Structural insights into peptide bond formation.
Journal: 2002/September - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
ISSN: 0027-8424
Abstract:
The large ribosomal subunit catalyzes peptide bond formation and will do so by using small aminoacyl- and peptidyl-RNA fragments of tRNA. We have refined at 3-A resolution the structures of both A and P site substrate and product analogues, as well as an intermediate analogue, bound to the Haloarcula marismortui 50S ribosomal subunit. A P site substrate, CCA-Phe-caproic acid-biotin, binds equally to both sites, but in the presence of sparsomycin binds only to the P site. The CCA portions of these analogues are bound identically by either the A or P loop of the 23S rRNA. Combining the separate P and A site substrate complexes into one model reveals interactions that may occur when both are present simultaneously. The alpha-NH(2) group of an aminoacylated fragment in the A site forms one hydrogen bond with the N3 of A2486 (2451) and may form a second hydrogen bond either with the 2' OH of the A-76 ribose in the P site or with the 2' OH of A2486 (2451). These interactions position the alpha amino group adjacent to the carbonyl carbon of esterified P site substrate in an orientation suitable for a nucleophilic attack.
Relations:
Content
Citations
(66)
References
(35)
Chemicals
(1)
Genes
(28)
Organisms
(1)
Processes
(1)
Affiliates
(1)
Similar articles
Articles by the same authors
Discussion board
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99(18): 11670-11675

Structural insights into peptide bond formation

Departments of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry and Chemistry, Yale University and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, 266 Whitney Avenue, New Haven, CT 06520-8114
To whom reprint requests should be addressed. E-mail: ude.elay.bsc@notrehtae.
Contributed by Thomas A. Steitz
Contributed by Thomas A. Steitz
Accepted 2002 Jul 8.

Abstract

The large ribosomal subunit catalyzes peptide bond formation and will do so by using small aminoacyl- and peptidyl-RNA fragments of tRNA. We have refined at 3-Å resolution the structures of both A and P site substrate and product analogues, as well as an intermediate analogue, bound to the Haloarcula marismortui 50S ribosomal subunit. A P site substrate, CCA-Phe-caproic acid–biotin, binds equally to both sites, but in the presence of sparsomycin binds only to the P site. The CCA portions of these analogues are bound identically by either the A or P loop of the 23S rRNA. Combining the separate P and A site substrate complexes into one model reveals interactions that may occur when both are present simultaneously. The α-NH2 group of an aminoacylated fragment in the A site forms one hydrogen bond with the N3 of A2486 (2451) and may form a second hydrogen bond either with the 2′ OH of the A-76 ribose in the P site or with the 2′ OH of A2486 (2451). These interactions position the α amino group adjacent to the carbonyl carbon of esterified P site substrate in an orientation suitable for a nucleophilic attack.

Abstract

Perhaps the first evolutionary event in the emergence of the “protein world” from the “RNA world” was the appearance of an enzyme capable of catalyzing peptide bond formation. The peptidyl transferase center of the large ribosomal subunit, where peptide bond synthesis occurs (14), has two major components: an A site, which interacts with the CCA end of aminoacylated tRNAs, and a P site, where the CCA ends of peptidyl tRNAs are bound when peptide bonds form (57). The reaction it catalyzes is the nucleophilic attack of the α amino group of an A site-bound aminoacyl tRNA on the carbonyl carbon of the ester bond that links a nascent peptide to a tRNA in the P site. The question we wish to address is how the ribosome, an RNA–protein machine with roots in the “RNA world,” enhances the rate of peptide bond formation.

Crystal structures of the large ribosomal subunit of Haloarcula marismortui complexed with an analogue of peptide synthesis intermediate and an A site substrate analogue (8, 9) demonstrated that the peptidyl transferase center is composed entirely of RNA and confirmed that the CCA sequences of A and P site substrates interact with 23S rRNA in the manner deduced, in part, earlier from biochemical and genetic experiments (6, 7, 10, 11). The proximity of the N3 of A2486 (2451 in Escherichia coli) to the attacking α amino group and the analogue of the tetrahedral intermediate led to the suggestion that A2486 (2451) may function as a general acid/base during peptide bond formation. This hypothesis appeared to be supported by data on the pH dependence of its chemical reactivity and the finding that mutations of A2486 are dominant lethal in vivo (12). Further, the interaction between the N3 of A2486 (2451) and the phosphate oxygen of the reaction intermediate observed in the structure implied an altered pKa (8).

The hypothesis that A2486 (2451) is functioning as a general base has been tested most notably by its mutation to the three other nucleotides. Initial studies suggested that the impact of A2486 (2451) mutations on the rate of peptide bond formation is small, 10-fold or less (1316). Furthermore, it is now clear that the chemical reactivity data that appeared to support the concept that A2486 (2451) acts as a general acid/base do not speak to its role in protein synthesis (17). However, more recent kinetic studies of 70S ribosomes that are greater than 90% active, done under conditions where the chemical step of peptide bond formation is likely to be rate limiting, demonstrate the existence of a titratable ribosomal component that affects catalysis and has a pKa of 7.4 (18). Its effects disappear when A2486 (2451) is mutated to U, and the rate of peptide bond formation catalyzed by the A2486U mutant ribosome is reduced by greater than 100-fold (18). These results could be explained either if A2486 (2451) acts as a general base or if there is an unknown pH-sensitive conformational change in the ribosome that depends on A2486 (2451).

Two concerns expressed about the relevance of these crystal structures to understanding the mechanism of peptide bond formation by the ribosome (19) have been shown to be unfounded (20). It has been argued that no inferences about the mechanism of peptide bond formation can be drawn from these crystal structures because large ribosomal subunits catalyze such reactions only in the presence of high concentrations of alcohol (21). Further, it has also been claimed that the ionic conditions in the crystals used to determine these structures were sufficiently far from physiological that the crystal structure is of limited functional relevance (19). However, the H. marismortui large subunits examined crystallographically are in fact highly active in peptide bond formation in the crystalline state, without the presence of alcohol, and manifest no sensitivity to the nature or concentration of salt (20). Furthermore, the structures obtained when peptidyl transferase substrates were diffused into preformed crystals under conditions that ensured a limited degree of reaction shows products, not substrates, bound to both the A and P sites (20). Thus, the crystal structures of the complexes previously published and those presented here are indeed relevant to the mechanism of peptide bond formation on the ribosome.

We have now determined the structure of a peptidyl-CCA bound to the P site of H. marismortui 50S ribosomal subunit and have refined the structures of its complexes with the substrates, products, and intermediates shown in Fig. Fig.1.1. When the structures of separately determined A and P site substrate complexes are placed together in one model, we observe that the attacking α amino group of the aminoacylated A site substrate forms hydrogen bonds with the N3 of A2486 (2451) and the 2′ OH of the A76 ribose of the P site substrate. The substrates are positioned for peptide bond formation by interactions that are entirely with the RNA component of the ribosome. From the present complex structures, it appears that the only candidates for chemical assistance in catalysis, if any occurs, are the N3 of A2486 (2451) and either the 2′ OH of the P site substrate or the 2′ OH of A2486 (2451). On the basis of this alignment, we expect that the oxyanion formed in the presumed tetrahedral carbon intermediate does not interact, as suggested (8), with A2486 (2451) but more likely points in the opposite direction. In the complexes of known structure, no ribosomal component is appropriately positioned to stabilize the oxyanion, although it cannot be excluded that U2620 (2585) moves to do so on formation of the intermediate.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is pq1724040001.jpg

Chemical structures of peptidyl transferase substrate analogues. (A) CCA-pcb is active as a P site substrate and binds to only the P site in the presence of the antibiotic, sparsomycin. (B) An aminoacylated RNA minihelix binds to the A site. (C) CCdA-phosphate-puromycin is an intermediate analogue containing A and P site-binding components. (D) CC-puromycin-phenylalanine-caproic acid–biotin and deacylated CCA are products of the peptidyl transferase reaction.

Click here to view.

Acknowledgments

We thank Betty Freeborn for technical assistance with ribosome purification and crystallization, Jimin Wang for conversations about crystallography, Scott Strobel for critical comments, and Dan Klein for help with data collection. We are indebted to Andrzej Joachimiak, Ruslan (Nukri) Sanishvili, and the staff of 19-ID at the Advanced Photon Source (Argonne National Laboratory). This research was supported by National Institutes of Health Grant GM22778 and an Agouron Institute grant (to T.A.S. and P.B.M.). Use of the Argonne National Laboratory Structural Biology Center beamlines at the Advanced Photon Source was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, under Contract W-31-109-ENG-38.

Acknowledgments

Abbreviation

CCA-pcbCCA-phenylalanine-caproic acid–biotin
Abbreviation

Footnotes

Data deposition: The atomic coordinates reported in this paper have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank, www.rcsb.org (PDB ID code 1M90).

Footnotes

References

  • 1. Traut R R, Monro R E. J Mol Biol. 1964;10:63–71.[PubMed]
  • 2. Rychlik I. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1966;114:425–427.[PubMed]
  • 3. Monro R E. J Mol Biol. 1967;26:147–151.[PubMed]
  • 4. Maden B E, Traut R R, Monro R E. J Mol Biol. 1968;35:333–345.[PubMed]
  • 5. Watson J D. Bull Soc Chim Biol. 1964;46:1399–1425.[PubMed]
  • 6. Moazed D, Noller H F. Cell. 1989;57:585–597.[PubMed]
  • 7. Moazed D, Noller H F. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1991;88:3725–3728.
  • 8. Nissen P, Hansen J, Ban N, Moore P B, Steitz T A. Science. 2000;289:920–930.[PubMed]
  • 9. Ban N, Nissen P, Hansen J, Moore P B, Steitz T A. Science. 2000;289:905–920.[PubMed]
  • 10. Samaha R R, Green R, Noller H F. Nature (London) 1995;377:309–314.[PubMed]
  • 11. Green R, Switzer C, Noller H F. Science. 1998;280:286–289.[PubMed]
  • 12. Muth G W, Ortoleva-Donnelly L, Strobel S A. Science. 2000;289:947–950.[PubMed]
  • 13. Xiong L, Polacek N, Sander P, Bottger E C, Mankin A. RNA. 2001;7:1365–1369.
  • 14. Polacek N, Gaynor M, Yassin A, Mankin A S. Nature (London) 2001;411:498–501.[PubMed]
  • 15. Thompson J, Kim D F, O'Connor M, Lieberman K R, Bayfield M A, Gregory S T, Green R, Noller H F, Dahlberg A E. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:9002–9007.
  • 16. Bayfield M A, Dahlberg A E, Schulmeister U, Dorner S, Barta A. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:10096–10101.
  • 17. Muth G W, Chen L, Kosek A B, Strobel S A. RNA. 2001;7:1403–1415.
  • 18. Katunin, V. I., Muth, G. W., Strobel, S. A., Wintermeyer, W. & Rodnina, M. V. (2002) Mol. Cell, in press.
  • 19. Yonath A. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct. 2002;31:257–273.[PubMed]
  • 20. Schmeing T M, Seila A C, Hansen J L, Freeborn B, Soukup J K, Scaringe S A, Strobel S A, Moore P B, Steitz T A. Nat Struct Biol. 2002;9:225–230.[PubMed]
  • 21. Diedrich G, Spahn C M, Stelzl U, Schafer M A, Wooten T, Bochkariov D E, Cooperman B S, Traut R R, Nierhaus K H. EMBO J. 2000;19:5241–5250.
  • 22. Ban N, Freeborn B, Nissen P, Penczek P, Grassucci R A, Sweet R, Frank J, Moore P B, Steitz T A. Cell. 1998;93:1105–1115.[PubMed]
  • 23. Otwinowski Z, Minor W. Methods Enzymol. 1997;276:307–326.[PubMed]
  • 24. Brunger A T, Adams P D, Clore G M, DeLano W L, Gros P, Grosse-Kunstleve R W, Jiang J S, Kuszewski J, Nilges M, Pannu N S, et al Acta Crystallogr D. 1998;54:905–921.[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 25. Klein D J, Schmeing T M, Moore P B, Steitz T A. EMBO J. 2001;20:4214–4221.
  • 26. Jones T A, Zou J Y, Cowan S W, Kjeldgaard M. Acta Crystallogr A. 1991;47:110–119.[PubMed]
  • 27. Brünger A T. Nature (London) 1992;355:472–474.[PubMed]
  • 28. Yusupov M M, Yusupova G Z, Baucom A, Lieberman K, Earnest T N, Cate J H, Noller H F. Science. 2001;292:883–896.[PubMed]
  • 29. Nissen P, Ippolito J A, Ban N, Moore P B, Steitz T A. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:4899–4903.
  • 30. Quiggle K, Kumar G, Ott T A, Ryu E K, Chládek S. Biochemistry. 1981;20:3480–3485.[PubMed]
  • 31. Welch M, Chastang J, Yarus M. Biochemistry. 1995;34:385–390.[PubMed]
  • 32. Wahl M C, Sundaralingam M. Nucleic Acids Res. 2000;28:4356–4363.
  • 33. Page M I, Jencks W P. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1971;68:1678–1683.
  • 34. Polacek N, Barta A. RNA. 1998;4:1282–1294.
  • 35. Green R, Noller H F. Annu Rev Biochem. 1997;66:679–716.[PubMed]
  • 36. Moazed D, Noller H F. Nature (London) 1989;342:142–148.[PubMed]
  • 37. Wilson K S, Noller H F. Cell. 1998;92:337–349.[PubMed]
Collaboration tool especially designed for Life Science professionals.Drag-and-drop any entity to your messages.