文章基本信息

标题：Reply to Harwood et al.: Alternative functional conformations of native human α 2-macroglobulin
本地全文：下载
作者：Daniel Luque ; Theodoros Goulas ; Carlos P. Mata 等
期刊名称：Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
印刷版ISSN：0027-8424
电子版ISSN：1091-6490
出版年度：2022
卷号：119
期号：37
DOI：10.1073/pnas.2211048119
语种：English
出版社：The National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
摘要：Harwood et al. ( 1) challenge our study of human α 2-macroglobulin (hα 2M) by cryogenic electron microscopy ( 2) based on differences with other α 2M-family members. This discrepancy would result from damaged protein caused by the usage of thawed frozen fresh plasma (TFP) for protein preparation. Instead, “homogeneously native” hα 2M would be purified from fresh, nonfrozen plasma (NP). To address this issue, we compared hα 2M purified from TFP and NP. Briefly, we found that both preparations were equivalent in electrophoretic migration patterns, ultraviolet absorbance profiles, molar mass distributions, and free thiol groups. No differences in the inhibitory capacity against trypsin and thermolysin with three different substrates were detected. Thus, the preparations were equivalent, active, and functional, as already mentioned in our paper ( 2). This confirms reports from many groups which have been using frozen fresh plasma over decades ( 3– 6). In particular, ref. 7 reckoned that frozen plasma may be used for native hα 2M preparation. Recently, a comparative study with NP samples was published by Huang et al. ( 8), which shows that native preparations contain particles with multiple conformations (figure 2 of ref. 8). This is in agreement with very early studies ( 9). Thus, purified, native hα 2M from NP does not evince a unique structure as postulated by Harwood et al. ( 1) but rather a compendium of them, as we found from TFP. In ref. 2, we performed in silico separation and analysis of several subclasses of particles (see figures S3 and S9 and table S1 in ref. 2). Specifically, ∼46,000 images were included in the native I set, which rules out that the protein was randomly damaged (tables S1 and S4 of ref. 2). In addition, the overall conformation of the fully native tetramer of ref. 8 is very similar to ours (compare figure 1B of ref. 8 with figures 2 and 3 of ref. 2). In particular, the MG7–CUB(TED)–RBD block adopts a similar overall conformation in both “extended” ( 2) and “expanded” ( 8) protomers, in which the thioester bond is protected by a hydrophobic circus and the nearby presence of RBD (see figure 4 E and F of ref. 2). There just seems to be a relative rearrangement of the RBDs. As to native α 2M-family members, the mentioned proteins operate as monomers through completely different mechanisms, except frog ovostatin, which occurs in a physiologically different context from hα 2M. In addition, α 2M-family members evince substantially different activated structures. Thus, consistent with disparate functions, there is no structural or functional homogeneity. However, we cannot exclude that the extended protomer of hα 2M may sample alternative conformations while maintaining a functional tetrameric structure. This is consistent with the large flexibility and conformational disparity found in the theoretically homogeneous native preparations. Note also that this variability (figure S2 of ref. 2) is reduced to a single activated tetramer conformation upon treatment with trypsin (figure S4 of ref. 2), which further underpins that our native preparations are functionally competent. Overall, the claims that our structures be artifacts resulting from damaged samples are not substantiated. Our study ( 2) and that of Huang et al. ( 8) complementarily recapitulate the mechanism of function of hα 2M.