maximal concentration tested in the calcein release assay. Fig.
5 shows the results for PC vesicles.
Similar results were obtained with PC/PS vesicles and, therefore, are
not shown. The results indicate that F9L
4 has a very strong
antagonism on the activity of
4-loop-
5 (Fig. 5). Whereas peptides
5,
4, and mutants I7S and Q8R displayed only weak
inhibition abilities, the F9L
4 inhibition of the hairpin was
marked; specifically, the activity of
4-loop-
5 was completely abolished when mixed with F9L
4 (Fig. 5). This surprising result occurred even when F9L
4 was incubated with the vesicles before adding the hairpin.

View larger version (94K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Inhibition of calcein release induced by
4-loop-
5 by the addition
of shorter peptides. Fluorescence emissions were recorded at 515 nm with 4-nm slits. Shown are peptide
4-loop-
5 (0.015 µM) alone as a control, and combined with the short
peptides WT, I7S, Q8R, and F9L
4 and with WT
5 at a molar ratio
of 0.15 peptide/lipid molar ratio.
5 was sequentially added to its NBD derivative, a
decrease in the NBD fluorescence and an increase in the rhodamine fluorescence were revealed, suggesting that Cry1Ac
5 self-associates in its membrane-bound state (Fig. 6). Similarly, it was found that the
Cry3A counterpart of
5 could also form oligomers when bound to the
membrane (15, 17, 19).

View larger version (25K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Peptide-peptide interaction within the
membrane. Theoretically and experimentally derived percentage of
energy transfer. Transfer efficiencies between donor and acceptor
5
Cry1Ac (empty circles) and Cry1Ac donor
5 and the
following Cry1Ac acceptors: filled squares, WT
4;
empty squares, I7S; semi-filled squares, Q8R;
crossed squares, F9L. Cross circles, FRET between
4 as energy donor and
4 as energy acceptor; empty
triangles, negative control donor N36 and acceptor
5 Cry1Ac.
The broken line represents a random distribution of monomers
(42) using a Ro of 51Å (17).
4 with
5 in the membrane was studied
as well. Peptide
4 and each one of its three mutants exhibited resonance energy transfer with
5, indicating that
4 and its mutants hetero-oligomerize with
5 (Fig. 6). In Fig. 6, the curve corresponding to a random distribution of monomers (42), assuming an
R0 (distance at which 50% FRET occurs) of 51 Å (17), is depicted as a dashed line. The interaction between
Rho-
5 and NBD-N36 (43), a peptide corresponding to a segment from
human immunodeficiency virus-1 gp41 that was shown to bind
membranes, was investigated as a negative control. Only random energy
transfer was observed for the negative control, suggesting no specific interaction with
5.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
4-loop-
5 is much more active in membrane permeation than either
of the hydrophobic helices by themselves (Fig. 4). For example, helix
4 shows no pore-forming activity at all, whereas
5 has low
activity (Fig. 4). This provides strong evidence that both helices and the loop connecting them are needed to form the channel and
subsequently cause toxicity. According to the crystal structure of the
homologue proteins Cry1Aa and Cry3A, the
4-loop-
5 hairpin is
hidden within the hydrophobic core of the protein (7, 8). Upon membrane binding, a metamorphosis occurs, and the hairpin is inserted into the
membrane in a manner consistent with the umbrella model (7, 15).
Furthermore spectrofluorometric analysis of the shorter helical
segments, such as pore-forming, membrane binding, FRET, or
competition assays, suggests that
4 and
5 of Cry1Ac have distinct
roles within the hairpin.
4 facing the lumen of the channel and
5 facing the lipid
interface, whereas the other helices are spread on the surface of the
membrane. Using cysteine labeling, Schwartz and co-workers showed that
4 is accessible to the lumen of the channel. Their conclusion was
that the
4-loop-
5 is inserted into the membrane and that
4
faces the lumen of the channel, whereas
5 is at an outer circle,
facing the hydrophobic environment of the membrane milieu. There is
concrete evidence to support this model. For example, Aronson and
co-workers (23) show that
5 is highly involved in the
oligomerization of the channels and that its ability to oligomerize
directly affects the protein toxicity. Furthermore,
4 is also highly
involved in toxicity, although the oligomerization of
4 is not
necessary for toxicity (23). Thus, with the help of
5
oligomerization, the more polar
4 inserts into the membrane and
lines the lumen of the channel.
5 can create pores (Fig. 4) and homo-oligomers
(Fig. 6) and that it exhibits a cooperative binding isotherm curve
(Fig. 3). In addition,
5 alone can release calcein molecules
trapped inside vesicles (Fig. 4), causing perforation of the membrane.
However, pore formation activity is extremely high when it is connected
to
4. Furthermore, loss of toxicity in Cry1Ac with mutations in
5
was directly correlated with the loss of oligomerization, suggesting
that
5 is crucial for membrane oligomerization (44, 23, 45). In
short,
5 can play an important role both in membrane insertion and
in the oligomerization of several proteins to form a channel. Helix
4 can also bind vesicles, although no cooperativity was observed
(Fig. 2A). This can be explained by the more polar nature of
4 compared with
5, which makes it harder for
4 to insert into
the membrane. Nevertheless, helix
4 has the ability to oligomerize
specifically within the membrane environment, both with
5 and with
itself (Fig. 6). In contrast,
4 and its mutants were incapable of
membrane permeation, except for the slight ability of F9L
4 (Fig.
4). This may indicate that
4 plays a role in oligomerization within
the phospholipid bilayers but is incapable of sufficient membrane
insertion without the help of
5.
4 is a homologue peptide to the F134L mutation on the
full-length protein, which was previously shown to have a 3-fold increase in toxicity (23). Importantly, the F9L
4 mutant is able to
form oligomers within the membrane. It also has cooperative binding and
slight membrane permeation capabilities. These facts may imply better
insertion into the membrane milieu than the wild type (Fig. 2,
A and D, insets). Substitution
of an aromatic amino acid, which prefers the phospholipid interface,
with leucine, which prefers the acyl chain environment, can explain why
F9L
4 would be more capable of membrane insertion. Thus, we suggest that the cooperative binding observed for F9L
4 is due to the depleting surface-bound F9L
4 as it inserts into the membrane (46,
47). The pore-forming activity of F9L
4, albeit low, supports the
hypothesis that
4 has a face exposed to the lumen of the channel.
4 to exhibit a strong inhibition on the
highly active
4-loop-
5 (Fig. 5). This inhibition occurs within
the membrane environment, since F9L
4 was also pre-incubated with
the vesicles before the addition of
4-loop-
5. All the other short
peptides (including
5) did not exhibit any significant inhibition
capability. Why is the inhibition so dramatically increased with a more
active mutation? This interference is most likely due to F9L
4
interacting with
5 within the membrane, which was previously shown
to be crucial for oligomerization of the pore. This increased
interaction between F9L
4 and the
5 segment within the hairpin is
enough to disrupt the natural
4- to-
5 interaction between two
hairpins, thus interfering with channel formation. Wild type
4 is
probably unable to have significant inhibition, because it cannot
insert deep enough into the membrane or in the proper orientation. This
leads us to the conclusion that the interaction most important for
oligomerization of the channel is that of
5 with
4. Furthermore,
this can explain why all the
4 mutants showed an energy transfer
with
5. Note that the
4 mutations affected the insertion ability
or channel properties of
4 but not its interaction with
5. Thus,
these mutations did not have a significant effect on oligomerization as
in the full-length protein while changing the activity of the channel
(23). The interaction of
5 with
5 may be less dominant for
oligomerization, since we would then expect wild type
5 to have a
greater inhibitory effect on the hairpin activity. The striking finding
that an
4 mutant can inhibit
4-loop-
5 pore formation
demonstrates the importance of the specific interaction between
4
and
5 within the membrane. In addition, it provides the first
example that a mutated helix of a pore-forming toxin can function as an
immunity protein by directly interacting with the segments that form
the pores. This mode of action has been proposed for the immunity proteins of colicin E1 (27).
4-loop-
5 hairpin is
inserted into the membrane. Oligomerization with other hairpins
produces a channel in which the lumen of the channel is constructed
mainly by
4 and partly by
5.
5 and the loop play a major role
in the insertion of the hairpin into the membrane and the
oligomerization of the channel.
-endotoxin can shed light on the general principles that govern
protein-protein interactions within the membrane. In addition,
inhibition of
4-loop-
5 pore formation by an
4 mutant presents
a potential strategy for interfering with the assembly and function of
other membrane proteins as well.
![]()
FOOTNOTES
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 972-8-9342711;
Fax: 972-8-9344112; E-mail: Yechiel.Shai@weizmann.ac.il.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Cramer, W. A.,
Cohen, F. S.,
Merrill, A. R.,
and Song, H. Y.
(1990)
Mol. Microbiol.
4,
519-526
2.
Bayley, H.
(1997)
Curr. Biol.
7,
763-764
3.
Lesieur, C.,
Vecsey-Semjen, B.,
Abrami, L.,
Fivaz, M.,
and Gisou van der Goot, F.
(1997)
Mol. Membr. Biol.
14,
45-64
4.
Bhakdi, S.,
Bayley, H.,
Valeva, A.,
Walev, I.,
Walker, B.,
Kehoe, M.,
and Palmer, M.
(1996)
Arch. Microbiol.
165,
73-79
5.
Cabiaux, V.,
Wolff, C.,
and Ruysschaert, J. M.
(1997)
Int. J. Biol. Macromol.
21,
285-298
6.
Rajamohan, F.,
Lee, M. K.,
and Dean, D. H.
(1998)
Prog. Nucleic Acids Res. Mol. Biol.
60,
1-27
7.
Li, J. D.,
Carroll, J.,
and Ellar, D. J.
(1991)
Nature
353,
815-821
8.
Grochulski, P.,
Masson, L.,
Borisova, S.,
Pusztai-Carey, M.,
Schwartz, J. L.,
Brousseau, R.,
and Cygler, M.
(1995)
J. Mol. Biol.
254,
447-464
9.
Li, J.,
Koni, P. A.,
and Ellar, D. J.
(1996)
J. Mol. Biol.
257,
129-152
10.
Schesser, J. H.,
Kramer, K. J.,
and Bulla, L. A., Jr.
(1977)
Appl. Environ. Microbiol.
33,
878-880
11.
Slatin, S. L.,
Abrams, C. K.,
and English, L.
(1990)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
169,
765-772
12.
Vachon, V.,
Paradis, M. J.,
Marsolais, M.,
Schwartz, J. L.,
and Laprade, R.
(1995)
J. Membr. Biol.
148,
57-63
13.
Knight, P. J.,
Crickmore, N.,
and Ellar, D. J.
(1994)
Mol. Microbiol.
11,
429-436
14.
Dean, D. H.,
Rajamohan, F.,
Lee, M. K.,
Wu, S. J.,
Chen, X. J.,
Alcantara, E.,
and Hussain, S. R.
(1996)
Gene
179,
111-117
15.
Gazit, E.,
La Rocca, P.,
Sansom, M. S.,
and Shai, Y.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
12289-12294
16.
Masson, L.,
Tabashnik, B. E.,
Liu, Y. B.,
Brousseau, R.,
and Schwartz, J. L.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
31996-32000
17.
Gazit, E.,
and Shai, Y.
(1993)
Biochemistry
32,
3429-3436
18.
Gazit, E.,
Bach, D.,
Kerr, I. D.,
Sansom, M. S.,
Chejanovsky, N.,
and Shai, Y.
(1994)
Biochem. J.
304,
895-902
19.
Gazit, E.,
and Shai, Y.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
2571-2578
20.
Cummings, C. E.,
Armstrong, G.,
Hodgman, T. C.,
and Ellar, D. J.
(1994)
Mol. Membr. Biol.
11,
87-92
21.
Aronson, A. I.,
Wu, D.,
and Zhang, C.
(1995)
J. Bacteriol.
177,
4059-4065
22.
Uawithya, P.,
Tuntitippawan, T.,
Katzenmeier, G.,
Panyim, S.,
and Angsuthanasombat, C.
(1998)
Biochem. Mol. Biol. Int.
44,
825-832
23.
Manoj Kumar, A. S.,
and Aronson, A. I.
(1999)
J. Bacteriol.
181,
6103-6107
24.
MacKinnon, R.,
Cohen, S. L.,
Kuo, A.,
Lee, A.,
and Chait, B. T.
(1998)
Science
280,
106-109
25.
Ben-Efraim, I.,
and Shai, Y.
(1996)
Protein Sci.
5,
2287-2297
26.
Ben-Efraim, I.,
and Shai, Y.
(1997)
Biophys. J.
72,
85-96
27.
Zhang, Y. L.,
and Cramer, W. A.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
10176-10184
28.
Choma, C.,
Gratkowski, H.,
Lear, J. D.,
and DeGrado, W. F.
(2000)
Nat. Struct. Biol.
7,
161-166
29.
Xiao Zhou, F.,
Cocco, M. J.,
Russ, W. P.,
Brunger, A. T.,
and Engelman, D. M.
(2000)
Nat. Struct. Biol.
7,
154-160
30.
Merrifield, R. B.,
Vizioli, L. D.,
and Boman, H. G.
(1982)
Biochemistry
21,
5020-5031
31.
Rapaport, D.,
and Shai, Y.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
23769-23775
32.
Shai, Y.,
Bach, D.,
and Yanovsky, A.
(1990)
J. Biol. Chem.
265,
20202-20209
33.
Allen, T. M.,
and Cleland, L. G.
(1980)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
597,
418-426
34.
Pouny, Y.,
Rapaport, D.,
Mor, A.,
Nicolas, P.,
and Shai, Y.
(1992)
Biochemistry
31,
12416-12423
35.
Schwarz, G.,
Gerke, H.,
Rizzo, V.,
and Stankowski, S.
(1987)
Biophys. J.
52,
685-692
36.
Schwarz, G.,
Stankowski, S.,
and Rizzo, V.
(1986)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
861,
141-151
37.
Rizzo, V.,
Stankowski, S.,
and Schwarz, G.
(1987)
Biochemistry
26,
2751-2759
38.
Beschiaschvili, G.,
and Seelig, J.
(1990)
Biochemistry
29,
52-58
39.
Gazit, E.,
and Shai, Y.
(1993)
Biochemistry
32,
12363-12371
40.
Chen, X. J.,
Curtiss, A.,
Alcantara, E.,
and Dean, D. H.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
6412-6419
41.
Schwartz, J. L.,
Juteau, M.,
Grochulski, P.,
Cygler, M.,
Prefontaine, G.,
Brousseau, R.,
and Masson, L.
(1997)
FEBS Lett.
410,
397-402
42.
Fung, B. K.,
and Stryer, L.
(1978)
Biochemistry
17,
5241-5248
43.
Kliger, Y.,
and Shai, Y.
(2000)
J. Mol. Biol.
295,
163-168
44.
Wu, D.,
and Aronson, A. I.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
2311-2317
45.
Aronson, A. I.,
Geng, C.,
and Wu, L.
(1999)
Appl. Environ. Microbiol.
65,
2503-2507
46.
Sipos, L.,
and von Heijne, G.
(1993)
Eur. J. Biochem.
213,
1333-1340
47.
Landolt-Marticorena, C.,
Williams, K. A.,
Deber, C. M.,
and Reithmeier, R. A.
(1993)
J. Mol. Biol.
229,
602-608
48.
Manolios, N.,
Bonifacino, J. S.,
and Klausner, R. D.
(1990)
Science
249,
274-277
49.
Engelman, D. M.
(1996)
Science
274,
1850-1851
50.
Cramer, W. A.,
Engelman, D. M.,
Von Heijne, G.,
and Rees, D. C.
(1992)
FASEB J.
6,
3397-3402
51.
MacKenzie, K. R.,
Prestegard, J. H.,
and Engelman, D. M.
(1997)
Science
276,
131-133
Copyright © 2000 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
F. Girard, V. Vachon, G. Prefontaine, L. Marceau, Y. Su, G. Larouche, C. Vincent, J.-L. Schwartz, L. Masson, and R. Laprade Cysteine Scanning Mutagenesis of {alpha}4, a Putative Pore-Lining Helix of the Bacillus thuringiensis Insecticidal Toxin Cry1Aa Appl. Envir. Microbiol., May 1, 2008; 74(9): 2565 - 2572. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Bloch, F. J. Quintana, D. Gerber, T. Cohen, I. R. Cohen, and Y. Shai T-Cell inactivation and immunosuppressive activity induced by HIV gp41 via novel interacting motif FASEB J, February 1, 2007; 21(2): 393 - 401. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Boonserm, M. Mo, C. Angsuthanasombat, and J. Lescar Structure of the Functional Form of the Mosquito Larvicidal Cry4Aa Toxin from Bacillus thuringiensis at a 2.8-Angstrom Resolution J. Bacteriol., May 1, 2006; 188(9): 3391 - 3401. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Carmieli, N. Papo, H. Zimmermann, A. Potapov, Y. Shai, and D. Goldfarb Utilizing ESEEM Spectroscopy to Locate the Position of Specific Regions of Membrane-Active Peptides within Model Membranes Biophys. J., January 15, 2006; 90(2): 492 - 505. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. Vachon, G. Prefontaine, C. Rang, F. Coux, M. Juteau, J.-L. Schwartz, R. Brousseau, R. Frutos, R. Laprade, and L. Masson Helix 4 Mutants of the Bacillus thuringiensis Insecticidal Toxin Cry1Aa Display Altered Pore-Forming Abilities Appl. Envir. Microbiol., October 1, 2004; 70(10): 6123 - 6130. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Gerber, N. Sal-Man, and Y. Shai Two Motifs within a Transmembrane Domain, One for Homodimerization and the Other for Heterodimerization J. Biol. Chem., May 14, 2004; 279(20): 21177 - 21182. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||