Abstract

The transmembrane domain that connects the extracellular and intracellular domains of cell-surface receptors must play a critical role in signal transduction. Here, we report studies of the interaction between the transmembrane helices (TM1 and TM2) of the Escherichia coli aspartate chemoreceptor (Tar). Tar exists as a homodimer regardless of its state of ligand occupancy. A particular residue substitution in TM1 (A19K) abolishes the signaling ability of Tar. This signaling defect can be suppressed by single residue substitutions in TM2 (W192R, A198E, V201E, and V202L). We have found that these suppressors can be divided into two groups. A198E and V201E (class 1) almost completely suppress the defects caused by A19K, and this suppression occurs between two subunits of the Tar dimer. In contrast, W192R and V202L (class 2) fail to suppress some signaling defects, and their suppression does not occur between subunits. Because disulfide-crosslinking studies predict that residues 198 and 201 point toward residue 19 of the partner subunit, we propose that the class 1 suppressors form an intersubunit salt bridge with Lys-19. Indeed, A19K was suppressed by several additional aspartate or glutamate substitutions on the same face of TM2 occupied by residues 198 and 201. None of these intersubunit salt bridges perturb signaling function, suggesting that the mechanism of transmembrane signal propagation does not involve large displacements (such as extensive rotation) of the TM1 and TM2 helices relative to each other.

Highlights

  • Cell-surface receptors detect extracellular signals and convert them into intracellular signals

  • Binding of ligands to the Escherichia coli aspartate chemoreceptor (Tar) is thought to trigger a conformational change within the receptor dimer, which must include some displacement of the TM domains with respect to each other

  • In MSAmaltose (MSA-Mal), cells expressing TarA19K1⁄7W192R or V202L did not swarm well, whereas the swarms made by cells expressing Tar-A19K1⁄7A198E or V201E were comparable with those of cells expressing wild-type Tar

Read more

Summary

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

Bacterial Strains and Plasmids—All strains used in this study are derivatives of Escherichia coli K-12. A pBR322-based plasmid, pAK101, carries the wild-type tar gene [20]. Cells expressing wild-type or mutant Tar proteins were grown, harvested, and washed as described above. A chemoeffector was added to cells suspended in motility medium, and the suspension was incubated at room temperature for 30 min. Wild-type and mutant Tar receptors were expressed in KO607, which lacks Tar and the related chemoreceptors Tsr, Trg, and Tap. Swarming ability was examined in MSA containing 0.1 mM aspartate (Asp) or 0.1 mM maltose (Mal). In temporal-stimulation assays, cells expressing any receptor other than Tar-A19K responded to aspartate (Asp), maltose (Mal), and glycerol (Glyc). Significant (ϩ), weak (Ϯ), or no (Ϫ) adaptation was observed

Wild type ϩ
RESULTS
Transmembrane Helices of the Aspartate Receptor
DISCUSSION
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call