Advertisement
JBC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M606038200 on October 12, 2006

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 281, Issue 51, 39465-39470, December 22, 2006
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
281/51/39465    most recent
M606038200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chung, W. Y.
Right arrow Articles by James, R. F. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chung, W. Y.
Right arrow Articles by James, R. F. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Inhibition of Escherichia coli Heat-labile Enterotoxin B Subunit Pentamer (EtxB5) Assembly in Vitro Using Monoclonal Antibodies*

Wen Yuan Chung{ddagger}, Rachel Carter§, Tara Hardy{ddagger}, Markus Sack, Timothy R. Hirst||, and Roger F. L. James{ddagger}1

From the {ddagger}Department of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 9HN, United Kingdom, §The Cancer Research UK Clinical Centre, Southampton, S016 6YD, United Kingdom, Die Leitseite der Rheinisch-Westfälischen Hochschule, 52056 Aachen, Germany, and the ||Departments of Pathology and Microbiology, University of Bristol, BS8 1TD, United Kingdom

Received for publication, June 23, 2006 , and in revised form, September 7, 2006.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Heat-labile enterotoxin (Etx) produced by certain strains of Escherichia coli is a major virulence factor related to cholera toxin. Both are hexameric proteins comprising one A-subunit and five B-subunits. The pentameric B-subunit of E. coli has a high affinity for GM1-ganglioside receptors on gut epithelial cells and is directly responsible for toxin entry. The pentameric B-subunit (EtxB5) is an exceptionally stable protein, being able to maintain its quaternary structure over a wide pH range (2.0- 11.0). However, little is known about the formation of the pentameric structure (EtxB5) from newly synthesized B-subunit monomers (EtxB1). We previously described and characterized a mAb (LDS47) that was shown to be highly specific for an N-terminal decapeptide region of EtxB1 (Amin, T., Larkins, A., James, R. F. L., and Hirst, T. R. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 20143-20150). Here we also describe a mAb (LDS16) with exquisite specificity for pentameric EtxB. In this study, we have used these two mAbs, in combination, to probe the in vitro assembly of EtxB5 from EtxB1. EtxB pentamers disassemble in highly acidic conditions, giving rise to monomeric B-subunits that can reassemble if placed in buffers of neutral pH. Using this in vitro assembly model, it was found that at a molar ratio of 1:1; LDS47:EtxB, 50% of reassembly was inhibited, and that this inhibition increased to 90% at a ratio of 2:1. These results infer that the N-terminal decapeptide region (APQSITELCS) defined by the LDS47 antibody is crucial for competent pentameric B-subunit assembly and stabilization.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Heat-labile enterotoxin (Etx)2 produced by certain strains of Escherichia coli is related to cholera toxin (Ctx) and causes diarrheal disease in humans and animals (2, 3). Enterotoxigenic E. coli diarrhea occurs in all age groups and has a high mortality rate in infants, particularly in developing countries (4, 5).

The pathogenesis of enterotoxigenic E. coli diarrheal disease requires three processes: firstly, colonization and adherence to the mucosal epithelium by the bacterial fimbriae; secondly, binding of secreted toxin via a specific receptor (which has been identified as GM1-ganglioside); and lastly, uptake of the toxin into the cell, causing disruption of the electrolyte balance in gut epithelium (6, 7). Heat-labile enterotoxin and Ctx are both heterohexameric complexes comprising one A subunit (possessing ADP-ribosyl transferase activity (Mr = 28,000)) and five identical B subunits (Mr = 12,000 each), which in vivo naturally assemble into a stable pentameric structure that has a high affinity for GM1-ganglioside ubiquitously found on mammalian cells (8-10).

The B-subunit of Etx from E. coli strains of human origin show a 96% sequence identity to one another and approximately an 80% identity to the B-subunit of cholera toxin (11). Crystallographic studies have shown that each B-subunit in the pentameric structure is folded into two three-stranded anti-parallel beta-sheets (with one sheet on each side of the monomer facing an adjacent B-subunit) and a large central helix positioned at the wall of the central pole, with the five helices (one from each subunit) forming a pentagonal helical barrel (12-14). The pentasaccharide moiety exposed at the surface of GM1 allows binding to the five pockets formed at the interfaces of the B-subunit monomer interaction (15). It has been shown that the underside of the B5 pentamer, where the GM1 ganglioside binding sites are located, has a positive surface potential. This is consistent with the fact that the terminal sialic acid of GM1 ganglioside is negatively charged and that cell membranes themselves are also negatively charged (Fig. 1). Following binding to GM1 on mucosal cells and trafficking of the toxin to the endoplasmic reticulum, the A subunit enters the cytosol and displays ADP ribosyltransferase activity.

Studying the pathways of B-subunit pentamerization in vivo is difficult because of the problems involved in investigating such processes in the complex environment of the periplasmic space (16). The use of in vitro conditions to study the disassembly and reassembly of B-subunit was first reported by Finkelstein et al. (17) in 1974, who showed that purified cholera toxin could be denatured in acid urea and subsequently reassembled into active toxin when neutralized. In this study, we have used in vitro denaturation/renaturation techniques to study a region of EtxB1 that is recognized by an EtxB1-specific monoclonal antibody (LDS47) to see whether this is a key epitope involved in pentamer formation (1). To facilitate this process, it was necessary to produce a monoclonal antibody (mAb) that did not recognize EtxB1 and was specific for EtxB5 (LDS16). Using the in vitro system of toxin reassembly and the highly specific mAbs, we show that the N-terminal region identified by LDS47 (APQSITELCS) is crucial for competent pentameric B-subunit assembly.


Figure 1
View larger version (82K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 1.
Visualization of the three-dimensional molecular features of EtxB. The B-subunit monomers are represented in blue and purple shades. The sugar moiety of the GM1-ganglioside directly associated with EtxB is shown in green. The N-terminal residue is indicated in red, and the rest of the N-terminal decapeptide recognized by the monoclonal antibody LDS47 is shown in orange. The receptor binding sites are located on the bottom side of the pentamer (panel a), which exhibits a positive surface potential (not shown) that facilitates binding to the negatively charged cell-membrane. The pentameric symmetry is illustrated by the five sugar moieties of the GM1-ganglioside bound to the pentamer. The A-subunit would reside on the top side with its C-terminal domain running through the central pore formed by the B-subunit pentamer (panel b). The N-terminal decapeptide (APQSITELCS) recognized by the monoclonal antibody LDS47 involved in pentamer assembly is located on the side (panels c and d). This region is not part of the GM1 binding site.

 

   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Preparation of Monoclonal Antibodies—Purified recombinant EtxB (1), either pentameric or monomeric, was used as an immunogen in MF1 x BALB/c F1 hybrid mice. These were immunized intraperitoneally three times with each dose containing the equivalent of 10 µg of EtxB/nitrocellulose suspension in 0.5 ml of PBS. The first two injections were 7 weeks apart, and the final immunization was 4 weeks later. A final 10-µg intraperitoneal dose was administered 3 days before the spleens were removed prior to fusion.

Production of mAbs—After the final antigen boost, spleen cells were isolated from immunized mice, mixed with NS0 myeloma cells in a ratio of 4:1, and fused using a modification of the method described by Kohler and Milstein (18) at 37 °C using 0.8 ml of 50% w/v polyethylene glycol (Mr = 1500). The cell suspension was added in 1-ml aliquots to each well in RPMI/Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Invitrogen) containing 15% v/v fetal calf serum (Seralab) and incubated at 37 °C in 5% CO2 (day 0). Hypoxanthine and azaserine (5 x 10-3 M and 2.85 x 10-5 M) in 1 ml of RPMI medium were added on day 1, and the medium in the wells was replaced every 2 days with 1 ml of RPMI/Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium + 15% fetal calf serum + hypoxanthine and azaserine. Supernatants were screened against EtxB1 and EtxB5 by ELISA on day 11, and positive wells were cloned by limiting dilution.

Screening of Hybridoma Supernatants—Two ELISA assays were employed to discriminate between antibodies that recognized denatured EtxB monomers and assembled EtxB pentamers.

GM1-ELISA—This was performed essentially as described previously by Amin and Hirst (19). Each hybridoma supernatant was added to the wells of a microtiter plate (Immulon 1, Dynatech) that had been coated with GM1-ganglioside and 0.2 µg/ml EtxB pentamer in PBS. Antibodies binding to EtxB were detected using a goat anti-mouse-horseradish peroxidase conjugate (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories).

Non-GM1-ELISA—Since denatured EtxB subunits do not bind to the receptor GM1, denatured EtxB monomers were coated directly onto the plastic surface of the microtiter plates. Denatured EtxB monomers were prepared by boiling 5 µg/ml purified EtxB in 30 mM dithiothreitol for 5 min. Microtiter plates were coated with this preparation for 1 h at 37 °C, and the plate was washed with PBS. Nonspecific binding sites were blocked with 1% (w/v) bovine serum albumin, and the remainder of the assay was carried out in a manner identical with the GM1-ELISA. In some assays, pentameric EtxB at 5µg/ml in PBS was also coated directly onto microtiter plates in the absence of GM1.

SDS-Polyacrylamide Gel Electrophoresis and Western Blot— EtxB5 (8 µg) and boiled EtxB5 (EtxB1, 8 µg) were loaded into SDS-polyacrylamide 14% (w/v) gels for electrophoresis on a Bio-Rad Protean II system. After SDS-PAGE, gels were transferred to nitrocellulose paper with transfer buffer in a Bio-Rad Trans-Blot apparatus for 45 min to permit efficient transfer. Nonspecific binding sites were blocked overnight in PBS containing 5% (w/v) Marvel. Blots were washed in PBS containing 0.05% v/v Tween 20 for 3 x 10 min with agitation. LDS16 supernatant (~2 µg/ml) was used neat for 1 h at room temperature with agitation. Blots were washed as previously and incubated with goat anti-mouse IgG conjugated to horseradish peroxidase diluted 1:2000 for 1 h. The blots were then washed and developed with an enhanced chemiluminescence system (ECL, Amersham Biosciences) for 10 min.

Antibody Purification—mAbs LDS16, LDS47 (1), LDS56 (20), and LDS102 (EtxB C-terminal-specific)3 (all IgG1 isotype) were purified from ascites fluid on a protein G-agarose column (mAb trap kit, Amersham Biosciences). Ascities fluid was filtered through a 0.5-µm filter and diluted 1:5 with 20 mM phosphate buffer, pH 7.0. The absorbed IgG was eluted from the column using 0.1 M glycine-HCl buffer, pH 2.7, with 1.0-ml fractions collected into tubes containing 0.06 ml of 1 M Tris-HCl, pH 9.0. The presence of IgG in eluted fractions was monitored by measuring absorbance at 280 nm. ELISA was used to confirm its activity.

Inhibition of Reassembly of EtxB1 (Monomers) to EtxB5 (Pentamers) in the Presence of LDS47—The concentration of purified EtxB5 was adjusted with PBS to 34 µM, and then this was diluted 1:4 in 0.1 M KCl/HCl, pH 1.0. After 20 s in these acidic conditions, the samples were neutralized by dilution in a 10x volume of 3.4 µM in McIlvaine buffer (0.2 M disodium hydrogen phosphate, 0.1 M citric acid, pH 7, filtered through a sterile 0.22-µm filter before use) and then incubated for a further 60 min at 23 °C with or without affinity-purified mAb LDS47 at 10x molar excess ratio. Immediately after neutralization and after incubation for specified times at 23 °C, samples were removed and diluted 100-fold in PBS to prevent further assembly followed by analysis using a GM1 ELISA. The percentage of reassembled EtxB5 at each time point was calculated relative to treated and immediately neutralized (within 20 s) EtxB pentamers by ELISA using LDS16 as a readout. In addition, samples were also removed from the reaction mixture at specified time points and mixed at a ratio of 4:1 with 5x SDS-PAGE sample buffer. These were kept on ice for up to 1 h before applying them to SDS-polyacrylamide gels without prior heating of the samples. This later procedure was used to identify reassembled EtxB5 since at ambient temperatures, EtxB5 is stable in SDS-containing buffers and migrates in SDS-polyacrylamide gels with an electrophoretic mobility characteristic of the B-subunit pentamer.

Disassembly and Reassembly of EtxB5 in the Presence of Inhibiting mAbs—The concentration of purified EtxB5 was adjusted with PBS to 34 µM and then diluted four times in 0.1 M KCl/HCl, pH 1.0. After 20 s in these acidic conditions, the samples were diluted 10 times to a final concentration of 3.4 µM in McIlvaine buffer. Inhibition of assembly was carried out in the presence of purified mAbs LDS47, LDS56, LDS102 (10x molar excess), and serial dilutions of LDS47 (see Figs. 5 and 6). Immediately after neutralization and after incubation for specified times at 23 °C, samples were removed and diluted 100-fold in PBS to prevent further assembly followed by analysis using a GM1 ELISA (see below).

Assessing Concentration-dependent Inhibition of EtxB Reassembly—Samples of the reassembly mixture were taken after 1 h, diluted 100-fold to a concentration of 34 nM, and then added to ELISA plates that had previously been coated with 200 ng of GM1 and subsequently blocked with 1% Marvel in PBS. Samples were serially diluted 2-fold in PBS, and bound EtxB5 was detected using LDS16 (1.66 mg/ml) at a 1:200 dilution. For quantification of the amount of EtxB5 bound to the ELISA plates for each test sample, optical density readings corresponding to dilutions located on the linear part of the curve were compared with the dilution of an EtxB5 standard (1 µg/ml, diluted 2-fold), giving the same optical density reading.


Figure 2
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 2.
LDS16 mAb binding specificity was determined by ELISA using wells coated with different antigens. a, lane 1, EtxB1; lane 2, EtxB5; lane 3, GM1 alone; lane 4, GM1+EtxB1; lane 5, GM1+EtxB5; lane 6, preincubated LDS16+EtxB1 on a GM1-coated plate; lane 7, preincubated LDS16+B5 on a GM1-coated plate. b, Western blot analysis using LDS16 as a probe showed that in non-reducing condition, it gave a single band at 43 kDa (lane 2) and also detected a faint band at 43 kDa with boiled EtxB (lane 1).

 
Generation of Three-dimensional Graphic Computerized Model of EtxB—Graphical representations of the three-dimensional molecular features were generated using a previously published homologous structure of CtxB5 (2CHB.pdb) (21) and the SWISS-model software package (22).

ELISA Experiments—These were repeated at least three times with each data point done in triplicate. The results are plotted as mean ± S.D.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
LDS16 mAb Binding Specificity—To characterize the precise specificity of LDS16 for EtxB, a series of ELISA experiments were performed (Fig. 2a). A maximal signal was detected with either EtxB5 bound directly to the plate or EtxB5 captured by GM1 (lanes 2 and 5). No signal was detected with EtxB1 bound directly to the plate (lane 1), but a small signal was detected with GM1 plus EtxB1 (lane 4) (see "Discussion). To use this system to elucidate the binding specificity of LDS16, two preincubation experiments were performed. EtxB1 and EtxB5 were preincubated with LDS16 at equimolar concentrations prior to adding to a GM1-coated plate (lanes 6 and 7). In neither case was a signal detected.

Having shown by ELISA (Fig. 2a) that LDS16 was highly specific for EtxB5, we went on to examine its specificity using Western blotting (Fig. 2b). In non-reducing conditions, LDS16 gave, as expected, a single band with EtxB5 running in its oligomeric configuration at 43 kDa (Fig. 2b, lane 2). After boiling in non-reducing conditions, LDS16 only detected a faint band in the pentameric form (incomplete dissociation, Fig. 2b, lane 1).

Concentration-dependent Inhibition of LDS16-EtxB5 Binding— As seen in the ELISA experiments described in the legend for Fig. 2, LDS16 binds strongly to both EtxB5 either bound directly to the plate or bound via GM1. We show in this experiment that free EtxB5 in solution will strongly inhibit LDS16 binding to EtxB5 on the plate but only to a plateau level in which ~70% of LDS16 binding is inhibited (Fig. 3a, panel i). Interestingly, the level of inhibition achieved by free EtxB5 when the plates are coated with GM1-EtxB5 is far less (~30%) (Fig. 3a, panel i), with a plateau level reached at ~2 µg/ml free EtxB5. As shown in Fig. 3b, LDS47 does show a faint band in Western blotting with boiled EtxB, possibly indicating the detection of the intermediate form of EtxB (see "Discussion"). In the ELISA experiment (Fig. 3a, panels i and ii), LDS47 does give a consistent signal with EtxB5 bound directly to plates, consistent with the Western blot (Fig. 3b). However, this binding is not inhibited by free EtxB5 (Fig. 3a, panels i and ii) in solution, consistent with the Western blot, which shows that LDS47 does not detect the pentameric form of EtxB (Fig. 3b). Consistent with Fig. 2a, LDS16 binds strongly to both directly coated EtxB5 and EtxB5 bound to GM1 (Fig. 3a, panel ii), but neither of these reactivities were inhibited by EtxB1, confirming the strong specificity shown by LDS16 to EtxB5 when compared with EtxB1.

Time-dependent Reassembly of EtxB5—To investigate the assembly of EtxB monomers to EtxB pentamers, we utilized the method described by Sixma et al. (12). Essentially, EtxB pentamers were exposed briefly to strong acidic conditions (pH 1.0-2.0), neutralized, and allowed to reassemble with or without the presence of inhibiting mAbs. Time-dependent reassembly was assessed using GM1-coated plates probed with LDS16. By plotting the level of EtxB5 obtained against time (Fig. 4a), it was possible to carry out one phase exponential association analysis. The half-rate of assembly either with or without the presence of LDS47 was similar (EtxB alone t1/2 = 9.416 min versus EtxB + LDS47 t1/2 = 10.82 min), and the rate of assembly was also comparable (EtxB alone {kappa} = 0.073 ± 0.008 min-1 versus EtxB + LDS47 {kappa} = 0.064 ± 0.025 min-1). The clear difference observed in the presence of LDS47 was in the maximum reassembly. In the absence of LDS47, 91.09% reassembly occurred by 60 min, whereas in the presence of LDS47, maximal reassembly reached only 38.12% (a 59% reduction). Importantly, this inhibition appeared irreversible (Fig. 4a). The inhibition of reassembly was also confirmed by Western blot analysis using LDS16 as a probe (Fig. 4b).

Inhibition of EtxB Reassembly—Using the same in vitro system of acid dissociation followed by neutralization, we studied the effects of the presence of various mAbs in the system. As can be seen from Fig. 5, reassembly following denaturation/neutralization gave almost 100% recovery of EtxB5 (lanes 1 and 2). In the presence of LDS47, renaturation was almost completely inhibited in the presence of either 1:1 or 2:1 molar ratios of EtxB to LDS47 (lanes 3 and 4). Other mAbs studied were LDS102, which has been shown to react to the C-terminal of EtxB13 (lane 5). This also gave partial inhibition of reassembly. A control mAb (LDS56) directed against an irrelevant bacterial antigen, CagA from Helicobacter pylori (20), had no effect on reassembly (lane 6).


Figure 3
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 3.
Concentration-dependent inhibition of LDS16-EtxB5 binding. a, panel i, plates were coated either directly with EtxB5 (B5c) or with GM1/EtxB5 (GM1c) and probed with LDS16 ({blacksquare} and {diamondsuit}) and LDS47 ({triangledown} and {triangleup}), and binding was inhibited by increasing concentrations of free EtxB5. a, panel ii, plates were coated either directly with EtxB5 (B5c) or with GM1/EtxB5 (GM1c) and probed with LDS16 ({blacksquare} and {diamondsuit}), LDS47 ({triangledown} and {triangleup}), and binding was inhibited by increasing concentrations of free EtxB1. b, Western blot analysis using LDS47 as a probe showed, as expected, only a strong single band in reducing conditions at 12 kDa (lane 1), but with boiled EtxB5, a 25-kDa band was also detected in addition to the expected 12-kDa monomer band (lane 2).

 


Figure 4
View larger version (53K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 4.
Time-dependent reassembly of EtxB5. a, following disassociation in 0.1 M KCl/HCL, pH 1, EtxB5 was allowed to reassociate by neutralization using McIlvaine buffer. Inhibition by LDS47 was determined by ELISA using GM1-coated plates probed with LDS16. b, to visualize reassembly, individual samples were taken at each time point and probed with LDS16 using Western blotting. It should be noted that a consistent band appears in the lower blot due to the presence of the LDS47 antibody. EtxB5 alone and LDS47 alone are included as controls.

 


Figure 5
View larger version (8K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 5.
Inhibition of EtxB reassembly. Following disassociation in 0.1 M KCl/HCL, pH 1, for 20 s, EtxB5 was allowed to reassociate by neutralization using McIlvaine buffer and left at room temperature for 1 h. Inhibition of reassembly in the presence of various antibodies was assessed by the GM1 capture ELISA system using LDS16 as a probe. Lane 1, EtxB alone untreated; lane 2, EtxB alone acid-treated and immediately neutralized (acid/neut); lane 3, acid/neut EtxB + LDS47 (1:1 molar ratio); lane 4, acid/neut EtxB + LDS47 (2:1 molar ratio); lane 5, acid/neut EtxB + LDS102 (1:1 molar ratio); lane 6, acid/neut EtxB + LDS56 (1:1 molar ratio); lane 7, EtxB alone, acid-treated but not neutralized.

 
Concentration-dependent Inhibition of EtxB Reassembly— The in vitro reassembly model was also used to determine the dose-response relationship between the concentration of LDS47 and the percentage reassembly of EtxB5. As can be seen from the sigmoid dose-response curve (Fig. 6) at a molar ratio of 1:1 (IC50 equals 0.345 µM ± 0.005 (R2 = 0.999)), 50% of reassembly was inhibited, and 90% inhibition was obtained at a molar ratio of 2:1 (Fig. 6).


Figure 6
View larger version (8K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 6.
Concentration-dependent inhibition of EtxB reassembly. Following disassociation in 0.1 M KCl/HCL, pH 1, for 20 s, EtxB5 was allowed to reassociate by neutralization using McIlvaine buffer and left at room temperature for 1 h. Inhibition of reassembly in the presence of increasing concentrations of LDS47 was assessed by the GM1 capture ELISA system using LDS16 as a probe.

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
At the present time, it is difficult to study the details of EtxB5 assembly and transport to the periplasm in vivo and, for this reason, many studies on EtxB assembly have been carried out in vitro (23, 24). A model has been put forward by Lesieur et al. (25), which suggests that in vitro (in the case of cholera toxin), following disassembly and neutralization, dimers, trimers, and tetramers can be reassembled in a mixture and that the concentrations of these decline with time, consistent with their assembly into pentamers. We have previously described and characterized a mAb (LDS47) that recognized the monomeric form of the B-subunit of E. coli heat-labile enterotoxin, which failed to recognize or precipitate the native B-subunit pentamer. In this study, we have gone on to use LDS47 with a newly described mAb LDS16 that has the converse reactivity (in that it has high specificity for pentameric EtxB but fails to bind monomeric EtxB) to directly study pentameric EtxB assembly in vitro. Previously, a lack of suitable reagents for studying toxin biogenesis has made this approach difficult. For instance, polyclonal antitoxin antisera generally have mixed specificities, and other anti-EtxB-specific mAbs recognize both pentamers and denatured subunits (26).

To fully characterize the specificities of LDS16 and LDS47, we carried out a series of ELISAs and Western blots. It can be clearly seen in the ELISA experiment shown in Fig. 2a that LDS16 will bind to EtxB5 either in its native form or when bound to GM1. Interestingly, preincubation of EtxB5 with LDS16 before binding to GM1-coated plates completely blocked EtxB5 binding (Fig. 2a, lane 6). This could be due to the mAb interfering with the GM1 binding site but is more likely to be the result of steric interference by the relatively large antibody molecules in an antigen/antibody complex.

The other surprising outcome of this experiment was that boiled EtxB (monomers) gave a small signal with LDS16 when added to GM1-coated plates. Given that on Western blot (Fig. 2b), LDS16 does detect a faint band with boiled EtxB in the pentameric position (43 kDa), it is likely that the high affinity of GM1 for EtxB5 allows the capture of incompletely disassociated EtxB (or reassociated EtxB5) and subsequent detection by the EtxB5-specific mAb.

It was possible to study the kinetics of binding of LDS16 to EtxB5 using ELISA (Fig. 3). By using Scatchard analysis, we determined that at a level of 0.3 µg/ml (or greater) free EtxB5, saturation binding occurred, blocking any further binding of LDS16 to EtxB5 (Fig. 3a, panel i). Neutralization of LDS16 binding to EtxB5 bound to GM1 was 6-fold less efficient (Fig. 3a, panel ii), indicating that the binding site of LDS16 is more effectively formed when EtxB5 is bound to GM1. As can be seen in Fig. 3a, panels i and ii, free EtxB1 does not inhibit binding of LDS16 to EtxB5, again demonstrating the tight specificity of this mAb to the pentameric structure. These experiments as a whole demonstrate the potential of the LDS16 binding site as being a key region for monitoring complete pentameric assembly.

In these experiments, we also looked at the kinetic behavior of LDS47, which we described in detail in an earlier publication (1). Although we have demonstrated the unique specificity or LDS47 toward EtxB1, there is always a small signal obtained against EtxB5 coated directly to plastic (Fig. 3 a, panel i) but never to EtxB5 coated via GM1 (Fig. 3a, panel ii). We previously interpreted this as being due to partial unfolding of EtxB5 on the plastic surface exposing the LDS47 binding site, but more sensitive blotting methods now available show that LDS47 can also recognize an intermediate form of EtxB5 (Fig. 3b) (with a molecular mass of ~25 kDa). The formation of such intermediates was previously hypothesized by us when analyzing models for CtxB assembly (25). Thus the signal obtained from LDS47 reacting with directly coated EtxB5 is more likely to be the result of recognition of an EtxB intermediate form than recognition of monomers per se.

In our previous analysis of LDS47, we concluded that the epitope recognized by LDS47 needed to adopt a secondary structure and that amino acid residues, such as 6, 7, and 10, which are exposed in both the monomer and the dimer, are essential for multimer formation (1). Here we clearly show (using the in vitro model of reassembly) that indeed, the LDS47 binding site is essential for pentamerization (Fig. 4). This goes to emphasize the importance of this mAb not only in the study of possible EtxB chaperones involved in assembly but also in the processes involved in assembly itself.

To confirm that the in vitro system of reassembly was not non-specifically affected by the presence of a mAb, we used an irrelevant control (LDS56), which had no effect on reassembly (Fig. 5, lane 6). This figure also shows that another mAb we have prepared against the C-terminal region of EtxB (LDS102) will also inhibit pentamer formation but only partially (Fig. 5, lane 5). This confirms that the inhibition of reassembly seen with LDS47 is not a result of steric hindrance per se but is a direct result of interference with the crucial N-terminal APQSITELCS assembly sequence.

Finally, we studied the kinetics of EtxB reassembly in the presence of LDS47 (Fig. 6). Here we show that there is a classic dose-response relationship between the concentration of LDS47 and the rate of pentamer formation, again emphasizing the crucial nature of the LDS47 binding site.

In conclusion, we have extended our previous studies of the role of the EtxB binding site defined by LDS47. We now show that the epitope recognized by this mAb (amino acids 1-10) plays a crucial and essential role in EtxB pentamerization. These studies can therefore form the basis of further work involved not only in determining how such a stable pentameric structure such as EtxB is assembled but also in the design of biologics that would interfere with its production, thus having applications in therapeutics against these important diarrheal diseases.


   FOOTNOTES
 
* The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact. Back

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 44-116-223-1406; Fax: 44-116-252-5030; E-mail: rj1{at}leicester.ac.uk.

2 The abbreviations used are: Etx, heat-labile enterotoxin; EtxB5, heat-labile enterotoxin B subunit pentamer; EtxB1, heat-labile enterotoxin B subunit monomer; Ctx, cholera toxin; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; GM1, monoganglioside-GM1 (Galbeta-3GalNacbeta1-(neu5Ac{alpha}2-3)-4Galbeta1-4Glcbeta1-cer); mAb, monoclonal antibody; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline. Back

3 T. R. Hirst and R. F. L. James, unpublished data. Back


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank Professor N. Williams (University of Bristol, UK) for advice in preparation of the manuscript.



   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Amin, T., Larkins, A., James, R. F. L., and Hirst, T. R. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 20143-20150[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Hirst, T. R. (1995) Bacterial Toxins and Virulence Factors in Disease: Handbook of Natural Toxins (Moss, J., Vaughan, M., Iglewski, B., and Tu, A.T., eds) Vol. 8, pp. 123-184, Marcel Dekker Inc., New York
  3. Echeverria, P., Seriwarana, J., Taylor, D. X., Yanggratoke, S., and Tirapat, C. (1985) Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 34, 547-554[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. DeMol, P., Brasseur, D., Hemelhof, W., Kalala, T., Butzler, J. P., and Vis, H. L. (1983) Lancet i, 516-18
  5. Evans, D. G., Olarte, J., Dupont, H. L., Evans, D. J., Jr., Galindo, E., Portnoy, B. L., and Conklin, R. H. (1977) J. Pediatr. 91, 65-68[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Spangler, B. D. (1992) Microbiol. Rev. 56, 622-647[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Merritt, E. A., and Hol, W. G. J. (1995) Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 5, 165-171[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  8. Holmgren, J., Lonnroth, I., Mansson, J., and Svennerholm, L. (1975) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 72, 2520-2524[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Fishman, P. H., Moss, J., and Osborne, J. C., Jr. (1978) Biochemistry 17, 711-716[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  10. Fishman, P. H., Pacuszka, T., Hom, B., and Moss, J. (1980) J. Biol. Chem. 255, 7657-7664[Free Full Text]
  11. Yamamoto, T., Gojobori, T., and Yokota, T. (1987) J. Bacteriol. 169, 1352-1357[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Sixma, T., Kalk, K. H., van Zanten, B. A., Dauter, Z., Kingma, J., Witholt, B., and Hol, W. G. (1993) J. Mol. Biol. 230, 890-918[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  13. Sixma, T., Pronk, S. E., Kalk, K. H., Wartna, E. S., van Zanten, B. A. M., Witholt, B., and Hol, W. G. J. (1991) Nature 351, 371-377[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  14. Hol, W. G. J., Sixma, T. K., and Merritt, E. A. (1995) in Bacterial Toxins and Virulence Factors in Disease: Handbook of Natural Toxins (Moss, J., Vaughan, M., Iglewski, B., and Tu, A.T., eds) pp. 185-223, Marcel Dekker Inc., New York
  15. Kuziemko, G. M., Stroh, M., and Stevens, R. C. (1996) Biochemistry 35, 6375-6384[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  16. Hardy, S. J., Holmgren, J., Johansson, S., Sanchez, J., and Hirst, T. R. (1988) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 85, 7109-7113[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Finkelstein, R. A., Boesman, M., Neoh, S. H., LaRue, M. K., and Delaney, R. (1974) J. Immunol. 113, 145-150[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Kohler, G., and Milstein, C. (1975) Nature 256, 495-497[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  19. Amin, T., and Hirst, T. R. (1994) Protein Expression Purif. 5, 198-204[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  20. Stephens, J.C., Larkins, A., James, R. F., and Rathbone, B. J. (1996) J. Immunol. Methods 190, 163-169[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  21. Merritt, E. A., Sarfaty, S., Jobling, M. G., Chang, T., Holmes, R. K., Hirst, T. R., and Hol, W. G. (1997) Protein Sci. 6, 1516-1528[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  22. Guex, N., and Peitsch, M.C. (1997) Electrophoresis 18, 2714-2723[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  23. Ruddock, L. W., Coen, J. J. F., Cheesman, C., Freedman, R. B., and Hirst, T. R. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 19118-19123[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Cheesman, C., Ruddock, L. W., and Freedman, R. B. (2004) Biochemistry 43, 1609-1617[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  25. Lesieur, C. Cliff, M. J., Carter, R., James, R. F. L., Clarke, A. R., and Hirst, T. R. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 16697-16704[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Sandkvist, M., Hirst, T.R., and Bagdasarian, M. (1990) J. Biol. Chem. 265, 15239-15244[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
281/51/39465    most recent
M606038200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chung, W. Y.
Right arrow Articles by James, R. F. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chung, W. Y.
Right arrow Articles by James, R. F. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 All ASBMB Journals   Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 
 Journal of Lipid Research   ASBMB Today 
Copyright © 2006 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
Advertisement
spacer
Advertisement
Advertisement