4.6 Article

Reconstitution of higher plant chloroplast chaperonin 60 tetradecamers active in protein folding

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 275, Issue 16, Pages 11829-11835

Publisher

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.275.16.11829

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Unlike the GroEL homologs of eubacteria and mitochondria, oligomer preparations of the higher plant chloroplast chaperonin 60 (cpn60) consist of roughly equal amounts of two divergent subunits, alpha and beta. The functional significance of these isoforms, their structural organization into tetradecamers, and their interactions with the unique binary chloroplast chaperonin 10 (cpn10) have not been elucidated. Toward this goal, we have cloned the alpha and beta subunits of the ch-cpn60 of pea (Pisum sativum), expressed them individually in Escherichia coli, and subjected the purified monomers to in vitro reconstitution experiments. In the absence of other factors, neither subunit (alone or in combination) spontaneously assembles into a higher order structure. However, in the presence of MgATP, the beta subunits form tetradecamers in a cooperative reaction that is potentiated by cpn10. In contrast, a subunits only assemble in the presence of beta subunits, Although beta and alpha/beta 14-mers are indistinguishable by electron microscopy and can both assist protein folding, their specificities for cpn10 are entirely different. Similar to the authentic chloroplast protein, the reconstituted alpha/beta 14-mers are functionally compatible with bacterial, mitochondrial, and chloroplast cpn10, In contrast, the folding reaction mediated by the reconstituted beta 14-mers is only efficient with mitochondrial cpn10. The ability to reconstitute two types of functional oligomer in vitro provides a unique tool, which will allow us to investigate the mechanism of this unusual chaperonin system.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available