Structure of subcomplex and
mechanisms of rotational catalysis of the ATP synthase
Sun Runguang, Zhang Jing *
(College of Physics and Information Technology, Department of Food Engineering, Shaanxi
Normal University, Xi'an 710062, China)
Received Mar. 4, 2003; Supported by the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.20272035) and the Foundation for
University Key Teachers by the Ministry of Education, China (No.2000-65).
Abstract Many scientists have observed that the F1F0-ATPase
complexes are comprised of 8,9, and 16 different subunits respectively in Escherichia
coli, chloroplasts and mitochondria. All F-type ATPase have a similar structure. The
globular F1 domain and the intrinsic membrane F0 domain linked by a
central and peripheral stalk. One of the stalks belongs to the rotor and is built of the g and e subunits. The other stalk belongs to the stator and consists of
subunits b2 (I, II) and d. The central stalk in ATP synthase, made of the g, d and e
subunits in the mitochondrial enzyme, is the key rotary element in the enzyme's catalytic
mechanism. The g subunit
penetrates the catalytic (a3b3) domain and protrudes
beneath it, interacting with a ring of the c subunits in the membrane that drives rotation
of the stalk during ATP synthesis. The d and e
subunits interact with a Rossmann fold in the g subunit, forming a foot. In ATP synthase, this foot interacts with
the c-ring and couples the transmembrane proton motive force to catalysis in the (a3b3) domain. A fuzzy cap and a mysterious collar structure
have also been visualized by electron microscopy. The F1F0-ATPase
from Escherichia coli, chloroplasts, and bovine heart mitochondria, catalyses the
formation of ATP (adenosine triphosphate) from ADP (adenosine diphosphate) and Pi
(inorganic phosphate) by using the energy of electrochemical proton gradient derived from
electron transport.
Keywords F1F0-ATPase;
structure of subcomplex; rotational catalysis; central stalk; second stalk;
1. INTRODUCTION
ATP synthase, also known as F1F0-ATPase from Escherichia coli,
chloroplasts, and bovine heart mitochondria, catalyses the formation of ATP (adenosine
triphosphate) from ADP (adenosine diphosphate) and Pi (inorganic phosphate) by using the
energy of electrochemical proton gradient derived from electron transport [1].
The F1F0-ATPase complexes are comprised of 8,9, and 16 different
subunits respectively in Escherichia coli (E. coli) [2,3],
chloroplasts [4] and mitochondria [5].
Many scientists have observed that all F-type ATPase have a similar
structure. The ATP synthase consists of two portions, globular F1 domain and
the intrinsic membrane F0, connected by two stalks: a central rotor stalk
containing g and e subunits and a peripheral, the second
stalk formed by d and two
copies of the b subunits (F0).
The second stalk is expected to keep the stator subunits from spinning along with the
rotor [6-9]. The simplest F1F0-type enzymes, e.g. as in
Escherichia coli, are composed of eight types of subunits in an unusual stoichiometry of a3b3g d e (F1) and ab2c12 (F0).
F1 extends from the membrane, with the a , and b subunits alternating around a central subunit g . ATP synthesis occurs alternately in
different b subunits, the
cooperative tight binding of ADP + Pi at one catalytic sites being coupled to ATP release
at a second, the differences in binding affinities appear to be caused by rotation of the g subunit in the center of the a3b3 hexamer. The g subunit traverses a 4.5 nm stalk connecting the catalytic subunits
to the membrane-traversing F0 sector. Subunit c is the H+-translocating
subunit of F0. Protonation/deprotonation of Asp61 in the center of the membrane
is coupled to structural changes in an extramembranous loop of subunit c which interacts
with both g and e subunits. Subunits g and e appear to move from one subunit c to another as ATP is
synthesized. The torque of such movement is proposed to cause the rotation of g within the a3b3 complex. Four protons are translocated for each ATP
synthesized. The movement of g and e therefore probably involves a unit of four c subunits [2] (Fig.1).
In chloroplasts, Fromme et al. identified that the F1 part has five different
subunits with the stoichiometry a3b3g d e , the F0 part has four subunits with the
likely stoichiometry b(I), b'(II), c12(III12),
a (VI)[4]. J. Walker's group established
that bovine heart F1F0-ATPase consists of 16 different subunits [10,11].
Five of them (a3b3g1d1e1) form the F1 portion with OSCP. The
mitochondrial oligomycin sensitivity conferring protein (OSCP) is considered equivalent to
the d subunit in E. coli.
The mitochondrial subunit d
is considered equivalent to the e subunit in E. coli [12]. The other subunits, (a(25
kDa), b(24 kDa), c9-12(8 kDa), d(19 kDa), e(8 kDa), f(10 kDa), g(11 kDa). A6L(8
kDa), and F6(9 kDa), form the membrane domain F0, which transports
protons through the membranes [13]. The inhibitor protein IF1 (8
kDa) is present also in apparently stoichiometric amounts (Fig.2). Subunits g , d , e , b, d and F6
together with subunit OSCP were thought in the past to contribute to the central
connecting stalk [14]. Subunits b, d, OSCP and F6 are known to be
present in the complex in one copy each [15,16]. This sub-complex (referred to
as stalk) formed a stoichiometric complex with F1 [17,18]. The
crystal structure of bovine F1 clearly shows that the g subunit is a major component of the
central stalk [19]. The rotation of the g subunit has been visualized by optical microscopy [20].
Therefore, this subunit could represent part of the peripheral feature, together with
subunits d and e [8]. The roles of subunits d and e and their locations in the bovine enzyme remain obscure. Bovine
ATP synthase preparations also contain three small polypeptides, designated subunits e, f,
and g respectively. Subunits e, f, and g could be immunoprecipitated with anti-OSCP IgG
from a fraction of bovine submitochondrial particles enriched in oligomycin-sensitive
ATPase. The NH2 termini of subunits f and g are exposed on the matrix side of
the mitochondrial inner membrane and can be curtailed by proteolysis. The COOH termini of
all three polypeptides are exposed on the cytosolic side of the inner membrane. Subunit f
cross-links to A6L and to subunit g, and subunit e cross-links to subunit g and appears to
form an e-e dimer. Thus, the bovine ATP synthase complex appears to have 16 unlike
subunits, twice as many as its counterpart in Escherichia coli [21].
Fig. 1 Model of features and structure of ATP synthase in
Escherichia coli
2. MOLECULAR MODELS OF MECHANISMS OF
ROTATIONAL CATALYSIS
A model for proton translocation was presented by Vik and Antonio [22] in
1994. In the model, protonated Arg210 of subunit a interacts with unprotonated Asp61 from
one subunit c, at site 1. A second subunit c, adjacent to the first at site 2, is also
unprotonated, and interacts with subunit a. The remaining c subunits have a protonated
Asp61, and interact with the membrane lipids. The Asp61 interacting with Arg210 at site 1
can be protonated from protons originating from the periplasm through an access channel
controlled by His245 and Glu219. When this protonation occurs, the oligomer of the c
subunits is free to rotate such that the newly protonated Asp61 can enter the lipid
environment. This rotation will be electrostatically driven, as the Arg210 will be
strongly attracted to the remaining unprotonated Asp61 at site 2. This arrangement assures
that rotation is unidirectional. When rotation occurs, a protonated Asp61 of subunit c
will move from the lipid environment into contact with subunit a. In this environment the
pKa of the Asp61 will be shifted down due to the more polar environment, and
the proton will be released. The role of Glu96, and perhaps-other residues, is likely to
be to contribute indirectly to the polar environment of the Asp61 of the subunit c at site
2. This ensures that the proton is released and that the cycle will continue. The negative
charge would help to draw the released proton the cytoplasmic surface.
After that, in 1996, Junge et al has proposed a model of how proton
transport through F0 might generate a rotary motion [23]. The
essence of this hypothetical rotary motor is that the essential carboxyl circumference of
the c annulus. Part of the external surface of the annulus interacts with subunit a, and
in this region the carboxyl groups are negatively charged. It is envisaged that subunit a
has an inlet port on the external surface of the membrane which allows a proton to
neutralize one of the negatively charged carboxylate group. The resulting un-ionized
carboxyl group will find its way by thermal vibrations to its preferred environment in
contact with the phospholipid bilayer. The neutralization of this carboxylate group at one
point of the circumference is accompanied by reionization of another group further around
the circumference of the c annulus, release of the proton on the opposite side of the
membrane through an exit port in subunit a and regeneration of a negative charge in the c
annulus-subunit a interface. These protonation/ deprotonation events result in a rotary
movement of the c annulus. The rotation brings the next negatively charged carboxyl group
to the inlet port, where in turn it is neutralized by another proton. The accompanying
release of another proton through the exit port generates further rotation. It is
envisaged that this rotary device is directly coupled to the g subunit. The synthesis of each ATP molecule requires a rotation of
the g subunit by 120¡ã ;
thus, each complete rotation of the g subunit in F1 produces three ATP molecules. In a
hypothetical proton motor with a c annulus consisting of twelve c subunits, this
corresponds to the sequential neutralization of four carboxylate groups by proton binding.
In other word, a H+: ATP ratio of four is compatible with a molar ratio of c
subunits in F0 of twelve. Likewise, a H+: ATP ratio of three
requires nine c subunits in each F0.
Wang & Oster assumed that the entire F1F0-ATPase
structure is arranged as a counter-rotating "rotor" and "stator" assembly [24,25]. The stator portion consists of the
catalytic sites contained in the hexameter, together with subunits a, b2, and d . The rotor consists of 9-12
c-subunits arranged in a ring and connected to the g-, and d-subunits that form the central "shaft". ATP synthase is
conceived as a rotary enzyme, the proton-transporting membrane portion, F0, and
the catalytic peripheral portion, F1. They are mounted on a central shaft
(subunit g ) and held
together by an eccentric bearing. Proton flow drives the rotor (namely, subunits c12eg ) relative to stator
(namely, subunits ab2da3b3) and extrudes spontaneously formed ATP from three
symmetrically arranged binding sites on a3b3 into the solution. The binding of subunit d to a3b3 is of sufficient strength to hold against the elastic
strain, which is generated during the operation of this enzyme. A single binding site for d on the hexagon of a3b3 is sufficient for the assumed hold-function of d in the stator [26].
The rotor-stator concept requires two stalks connecting F1
to F0. One of the stalks belongs to the rotor and is built of g and e subunits. The other stalk belongs to the stator and might consist
of subunits b2 (I, II) and d [27].
Recently, using electron micrographs of solubilised and negatively
stained F1F0-ATPase respectively from Escherichia coli[7],
chloroplasts[27] and bovine heart mitochondria[8], three new
features in the F1F0-ATPase are seen, one of which is a smaller
peripheral stalk. The second feature is a collar structure like an elliptical disk just
above the very compact density of the membrane domain, and the third feature is some
additional density on top of the F1 domain. The peripheral stalk seems to
connect the catalytic F1 domain to the collar structure above F0 domain.
These are very interesting features.
3. HYDROPHILIC GLOBULAR F1 PORTION
The structure of F1 portion from various sources is very clearly. It is made up
of three a subunits, three b subunits and one each of the g, d, and e
subunits. The three catalytic sites are found mainly on the b subunit. The three catalytic sites are
known to pass sequentially through three different conformations associated with substrate
binding, formation of tightly bound ATP, and release of the ATP. These changes are thought
to occur through a rotational catalysis where rotation of the g
subunit causes the requisite sequential changes in the b subunit [1,28]. In 1994, J.
Walker's group reported the X-ray structure of the
major portion of F1 with three different conformations of the b subunits that are likely to be
interconverted by rotation of the g subunit [19]. Duncan and Aggeler showed positional
interchange of the b subunits
as catalysis proceeds [29,30]. In 1997, Noji et al. attached a fluorescently
labeled actin filament to the g subunit of the F1 portion fixed on a slide then watched
the filament spin as the enzyme cleaved ATP. They dramatically showed the rotation
directly and provided strong evidence for the rotation by a specialized fluorescence
technique [20]. In 2002, Rubinstein and Walker found that the bound avidin has
been localised close to the F1 domain by electron microscopy of negatively
stained particles of the ATP synthase-avidin complex. The images were subjected to
multi-reference alignment and classification. Because of the presence of a flexible linker
between the OSCP and the biotinylation signal, the class-averages differ in the position
of the avidin relative to the F1 domain. These positions lie on an arc, and its
center indicates the position of the C terminus of the OSCP on the surface of the F1
domain. Since the N-terminal region of the OSCP is known to interact with the N-terminal
regions of the a -subunits, which are on top of the F1 domain distal from the F0
membrane domain, the OSCP extends almost 10 nm along the surface of F1 down
towards F0 where it interacts with the C terminus of the b subunit, which
extends up from F0[31].
4. HYDROPHOBIC F0 PORTION
There is one a subunit, two b subunits and 9-12 c subunits in the F0
portion from the bacterium Escherichia coli. The F0 portion from various plants
and animals is more complex, but it still contains the multiple copies of the c-type
subunit [32]. Three types of subunits make up of the F0 portion that
indicated an annular arrangement of twelve c subunits, with subunit a and b2 on
the periphery of the cylinder [33,34]. The long helical subunit-b2
dimer together with the d form
the peripheral stalk, linking subunit a of the F0 portion with one of the a-subunits of the F1 portion [35,36].
The ring of the c subunits makes contact with subunit a in the F0 portion
[34]. The subunit c ring is also linked to the g-subunit of the F1 core both directly and indirectly
through mutual contacts with the e-subunit. Asp61 in subunit c (an essential carboxylate of
Escherichia coli) translates protons at the interface between subunit a and c [32,37].
Current models postulate that protonation and subsequent ionization of
the Asp61 side chain in subunit c lead to rotation of the c12 oligomer with
respect to the a and b2 subunits [32,38,39]. Rotation of the c12
oligomer in turn cause rotation of the e- and g -subunits with respect to the catalytic sites on the b-subunits in the F1 portion [32].
The a and b subunits constitute the stator elements in the F0 sector of F1F0-ATP
synthase. The a subunit in association with the ring of the c subunits houses the proton
channel through F1F0-ATP synthase. The two b subunits dimerize,
forming an extended flexibly unit in the peripheral stalk linking the F1 and F0
sectors [40].
Subunit c in the F0 portion of the H+ transporting ATP
synthase is an essential part of its membrane domain that participates in transmembrane
proton conduction. The annular architecture of the subunit c from different species has
been previously reported. However, little is known about the type of interactions that
affect the formation of c-rings in the ATPase complex. In 2002, Arechaga et al. reported
that subunit c over-expressed in Escherichia coli and purified in non-ionic detergent
solutions self-assembles into annular structures in the absence of other subunits of the
complex. The results suggested that the ability of subunit c to form rings were determined
by its primary structure [41].
5. CENTRAL AND PERIPHERAL STALK
That two stalks link the F1 and F0 sectors of ATP synthase
respectively in Escherichia coli, chloroplasts, and mitochondria have been evidenced by
electron microscopy after negative staining of specimens [7-9]. The two b
subunits and the d subunit
associate to form b2d , a second, peripheral stalk extending from the
membrane up to the side of a3b3 and binding to the N-terminal regions of the a
subunits, which are approx. 12.5 nm from the membrane [42]. The E. coli. d-subunit interacts with the N-terminal
part of the a subunits that
is located on top of the F1 portion [43].
ATP synthase contains a rotary motor involved in biological energy
conversion. Its membrane-embedded F0 sector has a rotation generator fueled by
proton-motive force, which provides the energy required for the synthesis of ATP by the F1
domain. A ring of 10 c sub-subunits was obtained from crystals of a F1c10
complex of yeast mitochondrial ATP synthase by Stock et al in 1999. This is probably the
most novel of features in the mitochondrial ATP synthase. Each c subunit forms an ¦Á-helical hairpin. The interhelical loops of six to seven of the c
subunits are in close contact with the g and d subunits of the central stalk. The extensive contact between the c
ring and the stalk suggests that they may rotate as an ensemble during catalysis [44].
The recent structure of bovine a3b3g e d by Gibbons et al. has opened up new discussions in
2000. The central stalk in ATP synthase, made of the g, d and
e subunits in the
mitochondrial enzyme, is the key rotary element in the enzyme's catalytic mechanism. The g subunit penetrates the catalytic (a3b3) domain and protrudes beneath it, interacting with a
ring of the c subunits in the membrane that drives rotation of the stalk during ATP
synthesis. In other crystals of the F1-ATPase, the protrusion was disordered,
but with crystals of the F1-ATPase inhibited with dicyclohexylcarbodiimide, the
complete structure was revealed. The d and e subunits interact with a Rossmann fold in the g subunit, forming a foot. In ATP
synthase, this foot interacts with the c-ring and couples the transmembrane proton motive
force to catalysis in the (a3b3) domain [45].
In 2002, Meier et al. found that The Na+-translocating ATP
synthases from Ilyobacter tartaricus and Propionigenium modestum contain undecameric c
subunit rings of unusual stability. These c11 rings were isolated from both ATP synthases
and crystallized in two dimensions. Cryo-transmission electron microscopy projection maps
of the c-rings from both organisms were identical at 7Å resolution. Different
crystal contacts were induced after treatment of the crystals with
dicyclohexylcarbodiimide (DCCD), which is consistent with the binding of the inhibitor to
glutamate 65 in the C-terminal helix on the outside of the ring. The c subunits of the
isolated c11 ring of I. tartaricus were modified specifically by incubation with DCCD with
kinetics that was indistinguishable from those of the F1Fo holoenzyme [46].
6. FUZZY CAP
A fuzzy cap at the top of the F1 part has been found [7-9]. In
1988, Stephan Wilkens & Roderick A. Capaldi found that there is a cap at the top of
the F1 part at which the second stalk may bind from Escherichia coli by
electron microscopy after negative staining of specimens. After them, Simone Karrasch and
John E. Walker found there is some additional density, a fuzzy cap, on top of the F1
domain from bovine heart mitochondria [8]. This is likely includes N-terminal
stretches of the three copies of the a subunit and a part of the d subunit. The second stalk of the d and b subunits is the stator which
makes this rotation possible [9]. It is known that the bacterial d subunit and the equivalent bovine OSCP
is required for binding F1 to F0, implying that it interacts with
subunits in the membrane domain. Therefore, the inescapable conclusion is that OSCP (and
possibly also subunit d in
the bacterial and chloroplast enzymes) extends from the top of the F1, down its
external surface, to a region associated with the membrane domain [14]. In the
bovine enzyme, the N-terminal part of OSCP interacts with the N-terminal part of the a subunit [47].
Wilkens et al. have determined the location of the d subunit directly by imaging the intact
E.coli ATP-synthase labeled with a monoclonal antibody specific to d . The part of the d subunit is bound in the "dimple" formed by the N
terminal of the large subunits a and b on the very top of the F1, which
provides an explanation for why there is only one binding site for d on the F1 despite the
existence of three identical a b pairs. The fuzzy cap is clear on the very top of the F1
part, too [48].
7. THE POSITION OF THE IF1
SUBUNIT
Pullman and Monroy discovered a soluble, heat-stable protein in mitochondria from bovine
heart that inhibits the ATP hydrolytic activity of the F1F0-ATPase [49].
Further in vitro characterization of this "IF1"
protein was consistent with it being active under the
physiological conditions where ATP hydrolysis rather that ATP synthesis would occur. The
binding of the IF1 to the F1F0-ATPase in submitochondrial
particles requires the hydrolysis of ATP in the absence of an electrochemical gradient
across the inner membrane [50-52]. Similar conditions might be found in tumor
cells, where oxygen levels vary from the perivascular regions to the anoxic necrotic
centers. Thus, the IF1 could play an important role in the pathology of tissue
ischemia and tumor growth by helping conserve ATP under conditions of oxygen deprivation [53].
The position of the IF1 subunit in the ATP synthase has been
mapped by cross-linking experiments. Although yeast IF1 interacts at the
interface of the a and b subunits, cross-linking of bovine IF1 to the bovine F1
domain has only identified residues 394-359 on the C-terminus of the b subunit as the
binding site [54]. According to the binding change mechanism, only one of the
three b subunits can be in the open conformation and the 1:1 binding stoichiometry
observed between IF1 and F1 is consistent with this [50].
The ATPase inhibitor protein (IF1) binds at one side of the F1F0
connection. The carboxyl-terminal segment of the IF1 apparently binds to OSCP.
The 42L-58K segment of the IF1 binds at the surface of one of the three a b
pairs of the F1, thus preventing the cyclic interconversion of the catalytic
sites required for ATP hydrolysis [55]. Gaballo et al. suggested that the IF1
has a relevant physiopathological role for the conservation of the cellular ATP pool in
ischemic tissues. Under these conditions IF1, which appears to be over
expressed, prevents dissipation of the glycolytic ATP [56].
8. MYSTERIOUS COLLAR STRUCTURE
Recently, Simone Karrasch and John E. Walker, using electron micrographs of
solubilised and negatively stained F1F0-ATPase from bovine heart
mitochondria, showed that the new features in bovine F1F0-ATPase is
a collar structure like an elliptical disk just above the very compact density of the
membrane domain [11]. The mysterious collar above the membrane domain F0
may be a circular structure and could be connected to the subunit c complex, which is
believed to form a ring structure in the membrane [57-59]. It is possible that
this ring structure is extended to the area outside the membrane by the help of
hydrophilic parts of other subunit of the F0 [11]. The transmembrane
sector of the F0F1 rotary ATP synthase is proposed to organize with
an oligomeric ring of the c subunits, which function as a rotor, interacting with two b
subunits at the periphery of the ring, the b subunits functioning as a stator. The b
subunit cross-linked to subunit c, which suggests that, either only one of the two b
subunits lie adjacent to the c-ring or that both b subunits interact with a single c
subunit. The c subunit lying adjacent to subunit b was shown to be mobile and to exchange
with the c subunits that initially occupied non-neighboring positions. The oligomeric
c-ring can move with respect to the b-stator and provide further support for a rotary
catalytic mechanism in the ATP synthase [39].
Simone Karrasch and John E. Walker suggest that subunits g, d, e,
b, d, F6, and OSCP are likely to contribute to the central as well as to the
peripheral stalk, the collar and the additional density on top of the F1
particle [8]. The question that now arises is, which subunits of the F1F0-ATPase
contribute to the peripheral stalk, the collar, and which the features and structure of
subunits e, f, g, A6L are not known in the membrane domain.
9. NOVEL STRUCTURAL MODEL OF
ATP SYNTHASE
Subunit b appears to have two transmembrane ¦Á-helical
spans and an extensive hydrophilic domain that is highly charged and lies outside the
membrane where it interacts with the F1 via to OSCP. OSCP could form a stable
binary complex with the F1-ATPase. A stable sub-complex was also assembled from
one copy each of the subunit b, d, F6, and OSCP [16]. Subunit b and
d are components of the membrane domain of the ATP synthase [17]. The F6
subunit is also associated with the F0 portion [60]. As subunits F6
and d have no extensive hydrophobic regions in their sequence, they are likely to be
attached to the matrix surface of the inner mitochondrial membrane [61].
It is very clearly that subunit b and OSCP may in one copy each form
the peripheral stalk. The subunit d and F6 in one copy each may form a collar
structure; namely, a double helical, ring structure around the central stalk. This
circular collar structure may be composed of parts of the c subunits. The image of the
bovine enzyme contains the novel feature, seen as disc-shaped or collar evidently sitting
between the central stalk and the F0 domains. A similar collar was observed in
the Clostridial enzyme. The role of the collar is an even bigger mystery [14].
The mysterious collar structure remains to be confirmed.
Fig. 2 Model of features and structure of ATP synthase in
bovine heart mitochondria[64]
Recent research indicates
that ATP synthases (F0F1) contain two distinct nanomotors, one an
electrochemically driven proton motor contained within F0 that drives an ATP
hydrolysis-driven motor (F1) in reverse during ATP synthesis. This is depicted
in recent models as involving a series of events in which each of the three ab pairs comprising F1 is
induced via a centrally rotating subunit (g) to undergo the sequential binding changes necessary to synthesize
ATP (binding change mechanism). Stabilization of this rotary process is provided in
current models by a peripheral stalk or "stator" that has recently been shown to extend from near the bottom of the
ATP synthase molecule to the very top of the F1. Although quite elegant, these
models envision the stator as fixed during ATP synthesis, i.e., bound to only a single a b
pair. This is despite the fact that the binding change mechanism views each a b pair as
going through the same sequential order of conformational changes which demonstrate a
chemical equivalency among them. For this reason, Blum et al. proposed two different
dynamic models for stator function during ATP synthesis [62]. Up to the present
moment, three protein motors have been unambiguously identified as rotary engines: the
bacterial flagellar motor and the two motors that constitute ATP synthase (F0F1
ATPase)[63]. The F1 motor is driven by ATP hydrolysis.
According to the results of previous experiments, we suggest a model of
the structure of F1F0-ATPase in shown as Fig.2. This enzyme
structure consists of a fuzzy cap, a hydrophilic globular F1 portion, a central
stalk, a peripheral stalk, a collar structure, and a hydrophobic F0 portion
that is embedded in a phospholipid bilayer membrane. The well characterized subunits of
the bovine ATP synthase complex are the subunits a3b3gde and OSCP of the catalytic sector, F1; the
ATPase inhibitor protein (IF1); and subunits a, b, c9-12, d, e, f,
g, F6, and A6L, which are present in the membrane sector, F0,
and the two stalk (a central and a peripheral stalk) that connects F1 to F0.
A central rotor stalk containing g-, d- and e-subunits. The g subunit penetrates the catalytic (a3b3) domain and connects the catalytic subunits to the
membrane-traversing F0 sector, interacting with a ring of the c subunits in the
membrane that drives rotation of the stalk during ATP synthesis. The d and e subunits interact with a Rossmann fold in the g subunit, forming a foot. This foot
interacts with the c-ring and couples the transmembrane proton motive force to catalysis
in the (a3b3) domain. Thus, rotor
portion consists of g d e c9-12
sub-coplex, which is the key rotary element in the mitochondrial enzyme's catalytic mechanism. The peripheral stalk consists of one b and
OSCP subunits, which is the stator that makes the rotation possible. Only one b subunit
interacts with a single c subunit. The c subunit lying adjacent to subunit b was shown to
be mobile and to exchange with the c subunits that initially occupied non-neighboring
positions. The oligomeric c-ring can move with respect to the b-stator and provide further
support for a rotary catalytic mechanism in the ATP synthase. Sub-complex aba3b3 together with OSCP subunits form a stator portion in
the mitochondrial ATPsynthase. Subunit f cross-links to A6L and to subunit g, and subunit
e cross-links to subunit g and appears to form an e-e dimer. The circular collar structure
may be composed of the subunits d and F6 together with parts of the c subunits,
which sits between the central stalk and F0 domains. In the mitochondrial
enzyme, the N-terminal domain part of interacts with the N-terminal part of the a subunits
form a fuzzy cap at the very top of the F1 part.
Although the research progress of the ATP synthase is commendable,
questions and uncertainties remain. A further to the structure of ATP synthase will
probably uncover yet more surprising features.
REFERENCES
[1] Boyer P D, Annu, Rev. Biochem., 1997, 66: 717.
[2] Fillingame R H, Journal of Experimental Biology, 1997, 220: 217.
[3] Capalidi R A, Aggeler R, Wilkens S et al., J. Bioenerg. Biomembr., 1996, 28: 397.
[4] Fromme P, Boekema E J, Gr?ber P, Z. Naturforsch., 1987, 42c: 1239.
[5] Walker J E, Lutter R, Dupuis A et al., Biochemistry, 1991, 30: 5369.
[6] Suzuki T, Suzuki J, Mitome N et al., J. Biol. Chem., 2000, 275: 37902.
[7] Wilkens S, Capaldi R A, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1998, 1365: 93.
[8] Karrasch S, Walker J E, J. Mol. Biol., 1999, 290: 379.
[9] B?ttcher B, Bertsche I, Reuter R et al., J. Mol. Biol., 2000, 296: 449.
[10] Walker J E, Fearnley I M, Lutter R et al., Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., London, 1990, 326:
367.
[11] Buchanan S K, Walker J E, Biochem. J., 1996, 318: 343.
[12] Walker J E, Runswick M J, Saraste M, FEBS Lett., 1982, 146: 393.
[13] Boyer P D, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1993, 1140: 215.
[14] Walker J E, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 1998, 37: 2308.
[15] Nijtmans L G J, Klement P, Houstek J et al., Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1995, 1272: 190.
[16] Collinson I R, Skehel J M, Fearnley I M et al., Biochemistry, 1996, 35: 12640.
[17] Collinson I R, Van Raaij M J, Runswick M J et al., J. Mol. Biol., 1994a, 242: 408.
[18] Walker J E, Collinson I R, FEBS Letters, 1994, 346: 39.
[19] Abrahams J P, Leslie A G W, Lutter R et al., Nature, 1994, 370: 621.
[20] Noji H, Yasuda R, Yoshida M et al., Nature, 1997, 386: 299.
[21] Gelogrudow G I, Tomich J M, Hatefi Y, J.Biol. Chem., 1996, 271: 203040.
[22] Steven B. V, Antonio B J, J. Biol. Chem., 1994, 269: 30364.
[23] Junge W, Sabbert D, Engelbrecht S, Phys. Chem., 1996, 100: 2014.
[24] Wang H Y, Oster G, Nature, 1998, 396: 279.
[25] Elston T, Wang H Y, Oster G, Nature, 1998, 391: 510.
[26] Healer K, Panke O, Junge W, Biochemistry, 1999, 38: 13759.
[27] B?ttcher B, Schwarz L, Gr?ber P, J. Mol. Biol., 1998, 281: 757.
[28] Boyer P D, Nature, 1999, 402: 247.
[29] Duncan T M, Bulygin V V, Zhou Y et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 1995, 92: 10964.
[30] Aggeler A, Ogilvie I, Capaldi R A, J. Biol. Chem., 1997, 272: 19621.
[31] Rubinstein J L, Walke J E, J. Mol. Biol. 2002, 321: 613.
[32] Rastogl V K, Glrvln M E, Nature, 1999, 402: 263.
[33] Jones P C, Jiang W, Fillingame R H, J. Biol. Chem., 1998, 273: 17178.
[34] Jiang W, Fillingame R H, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 1998, 95: 6607.
[35] Aris J P, Simoni R D, J. Biol. Chem., 1983, 258: 14599.
[36] Rodgers A J W, J. Biol. Chem., 1997, 272: 31058.
[37] Watts S D, Zhang Y, Fillingame R H et al, FEBS Lett. 1995, 368: 235.
[38] Junge W, Lill H, Engelbrecht S, Trends Biochem. Sci., 1997, 22: 420.
[39] Jones P C, Hermolin J, Jiang W P, Fillingame R H, J. Biol. Chem., 2000, 275: 31340.
[40] Cain B D, Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes, 2000, 32: 365.
[41] Arechaga I, Butler P J G, Walker J E, Elsevier Science, 2002, 515: 189.
[42] Dunn S D, Mclachlin D T, Revington M, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 2000, 1458: 356.
[43] Fillingame R H, Girvin M E, Jiang W et al., Acta Phsiol. Scand., 1998, 643: 163.
[44] Stock D, Leslie A G W, Walker J E, Science, 1999, 286: 1700.
[45] Gibbons C, Montgomery M.G, Leslie A G W et al., J. Nature Structural Biology, 2000,
7: 1055.
[46] Meier T, Matthey U, von Ballmoos C et al., J. Mol. Biol. 2002, 325: 389.
[47] Joshi S, Javed A A, Gibbs L C, J.Biol.Chem., 1992: 267: 12860.
[48] Wilkens S, Zhou J, Nakayama R et al., 2000, 295: 387.
[49] Pullman M E, Monroy G C, J. Bio. Chem., 1963, 238: 3762.
[50] Lippe G, Sorgato M C, Harris D A, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1988, 933: 1.
[51] Lippe G, M. Sorgato M C, Harris D A, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1988, 933: 12.
[52] Power J, Cross R L, Harris D A, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1983, 724: 128.
[53] Green D W, Grover G J, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 2000, 1458: 243.
[54] Jackson P J, Harris D A, FEBS Letters, 1988, 229: 224.
[55] Papa S, Zanotti F, Gaballo A, Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes, 2000, 32:
401.
[56] Gaballo A, Zanotti F, Papa S, Current Protein and Peptide Science, 2002, 3: 451.
[57] Walker J E, Gay N, Powell S J, Kostina M et al., Biochemistry, 1987(b), 26: 8613.
[58] Singh S, Turina P, Bustamante C J, Keller D J, FEBS Letters, 1996, 397: 30.
[59] Takeyasu K, Omote H, Nettikadan S et al., FEBS Letters, 1996, 392: 110.
[60] Walker J E, Runswick M J, Poulter L, J. Mol. Biol., 1987(a), 197: 89.
[61] Collinson I R, Fearnley I M, Runswick M J, Biochem. J., 1994(b), 303: 639.
[62] Blum D J, Ko Y H, Hong S et al., Biochem. Biophys. Res. Com. 2001, 287: 801.
[63] Oster G, Wang H, Elsevier Science, 2003, 13: 114.
[64] Sun R G, J. Shaanxi Normal University (Natural Science Edition), 2003, 31: 70.
¡¡
|