Co-Translational Protein Folding in Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic Cell-Free Translation Systems

  • Vyacheslav A. Kolb
  • Aigar Kommer
  • Alexander S. Spirin

Abstract

Native structure formation of newly synthesized proteins is a key problem relating to the cell-free translation technology that is aimed at the synthesis of biologically active products. At the same time, a lot of experimental data indicate that the folding of newly synthesized proteins differs significantly from the in vitro process observed by Anfinsen in his classical experiments on the refolding of ribonuclease (Anfinsen 1973) and studied in detail by many other workers. The difference results mainly from (i) the contribution of multiple cellular components, such as protein disulphide isomerase, peptidylprolyl isomerase, and molecular chaperones that catalyze or assist the folding of synthesized proteins (Gething and Sambrook 1992; Georgopoulos and Welch 1993; Ellis 1994; Hartl 1996; Fink 1999), and (ii) the co-translational mode of the folding, implying that the N-terminal part of a nascent peptide starts its folding as soon as it is synthesized and emerges from the ribosome prior to the formation of the entire polypeptide chain (see refs below). The existence of stepwise protein folding starting from the N-terminal section of a growing polypeptide and progressively proceeding towards the C-terminus was first proposed by Phillips et al. (1967) from theoretical analysis of the folding pattern of hen egg lysozyme. Later, several experimental approaches demonstrated co-translational formation of native or native-like structure of nascent polypeptides, both in vitro and in vivo. It was shown that growing polypeptides are able to interact with free sub-units of the same protein, thus being involved in the assembly of quaternary structures on ribosomes (Kiho and Rich 1964; Gilmore et al. 1996).

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anfinsen CB (1973) Principles that govern the folding of protein chains. Science 181: 223–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bergman LW, Kuehl WM (1979) Formation of an intrachain disulfide bond on nascent immunoglobulin light chains. J Biol Chem 254: 8869–8876Google Scholar
  3. Buchberger A, Schröder H, Hesterkamp T, Schönfeld H-J, Bukau B (1996) Substrate shuttling between the DnaK and GroEL systems indicates a chaperone network promoting protein folding. J Mol Biol 261: 328–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen W, Helenius J, Braakman I, Helenius A (1995) Cotranslational folding and calnexin binding during glycoprotein synthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92: 6229–6233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ellis RG (1994) Role of molecular chaperones in protein folding. Curr Opin Struct Biol 4: 117–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fedorov AN, Baldwin TO (1995) Contribution of cotranslational folding to the rate of formation of native protein structure. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92: 1227–1231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fink AL (1999) Chaperone-mediated protein folding. Physiol Rev 79: 425–449Google Scholar
  8. Frydman J, Nimmesgern E, Ohtsuka K, Hartl FU (1994) Folding of nascent polypeptide chains in a high molecular mass assembly with molecular chaperones. Nature 370: 111–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Frydman J, Erdjument-Bromage H, Tempst R, Hartl FU (1999) Co-translational domain folding as the structural basis for the rapid de novo folding of firefly luciferase. Nature Struct Biol, 6: 697–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Georgopoulos C, Welch WJ (1993) Role of the major heat shock proteins as molecular chaperones. Ann Rev Cell Biol 9: 601–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gething M-J, Sambrook J (1992) Protein folding in the cell. Nature 355: 33–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gilmore R, Coffey MC, Leone G, McLure K, Lee PWK (1996) Co-translational trimerization of the reovirus cell attachment protein. EMBO J 15: 2651–2658Google Scholar
  13. Hanes J, Plckthun A (1997) In vitro selection and evolution of functional proteins by using ribosome display. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94: 4937–4942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hartl FU (1996) Molecular chaperones in cellular protein folding. Nature 381: 571–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kiho Y, Rich A (1964) Induced enzyme formed on bacterial polyribosomes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 51: 111–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kim J, Klein PG, Mullet JE (1991) Ribosome pause at specific sites during synthesis of membrane-bound chloroplast reaction centre protein D1. J Biol Chem 266: 14931–14938Google Scholar
  17. Kolb VA, Makeyev EV, Spirin AS (1994) Folding of firefly luciferase during translation in a cell-free system. EMBO J 13: 3631–3637Google Scholar
  18. Kolb VA, Makeyev EV, Kommer A, Spirin AS (1995) Cotranslational folding of proteins. Biochem Cell Biol 73: 1217–1220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kolb VA, Makeyev EV, Spirin AS (2000) Cotranslational of an eukaryotic multidomain protein in a prokaryotic translation system. J Biol Chem 275: 16597–16601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Komar AA, Kommer A, Krasheninnikov IA, Spirin AS (1997) Cotranslational folding of globin. J Biol Chem 272: 10646–10651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kudlicki W, Chirgwin J, Kramer G, Hardesty B (1995) Folding of an enzyme into an active conformation while bound as peptidyl-tRNA to the ribosome. Biochemistry 34: 14284–14287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lewis SA, Tian G, Vainberg IE, Cowan NJ (1996) Chaperonin-mediated folding of actin and tubulin. J. Cell Biol 132: 1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lin L, DeMartino GN, Greene WC (1998) Cotranslational biogenesis of NF-kB p50 by the 26S proteasome. Cell 92: 819–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Makeyev EV, Kolb VA, Spirin AS (1996) Enzymatic activity of the ribosome-bound nascent polypeptide. FEBS Lett 378: 166–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mullet JE, Klein PG, Klein RR (1990) Chlorophyll regulates accumulation of the plastid-encoded chlorophyll apoprotein CP43 and D1 by increasing apoprotein stability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 87: 4038–4042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Netzer WJ, Hartl FU (1997) Recombination of protein domains facilitated by co-translational folding in eukaryotes. Nature 388: 343–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nicola AV, Chen W, Helenius A (1999) Co-translational folding of an alphavirus capsid protein in the cytosol of living cell. Nat Cell Biol 1: 341–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Peters T, Davidson LK (1982) The biosynthesis of rat serum albumin. J Biol Chem 257: 8847–8853Google Scholar
  29. Phillips DC (1967) The hen egg-white lysozyme molecule. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 57: 484–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ryabova LA, Desplancq D, Spirin AS, Plückthun A (1997) Functional antibody production using cell-free translation: effects of protein disulfide isomerase and chaperones. Nature Biotechnol 15: 79–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schröder H, Langer T, Hartl FU, Bukau B (1993) DnaK, DnaJ and GrpE form a cellular chaperone machinery capable of repairing heat-induced protein damage. EMBO J 12: 4137–4144Google Scholar
  32. Srikakulam R, Winkelmann D (1999) Myosin II folding is mediated by a molecular chaperonin. J Biol Chem 274: 27265–27273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vysokanov AV (1995) Synthesis of chloramphenicol acetyltransferase in a coupled transcription-translation in vitro system lacking the chaperones DnaK and DnaJ. FEBS Lett 375: 211–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelbreg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vyacheslav A. Kolb
  • Aigar Kommer
  • Alexander S. Spirin
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Protein ResearchRussian Academy of SciencesPushchino, Moscow RegionRussia

Personalised recommendations