Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Virology, May 2000, p. 4541-4548, Vol. 74, No. 10
0022-538X/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Identifying the Determinants in the Equatorial Domain of
Buchnera GroEL Implicated in Binding Potato
Leafroll Virus
Saskia A.
Hogenhout,1
Frank
van der Wilk,1
Martin
Verbeek,1
Rob W.
Goldbach,2 and
Johannes
F. J. M.
van den
Heuvel1,*
Plant Research International, 6700 AA
Wageningen,1 and Wageningen
University, 6709 PD Wageningen,2 The
Netherlands
Received 9 September 1999/Accepted 22 February 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
Luteoviruses avoid degradation in the hemolymph of their aphid
vector by interacting with a GroEL homolog from the aphid's primary
endosymbiotic bacterium (Buchnera sp.). Mutational
analysis of GroEL from the primary endosymbiont of Myzus
persicae (MpB GroEL) revealed that the amino acids mediating
binding of Potato leafroll virus (PLRV;
Luteoviridae) are located within residues 9 to 19 and 427 to 457 of the N-terminal and C-terminal regions, respectively, of the
discontinuous equatorial domain. Virus overlay assays with a series of
overlapping synthetic decameric peptides and their derivatives
demonstrated that R13, K15, L17, and R18 of the N-terminal region and
R441 and R445 of the C-terminal region of the equatorial domain of
GroEL are critical for PLRV binding. Replacement of R441 and R445 by
alanine in full-length MpB GroEL and in MpB GroEL deletion mutants
reduced but did not abolish PLRV binding. Alanine substitution of
either R13 or K15 eliminated the PLRV-binding capacity of the other and
those of L17 and R18. In the predicted tertiary structure of
GroEL, the determinants mediating virus binding are juxtaposed in the
equatorial plain.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Potato leafroll
virus (PLRV; Luteoviridae), a positive-stranded
RNA virus, mainly replicates in the phloem tissue of its plant hosts
and is transmitted by aphids in a persistent and circulative manner
(29, 33). Based on ultrastructural studies of luteoviruses in vector and nonvector aphids, it has been postulated that virions are
transcellularly transported through epithelial-cell linings in the gut
and salivary gland (12). The hemolymph of an aphid acts as a
reservoir in which acquired virus particles are retained in an
infective form without replication for the life span of the aphid. A
GroEL homolog synthesized by the primary bacterial endosymbiont
(Buchnera sp.) of aphids is abundantly present in the
hemolymph and plays a crucial role in determining the persistent nature
of luteoviruses in the aphid's body fluid (32, 34). GroEL
homologs are highly conserved and belong to the chaperonin-60 family of
proteins, which are generally involved in the intracellular folding and
assembly of nonnative proteins in an ATP-dependent manner
(9). Crystallography of Escherichia coli GroEL
has demonstrated that the protein forms a cylinder-shaped homooligomer
of 14 subunits arranged in two heptameric rings stacked back to back.
Buchnera GroEL 14-mers have been immunodetected in the
hemolymph of aphids (32). In vitro ligand assays have shown
that luteovirus particles display a strong affinity for native GroEL
molecules as well as for the 60-kDa GroEL subunit (11, 17, 32,
34). Binding to Buchnera GroEL is mediated by the
N-terminal part of the readthrough domain (RTD) of the minor capsid
protein of a luteovirus (11, 32), which is produced as a
result of translational readthrough of the major capsid protein. The
luteovirus RTD is present on the surface of a virus particle
(4). Furthermore, in vivo studies have shown that luteovirus
mutants devoid of the RTD could not be sustained for a long period of
time in the aphid hemolymph (32), indicating that the
GroEL-RTD association protects the virus from rapid degradation in the
aphid. Recently, it was suggested that a GroEL homolog of endosymbiotic
origin exerted a protective function on Tomato yellow leaf curl
virus (TYLCV; Geminiviridae) during its passage through
the hemolymph of the whitefly Bemisia tabaci
(25). Association with GroEL homologs of endosymbiotic origin may therefore be a common evolutionary adaptation shared by
circulatively transmitted (plant) viruses.
Usually, hydrophobic residues of the apical domains, located on both
sides of the GroEL cylinder, mediate the binding of nonnative proteins
in the bacterial cytosol (3, 10). However, mutational analysis experiments of the gene encoding Buchnera GroEL
of Myzus persicae (MpB GroEL) revealed that the determinants
required for PLRV binding are located in the equatorial domain
(17). The equatorial domain forms the waist of the GroEL
14-mer and holds the cylinder together (3). It is made up of
two regions at the N terminus and C terminus that are not contiguous in
the amino acid sequence but are in spatial proximity after folding
of the GroEL polypeptide (3). This study identifies amino
acid residues of GroEL that are critical in the binding of PLRV
to the GroEL monomer by deletion mutant analysis and
pepscan-assisted site-directed mutagenesis.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Synthesis and cloning of Buchnera GroEL
mutants.
pGEX-2T constructs for the expression of truncated
mutants of MpB GroEL were generated by PCR using primers which
contained additional restriction sites (BamHI,
EcoRI, or HindIII sites) for cloning purposes
(Table 1). PCR amplification was
performed in 50 µl of 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.3) containing 0.4 mM
(total) deoxynucleoside triphosphates, 3 mM MgCl2, 50 mM
KCl, 10 ng of template DNA (pCR[Buchnera GroEL]
[12]), 0.25 µM each primer, and 2.5 U of
Taq polymerase (Boehringer Mannheim). Mixtures were incubated for 2 min at 94°C, followed by 35 cycles of 1 min at 94°C, 1 min at 50°C, and 2 min at 72°C, with a final incubation of 10 min at 72°C. All PCR products were first cloned into pCRII (TA
Cloning Kit; Invitrogen) digested with BamHI or
BamHI/EcoRI and subsequently religated into the
BamHI or BamHI/EcoRI sites of pGEX-2T.
MpB GroEL[1-57/134-408] was synthesized with primer set F10 and R7
using pGEX MpB GroEL[1-408] as a template. The resulting fragment was
digested with HindIII and self-ligated. Deletion mutants
MpB GroEL[122-408/475-548], -[122-548], -[122-474], and
-[122-408/475-548] have been described previously (17).
Single amino acid mutations were made using the QuickChange
Site-Directed Mutagenesis Kit (Stratagene). Primer design and
PCR were
performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations.
Constructs
pGEX MpB GroEL[1-408] and pGEX MpB GroEL[122-548] were
used as
templates for generating point mutations at the N terminus
and C
terminus, respectively. To obtain full-length constructs
of
MpB GroEL containing the point mutations at the N terminus,
the
C-terminal
XbaI/
EcoRI restriction fragment of
pGEX MpBGroEL[122-548]
was cloned into the
XbaI and
EcoRI sites of pGEX MpBGroEL[1-408]R13A,
pGEX MpBGroEL[1-408]K15A, or pGEX MpB GroEL[1-408]L17A/R18A. The
XbaI restriction site is located in the region encoding the
apical
domain of MpB GroEL (
17). To generate a
full-length construct
of MpB GroEL containing mutations at positions
R13, R441, and
R445, the C-terminal
XbaI/
EcoRI
restriction fragment of pGEX MpBGroEL[122-548]R441A/R445A
was cloned
into the
XbaI and
EcoRI sites of pGEX
MpBGroEL[1-408]R13A.
The full-length constructs of MpB GroEL
containing the C-terminal
point mutations at positions R441 and R445
were obtained by ligation
of the N-terminal
BamHI/
XbaI fragment of pGEX MpB GroEL[1-408]
to
the C-terminal
XbaI/
EcoRI fragment of pGEX
MpBGroEL[122-548]R441A/R445A.
The ligation product was cloned into
the
BamHI/
EcoRI sites of
pGEX-2T. All constructs
were verified by nucleotide sequence
analysis.
Expression and isolation of Buchnera GroEL
mutants.
The pGEX constructs containing GroEL sequences were
introduced into E. coli DH5
(Stratagene). For expression,
overnight cultures were diluted 1:10 in Luria broth (LB) containing
ampicillin (100 µg/ml) and grown at 37°C for 3 h.
Subsequently, 1 mM isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactoside (IPTG)
was added to induce protein synthesis, and cultures were allowed to
grow at room temperature. After 7 h, cells were pelleted at
4,000 × g for 10 min and resuspended in 50 mM Tris-HCl
(pH 7.5) containing 10 mM MgCl2. Cells were lysed by one
cycle of freeze-thawing and sonication. After centrifugation, the
glutathione S-transferase (GST) fusion proteins were
affinity purified from the supernatant using glutathione-Sepharose
(Pharmacia) according to the manufacturer's recommendations. To remove
the GST moiety, fusion proteins were incubated with thrombin for 3 h at 10°C. Cleaved products were analyzed by sodium dodecyl
sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) followed by
Western blot analysis with anti-MpB GroEL immunoglobulin G (IgG) (Plant
Research International, Wageningen, The Netherlands). To ensure that
similar quantities of deletion mutants were tested for their
virus-binding capacities (described below), they were diluted to yield
bands of similar intensities as assessed by amido black staining after
electroblotting. Each mutant was named after the positions of the first
and last amino acids bordering the included fragment.
Virus overlay assay.
PLRV (35) was maintained on
Physalis floridana as previously described and purified from
leaf material by a modified enzyme-assisted procedure (31).
Virus overlay assays (far-Western assays) were performed as described
before (17, 34). Similar amounts of MpB GroEL polypeptides
were separated by SDS-PAGE. After electrophoresis, gels were
conditioned in 10 mM 3-[cyclohexylamino]-1-propanesulfonic acid (pH
11.0) containing 10% methanol for 1 h, and proteins were electrotransferred onto nitrocellulose. All experiments were performed in duplicate. One protein blot was incubated overnight with purified PLRV (10 µg per ml), after which immunodetection with anti-PLRV IgG
and alkaline phosphatase-conjugated anti-rabbit IgG was carried out
(34). The other blot was stained with amido black to confirm whether similar amounts of the proteins were transferred to the membrane.
Pepscan analysis.
Decameric peptides were synthesized on
cellulose membranes using 9-fluorenylmethoxy carbonyl
(Fmoc)-amino acid active esters according to the manufacturer's
instructions (Genosys Biotechnologies). Subsequently, membranes
were incubated with blocking buffer (Genosys Biotechnologies) for
16 h at room temperature, followed by 10 µg of purified PLRV/ml
in blocking buffer for 16 h at room temperature. Bound virus
particles were detected with anti-PLRV IgG (Plant Research
International), followed by goat anti-rabbit IgG-alkaline phosphatase
conjugate (Sigma) at a concentration of 1 µg/ml in blocking buffer
for 3 h at room temperature. Duplicate membranes, treated in the
same manner as above but without the virus, served as negative controls.
Quantification of virus binding.
Virus binding in the
far-Western assays and pepscan analyses was quantified using the
Comparative Quantification module of Molecular Analyst software
(Bio-Rad, Hercules, Calif.), which calculates the pixel intensities of
the immunostained bands.
Comparative protein modeling.
A structural model of
Buchnera GroEL was generated using the automated
homology modeling server SWISS-MODEL (13) running at Glaxo
Wellcome Experimental Research (Geneva, Switzerland) and using the
three-dimensional (3D) structure model of E. coli GroEL
(3) as a modeling template. The predicted 3D template was
displayed using the Swiss-PdbViewer 3.5 (13), and the
generated graphic was further enhanced using the POV-Ray ray tracing
package 3.1 (POV-Team, Williamstown, Australia).
 |
RESULTS |
Identification of amino acids in the N-terminal part of the
equatorial domain of MpB GroEL mediating virus binding.
To
determine which region of the N-terminal part of the equatorial domain
of MpB GroEL harbors components with a PLRV-binding capacity, a series
of deletion mutants was synthesized based on the predicted secondary
structure of GroEL (Fig. 1a). All
deletion mutants, which were devoid of the C-terminal equatorial
domain, were expressed in E. coli, and after removal of the
GST moiety, similar amounts of the recombinant polyproteins
were tested for their capacities to bind purified PLRV in a virus
overlay assay. It was shown that deletion of the distal 57 amino acids
of the N-terminal equatorial domain abolished PLRV binding; PLRV bound as readily to MpB GroEL(1-408) as it did to recombinant GroEL, but
no binding to MpB GroEL(58-408) was detected (Fig. 1b and c). MpB
GroEL(1-57/134-408), which lacks the proximal part of the
equatorial domain, was still recognized by PLRV, although binding was
reduced by 45%. By homology to GroEL of E. coli, the distal
half of the N terminus of the equatorial domain of MpB GroEL is
characterized by four structural elements: three
-sheets and an
-helix (Fig. 1a). To further map the PLRV-binding site, additional
deletion mutants designed according to these secondary structures were
expressed and tested for virus binding in the overlay assay (Fig. 1c).
This revealed that residues in the first
-sheet were not critical
for binding, since PLRV bound as readily to MpB GroEL(9-408) as to
MpB GroEL(1-408). However, no virus binding to MpB
GroEL(19-408) or MpB GroEL(29-408) was detected, indicating
that the region containing the
-helical structure, and more
particularly the residues between amino acids 9 and 19, is required for
the interaction with PLRV (Fig. 1c).

View larger version (50K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Mapping of the N-terminal PLRV-binding site by virus
overlay assays of deletion derivatives of MpB GroEL. (a) Schematic
representation of MpB GroEL deletion mutants. The numbers in
parentheses correspond to the positions of amino acid residues of MpB
GroEL (17) and mark the borders of the deletion mutants.
N-eq, N-terminal region of the equatorial domain; N-int, N-terminal
region of the intermediate domain; Ap, apical domain; C-int, C-terminal
region of the intermediate domain; C-eq, C-terminal region of the
equatorial domain. Secondary structural elements are indicated by boxed
sine waves ( -helices) and arrows ( -strands). (b) Virus overlay
assay showing that the first 57 amino acid residues are involved in
PLRV binding (bottom) and amido black-stained blot (top). (c) Virus
overlay assay showing that residues 10 to 18 are involved in virus
binding (bottom) and amido black-stained blot (top). Lanes 1, wild-type
MpB GroEL isolated from M. persicae; lanes 2, recombinant
MpB GroEL. All other lanes contain the indicated deletion mutants of
MpB GroEL as depicted in panel a. The positions of MpB GroEL and
E. coli GroEL are indicated.
|
|
To assist site-directed mutagenesis, a pepscan analysis of the N
terminus of the equatorial domain was performed. This showed
that PLRV
exhibited affinity only for peptides in the region between
amino acid
residues 5 and 24 (Fig.
2a), thus
corroborating the
results of the mutational analysis. Alanine scanning
(Fig.
2b)
using the two peptides, KFGNEARIKM and RIKMLRGVNV, that
most strongly
interacted with PLRV identified the arginine at
position 13 (R13)
as the key residue in maintaining affinity for the
virus. Both
peptides failed to bind PLRV when R13 was replaced by
alanine.
Although alanine replacement of K15 eliminated PLRV binding of
the former peptide, it did not eliminate PLRV binding of the latter.
Alanine replacement of L17 and R18 only slightly reduced the PLRV
affinity of peptide RIKMLRGVNV.

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
(a) Schematic representation of PLRV-binding activities
of synthetic decameric peptides corresponding to amino acid residues 1 to 57 of the N-terminal region of the equatorial domain of MpB GroEL.
The results of the first 19 peptides are shown; no PLRV binding to any
of the subsequent peptides in this region was detected. Secondary
structural elements are indicated by thick arrows ( -strands) and
boxed sine waves ( -helices). Conserved sequences in GroEL/Hsp60
sequences are indicated by asterisks (14). (b) Alanine
scanning of the two decameric peptides with the strongest binding
capacities (boldfaced). The affinity of PLRV for the peptides has been
quantified using Molecular Analyst software (histograms) and is
interpreted as follows: +++, high affinity; ++, intermediate affinity;
+, low affinity; , no PLRV binding detected. Arrows indicate residues
critical for binding PLRV.
|
|
To verify the importance of R13, K15, L17, and R18 in PLRV
binding, these residues were replaced by alanines in the context
of MpB GroEL(1-408), resulting in MpB
GroEL(1-408)R13A, MpB GroEL(1-408)K15A,
and MpB
GroEL(1-408)L17A/R18A. When the respective
polypeptides
were tested in the virus overlay assay, it was
shown that MpB
GroEL(1-408)R13A and MpB GroEL(1-408)K15A lost
their virus-binding
capacities completely, whereas PLRV binding to MpB
GroEL(1-408)L17A/R18A
was reduced by 70% compared to binding
to the recombinant full-length
product (Fig.
3). The site-directed mutagenesis results
are entirely
consistent with those obtained from the pepscan analysis
(Fig.
2): alanine replacement of R13 or K15 eliminated the other's
virus-binding
capacity as well as those of L17 and R18.

View larger version (68K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Virus overlay assay (bottom panel) of alanine
replacement mutants of MpB GroEL(1-408) to identify
individual amino acids involved in PLRV binding. Lane 1, wild-type MpB GroEL isolated from M. persicae; lane 2, recombinant MpB GroEL. All other lanes contain wild-type MpB
GroEL(1-408) and point mutants of MpB GroEL(1-408) as
indicated. The positions of full-length MpB GroEL, MpB
GroEL(1-408), and alanine replacement mutants of MpB
GroEL(1-408) are indicated by arrows. (Top panel) Amido
black-stained blot.
|
|
Identification of amino acids involved in the C-terminal binding
site of MpB GroEL.
In a recent report it was shown that MpB
GroEL(122-474) bound PLRV, whereas MpB
GroEL(122-408/475-548) did not (17), indicating that
the determinants implicated in PLRV binding are located between residues 408 and 475 of the C-terminal equatorial domain of MpB GroEL.
To identify the amino acids responsible for PLRV binding, additional
mutants, all of which were devoid of the N-terminal equatorial domain,
were created based on the predicted secondary structure of MpB GroEL
(Fig. 4a). Virus overlay assays revealed that MpB GroEL(122-427) did not bind PLRV, whereas MpB
GroEL(122-457) and MpB GroEL(122-474) both did (Fig. 4b),
although virus binding to the latter mutant was reduced by about 35%.
It was therefore concluded that the amino acid(s) critical for binding
PLRV is present in the region between residues 427 and 457.

View larger version (55K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Mapping of the C-terminal PLRV-binding site by virus
overlay assays of deletion derivatives of MpB GroEL. (a) Schematic
representation of MpB GroEL deletion mutants. The numbers in
parentheses correspond to the positions of amino acid residues of MpB
GroEL (17) and mark the borders of the deletion mutants.
N-eq, N-terminal region of the equatorial domain; N-int, N-terminal
region of the intermediate domain; Ap, apical domain; C-int, C-terminal
region of the intermediate domain; C-eq, C-terminal region of the
equatorial domain. Secondary structural elements are indicated by boxed
sine waves ( -helices). (b) Virus overlay assay (right) showing that
the putative -helix between residues 427 and 457 is part of the
PLRV-binding site. Lanes 1, wild-type MpB GroEL isolated from M. persicae; lanes 2, recombinant MpB GroEL. All other lanes contain
the indicated deletion mutants of MpB GroEL as depicted in panel a.
(Left) Amido black-stained blot.
|
|
Pepscan analysis of this region showed that PLRV displayed a strong
affinity for the decameric peptide with the sequence VGIRVALRAM
(Fig.
5a). The substitutions R441A
and R445A diminished the PLRV-binding
capacity of this decameric
peptide by 90 and 50%, respectively
(Fig.
5b). When both arginines
were simultaneously replaced, no
binding of PLRV was detected (Fig.
5b).

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
(a) Schematic representation of the virus overlay assays
of decameric peptides corresponding to amino acid residues 423 to 476 of the C-terminal region of the equatorial domain of MpB GroEL.
The results of the first 21 peptides are shown; no PLRV binding to any
of the other peptides in this region was detected. Secondary
structural elements are indicated by boxed sine waves ( -helices).
Conserved sequences in GroEL/Hsp60 sequences are indicated by
asterisks. (b) Alanine scanning of the decameric peptide with the
strongest binding capacity as indicated in panel a (in boldface). The
affinity of PLRV for the peptides has been quantified using
Molecular Analyst software (histograms) and is interpreted as follows:
+++, high affinity; ++, intermediate affinity; +, low affinity;
, no PLRV binding detected. Arrows indicate residues critical for
binding PLRV.
|
|
Alanine substitution of R441 and R445 in MpB GroEL(122-548)
confirmed the results of the pepscan analysis, since PLRV binding
by
the mutants MpB GroEL(122-548)R441A and MpB GroEL(122-548)R445A
was only 20% of that of the recombinant full-length GroEL product
(Fig.
6). Unlike in the pepscan analysis,
changing both arginine
residues to alanine simultaneously (MpB
GroEL(122-548)R441A/R445A)
did not abolish virus binding but
reduced it by approximately
80%. This suggests that the context of
R441 and R445 (residues
between position 427 and 457) also contributes
to the PLRV-binding
capacity of the N-terminally truncated GroEL
mutant.

View larger version (67K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
Virus overlay assay (bottom panel) of alanine
replacement mutants of MpB GroEL(122-548) to identify individual
amino acids involved in PLRV binding. Lanes contain wild-type MpB
GroEL(122-548) and point mutants of MpB GroEL(122-548). The
positions of MpB GroEL(122-548), and alanine replacement mutants of
MpBGroEL(122-548) are indicated by arrowheads. (Top panel) Amido
black-stained blot.
|
|
As was shown previously, PLRV also interacted with endogenous
E. coli GroEL, copurified with some of the GST fusion products
(
17). Consequently, some lanes contain a 60-kDa
polypeptide
that binds PLRV (Fig.
4b and
6). Comparison of
the amino acid
sequences of GroEL from
M. persicae and
E. coli revealed that
all amino acids identified
in this study as implicated in virus
binding are conserved except for
R441, which is a lysine in GroEL
of
E. coli. Site-directed
mutagenesis showed that the modifications
R441K and R445K in MpB
GroEL(122-548) did not change its virus-binding
properties (data
not
shown).
Alanine substitutions in full-length MpB GroEL.
To verify
whether the amino acid residues of the equatorial domain of MpB GroEL,
which mediate PLRV binding to truncated GroEL polypeptides,
exert similar effects in full-length GroEL, single and simultaneous
alanine substitutions were made (Fig. 7).
In the N-terminal equatorial domain of full-length MpB GroEL, the same
set of alanine substitutions was made as in truncated GroEL (Fig. 3):
R13A, K15A, and L17A R18A. All three substitutions strongly reduced the
ability to bind purified PLRV, by 52% (R13A), 67% (K15A), and 72%
(L17A R18A) in the virus overlay assay in comparison with that of
recombinant MpB GroEL (Fig. 7). Moreover, R13, K15, and L17-R18
strongly affected each other's capacity to bind the virus, which is
consistent with the results obtained using MpB GroEL deletion mutants
(Fig. 3). It was also shown that alanine substitutions in the N
terminus of the equatorial domain did not completely eliminate virus
binding (Fig. 7), which is most likely due to PLRV binding by the
unaffected C terminus. However, it should be noted that the residual
binding capacity of the amino acids in the wild-type terminus differs
from what one would expect if all residues contributed equally to the
virus-binding capacity of the molecule. A similar observation was made
for alanine substitutions in the C terminus (R441A/R445A in Fig.
7). Only when mutations were made in both termini
(R13A/R441A/R445A in Fig. 7) did full-length MpB GroEL lose
virtually all of its capacity to bind purified PLRV.

View larger version (66K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
Virus overlay assay (bottom panel) of recombinant MpB
GroEL, alanine replacement mutants of MpB GroEL, and MpB
GroEL(19-408). (Top panel) Amido black-stained blot. The positions
of MpB GroEL, MpB GroEL point mutants, and MpB GroEL(19-408) are
indicated by arrowheads.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Our data reveal that only a limited number of amino acid residues
markedly influence the affinity of MpB GroEL for PLRV. These residues
are located between amino acid residues 9 and 19 and between amino
acids 427 and 457 of the N-terminal and C-terminal regions,
respectively, of the equatorial domain. This domain has previously been
identified as the one harboring the PLRV binding site (17).
Computer-generated structural predictions of the tertiary structure of
GroEL of E. coli demonstrate that the N-terminal and
C-terminal regions of the equatorial domain assemble to form the
complete equatorial domain in the E. coli GroEL monomer
(3). Buchnera GroEL shares >92% amino acid
sequence identity, as well as structural and functional features, with
E. coli GroEL (11, 17, 27). Also, the
Buchnera GroEL model suggests that the N-terminal and
C-terminal regions of the equatorial domain of MpB GroEL are in spatial
proximity, as they assemble into a single equatorial domain (Fig.
8).

View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 8.
Model of a Buchnera GroEL subunit showing
the positions of amino acid residues critical for PLRV binding. R13,
K15, L17, and R18 belong to the N-terminal region of the equatorial
domain, and R441 and R445 are in the C-terminal region of the
equatorial domain. Two different rotation angles of the model are
presented.
|
|
In the predicted tertiary structure, residues 9 to 19 of the
N-terminal equatorial domain assemble into an
-helix (Fig. 1, 2, and
8). Virus-binding studies with decameric peptides and with full-length
MpB GroEL and mutants thereof all demonstrated that amino acid residues
R13, K15, L17, and R18 are critical for PLRV binding to the N-terminal
equatorial domain. These residues are clustered on the hydrophilic side
of the putative
-helix. The Buchnera GroEL model also
predicts that residues R441 and R445 of the C-terminal PLRV-binding
site of MpB GroEL (Fig. 4b) are part of a helical structure.
Far-Western analysis further revealed that an additional determinant
besides residues R441 and R445 is involved in composing the
PLRV-binding site at the C-terminal region of the equatorial domain.
This determinant may be a structural component rather than a single
amino acid, since it was not identified in the pepscan analysis. It is
not unlikely that replacement of R441 and R445 by the neutral alanine
residues causes more changes in the physical and structural
characteristics of the decameric peptide VGIRVALRAM than the alanine
replacement of these residues in constructs of MpB GroEL, which may
suggest that the complete
-helix between residues 431 and 459 is
involved in PLRV binding. Since replacement of R441 and R445 by lysines
did not change the PLRV-binding capacity of VGIRVALRAM or MpB GroEL
mutants, it seems likely that the hydrophilic nature of the
-helix
rather than the identities of single amino acids is important for PLRV
binding. The
-helix harboring R441 and R445 is located toward the
exterior of the GroEL 14-mer, whereas the
-helix containing R13,
K15, L17, and R18 is located toward the cavity of the GroEL cylinder (3). It is not unusual for amino acids of the N-terminal and C-terminal parts of the equatorial domain to join so as to form a
complex binding site. The ATP-binding site of E. coli GroEL is also composed of amino acids from both termini of the equatorial domain (2). Structure predictions of Buchnera
GroEL show that all six residues are juxtaposed in the equatorial
plain, which is potentially accessible from the outside the native
molecule. However, it remains to be investigated to what extent the in
vivo virus-binding activity of GroEL can be extrapolated from the in vitro binding data. Based on the fact that minor deletions in the
termini of E. coli GroEL affect the formation of the 14-mers (see, e.g., references 5, 19, and
22), it is unlikely that the truncated
Buchnera GroEL mutants used in this study are able to
assemble into the native state. The role of the six identified residues
in the folding and multimerization of Buchnera GroEL is
yet to be determined.
The amino acid residues of MpB GroEL implicated in the binding of PLRV
(an extracellular event) are mainly hydrophilic in nature, whereas
residues involved in the binding of nonnative proteins in the cytosol
of a bacterial cell are generally hydrophobic (3, 10). The
involvement of hydrophilic residues in protein-protein interactions has been reported for other systems as well (7, 28). In the N-terminal part of the RTD of a luteovirus,
both hydrophilic and hydrophobic regions are present. The region
previously suggested to be involved in virus binding to GroEL is
mainly hydrophobic and is highly conserved among luteoviruses
(32). Moreover, this region, which is characterized by
the conserved Ser-Tyr-Gly triplet, is enriched in Trp, Tyr, Arg, and
Ile relative to the rest of the N-terminal part of the RTD.
Analysis of hot spots in protein interfaces has shown that these
residues are preferred over other amino acids in interactions between
proteins in a heterodimer (1). It is therefore tempting
to suggest that the interaction between GroEL and PLRV is of
a hydrophilic-hydrophobic nature.
Chaperonins have been classified into two groups (14, 20).
One contains chaperonins of bacterial origin (like GroEL) and of
eukaryotic organelles such as the mitochondrial Hsp60 or the ribulose-1,5-biphosphate carboxylase-oxygenase binding protein from
chloroplasts, all of which exhibit at least 50% sequence identity
(14, 15). The second group contains chaperonins from thermophilic bacteria such as the 2-subunit TF55 from Sulfolobus shibatae or Sulfolobus solfataricus and the 9-subunit
eukaryotic cytosolic TCP-1, which are 32 to 39% identical (21,
30). The two groups are weakly related but carry out similar
functions, i.e., folding of proteins in the cell cytosol, and have
structural similarities as well (6, 20, 23, 24, 26). The
fact that PLRV binds to Buchnera GroEL from several
aphid species (18) and to E. coli GroEL
(17) indicates that the amino acid residues implicated in
virus binding should be highly conserved among GroEL homologs.
Alignment of amino acid sequences of Buchnera
GroEL and E. coli GroEL indeed demonstrates that most amino
acids involved in binding PLRV (R13, K15, L17, R18, and R445) are
conserved between Buchnera GroEL and E. coli
GroEL. The arginine at position 441 of Buchnera
GroEL proteins is a lysine in the GroEL of E. coli (Fig. 9). But substitution of
this residue by a lysine did not influence the PLRV-binding capacity of
MpB GroEL(122-548) in virus overlay assays. Interestingly, R13 of
MpB GroEL is conserved among all Hsp60 sequences (Fig. 9) and is also
found in two subunits of TCP-1 (20, 21). Whether PLRV and
other luteoviruses also exhibit an affinity for GroEL homologs of
eukaryotic origin is yet to be determined.

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 9.
Alignment of Hsp60/GroEL amino acid sequences of
mitochondria, E. coli, and chloroplasts. Shown are
chloroplast cpn (subunit of chloroplast Hsp60) of Arabidopsis
thaliana (accession no. P21238), Brassica napus
(P34794), and Pisum sativum (P08926); mitochondrial hsp60 of
A. thaliana (P29197), Cucurbita maxima (Q05046),
B. napus (P35480), Drosophila melanogaster
(O02649), and Zea mais (P29185); Buchnera
GroEL sequences of Acyrthosiphon pisum (P25750), M. persicae (AF003957), Schizaphis graminum (Q59177),
Sitobion avenae (U77379), and Rhopalosiphum padi
(U77380); and GroEL of E. coli (reference
14). Sequences were aligned using the PILEUP program
(Genetics Computer Group, Madison, Wis. [8]). (a)
Alignment of the first 80 amino acids of the N-terminal regions of
GroEL/Hsp60 equatorial domains. (b) Alignment of amino acids 500 to
511 of the C-terminal regions of GroEL/Hsp60 equatorial domains.
Amino acids shown to be involved in PLRV-binding are boxed. The highly
conserved R13 is indicated by an asterisk.
|
|
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
This work was supported in part by Priority Program Crop
Protection grant 45.014 from the Netherlands Organization for
Scientific Research (NWO) and the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature
Management, and Fisheries (LNV).
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Plant Research
International, P.O. Box 16, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands. Phone: 31 317 476141. Fax: 31 317 410113. E-mail:
J.F.J.M.vandenHeuvel{at}plant.wag-ur.nl.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Bogan, A. A., and K. S. Thorn.
1998.
Anatomy of hot spots in protein interfaces.
J. Mol. Biol.
280:1-9[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Boisvert, D. C.,
J. Wang,
Z. Otwinowski,
A. L. Horwich, and P. Sigler.
1996.
The 2.4 Å crystal structure of the bacterial chaperonin GroEL complexed with ATP S.
Nat. Struct. Biol.
3:170-177[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 3.
|
Braig, K.,
Z. Otwinowski,
R. Hegde,
D. C. Boisvert,
A. Joachimiak,
A. L. Horwich, and P. Sigler.
1994.
The crystal structure of the bacterial chaperonin GroEL at 2.8 Å.
Nature
371:578-586[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Brault, V.,
J. F. J. M. van den Heuvel,
M. Verbeek,
V. Ziegler-Graff,
A. Reutenauer,
E. Herrbach,
J.-C. Garaud,
H. Guilley,
K. Richards, and G. Jonard.
1995.
Aphid transmission of beet western yellows luteovirus requires the minor capsid read-through protein P74.
EMBO J.
14:650-659[Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Burnett, B. P.,
A. L. Horwich, and K. B. Low.
1994.
A carboxy-terminal deletion impairs the assembly of GroEL and confers a pleiotropic phenotype in Escherichia coli K-12.
J. Bacteriol.
176:6980-6985[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Creutz, C. E.,
A. Liou,
S. L. Snyder,
A. Brownawell, and K. Willison.
1994.
Identification of the major chromaffin granule-binding protein, chromobindin A, as the cytosolic chaperonin CCT (chaperonin containing TCP-1).
J. Biol. Chem.
269:32035-32038[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Davis, S. J.,
S. Ikemizu,
M. K. Wild, and P. A. van der Merwe.
1998.
CD2 and the nature of protein interactions mediating cell-cell recognition.
Immunol. Rev.
163:217-236[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 8.
|
Devereux, J.,
P. Haeberli, and O. Smithies.
1984.
A comprehensive set of sequence analysis programs for the VAX.
Nucleic Acids Res.
12:387-395.
|
| 9.
|
Ellis, R. J., and S. M. van der Vies.
1991.
Molecular chaperones.
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
60:321-347[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Fenton, W. A.,
Y. Kashi,
K. Furtak, and A. L. Horwich.
1994.
Residues in chaperonin GroEL required for polypeptide binding and release.
Nature
371:614-619[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Filichkin, S. A.,
S. Brumfield,
T. P. Filichkin, and M. Young.
1997.
In vitro interactions of the aphid endosymbiotic SymL chaperonin with barley yellow dwarf virus.
J. Virol.
71:569-577[Abstract].
|
| 12.
|
Gildow, F. E.
1987.
Virus-membrane interactions involved in circulative transmission of luteoviruses by aphids.
Curr. Top. Vector Res.
4:93-120.
|
| 13.
|
Guex, N., and M. C. Peitsch.
1997.
SWISS-MODEL and the Swiss-PdbViewer: an environment for comparative protein modeling.
Electrophoresis
18:2714-2723[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Gupta, R. S.
1995.
Evolution of the chaperonin families (Hsp60, Hsp10 and Tcp-1) of protein and the origin of eukaryotic cells.
Mol. Microbiol.
15:1-11[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Gupta, R. S.,
D. J. Picketts, and S. Ahmad.
1989.
A novel ubiquitous protein `chaperonin' supports the endosymbiotic origin of mitochondrion and plant protoplasts.
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
163:780-787[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Hemmingsen, S. M.,
C. Woolford,
S. M. van der Vies,
K. Tilly,
D. T. Dennis,
C. P. Georgopoulos,
R. W. Hendrix, and R. J. Ellis.
1988.
Homologous plant and bacterial proteins chaperone oligomeric protein assembly.
Nature
333:330-334[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 17.
|
Hogenhout, S. A.,
F. van der Wilk,
M. Verbeek,
R. W. Goldbach, and J. F. J. M. van den Heuvel.
1998.
Potato leafroll virus binds to the equatorial domain of the aphid endosymbiotic GroEL homolog.
J. Virol.
72:358-365[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 18.
|
Hogenhout, S. A.,
M. Verbeek,
F. Hans,
P. M. Houterman,
M. Fortass,
F. van der Wilk,
H. Huttinga, and J. F. J. M. van den Heuvel.
1996.
Molecular bases of the interactions between luteoviruses and aphids.
Agronomie
16:167-173.
|
| 19.
|
Horowitz, A.,
E. S. Bochkareva,
O. Kovalenko, and A. S. Girshovich.
1993.
Mutation Ala2 Ser destabilizes intersubunit interactions in the molecular chaperone GroEL.
J. Mol. Biol.
231:58-64[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 20.
|
Kim, S.,
K. R. Willison, and A. L. Horwich.
1994.
Cytosolic chaperonin subunits have a conserved ATPase domain but diverged polypeptide-binding domains.
Trends Biochem. Sci.
19:543-548[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 21.
|
Kubota, H.,
T. Morita,
T. Nagata,
Y. Takemoto,
M. Nozaki,
G. Gachelin, and A. Matsushiro.
1991.
Nucleotide sequence of mouse Tcp-1a cDNA.
Gene
105:269-273[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Luo, G.-X., and P. M. Horowitz.
1994.
The stability of the molecular chaperonin cnp60 is affected by site-directed replacement of cysteine 518.
J. Biol. Chem.
269:32151-32154[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 23.
|
Marco, S.,
J. L. Carrascosa, and J. M. Valpuesta.
1994.
Reversible interaction of beta-actin along the channel of the TCP-1 cytoplasmic chaperonin.
Biophys. J.
67:364-368[Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Melki, R., and N. J. Cowan.
1994.
Facilitated folding of actins and tubulins occurs via a nucleotide-dependent interaction between cytoplasmic chaperonin and distinctive folding intermediates.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:2895-2904[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Morin, S.,
M. Ghanim,
M. Zeidan,
H. Czosnek,
M. Verbeek, and J. F. J. M. van den Heuvel.
1999.
A GroEL homologue from endosymbiotic bacteria of the whitefly Bemisia tabaci is implicated in the circulative transmission of tomato yellow leaf curl virus.
Virology
256:75-84[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Mummert, E.,
R. Grimm,
V. Speth,
C. Eckerskorn,
E. Schiltz,
A. A. Gatenby, and E. Schäfer.
1993.
A TCP1-related molecular chaperone from plants refolds phytochrome to its photoreversible form.
Nature
363:644-648[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 27.
|
Ohtaka, C.,
H. Nakamura, and H. Ishikawa.
1992.
Structures of chaperonins from an intracellular symbiont and their functional expression in Escherichia coli groE mutants.
J. Bacteriol.
174:1869-1874[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Singh, J.,
E. Garber,
H. van Vlijmen,
M. Karpusas,
Y. M. Hsu,
Z. Zheng,
J. H. Naismith, and D. Thomas.
1998.
The role of polar interactions in the molecular recognition of CD40L with its receptor CD40.
Protein Sci.
7:1124-1135[Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Sylvester, E. S.
1980.
Circulative and propagative virus transmission by aphids.
Annu. Rev. Entomol.
25:257-286[CrossRef].
|
| 30.
|
Trent, J. D.,
E. Nimmesgern,
J. S. Wall,
F. U. Hartl, and A. L. Horwich.
1991.
A molecular chaperone from a thermophilic archaebacterium is related to the eukaryotic protein t-complex polypeptide-1.
Nature
354:490-493[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 31.
|
van den Heuvel, J. F. J. M.,
T. M. Boerma, and D. Peters.
1991.
Transmission of potato leafroll virus from plants and artificial diets by Myzus persicae.
Phytopathology
81:150-154[CrossRef].
|
| 32.
|
van den Heuvel, J. F. J. M.,
A. Bruyère,
S. A. Hogenhout,
V. Ziegler-Graff,
V. Brault,
M. Verbeek,
F. van der Wilk, and K. Richards.
1997.
The N-terminal region of the luteovirus readthrough domain determines virus binding to Buchnera GroEL and is essential for virus persistence in the aphid.
J. Virol.
71:7258-7265[Abstract].
|
| 33.
|
van den Heuvel, J. F. J. M.,
C. M. de Blank,
D. Peters, and J. W. M. van Lent.
1995.
Localization of potato leafroll virus in leaves of secondarily-infected potato plants.
Eur. J. Plant Pathol.
101:567-571[CrossRef].
|
| 34.
|
van den Heuvel, J. F. J. M.,
M. Verbeek, and F. van der Wilk.
1994.
Endosymbiotic bacteria associated with circulative transmission of potato leafroll virus by Myzus persicae.
J. Gen. Virol.
75:2559-2565[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 35.
|
van der Wilk, F.,
M. J. Huisman,
B. J. C. Cornelissen,
H. Huttinga, and R. Goldbach.
1989.
Nucleotide sequence and organization of potato leafroll virus genomic RNA.
FEBS Lett.
245:51-56[CrossRef][Medline].
|
Journal of Virology, May 2000, p. 4541-4548, Vol. 74, No. 10
0022-538X/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Peter, K. A., Liang, D., Palukaitis, P., Gray, S. M.
(2008). Small deletions in the potato leafroll virus readthrough protein affect particle morphology, aphid transmission, virus movement and accumulation. J. Gen. Virol.
89: 2037-2045
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Hohn, T.
(2007). Plant virus transmission from the insect point of view. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
104: 17905-17906
[Full Text]
-
Fares, M. A., Barrio, E., Sabater-Munoz, B., Moya, A.
(2002). The Evolution of the Heat-Shock Protein GroEL from Buchnera, the Primary Endosymbiont of Aphids, Is Governed by Positive Selection. Mol Biol Evol
19: 1162-1170
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Scholthof, H. B.
(2001). Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions That Cut the Mustard. Plant Physiol.
127: 1476-1483
[Full Text]