Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Newest Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Methods & Resources
    • Archive
    • Subjects
  • Collections
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • License, Copyright, Fee
    • FAQ
    • Why submit
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editors & Staff
    • Board Members
    • Licensing and Reuse
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Privacy Policy
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • LSA LLC
  • Alerts
  • Other Publications
    • EMBO Press
    • The EMBO Journal
    • EMBO reports
    • EMBO Molecular Medicine
    • Molecular Systems Biology
    • Rockefeller University Press
    • Journal of Cell Biology
    • Journal of Experimental Medicine
    • Journal of General Physiology
    • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
    • Genes & Development
    • Genome Research

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Life Science Alliance
  • Other Publications
    • EMBO Press
    • The EMBO Journal
    • EMBO reports
    • EMBO Molecular Medicine
    • Molecular Systems Biology
    • Rockefeller University Press
    • Journal of Cell Biology
    • Journal of Experimental Medicine
    • Journal of General Physiology
    • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
    • Genes & Development
    • Genome Research
  • My alerts
Life Science Alliance

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Newest Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Methods & Resources
    • Archive
    • Subjects
  • Collections
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • License, Copyright, Fee
    • FAQ
    • Why submit
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editors & Staff
    • Board Members
    • Licensing and Reuse
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Privacy Policy
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • LSA LLC
  • Alerts
  • Follow lsa Template on Twitter
Research Article
Transparent Process
Open Access

Beetle luciferases with naturally red- and blue-shifted emission

View ORCID ProfileCésar Carrasco-López, Juliana C Ferreira, View ORCID ProfileNathan M Lui, Stefan Schramm, Romain Berraud-Pache, View ORCID ProfileIsabelle Navizet, View ORCID ProfileSantosh Panjikar, Panče Naumov, View ORCID ProfileWael M Rabeh  Correspondence email
César Carrasco-López
1New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for César Carrasco-López
Juliana C Ferreira
1New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nathan M Lui
1New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Nathan M Lui
Stefan Schramm
1New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Romain Berraud-Pache
2Laboratoire Modélisation et Simulation Multi Echelle, MSME UMR 8208 CNRS, Université Paris-Est, Marne-la-Vallée, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Isabelle Navizet
2Laboratoire Modélisation et Simulation Multi Echelle, MSME UMR 8208 CNRS, Université Paris-Est, Marne-la-Vallée, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Isabelle Navizet
Santosh Panjikar
3Australian Synchrotron, Clayton, Australia
4Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Santosh Panjikar
Panče Naumov
1New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Wael M Rabeh
1New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Wael M Rabeh
  • For correspondence: wael.rabeh@nyu.edu
Published 16 August 2018. DOI: 10.26508/lsa.201800072
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • Metrics
  • Reviewer Comments
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Supplementary Materials
  • Figure S1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S1. 2FoFc electron density maps contoured at 1 sigma and the corresponding atomic models.

    (A) REPh P1 crystal form at 3.05 Å resolution showing a random region of the protein and its electron density map around the core. (B) REPh P3121 crystal form solved at 3.6 Å resolution showing random region of its atomic model and electron density map around the core of the protein. (C) Loop348–361 in REPh fitted within the electron density. Only molecules C and F of the P1 crystal had sufficient quality in the electron density to trace the complete loop. (D) Loop521–528 in REPh fitted within the electron density map of the P3121 crystal form. Only molecule B of the P3121 crystal form has enough quality to trace the C-terminal domain that was not traceable in any of the molecules in the P1 crystal form. (E) Loop351–364 in GBAv fitted within the electron density. (F) Loop523–530 in GBAv fitted within the electron density.

  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1. Crystal structure of the naturally red-emitting luciferase from P. hirtus (REPh).

    (A) Front view of the partial octameric conformation found in the P1 crystal form (only the N-terminal domains were observed in the electron density maps). (B) Lateral view of the octamer that highlights the surface interactions between the monomers. (C) Close-up view and interactions across the dimer interface between monomers A1 (red) and A2 (blue). The interacting residues are shown as stick models with matching colors as monomers A1 and A2 in panels (A, B). The two surfaces are related to each other by a C2 axis. The broken lines show the interactions between residues R11, N179, and Y26. Mutation R11A disrupted the octamer to give monomers in solution. (D) Close-up view of the tetramer interface across the dimers, which are assembled as an octamer (monomer A1 is dark red and monomer D2 is white). The interactions between the two surfaces are predominantly hydrophobic interactions between Y153, M152, and F162 from both dimers. Similar to the dimer interface, the surfaces at the tetramer interface are related by a C2 axis. Single and double mutations at residues Y153 and F162 generated exclusively dimers in solution.

  • Figure S2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S2. Oligomerization of red-emitting luciferase REPh.

    (A) The octamer of REPh shows the N-terminal domains packed to form the core of the octamer and the C-terminal domains pointing outward. The dotted lines separate the N- from C-terminal domains in the complex and the arrows indicate the direction for the movement of the C-terminal domains during catalysis. The flexibility of the C-terminal domain is important for opening and closing of the active site. (B) Putative dimer of REPh in its double mutant Y153A/F162A as part of the dimer interface. (C) Size-exclusion chromatogram of WT REPh shows a peak with an estimated MW of ≈240 kD that corresponds to the tetramer. The single mutants F162A or Y153A in the tetramer interface of REPh produced only dimers with an estimated MW of ≈122 kD. The combination of R11A in the dimer interface with Y153A/F162A in the tetramer interface produced monomers as a single peak at 61 kD, which is identical to WT GBAv. However, the R11A alone was sufficient to disrupt the octameric assembly of the WT REPh and produced exclusively monomeric peak similar to the WT GBAv luciferase. All MWs were estimated by using MW gel filtration calibration kit on Superdex 200 5/150 GL (GE Healthcare). (D) SDS–PAGE analysis of the GBAv WT and the REPh WT and mutant protein samples after completing the protein purification. The REPh mutants are as follows: lane 1: R11A; lane 2: R11A, Y153A, and F162A; lane 3: Y153A and F162A; and lane 4: F162A. Coomassie stain was used to visualize the protein bands and ImagJ was used to quantity the protein samples' purity >90%.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2. Analysis of the structures of red-emitting REPh and blue-shifted green-emitting GBAv luciferases.

    (A) Full-length structure of molecule B, the only monomer with a complete C-terminal domain of REPh in the P3121 crystal form (the structures of the other three monomers in this crystal lack the C-terminal domain, which could not be observed in the difference electron density maps). The conformation of REPh has the largest aperture between the N-terminal (“N-Term”) and C-terminal (“C-Term”) domains among the luciferases with known crystal structures. (B) Structure of one of the two monomers in the asymmetric unit of GBAv (the monomer of GBAv with a larger aperture is shown here; the angle of the aperture of the other monomer is 30°). The structural packing of both GBAv monomers is less open relative to REPh. The RMSD value of the superimposed monomers is 0.22 Å based on all α-carbons in the structure (the deviations were prominent in the C-terminal domain, with RMSD of 2.1 Å). Identical conformations were found for the N-terminal domain, with RMSD based on the α-carbons of 0.08 Å. (C) The loose packing of loop348–361 (red) in the N-terminal domain of REPh relative to the tight packing of loop351–364 (blue) in the N-terminal domain of GBAv (see Fig S6). (D) The shift of loop348–361 (red) in REPh relative to loop351–364 (blue) in GBAv by superposition of the two monomers based on the α-carbons of the whole structures (Fig S6A). R353 (pink sticks) is the only known insertion in the REPh sequence. (E) Natural substituted residues found in loop348–361 (pink) of REPh close to the active sites are shown in gray and pink sticks. (F) The relatively conserved residue counterparts in loop351–364 (blue) of GBAv are shown in gray and blue sticks. In panels D, E, and F, the reaction product (oxyluciferin, shown with yellow sticks) is shown by superimposing the structures reported here with the structure of GLc in complex with oxyluciferin (PDB code: 2D1R).

  • Figure S3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S3. Two molecules in the asymmetric unit (AU) of the GBAv crystal.

    (A) General structure of molecule “A” in the AU of the GBAv crystal represented by its molecular surface. The C-terminal domain (highlighted in blue) and its N-terminal domain (cyan) have a different conformation relative to the other molecule “B” in the AU. In this case, the angle that describes the space between the domains is lower and, therefore, the overall conformation is less open for molecule “A” than molecule B. (B) View of the C-terminal domains of both molecules when superimposed. The different conformations of the C-terminal domains are clear when the two molecules (B in blue cartoons and A in cyan) are superimposed, with a rotation along the center of the main β-sheet.

  • Figure S4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S4. Analysis of the conformation of loop523–530 GBAv and loop521–528 REPh in “open” conformations against loop525–532 GLc in complex with bioluminescence product oxyluciferin (OLU) and AMP (PDB code:2D1R), which represents the “closed” conformation of luciferase.

    (A) Superimposition of GBAv (blue ribbons) and GLc (green ribbons). Loop523–530 (highlighted in brown in both structures) is displaced ≈19 Å upon closure of the active site. (B) A close-up view that shows the displacement of loop523–530 in GLc relative to GBAv. In the open conformation (GBAv), loop523–530 interacts with the hinge (D436, blue sticks) and D422 of the active site through K529 (blue sticks). Upon binding of the substrate, a large conformational rearrangement closes the active site to produce a conformation similar to that of GLc in complex with the products. In the closed conformation, K531 and D424 (green sticks) of GLc interact with OLU and AMP, and these interactions may be the driving force for the conformational change that closes the active site. (C) Interactions of loop523–530 GBAv in the open conformation with the hinge loop connecting the N- with the C-terminal domain. K529 of the loop interacts with D436 and D422 of the hinge loop and the N-terminal domain, respectively. T527 of the loop interacts with D422 in the N-terminal domain. The structure of the loop is maintained by interactions between K524 and the backbone carbonyl oxygen of G528. (D) Loop521–528 REPh in the C-terminal domain of REPh is more open and more distant from the N-terminal domain relative to GBAv. Loop521–528 REPh is less efficiently packed and lacks many of the interactions with the N-terminal domain (see Fig S6A). However, the interaction between K527 and E438 is maintained, and it is similar to K529 and D436 of GBAv. (E) In the closed conformation, loop525–532 of GLc is shifted closer to the substrate-binding site for direct interaction between K531 of loop525–532 with the α-phosphate of the nucleotide. Moreover, T529 of loop525–532 interacts with OLU through a water molecule. Loop525–532 of GLc also stabilized the closed conformation through interactions with T292 and D468 of the N- and C-terminal domains, respectively.

  • Figure S5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S5. Amino acid sequence alignment of beetle luciferases.

    The amino acid sequence alignment of loop348–361 and loop521–528 in REPh and loop351–364 and loop523–530 in GBAv was performed against luciferases from P. pyralis (GPp), Luciola cruciate (GLc), and Lampyris turkestanicus using Clustal Omega. The loop regions are highlighted in yellow. Amino acids R337 and K524 that altered the emission color of GBAv are boxed. Amino acid R353 insertion in REPh is indicated with an arrow that is also found in L. turkestanicus luciferase.

  • Figure S6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S6. Structural superimposition of loop351–364 in GBAv with the corresponding loop in REPh and other beetle luciferases.

    Superimposition in ribbons representation of GBAv (white) against (A) REPh (red); (B) GLc (yellow; PDB code: 2D1R); (C) GPp (green; PDB code: 3IES); (D) Luciferase from Lampyris turkestanicus (orange; PDB code: 4M46). The loop348–361 REPh (red) is displaced by ∼12 Å in comparison with the same loop351–364 GBAv (blue). On the other hand, loop351–364 GBAv has same conformation as the corresponding loops in green-emitting luciferases GLc, GPp, and luciferase from L. turkestanicus (panels B–D).

  • Figure S7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S7. Analysis of the active sites of GBAv (blue ribbons) and GLc (green ribbons).

    Superposition of these structures indicates that two loops (loop198–205 and loop314–319) in the blue-shifted green-emitting luciferase (GBAv) show a conformational change relative to the structure of green-emitting GLc in its closed conformation. (A) A close-up view of the helix above the active site shows the lateral chains (sticks) of residues in different conformations in the two structures. GBAv has a single substitution, S250, in the active site instead of F252 in GLc. (B) Residues I351 and R337 (in sticks color-coded according to the structure) are conserved in GLc and have identical conformations in the three determined crystal structures. The main structures are superimposed and shown in dark green (GPp), pale green (GLc), and blue ribbons (GBAv). Oxyluciferin in complex with GLc is shown as a ball-and-stick model. (C) Residues L334 and L348 from REPh (red sticks) are not conserved in the different green-emitting luciferases that are substituted by arginine and isoleucine, respectively.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3. Normalized bioluminescence emission spectra and kinetics of WT and mutants of luciferases REPh and GBAv.

    (A) At pH 8.0, the emission from WT REPh with λmax = 623 nm was blue-shifted between 600 and 610 nm in mutants of L334. (B) At pH 8.0, GBAv emission at λmax = 538 nm for the WT enzyme was red-shifted to 580 nm in double mutant R337L/I351L. Single mutant I351L did not alter the emission of GBAv. (C, D) Schematic of the experimental (C) and calculated (D) data for mutation-induced shifts of emissions of GBAv and REPh (Tables S2, S3, S4, and S5). The vertical y-axis is set at the WT emission of GBAv or REPh. Each arrow represents a mutant (labeled inside the arrow) that shifts the color from the WT emission and points in the direction of change of the emitted color. The tip of the arrow is a qualitative representation of the color shift and the maximum emission wavelength. The mutations that did not affect the color emitted by the WT luciferase are labeled immediately next to the y-axis. (E) Residues at the interface (green sticks) between the N- and C-terminal domains in the closed conformation of GLc. Previous mutations on residues at this interface (E490 and F467) and mutant K524A in GBAv (K526 in GLc) reported here red-shifted the color between 10 and 15 nm.

  • Figure S8.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S8. Superposition of the N-terminal domains of the “open” (GBAv-open) and the modeled “closed” (GBAv-closed) states of GBAv.

    The C-terminal domains of GBAv-closed (blue) and GBAv-open (green) are displaced with respect to the N-terminal domain. In the classical MD simulation performed with the GBAv-closed model, the oxyluciferin adopts a different position in the active site of GBAv-closed relative to simulation with green-emitting luciferases (Fig S9). The reorganization of the electrostatic potential exerted by the surrounding residues of GBAv leads to a blue shift of the emission. As a result of its new position, the oxyluciferin is distant from S250 of GBAv, the only residue of the active site that is substituted in the green luciferases (Fig S9). A hydrogen bond between S250 and oxyluciferin in GBAv-closed was not observed. Consequently, the presence of S250 alone cannot explain the observed blue shift of the emission of GBAv.

  • Figure S9.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S9. Ball-and-stick representation of the superposed structures of the GBAv-closed model with oxyluciferin and the crystal structure of GLc luciferase (green) with oxyluciferin that shows the oxyluciferin-binding pocket.

    The structures are superimposed in the N-terminal domains of GBAv-closed from snapshot 2 and the crystal structure of GLc luciferase. The GBAv-closed model is represented as color-coded atoms, whereas the oxyluciferin from GLc is in green. The AMPH is represented in color-coded atoms.

  • Figure S10.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S10. Normalized bioluminescence emission spectra and thermal analysis (DSC) of REPh and GBAv luciferases.

    (A) The normalized emission spectrum of WT REPh is independent of pH, with λmax = 623 nm. The single mutant K522A did not shift the WT emission. (B) The emission of GBAv is pH-dependent, and introduction of the K524A mutation red-shifts the WT emission by ≈18 nm, from 550 to 573 nm at pH 7.0, and from 538 to 555 nm at pH 8. (C–F) DSC thermograms of REPh and GBAv luciferases, WT (solid line), and mutants (broken line). The DSC measurements were acquired in the absence (blue) or presence of firefly 5 mM luciferin (red) or 5 mM ATP (green). The DSC scans were corrected for buffer baseline and the data were fitted to non–two-state transitions that show cooperative endothermic unfolding. REPh is thermodynamically less stable than GBAv. However, addition of substrates enhances the stability of REPh but does not alter that of GBAv. (G–H) Bar plot of the first (solid bars) and second (checkered bars) melting points calculated from the temperatures at the middle of the first and second transition of the DSC thermograms, respectively. (I) Bar plot of ΔHcal determined from the area under the peaks in the absence (blue) or presence of firefly luciferin (red) or ATP (green). The data are shown as mean ± SD, with n = 3.

Supplementary Materials

  • Figures
  • Table S1 Data collection and refinement statistics.

  • Supplementary Note 1

    In the structure of REPh, we were able to build the C-terminal domain of only one of the four molecules that were observed in the asymmetric unit of the P3121 crystal form. The C-terminal domain showed higher average B factors (69.4 Å2, with several regions with values above 100) relative to the N-terminal domain within the same crystal form (60.3 Å2). The electron density maps of the C-terminal domains in some of the molecules were incomplete, and in other cases they showed very little to no definite electron density. The redundancy imposed by the non-crystallographic symmetry aided in the building and refinement of a reliable model, particularly of the N-terminal domain, and improved the agreement between the structural model and the determined electron density (Supplementary Fig. 1a and 1b).

  • Supplementary Note 2

    The crystal structure of REPh is an octamer in the P1 crystal form and a tetramer in the P3121 crystal form (Fig. 1a and 1b; Supplementary Fig. 2a and 2b). The octamer of REPh is composed of dimers that are joined at the tetramer interface (Fig. 1c and 1d; Supplementary Fig. 2b). The tetramer is formed by interactions between M152, Y153 and F162 from the dimers (Fig. 1d). The degree of oligomerization of REPh in solution was confirmed by using size-exclusion chromatography (SEC; Supplementary Fig. 2c and 2d). The estimated molecular weight (MW) of the wild-type (WT) REPh from the SEC analysis was ≈ 240 kDa, which corresponds to the tetramer found in the P3121 crystal. The octamer with a predicted MW of 480 kDa was not observed in solution, which is probably a result of weak inter-tetramer interactions that dissociate in solution, but maybe stabilized at higher protein concentrations represented in the crystallization drops.

    Mutations at the tetramer interface, which include double mutant Y153A and F162A, produced dimers with MW of 122 kDa. The monomer was not detected for any of the mutations at the tetramer interface. However, the monomer units within the dimers are held strong polar interactions at two contact points on the dimer interface, where R11 from one of the monomers forms H-bonding interactions with Y26, Y30, and N179 of the other monomer (Fig. 1c). The single mutant R11A in the dimer interface was sufficient to disrupt all interface interactions and exclusively generated monomers of REPh with a MW of 61 kDa as determined by SEC analysis (Supplementary Fig. 2c). Interestingly, disrupting the dimer interface was sufficient to disassemble the tetramer interface. These results indicate that the overall interactions across the dimer interface are relatively stronger than those across the tetramer interface, and that the dimer is more stable than the tetramer. This can also explain why the octamer was not observed in solution as it might be less stable than the tetramer with more hydrophobic interface interactions.

  • Table S2 TD-DFT/MM emission for electronic transition between S1 and S0 for the model GBAv-closed-insert-R356 (resulting from the insertion of Arg 356). TD-DFT/MM done with 6-311G(2d,p) basis set and B3LYP functional on structure optimized at the same level of theory.

  • Supplementary Note 3

    The origin of the difference in color of emitted light was investigated by introducing mutations in REPh and GBAv at the following positions:

    • (1) Loop348‒361 in REPh, which corresponds to loop351‒364 in GBAv

    • (2) Loop521‒528 in REPh, which corresponds to loop523‒530 in GBAv

    • (3) Single mutants in the C-terminal domain, which includes S462F, E486K, and E486V in REPh, and F465S, E488K, and E488V in GBAv, which were found previously to alter the color emitted by luciferase from Luciola mingrelica (Modestova et al, 2014; Modestova & Ugarova, 2016).

    Multiple mutants of the C-terminal domain introduced here did not alter the emission of both REPh and GBAv luciferases. However, loop348‒361 was found to play an important role in determining the color of emitted light of REPh and GBAv. This loop is tightly packed against the N-terminal domain of GBAv and other green-emitting luciferases relative to REPh (Fig. 2c; Supplementary Fig. 6). Its high mobility in REPh is a consequence of the restructuring of the hydrogen bonding as a result of the natural substitutions and insertions (Fig. 2c).

    After detailed structural and sequence analysis of the luciferases, only few natural substitutions were found within the active site. Introduction of I351L, one of the natural substitutions found, did not change the emission of WT GBAv (Fig. 3b). However, introduction of R337L red-shifted the emission of WT GBAv from 538 to 580 nm (Fig. 3c), and it drastically decreased its intensity. Furthermore, the intensity of R337L was slightly enhanced after the introduction of a second mutation, I351L, which did not alter the emission of WT GBAv on its own. Similar to the single mutant (R337L), the double mutant (R337L/I351L) shifted the emission from 538 to 580 nm. Therefore, R337 is clearly important the red-emission, and the substitution I351L enhances the intensity without affecting the emission energy.

    Various mutations were introduced at position L334 in REPh to investigate its role in color emission. All mutants at L334 blue-shifted the emission of REPh from 623 nm for the WT enzyme to 610‒606 nm for L334R, L334K, L334E, L334Q, and L334F (Fig. 2e and 3a). The single mutant with the strongest blue shift (from 623 to 600 nm) is L334Q. The contribution of a second amino acid L348 does not appear to be significant in the fine-tuning of the color, because introduction of L348I mutation in REPh did not alter the WT emission energy (Fig. 3a and 3c).

    The role of loop523‒530 in the C-terminal domain was investigated by characterizing the role of K524, T527, and K529 in the stability and color emission of GBAv and its corresponding positions in REPh, K522, T525, and K527, respectively (Supplementary Fig. 4). Loop523‒530 is important for the opening and closing of the active site, and could play a role in the color of the emitted light and the enzyme stability. None of the mutants introduced in loop521‒528 of REPh, which includes K522R, K522E, K522Q, T525A, K527R, K527E, K527Q, and K527A, have altered the WT emission (Fig. 3C). Although K524A red-shifted the emission of GBAv, T527A and K529A did not alter its emission (Fig. 3C; Supplementary Fig. 7b). Furthermore, residue K524 plays an important role in the stabilization of the closed conformation. In the closed conformation of GLC in complex with oxyluciferin and AMP (PDB code: 2D1R) (Nakatsu et al, 2006), K526 in the C-terminal domain interacts with T292 in the N-terminal domain. The tight H-bonding interactions between K526 and T292 contribute to the microenvironment and tight packing around the active site of GLC as is the case for GBAv (Supplementary Fig. 4e). These interactions are absent in REPh (Supplementary Fig. 4d) because T292 of GBAv and GLC is substituted with P287 in REPh.

    Thermal unfolding analysis by differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) measurements revealed different thermodynamic stabilities with calculated melting points (Tm) of 35°C for WT REPh and 43 °C for WT GBAv. Although similar thermodynamic stability for the GBAv enzyme was determined in the absence or presence of substrates (Tm ≈ 43°C; Supplementary Fig. 7e and 7h), the addition of substrates changed the shape of thermograms and increased the stability of the WT REPh from 35°C to 41°C with luciferin (Supplementary Fig. 7c and 7g). Two transitions were observed for the melt of REPh in the presence of ATP with Tm values of 36°C and 41°C.

    The introduction of mutant K524A in GBAv slightly decreased its thermal stability relative to the WT enzyme with similar overall shapes of the thermograms (Supplementary Fig. 7e and 7f). However, the introduction of mutant K522A changed the overall shape of the thermogram of WT REPh (Supplementary Fig. 7c and 7d). In addition, the thermal melt of K522A REPh was not detectable in the absence of substrates and the signal was detectable only after the addition of substrate, luciferin or ATP.

    The emission of WT GBAv was pH-dependent, with a blue shift from 550 nm at pH 7.0 to 538 nm at pH 8.0 (Supplementary Fig. 7b). The introduction of K524A in GBAv red-shifted the WT emission by ≈ 18 nm, from 550 to 573 nm at pH 7.0 and from 538 to 555 nm at pH 8 (Supplementary Fig. 7b). Increasing the pH above 8.0 did not alter the emission of GBAv, but a decrease in pH below 7.0 inactivated the enzyme. The emission of REPh was pH-independent for both WT and the K522A mutant with λmax = 623 nm (Supplementary Fig. 7a).

  • Table S3 TD-DFT/MM emission for electronic transition between S1 and S0 for the model GBAv-closed-I351L (resulting from the I351L mutation in GBAv-closed before MD). The TD-DFT/MM calculations were performed with the 6-311G(2d,p) basis set with the B3LYP functional on a structure optimized at the same level of theory.

  • Table S4 TD-DFT/MM–calculated emission for electronic transition between S1 and S0 for the model GBAv-closed-R337L (resulting from the R337L mutation in GBAv-closed before MD). The TD-DFT/MM calculations were performed with the 6-311G(2d,p) basis set and the B3LYP functional on a structure optimized at the same level of theory.

  • Table S5 TD-DFT/MM emission for electronic transition between S1 and S0 for the model GBAv-closed-R337L/I351L (resulting from double R337L and I351L mutations in GBAv-closed before MD). The TD-DFT/MM calculations were performed with the 6-311G(2d,p) basis set and the B3LYP functional on a structure optimized at the same level of theory.

  • Supplementary Note 4

    Computational study of WT GBAv.

    To understand the natural blue shift of the light observed for GBAv relative to common green-yellow emitting luciferases, computational analyses were performed with one of the monomers extracted from the crystal structure of GBAv. The model was generated by following the steps outlined in the method section.

    As noted in the main text, GBAv has its C-terminal domain in an open conformation. Two models were analyzed: one model with an open C-terminal domain (“GBAv-open”) and one model was constructed with its C-terminal domain closed (“GBAv-closed”; Supplementary Fig. 9). The closure of the C-terminal domain was simulated by using an umbrella sampling classical molecular dynamics (MD), as described in the method section. Random snapshots were extracted from 10 ns classical MD simulations on both models, and the value of the fluorescence emission maximum was calculated by time-dependent density functional theory/molecular mechanics (TD-DFT/MM).

    The emission calculated from snapshots in GBAv-open shows a red shift relative to the experimental value (Supplementary Table 2). The most pronounced difference is 15 nm (0.06 eV). These results — accounting for the level of theory employed (TD-DFT/MM) and the intrinsic error of the method — show good agreement with the experimental emission recorded for GBAv. However, the calculated values are also close to the experimental emissions of other green-emitting firefly luciferases, which include the luciferases of Luciola cruciata at 560 nm (PDB code: 2D1R) and Photinus pyralis at 558 nm (PDB code: 4G36). Therefore, the crystal structure of GBAv in the open conformation did not show the expected blue-shifted emission of GBAv.

    The umbrella sampling classical MD simulations used to close the C-terminal domain and to obtain GBAv-closed has a flat free-energy profile, which reveals the absence of an energy barrier. The TD-DFT/MM-calculated emission of the resulting GBAv-closed model is slightly blue-shifted relative to the experimental value and further from the green-emitting firefly luciferase wavelengths. The largest difference is 13 nm (0.06 eV) and therefore the closed model better reproduced the experimental blue shift observed with GBAv luciferase.

    During the classical MD simulation performed on GBAv-closed, the oxyluciferin adopts a different position in the cavity than the one observed in simulations with models of green-emitting firefly luciferases (Supplementary Fig. 10). The reorganization of the electrostatic potential exerted by the residues that surround the active site in GBAv leads to a blue shift in emission. As a result of its new position, oxyluciferin is far from S250 in GBAv, the only residue of the active site that differs from the green-emitting luciferases (Supplementary Fig. 8). No hydrogen bond was observed between S250 and the oxyluciferin in GBAv-closed. Consequently, the sole presence of S250 alone cannot explain the observed blue shift in GBAv luciferase.

    To further understand the effect of residue S250 on the emission of GBAv, the corresponding in silico mutation F251S was included in the model GLc derived from the luciferase of Luciola cruciata (PDB code: 2D1R). The calculated emission of the F251S mutant of the GLc model shows a surprisingly small red shift, probably as a result of formation of a H-bond network between S251, a water molecule, and oxyluciferin. The calculated value of the emission is 566 nm (2.19 eV). The result indicates that the substitution of phenylalanine in GLc to serine in GBAv is not responsible for the experimentally observed blue shift.

    Computational study of mutations in GBAv and comparison with REPh.

    To identify the reasons behind the red-shifted emission of REPh relative to GBAv, selected amino acid residues in GBAv were mutated to those found in REPh. Three residues were found to be important for the difference between these two luciferases. Two mutations are on residues located in the active site, R337 and I351 in GBAv that correspond to L334 and L348 in REPh, respectively. To model the effect of these substitutions, we took snapshot 1 of the GBAv-closed model and manually replaced the residues to perform a 10 ns classical MD (three different simulations, with R337L, I351L, and double mutant R337L/I351L). Several snapshots were extracted from the MD calculation and the respective fluorescence electronic transitions were calculated.The single mutation, I351L, has nearly no effect on the emission of GBAv-closed, similar to the experimental results (Fig. 3 and Supplementary Table 3). As predicted and in accordance with the similar properties of these residues, the mutant I351L did not alter the emitted color. For the other single mutant, R337L, a red shift in emission was observed after a simulation time of 6.8 ns, with a red shift between 25 and 45 nm relative to GBAv-closed (Supplementary Table 4). The geometry of the active site was conserved, and no major changes in the oxyluciferin binding pocket were observed. However, during the MD simulation, R218 moved and formed a hydrogen bond with oxyluciferin (Supplementary Fig. 10). An analysis of the emission of the calculated value for single mutant R337L and the experimental values of the emission of single mutant R337L and double mutant R337L/I351L showed good agreement (snapshot 4 gives a value of 577 nm that is less than 5 nm different from the experimental value of 580 nm; Supplementary Table 4). As expected, the substitution of a charged residue close to oxyluciferin with an aliphatic residue has a strong effect on the emission.

    The double mutant, R337L/I351L, shifted the emission to the red after a MD simulation time of 7 ns (Supplementary Table 5). A large red-shift (>50 nm) was observed for this double mutant relative to GBAv-closed. This shift is not related to the geometry of the active site, which was conserved during the MD simulation without major changes in the position of oxyluciferin. However, displacement of R218 to form hydrogen bond with oxyluciferin was observed again. The calculated emissions are in a good agreement with the experimental results of double mutant R337L/I351L (See Table 5 in which experimental value = 580 nm, and calculated value = 595 nm). In the double mutation, mutation R337L appears to be more important relative to I351L to explain the red shift.

    Finally, the natural insertion R353 in loop348‒363 of REPh was studied in GBAv-closed. The presence of R353 appears as the most viable reason for the conformational changes observed for loop348‒363, including its high B factor. To model this motion, arginine was inserted at position 356 in snapshot 1 of GBAv-closed. A longer MD simulation of 30 ns was performed to extract several snapshots. A small red shift of ≈ 15 nm after 20 ns was observed (Supplementary Table 6). Even after a simulation time of 30 ns, the insertion of R356 did not change the conformation of the loop, in contrast with its position in the crystal structure of REPh. This result may be due to multiple amino acid substitutions that are responsible for the motion of loop351‒364, which includes the substitution of E354 in GBAv with N351 in REPh (Fig. 2e and 2f).

  • Table S6 TD-DFT/MM emissions corresponding to the electronic transition between S1 and S0 for GBAv-open and GBAv-closed. The TD-DFT/MM calculations were performed with the 6-311G(2d,p) basis set and the B3LYP functional on a structure optimized at the same level of theory.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Life Science Alliance.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Beetle luciferases with naturally red- and blue-shifted emission
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Life Science Alliance
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Life Science Alliance web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Color emission mechanism for beetle luciferases
César Carrasco-López, Juliana C Ferreira, Nathan M Lui, Stefan Schramm, Romain Berraud-Pache, Isabelle Navizet, Santosh Panjikar, Panče Naumov, Wael M Rabeh
Life Science Alliance Aug 2018, 1 (4) e201800072; DOI: 10.26508/lsa.201800072

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Color emission mechanism for beetle luciferases
César Carrasco-López, Juliana C Ferreira, Nathan M Lui, Stefan Schramm, Romain Berraud-Pache, Isabelle Navizet, Santosh Panjikar, Panče Naumov, Wael M Rabeh
Life Science Alliance Aug 2018, 1 (4) e201800072; DOI: 10.26508/lsa.201800072
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
Issue Cover

In this Issue

Volume 1, No. 4
August 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Cover (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Masthead (PDF)
Advertisement

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Materials and Methods
    • Supplementary Information
    • Acknowledgements
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • Metrics
  • Reviewer Comments
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Biophysics
  • Structural Biology

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Iodine-induced cellular toxicity
  • Filopodia from somatic cells shape oocyte quality
  • Dual role of H4K20me1 in axis patterning in Hydra
Show more Research Article

Similar Articles

EMBO Press LogoRockefeller University Press LogoCold Spring Harbor Logo

Content

  • Home
  • Newest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Subject Collections

For Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Guidelines
  • License, copyright, Fee

Other Services

  • Alerts
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feeds

More Information

  • Editors & Staff
  • Reviewer Guidelines
  • Feedback
  • Licensing and Reuse
  • Privacy Policy

ISSN: 2575-1077
© 2023 Life Science Alliance LLC

Life Science Alliance is registered as a trademark in the U.S. Patent and Trade Mark Office and in the European Union Intellectual Property Office.