Abstract

Staphylococcus aureus (SA) leukocidin LukED belongs to a family of bicomponent pore forming toxins that play important roles in SA immune evasion and nutrient acquisition. LukED targets specific G protein-coupled chemokine receptors to lyse human erythrocytes (red blood cells) and leukocytes (white blood cells). The first recognition step of receptors is critical for specific cell targeting and lysis. The structural and molecular bases for this mechanism are not well understood but could constitute essential information to guide antibiotic development. Here, we characterized the interaction of LukE with chemokine receptors ACKR1, CCR2 and CCR5 using a combination of structural, pharmacological and computational approaches. First, crystal structures of LukE in complex with a small molecule mimicking sulfotyrosine side chain (p-cresyl sulfate) and with peptides containing sulfotyrosines issued from receptor sequences revealed the location of receptor sulfotyrosine binding sites in the toxins. Then, by combining previous and novel experimental data with protein docking, classical and accelerated weight histogram (AWH) molecular dynamics we propose models of the ACKR1-LukE and CCR5-LukE complexes. This work provides novel insights into chemokine receptor recognition by leukotoxins and suggests that the conserved sulfotyrosine binding pocket could be a target of choice for future drug development.

Data availability

Diffraction data have been deposited in PDB under the accession codes 7P8T, 7P8S, 7P8U, 7P8X and 7P93. Source Data files containing the computational models of the ACKR1-LukE and CCR5-LukE complexes in Figures 6 and 7 have been provided as pdb files. Figure 2 - Source Data 1 contain the numerical data used to generate the figure.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Paul Lambey

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Omolade Otun

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Xiaojing Cong

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. François Hoh

    Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Luc Brunel

    Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Pascal Verdié

    Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5807-0293
  7. Claire M Grison

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Fanny Peysson

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Sylvain Jeannot

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Thierry Durroux

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Cherine Bechara

    Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Sébastien Granier

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    For correspondence
    sebastien.granier@igf.cnrs.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Cédric Leyrat

    Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France
    For correspondence
    cedric.leyrat@igf.cnrs.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0189-0562

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-17-CE15-0002-01)

  • Cédric Leyrat

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2022, Lambey et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,433
    views
  • 236
    downloads
  • 6
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Paul Lambey
  2. Omolade Otun
  3. Xiaojing Cong
  4. François Hoh
  5. Luc Brunel
  6. Pascal Verdié
  7. Claire M Grison
  8. Fanny Peysson
  9. Sylvain Jeannot
  10. Thierry Durroux
  11. Cherine Bechara
  12. Sébastien Granier
  13. Cédric Leyrat
(2022)
Structural insights into recognition of chemokine receptors by Staphylococcus aureus leukotoxins
eLife 11:e72555.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72555

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72555

Further reading

    1. Genetics and Genomics
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Iti Mehta, Jacob B Hogins ... Larry Reitzer
    Research Article

    Polyamines are biologically ubiquitous cations that bind to nucleic acids, ribosomes, and phospholipids and, thereby, modulate numerous processes, including surface motility in Escherichia coli. We characterized the metabolic pathways that contribute to polyamine-dependent control of surface motility in the commonly used strain W3110 and the transcriptome of a mutant lacking a putrescine synthetic pathway that was required for surface motility. Genetic analysis showed that surface motility required type 1 pili, the simultaneous presence of two independent putrescine anabolic pathways, and modulation by putrescine transport and catabolism. An immunological assay for FimA—the major pili subunit, reverse transcription quantitative PCR of fimA, and transmission electron microscopy confirmed that pili synthesis required putrescine. Comparative RNAseq analysis of a wild type and ΔspeB mutant which exhibits impaired pili synthesis showed that the latter had fewer transcripts for pili structural genes and for fimB which codes for the phase variation recombinase that orients the fim operon promoter in the ON phase, although loss of speB did not affect the promoter orientation. Results from the RNAseq analysis also suggested (a) changes in transcripts for several transcription factor genes that affect fim operon expression, (b) compensatory mechanisms for low putrescine which implies a putrescine homeostatic network, and (c) decreased transcripts of genes for oxidative energy metabolism and iron transport which a previous genetic analysis suggests may be sufficient to account for the pili defect in putrescine synthesis mutants. We conclude that pili synthesis requires putrescine and putrescine concentration is controlled by a complex homeostatic network that includes the genes of oxidative energy metabolism.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Eva Herdering, Tristan Reif-Trauttmansdorff ... Ruth Anne Schmitz
    Research Article

    Glutamine synthetases (GS) are central enzymes essential for the nitrogen metabolism across all domains of life. Consequently, they have been extensively studied for more than half a century. Based on the ATP-dependent ammonium assimilation generating glutamine, GS expression and activity are strictly regulated in all organisms. In the methanogenic archaeon Methanosarcina mazei, it has been shown that the metabolite 2-oxoglutarate (2-OG) directly induces the GS activity. Besides, modulation of the activity by interaction with small proteins (GlnK1 and sP26) has been reported. Here, we show that the strong activation of M. mazei GS (GlnA1) by 2-OG is based on the 2-OG dependent dodecamer assembly of GlnA1 by using mass photometry (MP) and single particle cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) analysis of purified strep-tagged GlnA1. The dodecamer assembly from dimers occurred without any detectable intermediate oligomeric state and was not affected in the presence of GlnK1. The 2.39 Å cryo-EM structure of the dodecameric complex in the presence of 12.5 mM 2-OG demonstrated that 2-OG is binding between two monomers. Thereby, 2-OG appears to induce the dodecameric assembly in a cooperative way. Furthermore, the active site is primed by an allosteric interaction cascade caused by 2-OG-binding towards an adaption of an open active state conformation. In the presence of additional glutamine, strong feedback inhibition of GS activity was observed. Since glutamine dependent disassembly of the dodecamer was excluded by MP, feedback inhibition most likely relies on the binding of glutamine to the catalytic site. Based on our findings, we propose that under nitrogen limitation the induction of M. mazei GS into a catalytically active dodecamer is not affected by GlnK1 and crucially depends on the presence of 2-OG.