Evolutionarily conserved binding of ribosomes to the translocation channel via the large ribosomal RNA

The contribution of mRNA targeting to spatial protein localization in bacteria

About 30% of all bacterial proteins execute their function outside of the cytosol and must be inserted into or translocated across the cytoplasmic membrane. This requires efficient targeting systems that recognize N-terminal signal sequences in client proteins and deliver them to protein transport complexes in the membrane. While the importance of these protein transport machineries for the spatial organization of the bacterial cell is well documented in multiple studies, the contribution of mRNA targeting and localized translation to protein transport is only beginning to emerge. mRNAs can exhibit diverse subcellular localizations in the bacterial cell and can accumulate at sites where new protein is required. This is frequently observed for mRNAs encoding membrane proteins, but the physiological importance of membrane enrichment of mRNAs and the consequences it has for the insertion of the encoded protein have not been explored in detail. Here, we briefly highlight some basic concepts of signal sequence-based protein targeting and describe in more detail strategies that enable the monitoring of mRNA localization in bacterial cells and potential mechanisms that route mRNAs to particular positions within the cell. Finally, we summarize some recent developments that demonstrate that mRNA targeting and localized translation can sustain membrane protein insertion under stress conditions when the protein-targeting machinery is compromised. Thus, mRNA targeting likely acts as a back-up strategy and complements the canonical signal sequence-based protein targeting.

Coping with stress: How bacteria fine-tune protein synthesis and protein transport

Maintaining a functional proteome under different environmental conditions is challenging for every organism, in particular for unicellular organisms, such as bacteria. In order to cope with changing environments and stress conditions, bacteria depend on strictly coordinated proteostasis networks that control protein production, folding, trafficking, and degradation. Regulation of ribosome biogenesis and protein synthesis are cornerstones of this cellular adaptation in all domains of life, which is rationalized by the high energy demand of both processes and the increased resistance of translationally silent cells against internal or external poisons. Reduced protein synthesis ultimately also reduces the substrate load for protein transport systems, which are required for maintaining the periplasmic, inner, and outer membrane subproteomes. Consequences of impaired protein transport have been analyzed in several studies and generally induce a multifaceted response that includes the upregulation of chaperones and proteases and the simultaneous downregulation of protein synthesis. In contrast, generally less is known on how bacteria adjust the protein targeting and transport machineries to reduced protein synthesis, e.g., when cells encounter stress conditions or face nutrient deprivation. In the current review, which is mainly focused on studies using Escherichia coli as a model organism, we summarize basic concepts on how ribosome biogenesis and activity are regulated under stress conditions. In addition, we highlight some recent developments on how stress conditions directly impair protein targeting to the bacterial membrane. Finally, we describe mechanisms that allow bacteria to maintain the transport of stress-responsive proteins under conditions when the canonical protein targeting pathways are impaired.

mRNA targeting eliminates the need for the signal recognition particle during membrane protein insertion in bacteria

Signal-sequence-dependent protein targeting is essential for the spatiotemporal organization of eukaryotic and prokaryotic cells and is facilitated by dedicated protein targeting factors such as the signal recognition particle (SRP). However, targeting signals are not exclusively contained within proteins but can also be present within mRNAs. By in vivo and in vitro assays, we show that mRNA targeting is controlled by the nucleotide content and by secondary structures within mRNAs. mRNA binding to bacterial membranes occurs independently of soluble targeting factors but is dependent on the SecYEG translocon and YidC. Importantly, membrane insertion of proteins translated from membrane-bound mRNAs occurs independently of the SRP pathway, while the latter is strictly required for proteins translated from cytosolic mRNAs. In summary, our data indicate that mRNA targeting acts in parallel to the canonical SRP-dependent protein targeting and serves as an alternative strategy for safeguarding membrane protein insertion when the SRP pathway is compromised.

Targeting of Proteins for Translocation at the Endoplasmic Reticulum

The endoplasmic reticulum represents the gateway to the secretory pathway. Here, proteins destined for secretion, as well as soluble and membrane proteins that reside in the endomembrane system and plasma membrane, are triaged from proteins that will remain in the cytosol or be targeted to other cellular organelles. This process requires the faithful recognition of specific targeting signals and subsequent delivery mechanisms to then target them to the translocases present at the ER membrane, which can either translocate them into the ER lumen or insert them into the lipid bilayer. This review focuses on the current understanding of the first step in this process representing the targeting phase. Targeting is typically mediated by cleavable N-terminal hydrophobic signal sequences or internal membrane anchor sequences; these can either be captured co-translationally at the ribosome or recognised post-translationally and then delivered to the ER translocases. Location and features of the targeting sequence dictate which of several overlapping targeting pathway substrates will be used. Mutations in the targeting machinery or targeting signals can be linked to diseases.

The mechanisms of integral membrane protein biogenesis

Roughly one quarter of all genes code for integral membrane proteins that are inserted into the plasma membrane of prokaryotes or the endoplasmic reticulum membrane of eukaryotes. Multiple pathways are used for the targeting and insertion of membrane proteins on the basis of their topological and biophysical characteristics. Multipass membrane proteins span the membrane multiple times and face the additional challenges of intramembrane folding. In many cases, integral membrane proteins require assembly with other proteins to form multi-subunit membrane protein complexes. Recent biochemical and structural analyses have provided considerable clarity regarding the molecular basis of membrane protein targeting and insertion, with tantalizing new insights into the poorly understood processes of multipass membrane protein biogenesis and multi-subunit protein complex assembly.

Rapid inactivation of the yeast Sec complex selectively blocks transport of post-translationally translocated proteins

The yeast endoplasmic reticulum has three distinct protein translocation channels. The heterotrimeric Sec61 and Ssh1 complexes, which bind translating ribosomes, mediate cotranslational translocation of proteins targeted to the endoplasmic reticulum by the signal recognition particle (SRP) and SRP receptor targeting pathway, whereas the heptameric Sec complex has been proposed to mediate ribosome-independent post-translational translocation of proteins with less hydrophobic signal sequences that escape recognition by the SRP. However, multiple reports have proposed that the Sec complex may function cotranslationally and be involved in translocation or integration of SRP-dependent protein translocation substrates. To provide insight into these conflicting views, we induced expression of the tobacco etch virus protease to achieve rapid inactivation of the Sec complex by protease-mediated cleavage within the cytoplasmic domain of the Sec63 protein. Protein translocation assays conducted after tobacco etch virus protease induction revealed a complete block in translocation of two well-characterized substrates of the Sec complex, carboxypeptidase Y (CPY) and Gas1p, when the protease cleavage sites were located at structural domain boundaries in Sec63. However, integration of SRP-dependent membrane protein substrates was not detectably impacted. Moreover, redirecting CPY to the cotranslational pathway by increasing the hydrophobicity of the signal sequence rendered translocation of CPY insensitive to inactivation of the Sec complex. We conclude that the Sec complex is primarily responsible for the translocation of yeast secretome proteins with marginally hydrophobic signal sequences.

The Dynamic SecYEG Translocon

The spatial and temporal coordination of protein transport is an essential cornerstone of the bacterial adaptation to different environmental conditions. By adjusting the protein composition of extra-cytosolic compartments, like the inner and outer membranes or the periplasmic space, protein transport mechanisms help shaping protein homeostasis in response to various metabolic cues. The universally conserved SecYEG translocon acts at the center of bacterial protein transport and mediates the translocation of newly synthesized proteins into and across the cytoplasmic membrane. The ability of the SecYEG translocon to transport an enormous variety of different substrates is in part determined by its ability to interact with multiple targeting factors, chaperones and accessory proteins. These interactions are crucial for the assisted passage of newly synthesized proteins from the cytosol into the different bacterial compartments. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge about SecYEG-mediated protein transport, primarily in the model organism Escherichia coli, and describe the dynamic interaction of the SecYEG translocon with its multiple partner proteins. We furthermore highlight how protein transport is regulated and explore recent developments in using the SecYEG translocon as an antimicrobial target.

Asparagine-linked glycosylation is not directly coupled to protein translocation across the endoplasmic reticulum in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Mammalian cells express two oligosaccharyltransferase complexes, STT3A and STT3B, that have distinct roles in N-linked glycosylation. The STT3A complex interacts directly with the protein translocation channel to mediate glycosylation of proteins using an N-terminal-to-C-terminal scanning mechanism. N-linked glycosylation of proteins in budding yeast has been assumed to be a cotranslational reaction. We have compared glycosylation of several glycoproteins in yeast and mammalian cells. Prosaposin, a cysteine-rich protein that contains STT3A-dependent glycosylation sites, is poorly glycosylated in yeast cells and STT3A-deficient human cells. In contrast, a protein with extreme C-terminal glycosylation sites was efficiently glycosylated in yeast by a posttranslocational mechanism. Posttranslocational glycosylation was also observed for carboxypeptidase Y-derived reporter proteins that contain closely spaced acceptor sites. A comparison of two recent protein structures indicates that the yeast OST is unable to interact with the yeast heptameric Sec complex via an evolutionarily conserved interface due to occupation of the OST binding site by the Sec63 protein. The efficiency of glycosylation in yeast is not enhanced for proteins that are translocated by the Sec61 or Ssh1 translocation channels instead of the Sec complex. We conclude that N-linked glycosylation and protein translocation are not directly coupled in yeast cells.

Heterogeneous translational landscape of the endoplasmic reticulum revealed by ribosome proximity labeling and transcriptome analysis

The endoplasmic reticulum (ER) is a nexus for mRNA localization and translation, and recent studies have demonstrated that ER-bound ribosomes also play a transcriptome-wide role in regulating proteome composition. The Sec61 translocon (SEC61) serves as the receptor for ribosomes that translate secretory/integral membrane protein-encoding mRNAs, but whether SEC61 also serves as a translation site for cytosolic protein-encoding mRNAs remains unknown. Here, using a BioID proximity-labeling approach in HEK293T Flp-In cell lines, we examined interactions between ER-resident proteins and ribosomes in vivo Using in vitro analyses, we further focused on bona fide ribosome interactors (i.e. SEC61) and ER proteins (ribophorin I, leucine-rich repeat-containing 59 (LRRC59), and SEC62) previously implicated in associating with ribosomes. We observed labeling of ER-bound ribosomes with the SEC61β and LRRC59 BioID reporters, comparatively modest labeling with the ribophorin I reporter, and no labeling with the SEC62 reporter. A biotin pulse-chase/subcellular fractionation approach to examine ribosome exchange at the SEC61β and LRRC59 sites revealed that, at steady state, ribosomes at these sites comprise both rapid- and slow-exchanging pools. Global translational initiation arrest elicited by the inhibitor harringtonine accelerated SEC61β reporter-labeled ribosome exchange. RNA-Seq analyses of the mRNAs associated with SEC61β- and LRRC59-labeled ribosomes revealed both site-enriched and shared mRNAs and further established that the ER has a transcriptome-wide role in regulating proteome composition. These results provide evidence that ribosomes interact with the ER membrane via multiple modes and suggest regulatory mechanisms that control global proteome composition via ER membrane-bound ribosomes.

Conserved motifs on the cytoplasmic face of the protein translocation channel are critical for the transition between resting and active conformations

The Sec61 complex is the primary cotranslational protein translocation channel in yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae). The structural transition between the closed inactive conformation of the Sec61 complex and its open and active conformation is thought to be promoted by binding of the ribosome nascent-chain complex to the cytoplasmic surface of the Sec61 complex. Here, we have analyzed new yeast Sec61 mutants that selectively interfere with cotranslational translocation across the endoplasmic reticulum. We found that a single substitution at the junction between transmembrane segment TM7 and the L6/7 loop interferes with cotranslational translocation by uncoupling ribosome binding to the L6/7 loop from the separation of the lateral gate transmembrane spans. Substitutions replacing basic residues with acidic residues in the C-terminal tail of Sec61 had an unanticipated impact upon binding of ribosomes to the Sec61 complex. We found that similar charge-reversal mutations in the N-terminal tail and in cytoplasmic loop L2/3 did not alter ribosome binding but interfered with translocation channel gating. These findings indicated that these segments are important for the structural transition between the inactive and active conformations of the Sec61 complex. In summary our results have identified additional cytosolic segments of the Sec61 complex important for promoting the structural transition between the closed and open conformations of the complex. We conclude that positively charged residues in multiple cytosolic segments, as well as bulky hydrophobic residues in the L6/7-TM7 junction, are required for cotranslational translocation or integration of membrane proteins by the Sec61 complex.

Driving Forces of Translocation Through Bacterial Translocon SecYEG

This review focusses on the energetics of protein translocation via the Sec translocation machinery. First we complement structural data about SecYEG's conformational rearrangements by insight obtained from functional assays. These include measurements of SecYEG permeability that allow assessment of channel gating by ligand binding and membrane voltage. Second we will discuss the power stroke and Brownian ratcheting models of substrate translocation and the role that the two models assign to the putative driving forces: (i) ATP (SecA) and GTP (ribosome) hydrolysis, (ii) interaction with accessory proteins, (iii) membrane partitioning and folding, (iv) proton motive force (PMF), and (v) entropic contributions. Our analysis underlines how important energized membranes are for unravelling the translocation mechanism in future experiments.

The Ribosome-Bound Protein Pam68 Promotes Insertion of Chlorophyll into the CP47 Subunit of Photosystem II

Photosystem II (PSII) is a large enzyme complex embedded in the thylakoid membrane of oxygenic phototrophs. The biogenesis of PSII requires the assembly of more than 30 subunits, with the assistance of a number of auxiliary proteins. In plants and cyanobacteria, the photosynthesis-affected mutant 68 (Pam68) is important for PSII assembly. However, its mechanisms of action remain unknown. Using a Synechocystis PCC 6803 strain expressing Flag-tagged Pam68, we purified a large protein complex containing ribosomes, SecY translocase, and the chlorophyll-binding PSII inner antenna CP47. Using 2D gel electrophoresis, we identified a pigmented Pam68-CP47 subcomplex and found Pam68 bound to ribosomes. Our results show that Pam68 binds to ribosomes even in the absence of CP47 translation. Furthermore, Pam68 associates with CP47 at an early phase of its biogenesis and promotes the synthesis of this chlorophyll-binding polypeptide until the attachment of the small PSII subunit PsbH. Deletion of both Pam68 and PsbH nearly abolishes the synthesis of CP47, which can be restored by enhancing chlorophyll biosynthesis. These results strongly suggest that ribosome-bound Pam68 stabilizes membrane segments of CP47 and facilitates the insertion of chlorophyll molecules into the translated CP47 polypeptide chain.

Evidence for a cytoplasmic pool of ribosome-free mRNAs encoding inner membrane proteins in Escherichia coli

Translation-independent mRNA localization represents an emerging concept in cell biology. In Escherichia coli, mRNAs encoding integral membrane proteins (MPRs) are targeted to the membrane where they are translated by membrane associated ribosomes and the produced proteins are inserted into the membrane co-translationally. In order to better understand aspects of the biogenesis and localization of MPRs, we investigated their subcellular distribution using cell fractionation, RNA-seq and qPCR. The results show that MPRs are overrepresented in the membrane fraction, as expected, and depletion of the signal recognition particle-receptor, FtsY reduced the amounts of all mRNAs on the membrane. Surprisingly, however, MPRs were also found relatively abundant in the soluble ribosome-free fraction and their amount in this fraction is increased upon overexpression of CspE, which was recently shown to interact with MPRs. CspE also conferred a positive effect on the membrane-expression of integral membrane proteins. We discuss the possibility that the effects of CspE overexpression may link the intriguing subcellular localization of MPRs to the cytosolic ribosome-free fraction with their translation into membrane proteins and that the ribosome-free pool of MPRs may represent a stage during their targeting to the membrane, which precedes translation.

Targeting and Insertion of Membrane Proteins

The insertion and assembly of proteins into the inner membrane of bacteria are crucial for many cellular processes, including cellular respiration, signal transduction, and ion and pH homeostasis. This process requires efficient membrane targeting and insertion of proteins into the lipid bilayer in their correct orientation and proper conformation. Playing center stage in these events are the targeting components, signal recognition particle (SRP) and the SRP receptor FtsY, as well as the insertion components, the Sec translocon and the YidC insertase. Here, we will discuss new insights provided from the recent high-resolution structures of these proteins. In addition, we will review the mechanism by which a variety of proteins with different topologies are inserted into the inner membrane of Gram-negative bacteria. Finally, we report on the energetics of this process and provide information on how membrane insertion occurs in Gram-positive bacteria and Archaea. It should be noted that most of what we know about membrane protein assembly in bacteria is based on studies conducted in Escherichia coli.

Ribosome binding induces repositioning of the signal recognition particle receptor on the translocon

The cotranslational transfer of nascent membrane proteins to the SecYEG translocon is facilitated by a reorientation of the SecY-bound signal recognition particle (SRP) receptor, FtsY, which accompanies the formation of a quaternary targeting complex consisting of SecYEG, FtsY, SRP, and the ribosome.

Cotranslational protein targeting delivers proteins to the bacterial cytoplasmic membrane or to the eukaryotic endoplasmic reticulum membrane. The signal recognition particle (SRP) binds to signal sequences emerging from the ribosomal tunnel and targets the ribosome-nascent-chain complex (RNC) to the SRP receptor, termed FtsY in bacteria. FtsY interacts with the fifth cytosolic loop of SecY in the SecYEG translocon, but the functional role of the interaction is unclear. By using photo-cross-linking and fluorescence resonance energy transfer measurements, we show that FtsY–SecY complex formation is guanosine triphosphate independent but requires a phospholipid environment. Binding of an SRP–RNC complex exposing a hydrophobic transmembrane segment induces a rearrangement of the SecY–FtsY complex, which allows the subsequent contact between SecY and ribosomal protein uL23. These results suggest that direct RNC transfer to the translocon is guided by the interaction between SRP and translocon-bound FtsY in a quaternary targeting complex.

An analysis of surface proteomics results reveals novel candidates for intracellular/surface moonlighting proteins in bacteria

Dozens of intracellular proteins have a second function on the cell surface, referred to as “intracellular/surface moonlighting proteins”. An analysis of the results of 22 cell surface proteomics studies was performed to address whether the hundreds of intracellular proteins found on the cell surface could be candidates for being additional intracellular/surface moonlighting proteins.

Mammalian SRP receptor switches the Sec61 translocase from Sec62 to SRP-dependent translocation

Two distinct pathways deliver secretory proteins to the Sec61 protein translocase in the endoplasmic reticulum membrane. The canonical pathway requires the signal recognition particle (SRP) and its cognate receptor (SR), and targets ribosome-associated proteins to the Sec translocase. The SRP-independent pathway requires the Sec translocase-associated ER membrane protein Sec62 and can be uncoupled from translation. Here we show that SR switches translocons to SRP-dependent translocation by displacing Sec62. This activity localizes to the charged linker region between the longin and GTPase domains of SRα. Using truncation variants, crosslinking and translocation assays reveals two elements with distinct functions as follows: one rearranges the translocon, displacing Sec62 from Sec61. A second promotes ribosome binding and is conserved between all eukaryotes. These specific regions in SRα reprogramme the Sec translocon and facilitate recruitment of ribosome-nascent chain complexes. Overall, our study identifies an important function of SR, which mechanistically links two seemingly independent modes of translocation.

Diversity and selectivity in mRNA translation on the endoplasmic reticulum

Pioneering electron microscopy studies defined two primary populations of ribosomes in eukaryotic cells: one freely dispersed through the cytoplasm and the other bound to the surface of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). Subsequent investigations revealed a specialized function for each population, with secretory and integral membrane protein-encoding mRNAs translated on ER-bound ribosomes, and cytosolic protein synthesis was widely attributed to free ribosomes. Recent findings have challenged this view, and transcriptome-scale studies of mRNA distribution and translation have now demonstrated that ER-bound ribosomes also function in the translation of a large fraction of mRNAs that encode cytosolic proteins. These studies suggest a far more expansive role for the ER in transcriptome expression, where membrane and secretory protein synthesis represents one element of a multifaceted and dynamic contribution to post-transcriptional gene expression.

Multifunctional roles for the protein translocation machinery in RNA anchoring to the endoplasmic reticulum

Signal sequence-encoding mRNAs undergo translation-dependent localization to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and at the ER are anchored via translation on Sec61-bound ribosomes. Recent investigations into the composition and membrane association characteristics of ER-associated mRNAs have, however, revealed both ribosome-dependent (indirect) and ribosome-independent (direct) modes of mRNA association with the ER. These findings raise important questions regarding our understanding of how mRNAs are selected, localized, and anchored to the ER. Using semi-intact tissue culture cells, we performed a polysome solubilization screen and identified conditions that distinguish polysomes engaged in the translation of distinct cohorts of mRNAs. To gain insight into the molecular basis of direct mRNA anchoring to the ER, we performed RNA-protein UV photocross-linking studies in rough microsomes and demonstrate that numerous ER integral membrane proteins display RNA binding activity. Quantitative proteomic analyses of HeLa cytosolic and ER-bound polysome fractions identified translocon components as selective polysome-interacting proteins. Notably, the Sec61 complex was highly enriched in polysomes engaged in the translation of endomembrane organelle proteins, whereas translocon accessory proteins, such as ribophorin I, were present in all subpopulations of ER-associated polysomes. Analyses of the protein composition of oligo(dT)-selected UV photocross-linked ER protein-RNA adducts identified Sec61α,β and ribophorin I as ER-poly(A) mRNA-binding proteins, suggesting unexpected roles for the protein translocation and modification machinery in mRNA anchoring to the ER. In summary, we propose that multiple mechanisms of mRNA and ribosome association with ER operate to enable an mRNA transcriptome-wide function for the ER in protein synthesis.

Dynamic interaction of the sec translocon with the chaperone PpiD

The Sec translocon constitutes a ubiquitous protein transport channel that consists in bacteria of the three core components: SecY, SecE, and SecG. Additional proteins interact with SecYEG during different stages of protein transport. During targeting, SecYEG interacts with SecA, the SRP receptor, or the ribosome. Protein transport into or across the membrane is then facilitated by the interaction of SecYEG with YidC and the SecDFYajC complex. During protein transport, SecYEG is likely to interact also with the protein quality control machinery, but details about this interaction are missing. By in vivo and in vitro site-directed cross-linking, we show here that the periplasmic chaperone PpiD is located in front of the lateral gate of SecY, through which transmembrane domains exit the SecY channel. The strongest contacts were found to helix 2b of SecY. Blue native PAGE analyses verify the presence of a SecYEG-PpiD complex in native Escherichia coli membranes. The PpiD-SecY interaction was not influenced by the addition of SecA and only weakly influenced by binding of nontranslating ribosomes to SecYEG. In contrast, PpiD lost contact to the lateral gate of SecY during membrane protein insertion. These data identify PpiD as an additional and transient subunit of the bacterial SecYEG translocon. The data furthermore demonstrate the highly modular and versatile composition of the Sec translocon, which is probably essential for its ability to transport a wide range of substrates across membranes in bacteria and eukaryotes.

On the expansion of ribosomal proteins and RNAs in eukaryotes

While the ribosome constitution is similar in all biota, there is a considerable increase in size of both ribosomal proteins (RPs) and RNAs in eukaryotes as compared to archaea and bacteria. This is pronounced in the large (60S) ribosomal subunit (LSU). In addition to enlargement (apparently maximized already in lower eukarya), the RP changes include increases in fraction, segregation and clustering of basic residues, and decrease in hydrophobicity. The acidic fraction is lower in eukaryote as compared to prokaryote RPs. In all eukaryote groups tested, the LSU RPs have significantly higher content of basic residues and homobasic segments than the SSU RPs. The vertebrate LSU RPs have much higher sequestration of basic residues than those of bacteria, archaea and even of the lower eukarya. The basic clusters are highly aligned in the vertebrate, but less in the lower eukarya, and only within families in archaea and bacteria. Increase in the basicity of RPs, besides helping transport to the nucleus, should promote stability of the assembled ribosome as well as the association with translocons and other intracellular matrix proteins. The size and GC nucleotide bias of the expansion segments of large LSU rRNAs also culminate in the vertebrate, and should support ribosome association with the endoplasmic reticulum and other intracellular networks. However, the expansion and nucleotide bias of eukaryote LSU rRNAs do not clearly correlate with changes in ionic parameters of LSU ribosomal proteins.

Heat shock transcription factor σ32 co-opts the signal recognition particle to regulate protein homeostasis in E. coli

The bacterial heat shock transcription factor, σ32, maintains proper protein homeostasis only after it is targeted to the inner membrane by the signal recognition particle (SRP), thereby enabling integration of protein folding information from both the cytoplasm and cell membrane.

All cells must adapt to rapidly changing conditions. The heat shock response (HSR) is an intracellular signaling pathway that maintains proteostasis (protein folding homeostasis), a process critical for survival in all organisms exposed to heat stress or other conditions that alter the folding of the proteome. Yet despite decades of study, the circuitry described for responding to altered protein status in the best-studied bacterium, E. coli, does not faithfully recapitulate the range of cellular responses in response to this stress. Here, we report the discovery of the missing link. Surprisingly, we found that σ³², the central transcription factor driving the HSR, must be localized to the membrane rather than dispersed in the cytoplasm as previously assumed. Genetic analyses indicate that σ³² localization results from a protein targeting reaction facilitated by the signal recognition particle (SRP) and its receptor (SR), which together comprise a conserved protein targeting machine and mediate the cotranslational targeting of inner membrane proteins to the membrane. SRP interacts with σ³² directly and transports it to the inner membrane. Our results show that σ³² must be membrane-associated to be properly regulated in response to the protein folding status in the cell, explaining how the HSR integrates information from both the cytoplasm and bacterial cell membrane.

All cells have to adjust to frequent changes in their environmental conditions. The heat shock response is a signaling pathway critical for survival of all organisms exposed to elevated temperatures. Under such conditions, the heat shock response maintains enzymes and other proteins in a properly folded state. The mechanisms for sensing temperature and the subsequent induction of the appropriate transcriptional response have been extensively studied. Prior to this work, however, the circuitry described in the best studied bacterium E. coli could not fully explain the range of cellular responses that are observed following heat shock. We report the discovery of this missing link. Surprisingly, we find that σ³², a transcription factor that induces gene expression during heat shock, needs to be localized to the membrane, rather than being active as a soluble cytoplasmic protein as previously thought. We show that, equally surprisingly, σ³² is targeted to the membrane by the signal recognition particle (SRP) and its receptor (SR). SRP and SR constitute a conserved protein targeting machine that normally only operates on membrane and periplasmic proteins that contain identifiable signal sequences. Intriguingly, σ³² does not have any canonical signal sequence for export or membrane-integration. Our results indicate that membrane-associated σ³², not soluble cytoplasmic σ³², is the preferred target of regulatory control in response to heat shock. Our new model thus explains how protein folding status from both the cytoplasm and bacterial cell membrane can be integrated to control the heat shock response.

The secretory pathway: exploring yeast diversity

Protein secretion is an essential process for living organisms. In eukaryotes, this encompasses numerous steps mediated by several hundred cellular proteins. The core functions of translocation through the endoplasmic reticulum membrane, primary glycosylation, folding and quality control, and vesicle-mediated secretion are similar from yeasts to higher eukaryotes. However, recent research has revealed significant functional differences between yeasts and mammalian cells, and even among diverse yeast species. This review provides a current overview of the canonical protein secretion pathway in the model yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, highlighting differences to mammalian cells as well as currently unresolved questions, and provides a genomic comparison of the S. cerevisiae pathway to seven other yeast species where secretion has been investigated due to their attraction as protein production platforms, or for their relevance as pathogens. The analysis of Candida albicans, Candida glabrata, Kluyveromyces lactis, Pichia pastoris, Hansenula polymorpha, Yarrowia lipolytica, and Schizosaccharomyces pombe reveals that many - but not all - secretion steps are more redundant in S. cerevisiae due to duplicated genes, while some processes are even absent in this model yeast. Recent research obviates that even where homologous genes are present, small differences in protein sequence and/or differences in the regulation of gene expression may lead to quite different protein secretion phenotypes.

Competitive binding of the SecA ATPase and ribosomes to the SecYEG translocon

During co-translational membrane insertion of membrane proteins with large periplasmic domains, the bacterial SecYEG complex needs to interact both with the ribosome and the SecA ATPase. Although the binding sites for SecA and the ribosome overlap, it has been suggested that these ligands can interact simultaneously with SecYEG. We used surface plasmon resonance and fluorescence correlation spectroscopy to examine the interaction of SecA and ribosomes with the SecYEG complex present in membrane vesicles and the purified SecYEG complex present in a detergent-solubilized state or reconstituted into nanodiscs. Ribosome binding to the SecYEG complex is strongly stimulated when the ribosomes are charged with nascent chains of the monotopic membrane protein FtsQ. This binding is competed by an excess of SecA, indicating that binding of SecA and ribosomes to SecYEG is mutually exclusive.

Conformational dynamics of the plug domain of the SecYEG protein-conducting channel

The central pore of the SecYEG preprotein-conducting channel is closed at the periplasmic face of the membrane by a plug domain. To study its conformational dynamics, the plug was labeled site-specifically with an environment-sensitive fluorophore. In the presence of a stable preprotein translocation inter-mediate, the SecY plug showed an enhanced solvent exposure consistent with a displacement from the hydrophobic central pore region. In contrast, binding and insertion of a ribosome-bound nascent membrane protein did not alter the plug conformation. These data indicate different plug dynamics depending on the ligand bound state of the SecYEG channel.

Promiscuous targeting of polytopic membrane proteins to SecYEG or YidC by the Escherichia coli signal recognition particle

The YidC insertase also integrates multispanning membrane proteins that had been considered to be exclusively SecYEG dependent. Only membrane proteins that require SecA can be inserted only via SecYEG. Targeting to YidC is SRP dependent, and the C-terminus of YidC cross-links to SRP, FtsY, and ribosomal subunits.

Protein insertion into the bacterial inner membrane is facilitated by SecYEG or YidC. Although SecYEG most likely constitutes the major integration site, small membrane proteins have been shown to integrate via YidC. We show that YidC can also integrate multispanning membrane proteins such as mannitol permease or TatC, which had been considered to be exclusively integrated by SecYEG. Only SecA-dependent multispanning membrane proteins strictly require SecYEG for integration, which suggests that SecA can only interact with the SecYEG translocon, but not with the YidC insertase. Targeting of multispanning membrane proteins to YidC is mediated by signal recognition particle (SRP), and we show by site-directed cross-linking that the C-terminus of YidC is in contact with SRP, the SRP receptor, and ribosomal proteins. These findings indicate that SRP recognizes membrane proteins independent of the downstream integration site and that many membrane proteins can probably use either SecYEG or YidC for integration. Because protein synthesis is much slower than protein transport, the use of YidC as an additional integration site for multispanning membrane proteins may prevent a situation in which the majority of SecYEG complexes are occupied by translating ribosomes during cotranslational insertion, impeding the translocation of secretory proteins.

Membrane protein insertion at the endoplasmic reticulum

Integral membrane proteins of the cell surface and most intracellular compartments of eukaryotic cells are assembled at the endoplasmic reticulum. Two highly conserved and parallel pathways mediate membrane protein targeting to and insertion into this organelle. The classical cotranslational pathway, utilized by most membrane proteins, involves targeting by the signal recognition particle followed by insertion via the Sec61 translocon. A more specialized posttranslational pathway, employed by many tail-anchored membrane proteins, is composed of entirely different factors centered around a cytosolic ATPase termed TRC40 or Get3. Both of these pathways overcome the same biophysical challenges of ferrying hydrophobic cargo through an aqueous milieu, selectively delivering it to one among several intracellular membranes and asymmetrically integrating its transmembrane domain(s) into the lipid bilayer. Here, we review the conceptual and mechanistic themes underlying these core membrane protein insertion pathways, the complexities that challenge our understanding, and future directions to overcome these obstacles.

Signal sequence-independent SRP-SR complex formation at the membrane suggests an alternative targeting pathway within the SRP cycle

Our study reveals an alternative route in the SRP-dependent protein targeting pathway that includes a preassembled, membrane-bound SRP-SR complex. This alternative route is fully sufficient to maintain cell viability in the absence of a soluble SRP.

Protein targeting by the signal recognition particle (SRP) and the bacterial SRP receptor FtsY requires a series of closely coordinated steps that monitor the presence of a substrate, the membrane, and a vacant translocon. Although the influence of substrate binding on FtsY-SRP complex formation is well documented, the contribution of the membrane is largely unknown. In the current study, we found that negatively charged phospholipids stimulate FtsY-SRP complex formation. Phospholipids act on a conserved positively charged amphipathic helix in FtsY and induce a conformational change that strongly enhances the FtsY-lipid interaction. This membrane-bound, signal sequence–independent FtsY-SRP complex is able to recruit RNCs to the membrane and to transfer them to the Sec translocon. Significantly, the same results were also observed with an artificial FtsY-SRP fusion protein, which was tethered to the membrane via a transmembrane domain. This indicates that substrate recognition by a soluble SRP is not essential for cotranslational targeting in Escherichia coli. Our findings reveal a remarkable flexibility of SRP-dependent protein targeting, as they indicate that substrate recognition can occur either in the cytosol via ribosome-bound SRP or at the membrane via a preassembled FtsY-SRP complex.

The bacterial SRP receptor, SecA and the ribosome use overlapping binding sites on the SecY translocon

Signal recognition particle (SRP)-dependent protein targeting is a universally conserved process that delivers proteins to the bacterial cytoplasmic membrane or to the endoplasmic reticulum membrane in eukaryotes. Crucial during targeting is the transfer of the ribosome-nascent chain complex (RNC) from SRP to the Sec translocon. In eukaryotes, this step is co-ordinated by the SRβ subunit of the SRP receptor (SR), which probably senses a vacant translocon by direct interaction with the translocon. Bacteria lack the SRβ subunit and how they co-ordinate RNC transfer is unknown. By site-directed cross-linking and fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) analyses, we show that FtsY, the bacterial SRα homologue, binds to the exposed C4/C5 loops of SecY, the central component of the bacterial Sec translocon. The same loops serve also as binding sites for SecA and the ribosome. The FtsY-SecY interaction involves at least the A domain of FtsY, which attributes an important function to this so far ill-defined domain. Binding of FtsY to SecY residues, which are also used by SecA and the ribosome, probably allows FtsY to sense an available translocon and to align the incoming SRP-RNC with the protein conducting channel. Thus, the Escherichia coli FtsY encompasses the functions of both the eukaryotic SRα and SRβ subunits in one single protein.

BiP modulates the affinity of its co-chaperone ERj1 for ribosomes

Ribosomes synthesizing secretory and membrane proteins are bound to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane and attach to ribosome-associated membrane proteins such as the Sec61 complex, which forms the protein-conducting channel in the membrane. The ER membrane-resident Hsp40 protein ERj1 was characterized as being able to recruit BiP to ribosomes in solution and to regulate protein synthesis in a BiP-dependent manner. Here, we show that ERj1 and Sec61 are associated with ribosomes at the ER of human cells and that the binding of ERj1 to ribosomes occurs with a binding constant in the picomolar range and is prevented by pretreatment of ribosomes with RNase. However, the affinity of ERj1 for ribosomes dramatically changes upon binding of BiP. This modulation by BiP may be responsible for the dual role of ERj1 at the ribosome, i.e. acting as a recruiting factor for BiP and regulating translation.

Structural studies and the assembly of the heptameric post-translational translocon complex

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, some of the nascent chains can be post-translationally translocated into the endoplasmic reticulum through the heptameric post-translational translocon complex (post-translocon). This membrane-protein complex is composed of the protein-conducting channel and the tetrameric Sec62/63 complex. The Sec62/63 complex plays crucial roles in targeting of the signal recognition particle-independent protein substrate to the protein-conducting channel and in assembly of the post-translocon. Although the molecular mechanism of the post-translational translocation process has been well established, the structure of the post-translocon and how the channel and the Sec62/63 complex form the heptameric complex are largely uncharacterized. Here, we report a 20-Å resolution cryo-electron microscopy structure of the post-translocon. The purified post-translocon was found to have a mass of 287 kDa, which is consistent with the unit stoichiometry of the seven subunits as determined by a cysteine labeling experiment. We demonstrated that Triton X-100 dissociated the heptameric complex into three subcomplexes identified as the trimeric translocon Sec61-Sbh1-Sss1, the Sec63-Sec71-Sec72 trimer, and the heterotetramer Sec62-Sec63-Sec71-Sec72, respectively. Additionally, a role of the sixth cytosolic loop of Sec61 in assembly of the post-translocon was demonstrated. Mutations of conserved, positively charged amino acid residues in the loop caused decreased formation of the post-translocon. These studies provide the first architectural description of the yeast post-translocon.

The mammalian and yeast translocon complexes comprise a characteristic Sec61 channel

In eukaryotes, protein translocation across and insertion into the membrane of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) is facilitated by a protein-conducting channel, the Sec61 complex or translocon. In our previous electrophysiological studies, we characterized the mammalian Sec61 channel from Canis familiaris. Here we extended these initial results to the Sec61 channel from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae and compared the basic electrophysiological properties of both channel preparations with respect to the gating behaviour, distribution of channel open states, ionic conductance, approximated pore dimensions, reversal potential and selectivity as well as voltage-dependent open probability. We found that the Sec61 complexes from both species displayed conformable characteristics of the highly dynamic channel in an intrinsically open state. In contrast, the bacterial Sec61-homologue, the SecYEG complex from Escherichia coli, displayed under the same experimental conditions significantly different properties residing in an intrinsically closed state. We therefore propose that considerable differences between the respective eukaryote and prokaryote protein-conducting channel units and their regulation exist.

Protein transport across and into cell membranes in bacteria and archaea

In the three domains of life, the Sec, YidC/Oxa1, and Tat translocases play important roles in protein translocation across membranes and membrane protein insertion. While extensive studies have been performed on the endoplasmic reticular and Escherichia coli systems, far fewer studies have been done on archaea, other Gram-negative bacteria, and Gram-positive bacteria. Interestingly, work carried out to date has shown that there are differences in the protein transport systems in terms of the number of translocase components and, in some cases, the translocation mechanisms and energy sources that drive translocation. In this review, we will describe the different systems employed to translocate and insert proteins across or into the cytoplasmic membrane of archaea and bacteria.

Single copies of Sec61 and TRAP associate with a nontranslating mammalian ribosome

During cotranslational protein translocation, the ribosome associates with a membrane channel, formed by the Sec61 complex, and recruits the translocon-associated protein complex (TRAP). Here we report the structure of a ribosome-channel complex from mammalian endoplasmic reticulum in which the channel has been visualized at 11 A resolution. In this complex, single copies of Sec61 and TRAP associate with a nontranslating ribosome and this stoichiometry was verified by quantitative mass spectrometry. A bilayer-like density surrounds the channel and can be attributed to lipid and detergent. The crystal structure of an archaeal homolog of the Sec61 complex was then docked into the map. In this model, two cytoplasmic loops of Sec61 may interact with RNA helices H6, H7, and H50, while the central pore is located below the ribosome tunnel exit. Hence, this copy of Sec61 is positioned to capture and translocate the nascent chain. Finally, we show that mammalian and bacterial ribosome-channel complexes have similar architectures.

Access to ribosomal protein Rpl25p by the signal recognition particle is required for efficient cotranslational translocation

Targeting of proteins to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) occurs cotranslationally necessitating the interaction of the signal recognition particle (SRP) and the translocon with the ribosome. Biochemical and structural studies implicate ribosomal protein Rpl25p as a major ribosome interaction site for both these factors. Here we characterize an RPL25GFP fusion, which behaves as a dominant mutant leading to defects in co- but not posttranslational translocation in vivo. In these cells, ribosomes still interact with ER membrane and the translocon, but are defective in binding SRP. Overexpression of SRP can restore ribosome binding of SRP, but only partially rescues growth and translocation defects. Our results indicate that Rpl25p plays a critical role in the recruitment of SRP to the ribosome.

Trigger Factor can antagonize both SecB and DnaK/DnaJ chaperone functions in Escherichia coli

Polypeptides emerging from the ribosome are assisted by a pool of molecular chaperones and targeting factors, which enable them to efficiently partition as cytoplasmic, integral membrane, or exported proteins. In Escherichia coli, the chaperones SecB, Trigger Factor (TF), and DnaK are key players in this process. Here, we report that, as with dnaK or dnaJ mutants, a secB null strain exhibits a strong cold-sensitive (Cs) phenotype. Through suppressor analyses, we found that inactivating mutations in the tig gene encoding TF fully relieve both the Cs phenotype and protein aggregation observed in the absence of SecB. This antagonistic effect of TF depends on its ribosome-binding and chaperone activities but unrelated to its peptidyl-prolyl cis/trans isomerase (PPIase) activity. Furthermore, in contrast to the previously known synergistic action of TF and DnaK/DnaJ above 30 degrees C, a tig null mutation partially suppresses the Cs phenotype exhibited by a compromised DnaK/DnaJ chaperone machine. The antagonistic role of TF is further exemplified by the fact that the secB dnaJ double mutant is viable only in the absence of TF. Finally, we show that, in the absence of TF, more SecA and ribosomes are associated with the inner membrane, suggesting that the presence of TF directly or indirectly interferes with the process of cotranslational protein targeting to the Sec translocon.

Human ribosomal protein L7 displays an ER binding property and is involved in ribosome-ER association

Human ribosomal protein L7 incorporates an ER-binding characteristic. It is evident from the in vivo ER co-localization of the transiently expressed recombinant L7 in mycophenolic acid treated HeLa cells, the in situ detection of the fluorescent L7 at the ER in digitonin-permeablized HeLa cells, and the expression of a similar K(D) value to ribosomes binding to the ER. However, no ER co-localization and a lower K(D) was observed if the last 50 amino acid residues at the carboxyl end of L7 were removed, implying that the carboxyl region embodies the ER-binding specificity. Based on the inhibitory effect of an anti L7 antibody during ribosome rebinding to the microsome, we suggest that the L7-ER-binding nature could be one of multiple factors that allow a nascent peptide-less ribosome to remain at the ER.

Ribosome binding to and dissociation from translocation sites of the endoplasmic reticulum membrane

We have addressed how ribosome-nascent chain complexes (RNCs), associated with the signal recognition particle (SRP), can be targeted to Sec61 translocation channels of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane when all binding sites are occupied by nontranslating ribosomes. These competing ribosomes are known to be bound with high affinity to tetramers of the Sec61 complex. We found that the membrane binding of RNC-SRP complexes does not require or cause the dissociation of prebound nontranslating ribosomes, a process that is extremely slow. SRP and its receptor target RNCs to a free population of Sec61 complex, which associates with nontranslating ribosomes only weakly and is conformationally different from the population of ribosome-bound Sec61 complex. Taking into account recent structural data, we propose a model in which SRP and its receptor target RNCs to a Sec61 subpopulation of monomeric or dimeric state. This could explain how RNC-SRP complexes can overcome the competition by nontranslating ribosomes.

Protein secretion in the Archaea: multiple paths towards a unique cell surface

Archaea are similar to other prokaryotes in most aspects of cell structure but are unique with respect to the lipid composition of the cytoplasmic membrane and the structure of the cell surface. Membranes of archaea are composed of glycerol-ether lipids instead of glycerol-ester lipids and are based on isoprenoid side chains, whereas the cell walls are formed by surface-layer proteins. The unique cell surface of archaea requires distinct solutions to the problem of how proteins cross this barrier to be either secreted into the medium or assembled as appendages at the cell surface.

A model for co-translational translocation: ribosome-regulated nascent polypeptide translocation at the protein-conducting channel

The protein-conducting channel (PCC) must allow both the translocation of soluble polypeptide regions across, and the lateral partitioning of hydrophobic transmembrane helices (TMHs) into, the membrane. We have analyzed existing structures of ribosomes and ribosome-PCC complexes and observe conformational changes suggesting that the ribosome may sense and orient the nascent polypeptide and also facilitate conformational changes in the PCC, subsequently directing the nascent polypeptide into the appropriate PCC-mediated translocation mode. The PCC is predicted to be able to accommodate one central, consolidated channel or two segregated pores with different lipid accessibilities, which may enable the lipid-mediated partitioning of a TMH from one pore, while the other, aqueous, pore allows translocation of a hydrophilic polypeptide segment. Our hypothesis suggests a plausible mechanism for the transitioning of the PCC between different configurations.

Isolation of Escherichia coli inner membranes by metal affinity two-phase partitioning

As reduction of sample complexity is a central issue in membrane proteomic research, the need for new pre-fractionation methods is significant. Here we present a method for fast and efficient enrichment of Escherichia coli inner membranes expressing a His-tagged integral membrane L-fucose-proton symporter (FucP). An enriched inner membrane fraction was obtained from a crude membrane mixture using affinity two-phase partitioning in combination with nickel-nitrilotriacetic acid (Ni-NTA) immobilized on agarose beads. Due to interaction between the beads and FucP, inner membranes were selectively partitioned to the bottom phase of a polymer/polymer aqueous two-phase system consisting of poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) and dextran. The partitioning of membranes was monitored by assaying the activity of an inner membrane marker protein and measuring the total protein content in both phases. The enrichment of inner membrane proteins in the dextran phase was also investigated by proteomic methodology, including sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE), trypsin digestion and liquid chromatography in combination with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Using a high level of significance (99.95%) in the subsequent database search, 36 proteins assigned to the inner membrane were identified in the bottom phase, compared to 29 when using the standard sucrose gradient centrifugation method for inner membrane isolation. Furthermore, metal affinity two-phase partitioning was up to 10 times faster than sucrose gradient centrifugation. The separation conditions in these model experiments provide a basis for the selective isolation of E. coli membranes expressing His-tagged proteins and can therefore facilitate research on such membrane proteomes.

Size, motion, and function of the SecY translocon revealed by molecular dynamics simulations with virtual probes

We report a hybrid, coarse-grained and atomistic, molecular dynamics simulation study of the size, motion, and function of the SecY protein-conducting channel. Growing and pushing virtual soft ball constructs through the pore of SecY, we mimic the push-through of polypeptides, performed cotranslationally by the ribosome and posttranslationally by the SecA ATPase. Forced lateral opening of a "front gate" between transmembrane helices is also induced by the passage of the virtual probes, with implications for the membrane insertion of peptides. We conclude that the SecY channel can stretch to allow passage of peptides with transversal sizes of approximately 16 A. The observed motion of a transmembrane helical "plug" controlling the closed and open states of the channel is consistent with experimental results and confirms previous hypotheses. Additionally, the "hinge" region for front gate opening is observed to be highly mobile as postulated. Both the forced dilation of a "ring" of residues at the middle of the pore and the lateral opening of the front gate are shown to induce plug displacement, but neither accomplish a full-extent motion of the plug to the back of the channel. For probes whose passage does not destroy the resilience of the SecY, both lateral exit and full translocation are observed, despite the fact that applied forces were always in the direction along the pore axis. Lateral exit is accompanied by front gate opening and slight plug displacement, whereas full translocation is accompanied by large plug displacement but no apparent lateral opening. Simulations also reveal that dilating the pore ring is a more effective way to destabilize the plug than intercalation of a cylinder-like probe at the front gate. Based on the simulations, the existence of a family of diverse open states is proposed.

Protein translocation by the Sec61/SecY channel

The conserved protein-conducting channel, referred to as the Sec61 channel in eukaryotes or the SecY channel in eubacteria and archaea, translocates proteins across cellular membranes and integrates proteins containing hydrophobic transmembrane segments into lipid bilayers. Structural studies illustrate how the protein-conducting channel accomplishes these tasks. Three different mechanisms, each requiring a different set of channel binding partners, are employed to move polypeptide substrates: The ribosome feeds the polypeptide chain directly into the channel, a ratcheting mechanism is used by the eukaryotic endoplasmic reticulum chaperone BiP, and a pushing mechanism is utilized by the bacterial ATPase SecA. We review these translocation mechanisms, relating biochemical and genetic observations to the structures of the protein-conducting channel and its binding partners.