Mechanisms Involved in the Functional Divergence of Duplicated GroEL Chaperonins in DK1622

English version České info

The gene encoding the GroEL chaperonin is duplicated in nearly 30% of bacterial genomes; and although duplicated groEL genes have been comprehensively determined to have distinct physiological functions in different species, the mechanisms involved have not been characterized to date. Myxococcus xanthus DK1622 has two copies of the groEL gene, each of which can be deleted without affecting cell viability; however, the deletion of either gene does result in distinct defects in the cellular heat-shock response, predation, and development. In this study, we show that, from the expression levels of different groELs, the distinct functions of groEL1 and groEL2 in predation and development are probably the result of the substrate selectivity of the paralogous GroEL chaperonins, whereas the lethal effect of heat shock due to the deletion of groEL1 is caused by a decrease in the total groEL expression level. Following a bioinformatics analysis of the composition characteristics of GroELs from different bacteria, we performed region-swapping assays in M. xanthus, demonstrating that the differences in the apical and the C-terminal equatorial regions determine the substrate specificity of the two GroELs. Site-directed mutagenesis experiments indicated that the GGM repeat sequence at the C-terminus of GroEL1 plays an important role in functional divergence. Divergent functions of duplicated GroELs, which have similar patterns of variation in different bacterial species, have thus evolved mainly via alteration of the apical and the C-terminal equatorial regions. We identified the specific substrates of strain DK1622's GroEL1 and GroEL2 using immunoprecipitation and mass spectrometry techniques. Although 68 proteins bound to both GroEL1 and GroEL2, 83 and 46 proteins bound exclusively to GroEL1 or GroEL2, respectively. The GroEL-specific substrates exhibited distinct molecular sizes and secondary structures, providing an encouraging indication for GroEL evolution for functional divergence.

Vyšlo v časopise: Mechanisms Involved in the Functional Divergence of Duplicated GroEL Chaperonins in DK1622. PLoS Genet 9(2): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1003306
Kategorie: Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1003306

Souhrn

Zdroje

1. LundPA (2009) Multiple chaperonins in bacteria—why so many? FEMS Microbiol Rev 33: 785–800.

2. LundPA (2001) Microbial molecular chaperones. Adv Microb Physiol 44: 93–140.

3. RansonNA, WhiteHE, SaibilHR (1998) Chaperonins. Biochem J 333 (Pt 2) 233–242.

4. RadfordSE (2006) GroEL: More than Just a folding cage. Cell 125: 831–833.

5. LinZ, RyeHS (2006) GroEL-mediated protein folding: making the impossible, possible. Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol 41: 211–239.

6. Bernal ZLHaRA (2012) Chaperonin-mediated folding of viral proteins. Adv Exp Med Biol 726: 307–324.

7. VanBogelenRA, ActonMA, NeidhardtFC (1987) Induction of the heat shock regulon does not produce thermotolerance in Escherichia coli. Genes Dev 1: 525–531.

8. FayetO, ZiegelhofferT, GeorgopoulosC (1989) The groES and groEL heat shock gene products of Escherichia coli are essential for bacterial growth at all temperatures. J Bacteriol 171: 1379–1385.

9. KernerMJ, NaylorDJ, IshihamaY, MaierT, ChangHC, et al. (2005) Proteome-wide analysis of chaperonin-dependent protein folding in Escherichia coli. Cell 122: 209–220.

10. GeorgeR, KellySM, PriceNC, ErbseA, FisherM, et al. (2004) Three GroEL homologues from Rhizobium leguminosarum have distinct in vitro properties. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 324: 822–828.

11. Rodriguez-QuinonesF, MaguireM, WallingtonEJ, GouldPS, YerkoV, et al. (2005) Two of the three groEL homologues in Rhizobium leguminosarum are dispensable for normal growth. Arch Microbiol 183: 253–265.

12. OjhaA, AnandM, BhattA, KremerL, JacobsWRJr, et al. (2005) GroEL1: a dedicated chaperone involved in mycolic acid biosynthesis during biofilm formation in mycobacteria. Cell 123: 861–873.

13. BittnerAN, FoltzA, OkeV (2007) Only one of five groEL genes is required for viability and successful symbiosis in Sinorhizobium meliloti. J Bacteriol 189: 1884–1889.

14. GouldPS, BurgarHR, LundPA (2007) Homologous cpn60 genes in Rhizobium leguminosarum are not functionally equivalent. Cell Stress Chaperones 12: 123–131.

15. LiJ, WangY, ZhangCY, ZhangWY, JiangDM, et al. (2010) Myxococcus xanthus viability depends on groEL supplied by either of two genes, but the paralogs have different functions during heat shock, predation, and development. J Bacteriol 192: 1875–1881.

16. Dworkin M, and Kaiser D. (1993) Myxobacteria II. American Society for Microbiology, Wshington, DC.

17. ShimketsLJ (1990) Social and developmental biology of the myxobacteria. Microbiol Rev 54: 473–501.

18. GoldmanBS, NiermanWC, KaiserD, SlaterSC, DurkinAS, et al. (2006) Evolution of sensory complexity recorded in a myxobacterial genome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103: 15200–15205.

19. OtaniM, TabataJ, UekiT, SanoK, InouyeS (2001) Heat-shock-induced proteins from Myxococcus xanthus. J Bacteriol 183: 6282–6287.

20. LynchM, ForceA (2000) The probability of duplicate gene preservation by subfunctionalization. Genetics 154: 459–473.

21. QianW, LiaoBY, ChangAY, ZhangJ (2010) Maintenance of duplicate genes and their functional redundancy by reduced expression. Trends Genet 26: 425–430.

22. HuY, HendersonB, LundPA, TormayP, AhmedMT, et al. (2008) A Mycobacterium tuberculosis mutant lacking the groEL homologue cpn60.1 is viable but fails to induce an inflammatory response in animal models of infection. Infect Immun 76: 1535–1546.

23. BarreiroC, Gonzalez-LavadoE, BrandS, TauchA, MartinJF (2005) Heat shock proteome analysis of wild-type Corynebacterium glutamicum ATCC 13032 and a spontaneous mutant lacking GroEL1, a dispensable chaperone. J Bacteriol 187: 884–889.

24. KimAI, GhoshP, AaronMA, BibbLA, JainS, et al. (2003) Mycobacteriophage Bxb1 integrates into the Mycobacterium smegmatis groEL1 gene. Mol Microbiol 50: 463–473.

25. KovacsE, van der ViesSM, GlatzA, TorokZ, VarvasovszkiV, et al. (2001) The chaperonins of Synechocystis PCC 6803 differ in heat inducibility and chaperone activity. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 289: 908–915.

26. SatoM, Nimura-MatsuneK, WatanabeS, ChibazakuraT, YoshikawaH (2007) Expression analysis of multiple dnaK genes in the cyanobacterium Synechococcus elongatus PCC 7942. J Bacteriol 189: 3751–3758.

27. SatoS, IkeuchiM, NakamotoH (2008) Expression and function of a groEL paralog in the thermophilic cyanobacterium Thermosynechococcus elongatus under heat and cold stress. FEBS Lett 582: 3389–3395.

28. BrocchieriL, KarlinS (2000) Conservation among HSP60 sequences in relation to structure, function, and evolution. Protein Sci 9: 476–486.

29. BridgerWA, WolodkoWT, HenningW, UptonC, MajumdarR, et al. (1987) The subunits of succinyl-coenzyme A synthetase–function and assembly. Biochem Soc Symp 54: 103–111.

30. DalzielK (1980) Isocitrate dehydrogenase and related oxidative decarboxylases. FEBS Lett 117Suppl: K45–55.

31. McBrideMJ, ZusmanDR (1993) FrzCD, a methyl-accepting taxis protein from Myxococcus xanthus, shows modulated methylation during fruiting body formation. J Bacteriol 175: 4936–4940.

32. VlamakisHC, KirbyJR, ZusmanDR (2004) The Che4 pathway of Myxococcus xanthus regulates type IV pilus-mediated motility. Mol Microbiol 52: 1799–1811.

33. WallD, KolenbranderPE, KaiserD (1999) The Myxococcus xanthus pilQ (sglA) gene encodes a secretin homolog required for type IV pilus biogenesis, social motility, and development. J Bacteriol 181: 24–33.

34. JakovljevicV, LeonardyS, HoppertM, Sogaard-AndersenL (2008) PilB and PilT are ATPases acting antagonistically in type IV pilus function in Myxococcus xanthus. J Bacteriol 190: 2411–2421.

35. ThomassonB, LinkJ, StassinopoulosAG, BurkeN, PlamannL, et al. (2002) MglA, a small GTPase, interacts with a tyrosine kinase to control type IV pili-mediated motility and development of Myxococcus xanthus. Mol Microbiol 46: 1399–1413.

36. NudlemanE, WallD, KaiserD (2006) Polar assembly of the type IV pilus secretin in Myxococcus xanthus. Mol Microbiol 60: 16–29.

37. OrengoCA, PearlFM, BrayJE, ToddAE, MartinAC, et al. (1999) The CATH Database provides insights into protein structure/function relationships. Nucleic Acids Res 27: 275–279.

38. HouryWA, FrishmanD, EckerskornC, LottspeichF, HartlFU (1999) Identification of in vivo substrates of the chaperonin GroEL. Nature 402: 147–154.

39. TyagiNK, FentonWA, HorwichAL (2009) GroEL/GroES cycling: ATP binds to an open ring before substrate protein favoring protein binding and production of the native state. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106: 20264–20269.

40. SkjaervenL, MugaA, ReuterN, MartinezA (2012) A dynamic model of long-range conformational adaptations triggered by nucleotide binding in GroEL-GroES. Proteins 80: 2333–2346.

41. TaguchiH (2005) Chaperonin GroEL meets the substrate protein as a “load” of the rings. J Biochem 137: 543–549.

42. KrishnaKA, RaoGV, RaoKR (2007) Chaperonin GroEL: structure and reaction cycle. Curr Protein Pept Sci 8: 418–425.

43. AzemA, KesselM, GoloubinoffP (1994) Characterization of a functional GroEL14(GroES7)2 chaperonin hetero-oligomer. Science 265: 653–656.

44. BraigK, OtwinowskiZ, HegdeR, BoisvertDC, JoachimiakA, et al. (1994) The crystal structure of the bacterial chaperonin GroEL at 2.8 A. Nature 371: 578–586.

45. TangYC, ChangHC, RoebenA, WischnewskiD, WischnewskiN, et al. (2006) Structural features of the GroEL-GroES nano-cage required for rapid folding of encapsulated protein. Cell 125: 903–914.

46. HouryWA (2001) Mechanism of substrate recognition by the chaperonin GroEL. Biochem Cell Biol 79: 569–577.

47. Ohno S (1970) Evolution by Gene Duplication. New York: Springer-Verlag.

48. ZhangJ (2003) Evolution by gene duplication: an update. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 18: 292–298.

49. GoyalK, QamraR, MandeSC (2006) Multiple gene duplication and rapid evolution in the groEL gene: functional implications. J Mol Evol 63: 781–787.

50. HeX, ZhangJ (2005) Rapid subfunctionalization accompanied by prolonged and substantial neofunctionalization in duplicate gene evolution. Genetics 169: 1157–1164.

51. KumarCM, KhareG, SrikanthCV, TyagiAK, SardesaiAA, et al. (2009) Facilitated oligomerization of mycobacterial GroEL: evidence for phosphorylation-mediated oligomerization. J Bacteriol 191: 6525–6538.

52. HodgkinJ, KaiserD (1977) Cell-to-cell stimulation of movement in nonmotile mutants of Myxococcus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 74: 2938–2942.

53. BodeHB, RingMW, SchwarG, KroppenstedtRM, KaiserD, et al. (2006) 3-Hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (CoA) synthase is involved in biosynthesis of isovaleryl-CoA in the myxobacterium Myxococcus xanthus during fruiting body formation. J Bacteriol 188: 6524–6528.

54. KroosL, KuspaA, KaiserD (1986) A global analysis of developmentally regulated genes in Myxococcus xanthus. Dev Biol 117: 252–266.

55. ThompsonJD, HigginsDG, GibsonTJ (1994) CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res 22: 4673–4680.

56. TamuraK, PetersonD, PetersonN, StecherG, NeiM, et al. (2011) MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Mol Biol Evol 28: 2731–2739.

57. ZhangZ, LiJ, ZhaoXQ, WangJ, WongGK, et al. (2006) KaKs_Calculator: calculating Ka and Ks through model selection and model averaging. Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics 4: 259–263.

58. NeiM, GojoboriT (1986) Simple methods for estimating the numbers of synonymous and nonsynonymous nucleotide substitutions. Mol Biol Evol 3: 418–426.

59. TzengYH, PanR, LiWH (2004) Comparison of three methods for estimating rates of synonymous and nonsynonymous nucleotide substitutions. Mol Biol Evol 21: 2290–2298.

60. EwaltKL, HendrickJP, HouryWA, HartlFU (1997) In vivo observation of polypeptide flux through the bacterial chaperonin system. Cell 90: 491–500.