The chloroplast cpn20 protein is a functional homolog of the cpn10 co-chaperonin, but its gene consists of two cpn10-like units joined head-to-tail by a short chain of amino acids. This double protein is unique to plastids and was shown to exist in plants as well plastid-containing parasites. In vitro assays showed that this cpn20 co-chaperonin is a functional homolog of cpn10. In terms of structure, existing data indicate that the oligomer is tetrameric, yet it interacts with a heptameric cpn60 partner. Thus, the functional oligomeric structure remains a mystery. In this review, we summarize what is known about this distinctive chaperonin and use a bioinformatics approach to examine the expression of cpn20 in Arabidopsis thaliana relative to other chaperonin genes in this species. In addition, we examine the primary structure of the two homologous domains for similarities and differences, in comparison with cpn10 from other species. Lastly, we hypothesize as to the oligomeric structure and raison d'être of this unusual co-chaperonin homolog.

Chaperonins cpn60 and cpn10 are essential proteins involved in cellular protein folding. Plant chloroplasts contain a unique version of the cpn10 co-chaperonin, cpn20, which consists of two homologous cpn10-like domains (N-cpn20 and C-cpn20) that are connected by a short linker region. Although cpn20 seems to function like other single domain cpn10 oligomers, the structure and specific functions of the domains are not understood. We mutated amino acids in the "mobile loop" regions of N-cpn20, C-cpn20 or both: a highly conserved glycine, which was shown to be important for flexibility of the mobile loop, and a leucine residue shown to be involved in binding of co-chaperonin to chaperonin. The mutant proteins were purified and their oligomeric structure validated by gel filtration, native gel electrophoresis, and circular dichroism. Functional assays of protein refolding and inhibition of GroEL ATPase both showed (i) mutation of the conserved glycine reduced the activity of cpn20, whether in N-cpn20 (G32A) or C-cpn20 (G130A). The same mutation in the bacterial cpn10 (GroES G24A) had no effect on activity. (ii) Mutations in the highly conserved leucine of N-cpn20 (L35A) and in the corresponding L27A of GroES resulted in inactive protein. (iii) In contrast, mutant L133A, in which the conserved leucine of C-cpn20 was altered, retained 55% activity. We conclude that the structure of cpn20 is much more sensitive to alterations in the mobile loop than is the structure of GroES. Moreover, only N-cpn20 is necessary for activity of cpn20. However, full and efficient functioning requires both domains.

No abstract

In this study, we have investigated the relationship between chaperonin/co-chaperonin binding, ATP hydrolysis, and protein refolding in heterologous chaperonin systems from bacteria, chloroplast, and mitochondria. We characterized two types of chloroplast cpn60 oligomers, ch-cpn60 composed of alpha and beta subunits (alpha(7)beta(7) ch-cpn60) and one composed of all beta subunits (beta(14) ch-cpn60). In terms of ATPase activity, the rate of ATP hydrolysis increased with protein concentration up to 60 microM, reflecting a concentration at which the oligomers are stable. At high concentrations of cpn60, all cpn10 homologs inhibited ATPase activity of alpha(7)beta(7) ch-cpn60. In contrast, ATPase of beta(14) ch-cpn60 was inhibited only by mitochondrial cpn10, supporting previous reports showing that beta(14) is functional only with mitochondrial cpn10 and not with other cpn10 homologs. Surprisingly, direct binding assays showed that both ch-cpn60 oligomer types bind to bacterial, mitochondrial, and chloroplast cpn10 homologs with an equal apparent affinity. Moreover, mitochondrial cpn60 binds chloroplast cpn20 with which it is not able to refold denatured proteins. Protein refolding experiments showed that in such instances, the bound protein is released in a conformation that is not able to refold. The presence of glycerol, or subsequent addition of mitochondrial cpn10, allows us to recover enzymatic activity of the substrate protein. Thus, in our systems, the formation of co-chaperonin/chaperonin complexes does not necessarily lead to protein folding. By using heterologous oligomer systems, we are able to separate the functions of binding and refolding in order to better understand the chaperonin mechanism.

No abstract