New Perspectives on Escherichia coli Signal Peptidase I Substrate Specificity: Investigating Why the TasA Cleavage
Joanna E Musik1, Jessica Poole1, Christopher J Day1
1Institute for Glycomics, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Abstract:
Escherichia coli signal peptidase I (LepB) has been shown to inefficiently cleave secreted proteins with aromatic amino acids at the second position after the signal peptidase cleavage site (P2'). The Bacillus subtilis exported protein TasA contains a phenylalanine at P2', which in B. subtilis is cleaved by a dedicated archaeal-organism-like signal peptidase, SipW. We have previously shown that when the TasA signal peptide is fused to maltose binding protein (MBP) up to the P2' position, the TasA-MBP fusion protein is cleaved very inefficiently by LepB. However, the precise reason why the TasA signal peptide hinders cleavage by LepB is not known. In this study, a set of 11 peptides were designed to mimic the inefficiently cleaved secreted proteins, wild-type TasA and TasA-MBP fusions, to determine whether the peptides interact with and inhibit the function of LepB. The binding affinity and inhibitory potential of the peptides against LepB were assessed by surface plasmon resonance (SPR) and a LepB enzyme activity assay. Molecular modeling of the interaction between TasA signal peptide and LepB indicated that the tryptophan residue at P2 (two amino acids before the cleavage site) inhibited the active site serine-90 residue on LepB from accessing the cleavage site. Replacing the P2 tryptophan with alanine (W26A) allowed for more efficient processing of the signal peptide when the TasA-MBP fusion was expressed in E. coli. The importance of this residue to inhibit signal peptide cleavage and the potential to design LepB inhibitors based on the TasA signal peptide are discussed. IMPORTANCE Signal peptidase I is an important drug target, and understanding its substrate is critically important to develop new bacterium-specific drugs. To that end, we have a unique signal peptide that we have shown is refractory to processing by LepB, the essential signal peptidase I in E. coli, but previously has been shown to be processed by a more human-like signal peptidase found in some bacteria. In this study, we demonstrate how the signal peptide can bind but is unable to be processed by LepB, using a variety of methods. This can inform the field on how to better design drugs that can target LepB and understand the differences between bacterial and human-like signal peptidases.
