crystallization communications
Refolding, crystallization and preliminary X-ray structural studies of the West Nile virus envelope (E) protein domain III
aNuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University, Oxford OX3 9DU, England, bLaboratory of Structural Biology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China, and cLaboratory of Molecular Immunology and Molecular Virology, Institute of Microbiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100080, People's Republic of China
*Correspondence e-mail: gaof@im.ac.cn
Domain III of the West Nile virus envelope protein, the putative receptor-binding domain, is a major virion-surface determinant for virulence. This protein was reported to be intrinsically unstable and has defied previous crystallization attempts. It has now been purified from inclusion bodies by protein refolding and was crystallized using the hanging-drop vapour-diffusion method at 291 K. The crystals belong to P2221, with unit-cell parameters a = 52.6, b = 59.7, c = 95.0 Å. A complete data set was collected to 2.8 Å at 100 K with Cu Kα X-rays from a rotating-anode generator.
1. Introduction
West Nile virus (WNV) is a member of the genus Flavivirus from the family Flaviviridae that infects a variety of mammalian and avian hosts, including human beings. It is an emerging virus in the Western hemisphere. The first outbreak in the United States was reported in 1999 in New York and subsequently spread across the country. In 2002, WNV was responsible for the largest outbreak of arthropod-borne encephalitis in the Western hemisphere. In 2003, more than 9800 human cases and 264 deaths were reported (Centers for Disease Control and Protection, 2003). There were still more than 2400 cases and 87 deaths in 2004 (Centers for Disease Control and Protection, 2004). Flaviviruses produce three structural proteins, with the envelope (E) protein being the major component of the virion surface. All flaviviral E proteins have three domains: I, II and III. It is known that domain III (ED3) of flaviviruses has important implications in virulence. In louping ill virus, dengue virus and WNV, single-amino-acid mutations in this domain disrupt the binding of neutralizing (Jiang et al., 1993; Gao et al., 1994; Volk et al., 2004; Modis et al., 2005). Subsequently, ED3 was proposed to be the receptor-binding domain (Crill & Roehrig, 2001; Mandl et al., 2000) and thus plays a central role in the receptor-mediated endocytotic entry mechanism of flaviviruses (Heinz & Allison, 2000). Comparative structural studies of ED3s might shed light on the general pathogenesis and virulence of this genus of viruses. Owing to their crucial roles in the viral life cycle, the ED3s are attractive targets for drug development. An atomic structure of the ED3 may aid the design of virus-entry inhibitors, for example, by virtual screening. Recently, the solution structure of the ED3 from the New York strain of WNV has been described (Volk et al., 2004). However, structures determined by X-ray crystallography are often more desirable for guiding structure-based drug design and protein-engineering studies because the atomic positions of ordered surface side chains are generally better defined. In the past, the WNV ED3 has defied crystallization, presumably because the protein is intrinsically unstable, as revealed by biophysical comparisons with three other homologous flaviviral ED3s (Yu et al., 2004). We have overcome the production and purification of recombinant WNV ED3 (WNV-rED3) by protein refolding and report here the successful crystallization of this protein.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Protein expression
The DNA encoding WNV-rED3 (residues 298–415) was cloned into the pET11a vector (Novagen) and transformed into Escherichia coli BL21DE3 cells. The recombinant protein was overexpressed in bacteria grown in LB medium containing 100 µg ml−1 ampicillin at 310 K. When the culture density reached an OD600 of 0.5–0.7, IPTG was added to a final concentration of 1 mM to induce expression and the cells were grown for a further 4 h at 310 K. The proteins were expressed as inclusion bodies and prepared as previously described (Gao et al., 1998). Cells were harvested by centrifugation and sonicated in lysis buffer (10 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.0, 150 mM NaCl, 10 mM EDTA, 2 mM DTT, 0.5 mM PMSF, 100–400 µg ml−1 lysozyme, 10% glycerol, 20 µg ml−1 DNAse I). After centrifugation, the pellet was treated with Triton wash buffer (0.5% Triton X-100, 50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.0, 100 mM NaCl, 0.1% sodium azide, 10 mM EDTA, 2 mM DTT) and further washed with resuspension buffer (50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.0, 100 mM NaCl, 10 mM EDTA, 2 mM DTT). The washed inclusion bodies were then dissolved in guanidine buffer (6 M guanidine, 50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.0, 100 mM NaCl, 10 mM EDTA, 10 mM DTT). The purity of the sample was assessed by SDS–PAGE.
2.2. Protein refolding, purification and mass-spectrometric analysis
Refolding of the recombinant protein was performed at low temperature (277–285 K) in refolding buffer (200 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.0, 1 M L-arginine, 10 mM EDTA, 0.1 mM PMSF, 5 mM reduced glutathione, 0.5 mM oxidized glutathione). A total of 60 mg (20 mg each day for 3 d) of sample was added to cold refolding buffer (1 l) and incubated over 3 d. After refolding, the sample was concentrated in a stir cell to a volume of 30–50 ml and centrifuged at 15 000 rev min−1 at 277 K for 30 min. The supernatant was dialysed into gel-filtration buffer (50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.0, 150 mM NaCl) and purified by gel-filtration using a Superdex 75 HR column (Amersham). The purified protein was desalted and its molecular weight was determined by to be 12 488.0 Da (Fig. 1), which agrees well with the calculated weight of 12 488.6 Da.
2.3. Crystallization
Crystallization trials were set up with Hampton Crystal Screens 1 and 2 at 291 K using the hanging-drop method. Drops contained equal volumes (1 µl each) of protein solution (10 mg ml−1) and reservoir crystallization buffer and were placed over a well containing 200 µl reservoir solution. Crystals suitable for data collection were grown from the optimized conditions [1.5 M ammonium sulfate, 100 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.5 with 9–10%(v/v) DMSO] to full size (typical dimensions 10 × 10 × 100 µm; Fig. 2) in four weeks.
2.4. Data collection and processing
Data were collected in-house on a Rigaku MicroMax007 rotating-anode X-ray generator operating at 40 kV and 20 mA (Cu Kα; λ = 1.5418 Å) equipped with an R-AXIS VII++ image-plate detector. A complete set was collected to 2.8 Å (Fig. 3) at 100 K from a single crystal. The diffraction data were indexed, integrated and scaled with DENZO and the HKL2000 software package (Otwinowski & Minor, 1997). The statistics of data processing are summarized in Table 1. The was determined to be P2221, with unit-cell parameters a = 52.6, b = 59.7, c = 95.0 Å. The Matthews coefficients (Table 2; Matthews, 1968) are consistent with either two or three molecules in the asymmetric unit.
|
|
3. Results and discussion
The target protein is expressed at elevated levels as inclusion bodies. We demonstrate here that these insoluble materials can be successfully refolded and purified. The purified sample has a molecular weight of 12.5 kDa, as determined by et al., 2004), this refolded protein forms good-quality crystals that diffract to medium resolution. It is conceivable that the protein-refolding approach may be generally applicable to the purification and crystallization of other homologous viral envelope proteins. A similar refolding approach of WNV-rED3 has been reported by Chu et al. (2005), who showed that the preparation is biologically active. Further optimization of crystal quality and structure solution of this protein are under way.
and SDS–PAGE, which agrees well with the monomeric molecular weight. The gel-filtration elution profile is consistent with a monomeric species in solution (data not shown). Although WNV domain III is significantly less stable than its other flaviviral homologues (YuAcknowledgements
We thank the Laboratory of Structural Biology of Tsinghua University and the Laboratory of Molecular Immunology and Molecular Virology in the Institute of Microbiology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences for providing resources, research and technical support for this project. We are grateful to Dr Alan D. T. Barrett for providing us with the plasmid harbouring the WNV E gene. Dr Yu Wai Chen is a visiting professor at the Laboratory of Molecular Immunology and Molecular Virology in the Institute of Microbiology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS). This work was partially supported by a grant from The National Natural Sciences Foundation of China (grant No. 30228025).
References
Centers for Disease Control and Protection (2003). West Nile Virus: Surveillance and Control Case Count of West Nile Virus Disease 2003. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/surv&controlCaseCount03_detailed.htm. Google Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and Protection (2004). West Nile Virus: Surveillance and Control Case Count of West Nile Virus Disease 2004. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/surv&controlCaseCount04_detailed.htm. Google Scholar
Chu, J. J., Rajamanonmani, R., Li, J., Bhuvanakantham, R., Lescar, J. & Ng, M. L. (2005). J. Gen. Virol. 86, 405–412. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Crill, W. D. & Roehrig, J. T. (2001). J. Virol. 75, 7769–7773. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Gao, G. F., Gerth, U. C., Wyer, J. R., Willcox, B. E., O'Callaghan, C. A., Zhang, Z., Jones, E. Y., Bell, J. I. & Jakobsen, B. K. (1998). Protein Sci. 7, 1245–1249. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Gao, G. F., Hussain, M. H., Reid, H. W. & Gould, E. A. (1994). J. Gen. Virol. 75, 609–614. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Heinz, F. X. & Allison, S. L. (2000). Adv. Virus Res. 55, 231–269. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Jiang, W. R., Lowe, A., Higgs, S., Reid, H. & Gould, E. A. (1993). J. Gen. Virol. 74, 931–935. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Mandl, C. W., Allison, S. L., Holzmann, H., Meixner, T. & Heinz, F. X. (2000). J. Virol. 74, 9601–9609. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Matthews, B. W. (1968). J. Mol. Biol. 33, 491–497. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Modis, Y., Ogata, S., Clements, D. & Harrison, S. C. (2005). J. Virol. 79, 1223–1231. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Otwinowski, Z. & Minor, W. (1997). Methods Enzymol. 276, 307–326. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Volk, D. E., Beasley, D. W., Kallick, D. A., Holbrook, M. R., Barrett, A. D. & Gorenstein, D. G. (2004). J. Biol. Chem. 279, 38755–38761. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Yu, S., Wuu, A., Basu, R., Holbrook, M. R., Barrett, A. D. & Lee, J. C. (2004). Biochemistry, 43, 9168–9176. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
© International Union of Crystallography. Prior permission is not required to reproduce short quotations, tables and figures from this article, provided the original authors and source are cited. For more information, click here.