 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Contents |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Residue conservation analysis
|
|
|
|
|
PDB id:
|
 |
|
 |
| Name: |
 |
Chaperone
|
 |
|
Title:
|
 |
Gp31 co-chaperonin from bacteriophage t4
|
|
Structure:
|
 |
Gp31. Chain: a, b, c, d, e, f, g. Engineered: yes
|
|
Source:
|
 |
Enterobacteria phage t4. Organism_taxid: 10665. Organ: brain. Cellular_location: cytoplasm. Gene: 31. Expressed in: escherichia coli. Expression_system_taxid: 562.
|
|
Biol. unit:
|
 |
Heptamer (from PDB file)
|
|
Resolution:
|
 |
|
2.30Å
|
R-factor:
|
0.225
|
R-free:
|
0.254
|
|
|
Authors:
|
 |
J.F.Hunt,S.M.Van Der Vies,L.Henry,J.Deisenhofer
|
Key ref:
|
 |
J.F.Hunt
et al.
(1997).
Structural adaptations in the specialized bacteriophage T4 co-chaperonin Gp31 expand the size of the Anfinsen cage.
Cell,
90,
361-371.
PubMed id:
DOI:
|
 |
|
Date:
|
 |
|
27-Mar-98
|
Release date:
|
26-Aug-98
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROCHECK
|
|
|
|
|
Headers
|
 |
|
|
References
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P17313
(VG31_BPT4) -
Capsid assembly protein Gp31
|
|
|
|
Seq: Struc:
|
 |
 |
 |
111 a.a.
107 a.a.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
Key: |
 |
PfamA domain |
 |
 |
 |
Secondary structure |
 |
 |
CATH domain |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
Gene Ontology (GO) functional annotation
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
Cellular component
|
cytoplasm
|
1 term
|
 |
|
Biological process
|
viral capsid assembly
|
2 terms
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
DOI no:
|
Cell
90:361-371
(1997)
|
|
PubMed id:
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Structural adaptations in the specialized bacteriophage T4 co-chaperonin Gp31 expand the size of the Anfinsen cage.
|
|
J.F.Hunt,
S.M.van der Vies,
L.Henry,
J.Deisenhofer.
|
|
|
|
| |
ABSTRACT
|
|
|
| |
|
The Gp31 protein from bacteriophage T4 functionally substitutes for the
bacterial co-chaperonin GroES in assisted protein folding reactions both in
vitro and in vivo. But Gp31 is required for the folding and/or assembly of the
T4 major capsid protein Gp23, and this requirement cannot be satisfied by GroES.
The 2.3 A crystal structure of Gp31 shows that its tertiary and quaternary
structures are similar to those of GroES despite the existence of only 14%
sequence identity between the two proteins. However, Gp31 shows a series of
structural adaptations which will increase the size and the hydrophilicity of
the "Anfinsen cage," the enclosed cavity within the GroEL/GroES
complex that is the location of the chaperonin-assisted protein folding reaction.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Selected figure(s)
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Figure 1.
Figure 1. Electron Density Maps(A) Electron density map
([29]) obtained by iterative solvent flattening (without NCS
averaging) starting with the initial molecular replacement
phases. The backbone trace of the molecular replacement search
model is shown in yellow. There is a single Gp31 heptamer in the
crystallographic asymmetric unit.(B) The SIGMA-A ([49]) weighted
(2F[o]-F[c]) map from the refined model. The phosphate zipper
holding together the mobile loop cage is shown in a view looking
down the 7-fold symmetry axis. The crystallographic 2-fold axis
runs parallel to the plane of the page. The electron density for
the phosphate anions is highlighted in red.
|
 |
Figure 2.
Figure 2. The Structure of Gp31(A) Crystallographically
observed secondary structure in Gp31 and structural alignment of
Gp31 with GroES. Red indicates β-strands, blue indicates
α-helices, and green indicates 3[10]-helices. The Greek letters
indicate β-turn classification ([66]). The shaded boxes
delineate the 58 residues of the shared structural core in Gp31
and GroES. The underlined sequences represent the dynamically
disordered residues of the mobile loop as observed by NMR ( [36
and 37]). The residues in Gp31 making van der Waals contacts in
the hydrophobic core of the β-barrel are indicated by
asterisks, and the location of the turn in the GroEL-bound
conformation of the mobile loop is indicated by “t” ( [37]).
Vertical boxes indicate positions where identical residues occur
in the β-barrel domain of quinoneoxidoreductase which shares
the same fold as Gp31/GroES ([44]). The numbers at the bottom
refer to the sequence of Gp31.(B) Stereo pair ([34 and 43])
showing the Cα trace of the Gp31 and GroES monomers after
least-squares alignment of the structural core. Gp31 is shown in
light green, except for the mobile loop which is shown in
yellow, and GroES is shown in dark purple. The side-chain of
Gln75 is shown for Gp31, while the side-chain of Tyr71 is shown
for GroES.(C) Two orthogonal views of the Gp31 and GroES
heptamers (with color coding as in [B]); the single well-ordered
copy of the mobile loop observed in the crystal structure GroES
heptamer is also shown in yellow.
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
The above figures are
reprinted
by permission from Cell Press:
Cell
(1997,
90,
361-371)
copyright 1997.
|
|
| |
Figures were
selected
by an automated process.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Literature references that cite this PDB file's key reference
|
|
 |
| |
PubMed id
|
 |
Reference
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
C.Weiss,
A.Bonshtien,
O.Farchi-Pisanty,
A.Vitlin,
and
A.Azem
(2009).
Cpn20: Siamese twins of the chaperonin world.
|
| |
Plant Mol Biol, 69,
227-238.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
D.K.Clare,
P.J.Bakkes,
H.van Heerikhuizen,
S.M.van der Vies,
and
H.R.Saibil
(2009).
Chaperonin complex with a newly folded protein encapsulated in the folding chamber.
|
| |
Nature, 457,
107-110.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
A.L.Horwich,
W.A.Fenton,
E.Chapman,
and
G.W.Farr
(2007).
Two families of chaperonin: physiology and mechanism.
|
| |
Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol, 23,
115-145.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
G.Stan,
B.R.Brooks,
G.H.Lorimer,
and
D.Thirumalai
(2006).
Residues in substrate proteins that interact with GroEL in the capture process are buried in the native state.
|
| |
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 103,
4433-4438.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Y.C.Tang,
H.C.Chang,
A.Roeben,
D.Wischnewski,
N.Wischnewski,
M.J.Kerner,
F.U.Hartl,
and
M.Hayer-Hartl
(2006).
Structural features of the GroEL-GroES nano-cage required for rapid folding of encapsulated protein.
|
| |
Cell, 125,
903-914.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
B.Pierce,
W.Tong,
and
Z.Weng
(2005).
M-ZDOCK: a grid-based approach for Cn symmetric multimer docking.
|
| |
Bioinformatics, 21,
1472-1478.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
E.van Duijn,
P.J.Bakkes,
R.M.Heeren,
R.H.van den Heuvel,
H.van Heerikhuizen,
S.M.van der Vies,
and
A.J.Heck
(2005).
Monitoring macromolecular complexes involved in the chaperonin-assisted protein folding cycle by mass spectrometry.
|
| |
Nat Methods, 2,
371-376.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
F.Arisaka
(2005).
Assembly and infection process of bacteriophage T4.
|
| |
Chaos, 15,
047502.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
M.Morange
(2005).
What history tells us II. The discovery of chaperone function.
|
| |
J Biosci, 30,
461-464.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
N.Numoto,
A.Kita,
and
K.Miki
(2005).
Crystal structure of the Co-chaperonin Cpn10 from Thermus thermophilus HB8.
|
| |
Proteins, 58,
498-500.
|
 |
|
PDB code:
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
P.J.Bakkes,
B.W.Faber,
H.van Heerikhuizen,
and
S.M.van der Vies
(2005).
The T4-encoded cochaperonin, gp31, has unique properties that explain its requirement for the folding of the T4 major capsid protein.
|
| |
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 102,
8144-8149.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
F.Shewmaker,
M.J.Kerner,
M.Hayer-Hartl,
G.Klein,
C.Georgopoulos,
and
S.J.Landry
(2004).
A mobile loop order-disorder transition modulates the speed of chaperonin cycling.
|
| |
Protein Sci, 13,
2139-2148.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
G.Fossati,
P.Cremonesi,
G.Izzo,
E.Rizzi,
G.Sandrone,
S.Harding,
N.Errington,
C.Walters,
B.Henderson,
M.M.Roberts,
A.R.Coates,
and
P.Mascagni
(2004).
The Mycobacterium tuberculosis chaperonin 10 monomer exhibits structural plasticity.
|
| |
Biopolymers, 75,
148-162.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
R.H.Lilien,
C.Bailey-Kellogg,
A.C.Anderson,
and
B.R.Donald
(2004).
A subgroup algorithm to identify cross-rotation peaks consistent with non-crystallographic symmetry.
|
| |
Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr, 60,
1057-1067.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
V.V.Mesyanzhinov,
P.G.Leiman,
V.A.Kostyuchenko,
L.P.Kurochkina,
K.A.Miroshnikov,
N.N.Sykilinda,
and
M.M.Shneider
(2004).
Molecular architecture of bacteriophage T4.
|
| |
Biochemistry (Mosc), 69,
1190-1202.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
E.S.Miller,
E.Kutter,
G.Mosig,
F.Arisaka,
T.Kunisawa,
and
W.Rüger
(2003).
Bacteriophage T4 genome.
|
| |
Microbiol Mol Biol Rev, 67,
86.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
J.J.Guidry,
F.Shewmaker,
K.Maskos,
S.Landry,
and
P.Wittung-Stafshede
(2003).
Probing the interface in a human co-chaperonin heptamer: residues disrupting oligomeric unfolded state identified.
|
| |
BMC Biochem, 4,
14.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
B.Taneja,
and
S.C.Mande
(2002).
Structure of Mycobacterium tuberculosis chaperonin-10 at 3.5 A resolution.
|
| |
Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr, 58,
260-266.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
F.Keppel,
M.Rychner,
and
C.Georgopoulos
(2002).
Bacteriophage-encoded cochaperonins can substitute for Escherichia coli's essential GroES protein.
|
| |
EMBO Rep, 3,
893-898.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
J.D.Wang,
C.Herman,
K.A.Tipton,
C.A.Gross,
and
J.S.Weissman
(2002).
Directed evolution of substrate-optimized GroEL/S chaperonins.
|
| |
Cell, 111,
1027-1039.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
G.Klein,
and
C.Georgopoulos
(2001).
Identification of important amino acid residues that modulate binding of Escherichia coli GroEL to its various cochaperones.
|
| |
Genetics, 158,
507-517.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
D.Ang,
F.Keppel,
G.Klein,
A.Richardson,
and
C.Georgopoulos
(2000).
Genetic analysis of bacteriophage-encoded cochaperonins.
|
| |
Annu Rev Genet, 34,
439-456.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
A.Richardson,
and
C.Georgopoulos
(1999).
Genetic analysis of the bacteriophage T4-encoded cochaperonin Gp31.
|
| |
Genetics, 152,
1449-1457.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
A.Richardson,
S.M.van der Vies,
F.Keppel,
A.Taher,
S.J.Landry,
and
C.Georgopoulos
(1999).
Compensatory changes in GroEL/Gp31 affinity as a mechanism for allele-specific genetic interaction.
|
| |
J Biol Chem, 274,
52-58.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
C.Sakikawa,
H.Taguchi,
Y.Makino,
and
M.Yoshida
(1999).
On the maximum size of proteins to stay and fold in the cavity of GroEL underneath GroES.
|
| |
J Biol Chem, 274,
21251-21256.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
K.Mukherjee,
H.Nagai,
N.Shimamoto,
and
D.Chatterji
(1999).
GroEL is involved in activation of Escherichia coli RNA polymerase devoid of the omega subunit in vivo.
|
| |
Eur J Biochem, 266,
228-235.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
L.Liljas
(1999).
Virus assembly.
|
| |
Curr Opin Struct Biol, 9,
129-134.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
M.M.Roberts,
A.R.Coker,
G.Fossati,
P.Mascagni,
A.R.Coates,
and
S.P.Wood
(1999).
Crystallization, x-ray diffraction and preliminary structure analysis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis chaperonin 10.
|
| |
Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr, 55,
910-914.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
A.Horovitz
(1998).
Structural aspects of GroEL function.
|
| |
Curr Opin Struct Biol, 8,
93.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
A.Richardson,
S.J.Landry,
and
C.Georgopoulos
(1998).
The ins and outs of a molecular chaperone machine.
|
| |
Trends Biochem Sci, 23,
138-143.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
B.Bukau,
and
A.L.Horwich
(1998).
The Hsp70 and Hsp60 chaperone machines.
|
| |
Cell, 92,
351-366.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
C.Herman,
and
R.D'Ari
(1998).
Proteolysis and chaperones: the destruction/reconstruction dilemma.
|
| |
Curr Opin Microbiol, 1,
204-209.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
J.D.Andreadis,
and
L.W.Black
(1998).
Substrate mutations that bypass a specific Cpn10 chaperonin requirement for protein folding.
|
| |
J Biol Chem, 273,
34075-34086.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
P.B.Sigler,
Z.Xu,
H.S.Rye,
S.G.Burston,
W.A.Fenton,
and
A.L.Horwich
(1998).
Structure and function in GroEL-mediated protein folding.
|
| |
Annu Rev Biochem, 67,
581-608.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
R.Jaenicke
(1998).
Protein self-organization in vitro and in vivo: partitioning between physical biochemistry and cell biology.
|
| |
Biol Chem, 379,
237-243.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
W.J.Netzer,
and
F.U.Hartl
(1998).
Protein folding in the cytosol: chaperonin-dependent and -independent mechanisms.
|
| |
Trends Biochem Sci, 23,
68-73.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Y.Dubaquié,
R.Looser,
U.Fünfschilling,
P.Jenö,
and
S.Rospert
(1998).
Identification of in vivo substrates of the yeast mitochondrial chaperonins reveals overlapping but non-identical requirement for hsp60 and hsp10.
|
| |
EMBO J, 17,
5868-5876.
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
The most recent references are shown first.
Citation data come partly from CiteXplore and partly
from an automated harvesting procedure. Note that this is likely to be
only a partial list as not all journals are covered by
either method. However, we are continually building up the citation data
so more and more references will be included with time.
Where a reference describes a PDB structure, the PDB
code is
shown on the right.
|
|