Abstract
E. coli GroEL is a member of ATP-dependent chaperonin family and is involved in proper folding of cytosolic bacterial proteins. The E. coli GroEL contains 14 identical subunits of ~58.3 kD and arranged as two stalked rings. In current study, we have determined the X-ray structure of E. coli GroEL at 3.2-A resolution. The GroEL protein was coexpressed during recombinant M. tuberculosis DprE1 protein expression in E. coli and was co-purified with DprE1. The GroEL-DprE1 complex was crystallized and x-ray structure analysis yielded electron density for only GroEL protein only and no density for DrpE1 protein. Comparison of our GroEL structure with previous wild type GroEL (PDB-1XCK), DM-GroEL-(ATP)14 (PDB-1KP8) and GroEL- GroES-(ADP)7 (PDB-1PF9) structures have yielded the differences in (i) interactions between heptameric rings involved in allosteric signaling (ii) interactions within heptameric ring, (iii) H and I helices of apical domain involved in substrate binding and (iv) residues involved in signaling route. These results indicate that our GroEL structure may be in different state, which occurred during protein folding cycle after unloading the substrate and ADP.
Highlights
The GroEL protein is a member of ATP-dependent chaperonin family and promotes protein folding together with GroES protein [1]
Structural comparison analysis has shown significant differences in inter and intra heptameric rings contacts of GroEL protein, in H and I helices of apical domain involved in substrate binding and in residues involved in signaling route
These data suggest that our GroEL structure has occurred in different stage of protein folding cycle, when substrate and ADP is unloaded during crystallization experiment
Summary
The GroEL protein is a member of ATP-dependent chaperonin family and promotes protein folding together with GroES protein [1]. The intermediate domain of GroEL links apical domain to equatorial domain and flanked by hinge region This hinge region allows the movement of polypeptide in response to ATP and GroES binding [2,3,4]. Structural comparison analysis has shown significant differences in inter and intra heptameric rings contacts of GroEL protein, in H and I helices of apical domain involved in substrate binding and in residues involved in signaling route. These data suggest that our GroEL structure has occurred in different stage of protein folding cycle, when substrate and ADP is unloaded during crystallization experiment
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
