Skip to main content
PLOS Biology logoLink to PLOS Biology
. 2023 Feb 6;21(2):e3001987. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001987

Comprehensive structural characterization of the human AAA+ disaggregase CLPB in the apo- and substrate-bound states reveals a unique mode of action driven by oligomerization

Damu Wu 1, Yan Liu 2, Yuhao Dai 1,3, Guopeng Wang 1, Guoliang Lu 2, Yan Chen 1, Ningning Li 1,4, Jinzhong Lin 2,*, Ning Gao 1,4,5,*
Editor: Ursula H Jakob6
PMCID: PMC9934407  PMID: 36745679

Abstract

The human AAA+ ATPase CLPB (SKD3) is a protein disaggregase in the mitochondrial intermembrane space (IMS) and functions to promote the solubilization of various mitochondrial proteins. Loss-of-function CLPB mutations are associated with a few human diseases with neutropenia and neurological disorders. Unlike canonical AAA+ proteins, CLPB contains a unique ankyrin repeat domain (ANK) at its N-terminus. How CLPB functions as a disaggregase and the role of its ANK domain are currently unclear. Herein, we report a comprehensive structural characterization of human CLPB in both the apo- and substrate-bound states. CLPB assembles into homo-tetradecamers in apo-state and is remodeled into homo-dodecamers upon substrate binding. Conserved pore-loops (PLs) on the ATPase domains form a spiral staircase to grip and translocate the substrate in a step-size of 2 amino acid residues. The ANK domain is not only responsible for maintaining the higher-order assembly but also essential for the disaggregase activity. Interactome analysis suggests that the ANK domain may directly interact with a variety of mitochondrial substrates. These results reveal unique properties of CLPB as a general disaggregase in mitochondria and highlight its potential as a target for the treatment of various mitochondria-related diseases.


The human AAA+ ATPase CLPB (SKD3) is a protein disaggregase in the mitochondrial intermembrane space that promotes the solubilization of various mitochondrial proteins. This structural and functional study of CLPB provides insights into its assembly and mechanism of action.

Introduction

Protein misfolding and aberrant aggregation are devastating to many fundamental functions of the cell and failures to remediate them are closed related to many human diseases [1,2]. To maintain a healthy proteome, cells have evolved multiple dedicated systems, one of which is the HSP100 chaperone family [35]. As a subfamily of the AAA+ ATPase, HSP100 proteins generally contain an N-terminal domain (NTD), 1 or 2 ATPase domains (or nucleotide-binding domain, NBD), and usually function in hexameric forms. Taking yeast Hsp104 as an example, the NTD is involved in substrate binding, while the NBD1 and NBD2 bind and hydrolyze ATP to facilitate power substrate unfolding and translocation [6]. Similar to many other AAA+ ATPases, Hsp104 unfolds and transports substrates through its central pore by a ratchet-like motion of the highly conserved pore-loops (PLs) on the ATPase domains [7]. The ATP-hydrolysis cycle-dependent conformational change of each subunit results in both inter- and intra-subunit structural remodeling, which collectively lead to the threading and unidirectional movement of the peptide within the central channel [7].

Recently, a new type of HSP100 family proteins, CLPB (also known as SKD3) was reported to act as a protein disaggregase in the intermembrane space (IMS) of mitochondria [811]. The N-terminus of CLPB has a mitochondrial targeting signal (MTS), followed by an ankyrin repeat (ANK) domain, and ends with a C-terminal NBD (Fig 1A). There is a short hydrophobic stretch between the MTS and the first ankyrin motif (AM), as well as a long linker helix (LH) between ANK domain and NBD (Fig 1A). The MTS is cleaved by mitochondrial processing peptidase (MPP), followed by a second cleavage by presenilin-associated rhomboid-like (PARL) protease to remove additional hydrophobic residues from the N-terminus [11,12]. The ANK domain is a unique feature of CLPB compared to other AAA+ ATPases, and the removal of ANK domain disrupts the disaggregase activity of CLPB [8].

Fig 1. Cryo-EM structures of the CLPB double-heptamer in the apo-state and the CLPBE425Q double-hexamer in the substrate-bound state.

Fig 1

(A) Domain organization of H. sapiens CLPB. CLPB is composed of an MTS, a short hydrophobic stretch (S), an LH, 4 ankyrin-repeat (ANK) motifs, an NBD, and a CTD. (B) Representative 2D classification averages of CLPB and CLPBE425Q datasets. (C, D) The density maps of the double-heptamer (C) and double-hexamer (D), superimposed with the models of CLPB. The density maps are shown in the side and top (ATPase ring) views. The higher-order oligomer is mediated by ANK domains. The substrate was labeled as yellow. LH, linker helix; NBD, nucleotide-binding domain.

Dysfunction of CLPB by mutations is associated with several human diseases, such as the 3-methylglutaconic aciduria (3-MGA) [10,1316]. A common disorder of the 3-MGA patients is the increased urinary 3-methylglutaric acid excretion, often with varying degree of microcephaly, small birth weight, neutropenia, severe encephalopathy, intellectual disability, movement disorder, and cataracts [10,1316]. Moreover, heterozygous missense variants of CLPB were also identified in patients with severe congenital neutropenia (SCN), and these variants were found to disrupt granulocyte differentiation of human hematopoietic progenitors [17]. Many of these disease-related mutations have been shown to impair the disaggregase activity of CLPB, such as T268M, R408G, R475Q, A591V, R650P in 3-MGA and N499K, E557K, R561G, R620C in SCN [8,17]. At the cellular level, CLPB is important in maintaining normal cristae structure of mitochondria [18]. CLPB interacts with HAX1, an anti-apoptotic factor of BCL-2 family, to promote cell survival [10,18]. Up-regulated cellular level of CLPB in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cells was found to mediate the resistance to BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax [18]. Recently, CLPB was also found to have negative correlation with the progression-free survival in castration-resistant prostate cancer [19].

It is currently not clear why CLPB has such a broad role in different aspects of mitochondrial function and how the ANK and NBD domains work together to fulfill its essential disaggregase activity. Here, we present a structural and functional characterization of human CLPB. Unexpectedly, we found that CLPB assembles into a homo-tetradecamers in the absence of substrate. Upon substrate binding, the CLPB complex is converted into dodecamers consisting 2 conventional hexameric units. The NBD ring within a hexamer shares common structural features of typical AAA+ unfoldase/disaggregase, with a spiral arrangement of PLs to interact with a fully threaded substrate. The N-terminal ANK domain is essential for the higher-order organization of CLPB and contributes to the disaggregase activity by directly interacting with various mitochondrial substrates. These results provide a framework for further dissection of the role of CLPB in regulating various mitochondrial functions.

Results

Cryo-EM structures of CLPB in the apo-state and substrate-bound state

We cloned the coding sequence of CLPB from a homemade cDNA library of HEK-293T cells, and sequencing result indicated that it was the splicing isoform 2 (UNIPROT: Q9H078-2). Different expression constructs were tested. Firstly, CLPB without the MTS [10], named CLPB-N92 (Fig 1A), was expressed and purified from E. coli cells. Consistent with a previous study [9], CLPB-N92 formed large aggregates and was highly heterogenous in size as shown by gel filtration and negative staining electron microscopy (nsEM) (S1A and S1B Fig). In addition to the signal peptide removal, CLPB was reported to be further processed by a mitochondrial protease PARL localized in the inner membrane, and the predicted cleavage site is between C126 and Y127 [12]. Notably, a hydrophobic stretch within the region removed by PARL (Fig 1A) was reported to inhibit the disaggregase activity of CLPB [8]. Therefore, as a validation, we expressed full-length CLPB exogenously in HEK-293T cells and examined the sizes of protein products. Western blotting analysis showed 2 clear bands with the precursor form gradually decreasing over time (S1C Fig). Next, another construct harboring the sequence of CLPB starting from PARL cleavage site (named CLPB-N127) was tested for HEK-293T expression, which resulted in a protein product in the same size as the mature form of CLPB (S1D Fig). Therefore, the CLPB-N127 construct was finally used for CLPB protein preparation from E. coli cells.

Interestingly, both gel filtration and nsEM showed that the purified CLPB complex is in a higher oligomeric state rather than a hexamer as expected from typical AAA+ unfoldases and disaggregases (S2A and S2B Fig). Very recently, 2 independent studies have also reported that purified CLPB exhibits an unusual higher-order oligomeric form [20,21]. And this higher-order organization is irrelevant of exogenously supplemented AMPPNP (S2A Fig). Despite this unusual observation, the purified CLPB complex is competent in both ATPase and disaggregase activities (S1E and S1F Fig and S1 Data). AMPPNP-treated CLPB complexes were then subjected to cryo-EM analysis. The 2D classification showed a three-layered architecture and a heptameric feature for the side-view and top-view average images, respectively (Fig 1B). Further 3D classification indicated that CLPB complexes are double-heptamers, and they are extremely dynamic in structure, with both inter- and intra-heptamer conformational variations. With different 3D classification strategies, we could only push the overall resolution to a range of 6 to 7 Å (S3 Fig and S1 Table). At this resolution, secondary structures were resolved in certain regions, and the map matches well with the predicted model of CLPB by AlphaFold2 [22]. The overall size of the complex is 175 Å and 160 Å in height and width, respectively. The 7 NBDs form a closed ring, with an open channel (24 Å in diameter) in the center. The “head-to-head” organization of the 2 heptamers is mediated by their N-terminal ANK domains (Fig 1C). Although a heptameric form of the ATPase modules is rare among AAA+ ATPases, another mitochondrial AAA+ ATPase Bcs1 was recently reported to exist in a homo-heptamer form [23,24].

Since the double-heptamer contains no substrate and is widely open in the central pore, we set out to obtain a structure of the substrate-engaged CLPB complex. A convenient way of doing this is through a Walker B mutation (E425Q) in the NBD domain. For most of the AAA+ proteins, this mutation would greatly slow down ATP hydrolysis but not ATP binding. Structural studies of a few AAA+ unfoldases/disaggregases showed that this mutation often resulted in a co-purification of endogenous peptide in the central channel [2528]. Therefore, we prepared CLPBE425Q mutant from E. coli cells (S2C and S2D Fig) and analyzed the sample by cryo-EM (S4 Fig). Unexpectedly, top-view class averages from 2D classification showed a hexameric ring (Figs 1B and S5B). Similar to the wild-type (WT) CLPB complex, the mutant complex is also highly dynamic and the global density map could only be refined to an overall resolution of 7.9 Å. With local refinement, the NBD ring was improved to 5.2 Å (S4C, S4D, and S4F Fig). From the structure, it is clear that the mutant CLPBE425Q now takes a double-hexamer (dodecamer) form. Compared with the WT structure, while the width of the mutant complex reduces from 160 Å to 135 Å, the overall height increases from 175 Å to 200 Å (Fig 1D). This is due the spiral configuration of CLPBE425Q subunits within each hexamer. From the improved map of the NBD ring, the substrate density in the central channel could be unambiguously identified (S4D Fig). In general, the helical arrangement of subunits within a hexamer is highly similar to other substrate-bound AAA+ ATPases [7,25,2830].

To confirm that this higher-order organization of CLPB is not an artifact of exogenous expression in E. coli, we examined the oligomeric states of CLPB variants purified from HEK-293T cells. The nsEM analysis indicates that both the WT and mutant CLPB complexes derived from human cells display a similar higher-order organization as the E. coli ones (Fig 2A). Next, to rule out the possible splicing isoform specific effect on the oligomeric state, we also examined the isoform-1 of CLPB (UNIPROT: Q9H078-1) purified from E. coli cells (S2E and S2F Fig) using both nsEM and cryo-EM. This isoform-1 is 30 residues longer in the ANK domain than the isoform-2. Our results show that CLPBisoform1 complexes are again double-heptamers with an open central channel in the NBD ring (Figs 2E and S5C).

Fig 2. The CLPB double-heptamers transform into double-hexamers upon substrate binding.

Fig 2

(A) CLPB complexes purified from HEK293 cells form double-oligomeric state. Representative nsEM images (left) and 2D classification averages of nsEM particles (right) of CLPB and CLPBE425Q from HEK-293T cells. (B) The proportion of the hexameric and heptameric top views in the CLPB-AMPPNP, CLPBE425Q-ATP, CLPBisoform1-AMPPNP, CLPB-ATPγS, and CLPB+Casein-ATPγS datasets (S2 Data). (C–G) Representative top views of 2D classification averages of CLPB-AMPPNP (C), CLPBE425Q-ATP (D), CLPBisoform1-AMPPNP (E), CLPB-ATPγS (F), and CLPB+Casein-ATPγS (G) datasets. The top views with hexameric feature are indicated by red boxes. nsEM, negative staining electron microscopy.

In short, our results and two recent independent studies [20,21] demonstrate that mitochondrial CLPB, unlike other typical AAA+ proteins, adopts a unique higher-order structure. The CLPB-specific ANK domain mediates the attachment of 2 heptamers/hexamers through a head-to-head dimerization. Both the double-heptamer and double-hexamer are highly dynamic. As also observed in another structural study of CLPB [20], several factors contribute to the conformational flexibility of the full-length complexes. The first is the hexamer/heptamer interface. Although the ANK domains from the 2 heptamer/hexamers interact with each other, they do not have lateral interactions within a single heptamer/hexamer. Thus, the interface between 2 heptamers/hexamers is rather flexible. The second is the flexibility within each heptamers/hexamers because the AAA+ domain rings are known to adopt unsymmetrical and dynamic conformations.

Substrate binding induces the transition from double-heptamer to double-hexamer

A major difference between the WT and E425Q CLPB structures is the presence of a peptide substrate in the central pore, which brings close CLPB subunits to form a more compact structure. As shown in the 2D classification results, most of the top-view classes of the WT CLPB particles are heptameric, and only a tiny top-view class, 1.7% of all top-view particles, display a hexameric feature (Figs 2B, 2C, and S5A and S2 Data). In contrast, all the top-view classes of the CLPBE425Q particles are hexameric exclusively (Figs 2B–2D and S5B). This suggests that the binding of substrate may induce a transition from tetradecamers to dodecamers.

To test this hypothesis, we incubated the WT CLPB complexes with a model substrate casein [8] in the presence of excessive ATPγS, which has been shown to best promote the binding of casein to Hsp104 [7,31] and CLPB [20]. As a control, WT CLPB complexes were also treated with ATPγS alone. Cryo-EM 2D classification was employed to analyze their oligomeric states. For the CLPB-ATPγS dataset, only a small fraction (8.0% of all top-view particles) shows a hexameric ring (Fig 2B and 2F), indicating that the majority of particles retain the form of double-heptamer. In sharp contrast, in the presence of casein and ATPγS, the percentage of hexameric top-view particles has increased to 51.8% (Fig 2B and 2G). Consistently, Cupo and colleagues recently also found that a mixture of CLPB double-hexamers and double-heptamer in the present of casein and ATPγS. These results indicate that substrate binding is likely the most important factor that drives the formation of double-hexamers from double-heptamer.

The ANK domain is essential for the assembly and function of CLPB complexes

To validate the role of the ANK domain in organizing the higher-order structure, we created an NBD-only variant by truncating the N-terminal ANK domain. Gel filtration and nsEM reveal that CLPB-NBD proteins still form oligomers (S9 Fig), but the size is much smaller than the double-heptamer or double-hexamer. Thus, these results and a similar study [20] experimentally proved a role of the ANK domain in assembling the higher-order CLPB complex. Next, we examined whether these CLPB-NBD oligomers have ATPase and disaggregase activities. Our results show that the disaggregase activity critically depends on the integrity of both the ANK and NBD domains. The introduction of E425Q mutation (CLPBE425Q or CLPB-NBDE425Q) and the deletion of ANK domain (CLPB-NBD) both resulted in a complete loss of the disaggregase activity. This is consistent with a previous study [8], suggesting an essential role of the ANK domain in the disaggregase function of CLPB. However, in contrast to the same study, our data show that CLPB-NBD is active in hydrolyzing ATP, and the activity is even higher than the WT CLPB (S6 Fig and S3 Data). This discrepancy is due to the fact that CLPB-NBD in that study only formed dimer-like species under their pH 8.0 condition, whereas we used an acidic condition (pH 6.8) that is more relevant to that of the mitochondrial IMS.

For functional analysis of the ANK domain, we determined the crystal structure of the ANK domain at 2.1 Å resolution (S2 Table). The ANK domain of CLPB contains 4 AMs and a unique insertion (consisting of 2 short helices) between AM2 and AM3 (Fig 3A, right panel). The isoform 1 of CLPB differs from the isoform 2 exactly in this region, with 30 residues more in this insertion sequence (Fig 3A, left panel). Since the ANK domain is important for both the assembly and function of CLPB, we wonder whether this insertion is functionally relevant. From the density map of the double-hexamer, the substrate density extends from the NBD ring to the layers of ANK domains, and some extra density in the center of the ANK layers was observed (S7A Fig). Fitting of the crystal structure of the ANK domain reveals that the insertion exactly locates in the inner surface of the ANK layers. Interestingly, the insertion contains 2 patches of hydrophobic residues (Fig 3B), implying a potential role in substrate binding. Therefore, we constructed another CLPB mutant with the insertion completely deleted (CLPBΔ201–232) and compared this mutant with both isoforms 1 and 2 in their ATPase and disaggregase activities. The CLPBΔ201–232 mutant showed the same oligomeric state as the isoforms 1 and 2 (S7C–S7E Fig). The 2 isoforms have comparable activities in these 2 molecular functions (Fig 3C and S4 Data). Although the deletion in CLPBΔ201–232 had no effect on the ATPase activity, it reduced disaggregase activity sharply by more than 50% (Fig 3C and 3D and S4 Data). Therefore, this insertion is likely involved in the substrate recognition and may also contribute to the translocation of the substrate to the C-terminal NBD ring. In agreement with our data, Cupo and colleagues also found that the deletion of this loop (Skd3ΔL), as well as the deletion of the first 2 AMs or the last 2 AMs, all resulted in more than 50% of reduction in the disaggregase activity [20].

Fig 3. The ANK domain is essential for the disaggregase activity of CLPB.

Fig 3

(A) X-ray crystallography structure and AlphaFold predicted model of the ANK domain. The RMSD between these 2 structures is 2.6 Å. (B) The hydrophobic surfaces of the ANK domain. Two hydrophobic patches were found in the unique insertion. (C) The ATPase assay of CLPB, CLPBΔ201–232, and CLPBisoform1. ATPase activity was compared to CLPB (N = 3, individual data points shown as dots, bars show mean ± SD) (S4 Data). (D) The disaggregase activity assay of CLPB, CLPBΔ201–232, and CLPBisoform1. Disaggregase activity was compared to CLPB (N = 3, individual data points shown as dots, bars show mean ± SD, *p < 0.05) (S4 Data). (E) ATPase assay of CLPB, CLPBR178E, and CLPBR227E (S4 Data). (F) Disaggregase activity assay of CLPB, CLPBR178E, and CLPBR227E. Results show that the disaggregase activities of CLPBR178E and CLPBR227E are reduced by 70%–80% (N = 3, individual data points shown as dots, bars show mean ± SD, **p < 0.01) (S4 Data). (G) The ANK domain dimer interface. One is the AM1-AM2 and the other is the second helix of the insertion. Two positively charged residues (R178 and R227) are labeled as black dashed circles on the ANK surface electrostatic potential.

Next, we analyzed the dimer interface of the ANK domain by docking the ANK models into the density maps of the double-heptamer and double-hexamer (S8A and S8B Fig). The ANK dimers in the 2 higher-order structures are not identical but generally similar. For the ANK dimer in the double-hexamer, 2 regions of the ANK domain contribute to the dimerization, the AM1/2 motifs and the insertion (Fig 3G). One interface is relatively extensive and formed by 4 connecting loops between the first and second helices of the AM1 or AM2 from the 2 opposite ANK domains. The other interface is mediated by the second helix (and its downstream flanking sequence) of the insertion, and 2 arginine residues, R178 and R227, appear to be important in this interface. Based on the electrostatic surface potential, these 2 residues of 1 ANK domain point to a highly negatively charged surface patch (E140, E221, D222, and D223) of the opposite ANK domain (Fig 3G). In fact, both R178 and R227 are highly conserved among the metazoan species [8]. Therefore, we performed mutagenesis (R178E and R227E) to test whether they could disrupt the ANK dimerization. Unexpectedly, the 2 CLPB mutants still maintain a higher-order assembly, but their disaggregase activities are severely impaired by 70% to 80% (Figs 3E, 3F, and S8C–S8E and S4 Data). These results further emphasize a role of the ANK domain in the disaggregase function of CLPB.

CLPB-NBD assembles into polypeptide-engaged helical structures

Due to the large inter- and intra-hexamer/heptamer flexibility, the structures of full-length CLPB complexes were not solved in atomic resolution. CLPB-NBD was thus used as a surrogate for high-resolution structural determination. Two mutant versions of CLPB (NBD and NBDE425Q) were analyzed by cryo-EM (S9A–S9F Fig), which again confirmed that E425Q mutation resulted in co-purification of an endogenous peptide in the central channel. Also similar to the full-length complexes, the top-view classes of the NBDE425Q particles are exclusively hexameric, whereas both hexameric and heptameric arrangements were observed for the NBDWT particles (S9F Fig). Subsequently, we focused on the NBDE425Q dataset for high-resolution refinement. After several rounds of 3D classification, 3 different oligomeric arrangements, hexameric, heptameric, and nonameric, were identified. The nonamer appeared to be more stable and could be resolved at an overall resolution of 3.7 Å (S10 Fig), allowing the atomic modeling of the NBD of CLPB. In the nucleotide-binding pockets of the nonamer, a total of 8 ATP molecules could be modeled (S11 Fig). The conserved functional motifs on the ATPase domain are well resolved, including the Walker A motif (351-GSSGIGKT-358), sensor-1 (464-TSN-466), and sensor-2 (588-GAR-590) (Fig 5E). The conserved residues I317, I318, and F541 form a hydrophobic pocket to stabilize the adenine ring of ATP, while T358 stabilizes the β- and γ-phosphates through a Mg2+ ion (Fig 5E). The Arginine Finger (R531) from the adjacent protomer points to the γ-phosphate of ATP. In general, these structures show that the NBD of CLPB is a typical AAA+ ATPase module, underscoring a conserved mechanism of ATP-powered substrate unfolding and translocation [32].

Fig 5. Structure of the NBD nonamer in processing a peptide substrate.

Fig 5

(A) Density map of the NBD nonamer in the substrate-processing state. Nine protomers are indicated as P1 to P9 and painted in different colors. The central substrate is colored yellow. (B) The spiral configuration of the PLs of CLPB protomers around the substrate in the central channel. PL-Is and PL-IIs are shown in the left and right panels, respectively. While the conserved PL-Is (G399-Y400-V401-G402) directly interact with the substrate, the PL-IIs (E386-R387-H388) situate in slightly larger distances from the substrate. (C, D) Magnified view of the interactions between the PL-I of P3, P4, and P5 and the backbone of substrate. The substrate could be modeled in both directions, N to C or C to N. The potential hydrogen bonds are indicated by dashed lines and the distances are labeled. (E) Magnified view of the conserved ATP-binding pocket of CLPB. Functionally important residues of Walker A motif (K357, T358), Walker B motif (E425), sensor-1 (N466), sensor-2 (R590), arginine finger (R531), and the conserved residue I317, I318. Atomic model and density map are shown in the left and right panels, respectively. NBD, nucleotide-binding domain; PL, pore-loop.

The central channels of all 3 states are occupied by a peptide substrate, which forms successive interactions with the helically arranged CLPB protomers (Fig 4A–4C). In the nonamer, 9 protomers form a 1.5-turn helix around the central substrate. Besides the protomer number, the 3 oligomers also show obvious structural differences. While the twist angle between neighboring subunits is roughly 60° in all 3 forms, the axial rise within each oligomer is not constant and varies in the hexamer and heptamer largely. The axial displacements between P1 and P6 are roughly 25 Å, 30 Å, and 35 Å for the hexamer, heptamer, and nonamer, respectively (Fig 4D–4F). This is expected, as more axial space is required to fit in the seventh and more subunits onto the hexamer. In the full-length complexes, the ANK domain provides a steric hindrance to end the helical extension.

Fig 4. Cryo-EM characterization of the NBD helical structures of CLPB.

Fig 4

(A–C) Density maps of the NBD hexamer (A), heptamer (B), and nonamer (C), respectively. Protomers are painted in different colors. (D–F) Distances along the central substrate between the PL residue Y400 of P1 and P6 in the hexamer (D), heptamer (E), and nonamer (F). The axial rise of P6 relatively to P1 are labeled. NBD, nucleotide-binding domain; PL, pore-loop.

Overall, these data show that the ANK domain is essential in determining the oligomeric state of CLPB complex and also explain why our CLPB-NBD still retains ATPase activity. Although this nonameric helical structure does not exist in a physiological context, it serves as a high-resolution model to demonstrate that CLPB-NBD shares many characteristics of typical AAA+ proteins.

The substrate interacts with conserved pore-loops of the helically arranged NBDs

The density of the polypeptide backbone is well resolved in the nonamer and was modeled as a 17-residue poly-alanine fragment (Fig 5A and 5B). The peptide spans about 53 Å length in the central channel of the nonamer and displays successive interactions with the PL-I and PL-II from NBD protomers (Fig 5B). For each protomer, a canonical PL-I (399-GYVG-402) binds to the peptide through 2 hydrogen bonds formed between the main-chain atoms (Fig 5C). The first is between the carbonyl oxygen of the substrate residue N and the main-chain nitrogen of V401, and the other between the carbonyl oxygen of G399 and the main-chain nitrogen of the substrate residue N+2 (Fig 5C). This pattern of interactions is nearly identical for all protomers, except that the hydrogen bond distances vary between 2.5 to 4.0 Å. Thus, the axial step size of PLs is exactly 2 residues. Of note, the main-chain atoms of Y400 do not participate in sequence-independent interaction with the substrate backbone. Therefore, the essential role of Y400 in the disaggregase activity should arise from its aromatic side-chain, which could interact with various side-chains of a threaded substrate. Moreover, the substrate could be modeled in both directions (N to C or C to N) in the density map, and both configurations could satisfy this repeated pattern of interactions (Fig 5C and 5D). In contrast to the PL-I, the PL-II, consisting of E386, R387, and H388, is relatively away from the substrate backbone, except that the side-chain of H388 is within 4-Å distance with the β-carbon atom of the substrate (Fig 5B). Thus, it is likely that the primary role of PL-II during substrate processing is to interact with different side-chains of the substrate through its polar residues.

In short, our results and a recent study [20] indicate that the NBD ring of CLPB is a typical unfoldase core, and the PLs of CLPB functions to grip and move the substrate within the central channel in a conserved manner as classic AAA+ unfoldases/disaggregases.

Mitochondrial interactome analysis of the ANK domain

Previous data showed that CLPB knockout cells exhibited decreased solubility for many proteins in the IM and IMS of mitochondria, including HAX1, TOMM22/70, TIMM22/23, HTRA2, PHB1/2, OPA1, STOML2, and SLC25 family proteins [8]. Given the essentiality of the ANK domain in the disaggregase activity of CLPB, we performed a mass spectrometry (MS)-based interactome analysis of the ANK domain. A plasmid harboring the MTS and ANK domain sequences was expressed in HEK-293T cells, and mitochondria were then isolated, lysed, and dissolved in 1% detergent. The ANK domain and its binders were purified through a C-terminal Strep tag, and subject to MS analysis (Fig 6A). A relatively stringent criterion (fold-change > 4 and p-value < 0.01) were used for enrichment analysis (3 biological replicates). With DAVID Bioinformatics Resources [33], we restricted our analysis on mitochondrial proteins detected in the samples. Compared with the control sample, 934 mitochondrial proteins were significantly enriched in the ANK sample (Fig 6B and S3 Table and S5 Data), and most of them are located in the IM and matrix (60.3%). Although CLPB is located in the IMS, it may also function to promote the solubility of certain membrane proteins with IMS-exposed domains. Therefore, we focused on proteins from the OM, IMS, and IM. As a result, 381 such proteins were selected for further analysis, including all of those potential substrates previously reported to be most affected by CLPB-knockout [8]. If these proteins were ranked by their abundances, 3 IMS proteins stood out in the top 20 list, including HAX1, OPA1, and AGK (Fig 6C and S4 Table). Consistently, both HAX1 and OPA1 have been experimentally validated to interact with CLPB [18,34]. In general, the ANK interactome identified in this study agrees well with previous proteomic data based on full-length CLPB [18,34], indicating that the ANK domain has a direct role in substrate binding.

Fig 6. The mitochondrial interactome of the ANK domain.

Fig 6

(A) HEK-293F cells expressing the MTS-ANK-HA or MTS-ANK-Strep constructs were subjected to pulldown experiments with Strep resins. Precipitates were analyzed by SDS-PAGE, Coomassie blue staining, and MS. (B) Volcano plot showing the mitochondrial proteins co-precipitated with MTS-ANK-Strep. A total of 935 proteins that were enriched in the MTS-ANK-Strep are labeled in light red. The potential substrates, previously reported to be most affected by CLPB-knockout, are highlighted in red. A relatively stringent criterion (fold-change > 4 and p-value < 0.01) were used for enrichment analysis (3 biological replicates), indicating with blue dashed lines (S5 Data). (C) Top 20 proteins in OM, IMS, and IM are listed based on the ranking of protein abundances (S4 Table). (D) HEK-293F cells expressing the MTS-ANK-Strep, MTS-ANKΔloop-Strep, and MTS-ANKisoform1-Strep constructs were subjected to pulldown experiments with Strep resins. Precipitates were analyzed by SDS-PAGE, Coomassie blue staining, and MS. (E, F) Volcano plot showing the fold change of the OM, IMS, and IM mitochondrial proteins in MTS-ANK-Strep compared to MTS-ANKΔloop-Strep (E) or MTS-ANKisoform1-Strep (F). Proteins in the top 20 list (C) were heighted in red (S6 and S7 Data). IMS, intermembrane space; MS, mass spectrometry; MTS, mitochondrial targeting signal.

We also showed that the unique insertion between AM2 and AM3 in the ANK domain is important in the disaggregase activity in vitro (Fig 3). Therefore, 2 ANK variants were next used for interactome analysis. The MTS-ANKΔ201–232 and MTS-ANKisoform1 were expressed in HEK-293T cells and their interactome were similarly analyzed by MS (Fig 6D). Among the analyzed mitochondrial OM, IMS, and IM proteins, 8 proteins were more enriched in the ANKisoform2 sample, including ATAD3B/ATAD3A, SLC25A4/5/12/13, HAX1, and DNM1L (Fig 6F and S6 Data). All of them are indeed among the most abundant top 20 list. In contrast, a larger number of proteins (14) were much more enriched in the ANKisoform2 sample than the ANKΔ201–232 sample, again including HAX1 and DNM1L (Fig 6E and S7 Data). Highly consistent with our findings, a recent study reported that HAX1 preferentially binds to the isoform 2 of CLPB in vivo, rather than the isoform 1 [34].

These interactome analyses support a direct role of the ANK domain in substrate binding, and together with previous studies [8,18,34] confirmed that HAX1 is one of the natural substrates of CLPB. The differential enrichment between the isoform1 and 2 further suggests a possible role of the ANK insertion in substrate selection, probably through altered binding affinity.

Discussion

In the present work, we characterized the structures of CLPB in both the apo- and substrate-bound states. Unexpectedly, we found that apo CLPB assembles into higher-order structures, in the form of a double-heptamer through inter-molecular interactions mediated by N-terminal ANK domains (Fig 1). This high-order organization is consistent with recent structural studies of purified CLPB [20,21] and a previous native gel analysis of endogenous CLPB proteins [11]. We further demonstrated that the double-heptamers could be efficiently converted to double-hexamers upon the addition of a model substrate and ATPγS (Fig 2). It is not clear whether the double-heptamer is a physiological state of CLPB in vivo. But several lines of evidence appear to suggest it is not a pure in vitro artifact. First, the heptamer form is the predominant species of apo CLPB (Fig 2), indicating that it is an intrinsic property of the CLPB ATPase module. Although AAA+ proteins are generally considered to be hexamers, an increasing number of AAA+ proteins were recently discovered to take heptamer as a primary oligomeric state [23,24,35,36], including a mitochondrial IM-bound AAA+ protein Bcs1 [23,24]. Second, the substrate-induced change on the oligomeric state has also been observed for other AAA+ members, such as DNA helicase AAV2 Rep68 [37], RuvB [38], and archaeal MCM [39]. Third, the ATPase activity of full-length CLPB (double-hexamer) is lower than CLPB-NBD alone (S6 Fig). In fact, roughly two-thirds of CLPB-NBD particles exhibit a hexameric arrangement. This indicates that the heptamer is not optimized for efficient ATP-hydrolysis. Thus, as a substrate-free state, the heptameric form could avoid necessary ATP consumption in the IMS. Notably, the buffer we used to prepare CLPB complexes was at pH 6.8, which closely resembles that of the IMS [40]. Therefore, we propose that if the heptameric form is not an in vitro artifact, it could be a resting state of CLPB in mitochondria that could respond to the ATP concentration and the availability of substrates to change its oligomeric states. This interesting hypothesis merits further investigation.

With these said, the core of substrate-engaged CLPB is still hexameric as shown in the structures of CLPBE425Q and NBD (Figs 1 and 4) [20]. In the high-resolution structures of the NBDE425Q, the PL-Is of the protomers form a spiral staircase around the substrate in a two-residue step-size (Fig 5C and 5D). These PL-Is interact with the substrate in a sequence-independent manner and capable of accommodating polypeptide in both the N-C and C-N directions. This implies that CLPB could potentially thread the substrate in both directions, similar as bacterial ClpX and ClpA [41]. These data indicate that the mechanisms of CLPB in substrate threading and translocation are highly similar to those cytosolic AAA+ unfoldases/disaggregase, such as Cdc48/p97 and Hsp104 [7,25,29,30].

In the double-hexamer, both hexamers are in active conformation with the substrate being threaded through the central pores of their ATPase rings. This raises an interesting question: Whether or not the 2 hexamers work in a synergistic manner, since a CLPB hexamer already contains all essential structural features of a unfoldase/disaggregase. A conventional model is that the 2 hexamers work independently, and upon engagement with a protein aggregate the 2 hexamers do not need to maintain stable association for all 6 pairs of ANK domains. However, as seen in the structure of the double-hexamer (Fig 1D), it is also possible that the axial movement of a CLPB subunit in 1 hexamer during the ATP-hydrolysis cycle could potentially affect another CLPB subunit in the other hexamer through their tightly associated ANK domains. Unfortunately, our attempt to obtain ANK mutants to separate its roles in structural organization and disaggregase activity has failed (Fig 3E and 3F). It is possible that a complete disaggregase cycle of CLPB may involve dynamic remodeling of the dimer interface or even disassociation/re-association of hexamers [20]. Moreover, this “head to head” organization reminds us of the recent findings on the double-hexamer form of p97 [4245], although p97 utilizes a “back to back” interface through 2 C-terminal ATPase rings. These 2 examples underline a possibility that AAA+ proteins could adopt different higher-order assemblies to serve different purposes.

We also determined the crystal structure of the ANK domain and analyzed its functional significance in the disaggregase function. Our data showed that the ANK domain is indispensable for the disaggregase activity of CLPB, and a deletion of the unique insertion in the ANK domain resulted in more than 50% reduction on the disaggregase activity (Fig 3D). Furthermore, 2 single mutations of the ANK domain in the ANK dimer interface, including R178E and R227E, both greatly impaired the disaggregase activity by 70% to 80% (Fig 3F). R227 is exactly located to the insertion sequence. These observations suggest that this unique insertion is functionally important. Since this insertion is at the innermost position of the ANK ring and distant from the PLs of the ATPase modules, the ANK domain may function to recognize and pass the substrate to the distal ATPase ring. This hypothesis was further supported by our interactome analysis of the separate ANK domain. A large number of the IM and IMS proteins were greatly enriched in the sample affinity-purified through tagged ANK, including all of those previously found to be prone to aggregation in ΔCLPB cells [8]. Many of these candidates have also been reported to interact with CLPB in previous large-scale proteomics studies [46,47] and 2 of them have been experimentally validated, such as HAX1 and OPA1 [18,34]. Of note, several mitochondrial proteins involved in cristae remodeling are among the most enriched group, including OPA1, DNM1L, and IMMT. This appears to collaborate with the previous finding that CLPB loss resulted in altered cristae structure in mitochondria [18]. We also tested the ANKΔ201–232 and ANKisoform1 in interactome analysis. Compared with the ANKisoform2, a relative extensive change on the enrichment profile was observed for the ANKΔ201–232 sample. In contrast, comparison between isoform 1 and isoform 2 reveals that many potential substrates of CLPB are significantly more enriched in the sample of ANKisoform2, including HAX1 and DNM1L (Fig 6E and 6F). These results further pinpoint a role of the ANK-insertion in the substrate recruitment and suggest another level of regulation on CLPB function through alternative splicing.

The structures of CLPB also allow us to map disease-related mutations [8,10,1316,48,49] on the atomic model to understand their possible effect on the function of CLPB. Mutations associated with 3-MGA could be categorized into 3 classes. The first class of mutations lie at the interface between 2 adjacent CLPB protomers, including R378G, R445Q, Y587C, R598C, and E609K (Fig 7A). These mutations likely perturb the inter-protomer communication to impair CLPB function. The second class consists of M381I, C456R, E471K, and Y537C in the large subdomain, and A561V, G616V, R620P, and I652N in the small subdomain (Fig 7B). These mutations are away from the inter-protomer or inter-domain interfaces, and they may destabilize the domain structure of CLPB (Fig 7B). The third class of mutations are in the AM3 of the ANK domain. Besides 2 nonsense mutations (R250* and K321*), 3 mutations (T238M, A239T, and Y242C) are on the first helix of the AM3 (Fig 7C). This region contains a characteristic tetrapeptide (-TPLH-) motif (238-TALH-241 in CLPB) and is highly conserved among AMs [50]. Therefore, these mutations might destabilize the structure of the ANK domain or lead to misfolding of the AMs. Consistently, it was shown that T238M did not affect the ATPase activity, but largely inhibited the disaggregase activity [8]. As for mutations related to SCN, they are exclusively located close to the active center of the NBD (Fig 7D). They are distributed in sensor-1 (N466K), sensor-2 (R590C), AF (R531Q/G), and Walker A motif (T358K). It is apparent that they may affect the binding and hydrolysis of ATP (Fig 5E). Indeed, CLPB with these mutations were defective in both the ATPase and disaggregase activities in vitro [17].

Fig 7. The disease-related mutations of CLPB in 3-MGA and SCN.

Fig 7

(A) 3-MGA-related mutations in the interface of adjacent protomers. (B) 3-MGA-related mutations within the large and small subdomain of the ATPase domain. (C) 3-MGA-related mutations in the ANK domain. (D) SCN-related mutations in the ATP-binding pocket. Residues on the positions of these mutations are highlighted in magenta or red sphere models. ATP molecule is highlighted in stick models. SCN, severe congenital neutropenia; 3-MGA, 3-methylglutaconic aciduria.

Methods

Protein expression and purification

The coding sequence (isoform 2) of human CLPB, amplified from a homemade cDNA library of HEK-293T cells, was cloned into pET28a vector with an N-terminal His×6-SUMO tag followed by a TEV protease cleavage sequence and expressed in E. coli Transetta (DE3) cells (TransGen Biotech). CLPB protein variants were purified as reported previously [9], with some modifications. Briefly, the culture was induced with 1 mM IPTG at OD600 of 0.6 to 0.8 at 20°C overnight. Cells were harvested and resuspended in lysis buffer I (50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 500 mM NaCl, 5% glycerol, 1% Triton X-100, and 1 mM PMSF) and lysed by sonication. Lysates were cleared by centrifugation in a JA-25.50 rotor (Beckman) for 30 min at 20,000 r.p.m., and the supernatants were precipitated with ammonium sulfate at 35% saturation and incubated for 10 min at room temperature (RT). The cloudy lysates were centrifuged for 30 min at 15,000 r.p.m., and protein pellets were dissolved with Buffer B (50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.5), 5 mM DTT). The samples were then purified using a Mono Q column (GE Healthcare), and the bound proteins were eluted with a linear gradient to 60% Buffer C (50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.5), 1 M NaCl). To remove the His×6-SUMO tag, TEV protease was added into the eluates and incubated at RT for 2 h. The tags and contaminations were removed by size-exclusion chromatography (Superose 6 Increase 10/300 GL, GE Healthcare) using the elution buffer (20 mM HEPES-KOH (pH 6.8), 300 mM KCl, 5 mM MgCl2). Peak fractions were pooled, concentrated, and incubated with 5 mM nucleotide (AMPPNP for CLPB, ATP for CLPBE425Q) at RT for 2 h. Approximately 1 mM BS3 was added to improve the sample stability, and the sample was further subjected to size-exclusion chromatography (Superose 6 Increase 10/300 GL, GE Healthcare). Peak fractions were first examined by nsEM, pooled, concentrated, and mixed with 1 mM nucleotide for cryo-EM grids preparation. CLPBE425Q and CLPBY400A were generated by site-specific mutagenesis, and the samples for cryo-EM grids preparation were similarly purified.

For preparation of NBD and NBDE425Q proteins, harvested cells were resuspended in lysis buffer II (50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 300 mM NaCl, 5% glycerol, 1% Triton X-100, 1 mM PMSF, and 20 mM imidazole) and lysed by sonication. The supernatants were incubated with Ni–NTA agarose beads (GE Healthcare) at 4°C for 2 h. After washing with lysis buffer for 5 times, proteins were eluted with elution buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 300 mM NaCl, 5 mM MgCl2, and 500 mM imidazole). TEV protease was added into the eluates to remove His×6-SUMO tags and incubated at RT for 2 h. The proteins were loaded onto a size-exclusion column (Superose 6 Increase 10/300 GL, GE Healthcare), which was pre-equilibrated with 20 mM HEPES-KOH (pH 6.8), 300 mM KCl, 5 mM MgCl2. Peak fractions were pooled, concentrated, and incubated with 5 mM nucleotide (AMPPNP for NBD, ATP for NBDE425Q) at RT for 2 h, and the sample was then loaded onto a size-exclusion column. Peak fractions were examined by nsEM, pooled, concentrated, and mixed with 1 mM nucleotide for cryo-EM grids preparation.

For purification of the ANK domain, cells were resuspended in lysis buffer III (50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 500 mM NaCl, 5% glycerol, 1% Triton X-100, 1 mM PMSF, and 20 mM imidazole) and lysed by sonication. The supernatants were incubated with Ni–NTA agarose beads (GE Healthcare) at 4°C for 2 h. The eluates were loaded onto a size-exclusion column (Superdex 75 10/300 GL, GE Healthcare) and eluted with 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 150 mM NaCl.

ATPase activity measurement

Approximately 0.1 μm WT CLPB or CLPB variants were incubated with 1 mM ATP at 30°C for 30 min in ATPase activity buffer (20 mM HEPES-KOH (pH 6.8), 150 mM KAOc, 5 mM MgCl2, 0.1% Tween-20). ATPase activity was measured using the malachite green phosphate assay [51]. For each protein, at least 2 biological replicates were measured with 3 independent replicates.

Luciferase disaggregation assay

Disaggregase activity was measured as previously reported [8]. Briefly, 1 μm WT CLPB or CLPB variants were incubated with 50 nM freshly prepared firefly luciferase aggregates at 30°C for 90 min in luciferase reactivation buffer (20 mM HEPES-KOH (pH 8.0), 150 mM KAOc, 10 mM KAOc, 10 mM DTT, 5 mM ATP). Recovered luminescence was monitored with the luciferase reporter assay kit. The disaggregase activity of CLPB in S1F Fig was detected using the kit from Beyotime Biotech (CAT# RG005), and the measurements in other figures were done with the kit from TransGen Biotech (CAT# FR101-01).

Transient overexpression of CLPB variants

HEK-293 T/F cells were transfected with pCAG vector containing CLPB variants. Cells were transfected using PEI transfection reagent and harvested after 48 h.

Western blots

Cells were washed with PBS and incubated with lysis buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 150 mM NaCl, 1% Triton X-100, 0.1% SDS, and 1 mM PMSF) for 30 min on ice. α-Strep antibody (Huaxing Bio, CAT# HX1816) was used to detect the target protein.

Mitochondrial isolation and preparation of the ANK pulldown samples

Mitochondria were isolated as previously described [8,52]. Briefly, cell pellets from 800 mL culture were resuspended in 40 mL mitochondria isolation buffer (20 mM HEPES-KOH (pH 7.6), 250 mM sucrose, and 2 mM EDTA) and homogenized with a Dounce homogenizer at 4°C. Lysates were centrifuged at 1,300g for 5 min. The supernatant was collected and centrifuged at 13,000g for 15 min. And the pellet was resuspended with lysis buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 150 mM NaCl, 1% Triton X-100, and 1 mM PMSF) and incubated for 30 min at 4°C. Lysates were centrifuged at 20,000g for 30 min, and the supernatants were collected and incubated with Strep resin for 2 h at 4°C. After extensive washing, SDS-loading buffer was added to the sample. The samples were separated by MOPS-PAGE on a gradient gel (4% to 20%).

LC-MS/MS analysis

The samples were excised into several parts form protein gels, reduced with DTT, alkylated with iodoacetamide (IAA), and subsequently digested with trypsin. Peptides were analyzed by Thermo Orbitrap Exploris 480 mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific) coupled with an Easy LC system (Thermo Fisher Scientific). Peptides mixtures were loaded onto C18 Trap Column in Buffer A (0.1% formic acid) and separated with a gradient Buffer B (0.1% formic acid, 80% ACN) (2 min 4% to 8% B; 37 min 8% to 25% B; 11 min 25% to 35% B; 7 min 35% to 95% B; 3 min 95% B) at a flow rate of 300 nL/min. Data were acquired in data-dependent mode with the following settings: MS1 60,000 resolution, 300 to 1,650 m/z of mass range; MS2 30% normalized collision energy, 15,000 resolution, 1.6 m/z of isolation window. Proteins were identified and quantified by Proteome Discoverer software 2.2 using default settings against a database of UNIPROT Homo sapiens. Methionine oxidation and N-terminal acetylation were set as variable modifications. Protein-level and peptide-level false discovery rate (FDR) was set at 1%.

The differential enrichment analyses were based on 3 biological replicates (starting from expression plasmid transfection) and a stringent screening condition (p-value < 0.01 and Fold change > 4) was used. In the MTS-ANK-Strep samples, 1,115 mitochondrial proteins were detected, of which 934 proteins were highly enriched, compared with the MTS-HA sample (S5 Data). From these highly enriched proteins, those located in the OM, IMS, and IM were selected for further analysis (S4 Table and Fig 6C). The comparison between the MTS-ANK-Strep and MTS-ANKΔ201-232-Strep samples was focused on 374 mitochondria proteins with OM, IMS, and IM locations (S7 Data). The comparison between the MTS-ANK-Strep and MTS-ANKisoform1-Strep samples was similarly done, and 332 OM, IMS, and IM proteins were used for analysis (S6 Data).

Cryo-EM grids preparation

Cryo-grids were prepared with an FEI Vitrobot Mark IV with the chamber set at 6°C and 100% humidity. A total of 4 μL aliquots of the prepared samples described above were applied onto the glow-discharged holey-carbon grids (R1.2/1.3, Au, 300 mesh, Quantifoil) and blotted after a 30-s waiting time. The grids were then flash frozen using liquid ethane. The cryo-grids were screened using an FEI Talos Arctica microscope operated at an accelerating voltage of 200 kV, and the qualified ones were recovered for data collection. To address the issue of strong preferred orientation of the particles distribution in the cryo-grids for CLPB and CLPBE425Q samples, 0.5 mM CHAPSO was added to these 2 samples, as described previously [53].

Cryo-EM data collection and image processing

For the sample of CLPB-AMPPNP, micrographs were collected using a 300-kV FEI Titan Krios microscope (Gatan GIF K3 camera) at a nominal magnification of 81,000× (calibrated pixel size of 1.07 Å). A total of 40 frames with a total exposure time of 3.2 s at a dose rate of 20 e-/pixel/s were collected (defocus ranging from −1 to −1.4 μm). A total of 9,341 micrographs were collected automatically using the EPU software (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The micrographs were subjected to beam-induced motion correction using MotionCor2 [54], and contrast transfer function (CTF) parameters for each micrograph were determined by Gctf [55]. RELION (v3.1) was used to perform data processing [56]. After auto-picking, the particles were subjected to 2D classification and several rounds of preliminary 3D classifications. A total of 299,306 particles were selected and subjected to the next round of fine 3D classification (K = 4), and a final set of 231,212 particles were kept for 3D refinement. For double-heptamer, another round of 3D classification (K = 6) with particle alignment skipped was performed to improve the resolution. Finally, 153,005 particles were kept for the final 3D refinement (final resolution 6.8 Å). Due to the inter-heptamer flexibility, mask-based (only including a single heptamer) classification (K = 6) and refinement were applied, which showed no significant improvement on the maps (S3 Fig). In addition, multiple rounds of local classification focusing on the NBD ring or partial CLPB subunits, applied on the symmetry expansion derived half-particles, were also tested. However, none of them was able to reach better than 5 Å resolution.

For the sample of CLPBE425Q-ATP, micrographs were acquired using a 300-kV FEI Titan Krios microscope (Gatan GIF K2 camera) at a nominal magnification of 36,000× (calibrated pixel size of 1.052 Å). A total of 32 frames with an exposure time of 8 s were collected with defocus ranged from −1.2 to −1.8 μm. A total of 4,574 micrographs were collected automatically using SerialEM [57]. After 2D classification and several round 3D classifications, a 7.5-Å density map was achieved (S4 Fig). In addition, a density map of 5.2 Å could be achieved by applying a local mask of the NBD ring during reconstruction (S4C, S4D, and S4F Fig).

For the sample of CLPBisoform1-AMPPNP, a total of 953 micrographs were collected using a 200-kV FEI Talos Arctica microscope (Gatan K2 camera) at a nominal magnification of 36,000× (calibrated pixel size of 1.157 Å), and 32 frames with exposure time of 8 s were collected with defocus ranged from −1.1 to −1.8 μm. After several rounds of 2D classifications, only hexameric rings of top views were observed (S5C Fig).

For the sample of CLPB-casein-ATPγS, 20 μL casein (4.0 mg/mL) was added into 40 μL CLPB (2.0 mg/mL) before vitrification. A total of 885 micrographs were recorded with 200-kV FEI Talos Arctica (Gatan K2 camera) at a magnification of 36,000× (calibrated pixel size of 1.157 Å). A total of 32 frames with exposure time of 8 s were collected with defocus ranged from −1.4 to −2.0 μm under low-dose condition. After several rounds of 2D classifications, 54,771 particles were left, and hexameric rings (25,867 particles) and heptameric rings (24,046 particles) of top views were both observed (S5D Fig). As a control, CLPB-ATPγS dataset was prepared as CLPB-casein-ATPγS without adding casein.

For the sample of NBDE425Q-ATP, micrographs were recorded with 300-kV FEI Titan Krios G3i microscope (Gatan GIF K3 camera) at a nominal magnification of 64,000× (pixel size of 1.08 Å). A total of 32 frames with exposure time of 2.44 s were collected with defocus ranged from −1 to −1.4 μm. A total of 3,453 micrographs were collected, and 3,753,541 auto-picked particles were split into 2 parts to facilitate processing. After several rounds of 2D and 3D classification, 3 different major states were found: hexamer, heptamer, and nonamer. The density map of hexamer particles was refined to 7.4 Å (S10 Fig). The particle sets of heptamer and nonamer were further optimized, and after CTF refinement and Bayesian polishing, the final density maps were determined at resolutions of 4.1 Å and 3.7 Å, respectively (S10 Fig).

For the sample of NBDWT-AMPPNP, a total of 720 micrographs were recorded with 200-kV FEI Talos Arctica microscope (Gatan K2 camera) at a nominal magnification of 36,000× (calibrated pixel size of 1.157 Å), and 32 frames with exposure time of 8 s were collected with defocus ranged from −1.2 to −2.0 μm. After 2D classification, both hexameric rings and heptameric rings of top views were observed (S9 Fig).

The parameters and statistics for data collection and processing were summarized in S1 Table.

Crystallization, data collection, and structure determination of the ANK domain

Plate-shaped crystals of CLPB-ANK were obtained within 3 weeks by sitting drop vapor diffusion method at 16°C. Typically, a volume of 1 μL of protein solution at a concentration of 6 to 12 mg/mL in the GF buffer (5 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 100 mM NaCl) was mixed with an equal volume of a precipitant well solution of 0.2 M ammonium citrate tribasic (pH 7.0), 20% (w/v) polyethylene glycol 3,350. Crystals were directly frozen and stored in liquid nitrogen prior to data collection. The final dataset was collected at the Shanghai Synchrotron Radiation Facility (SSRF) beamline BL18U1 (wavelength = 0.97915 Å, temperature = 100 K). A 900 diffraction images were collected with oscillation step of 0.2°. The data were merged and scaled using XDS [58] and Aimless [59]. The initial structure solution was obtained using the molecular replacement program PHASER [60] followed by AutoBuild [61] with a prediction structure of CLPB by AlphaFold2 [22]. Further model building was done using Coot and Phenix [62,63]. Data collection and refinement statistics are summarized in S2 Table and the atomic coordinates and structure factors have been deposited in the protein data bank (PDB ID: 7XC5).

Model building and refinement

Model building was based on the predicted initial model of CLPB by AlphaFold2 [22] and the crystal structure of the ANK domain. The initial models were first docked into the cryo-EM density map using UCSF Chimera [64], rebuilt manually in Coot and refined (real-space) using Phenix [62,63]. Figures preparation and structure analysis were performed with UCSF ChimeraX [65] and Chimera [64].

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Biochemical and functional characterization of CLPB proteins.

(A) The purification of CLPB-N92, analyzing by size-exclusion chromatography (left) and SDS-PAGE (right). (B) Negative staining electron microscopy of the peak fraction in (A). Result shows that CLPB-N92 formed large aggregates and was highly heterogenous in size. (C) Time course of the C-terminal Step-tagged full-length CLPB (CLPB-FL) expression in transiently transfected HEK-293T cells. (D) CLPB-FL, CLPB-N92, and CLPB-N127 expression in transiently transfected HEK-293T cells. Data show that the CLPB-N127 has the same molecular weight as the mature form of CLPB. (E) ATPase activity of CLPB-N127 (S1 Data). (F) Disaggregase activity of CLPB-N127 (S1 Data).

(TIF)

S2 Fig. Sample preparation of CLPB-AMPPNP, CLPBE425Q-ATP, and CLPBisoform1-AMPPNP.

(A) Purification of CLPB using size-exclusion chromatography with AMPPNP (red line) or without AMPPNP (black line). Corresponding fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE (right panel). (B) Representative nsEM image of the peak fraction in (A). (C) Purification of CLPBE425Q using size-exclusion chromatography in the presence of ATP. Corresponding fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE (right panel). (D) Representative nsEM image of the peak fraction in (C). (E) Purification of CLPBisodorm1 using size-exclusion chromatography. Corresponding fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE (right panel). (F) Representative nsEM image of the peak fraction in (E).

(TIF)

S3 Fig. Image processing workflow of the CLPB-AMPPNP dataset.

(A) Image processing workflow of the CLPB dataset (see Methods for details). (B, C) Fourier shell correlation (FSC) curves for the final cryo-EM map of the double-heptameric complex (B) or heptameric complex (C) using the gold standard FSC 0.143 criteria.

(TIF)

S4 Fig. Image processing workflow of the CLPBE425Q-ATP dataset.

(A) Image processing workflow of the CLPBE425Q dataset. (B, C) Local resolution estimation of CLPBE425Q double-hexamer (B) or NBD alone (C). (D) Density map of the NBD alone. The central substrate is colored yellow. (E, F) Fourier shell correlation curve of the final map of the CLPBE425Q double-hexamer (E) and NBD (F).

(TIF)

S5 Fig. Conversion of the CLPB double-heptamer to double-hexamer upon substrate binding.

(A–D) Representative 2D classification averages of CLPB (A), CLPBE425Q (B), CLPBisoform1 (C), and CLPB+Casein (D) datasets. The top views with hexameric features are indicated by red boxes.

(TIF)

S6 Fig. The ANK domain is essential for the disaggregase activity of CLPB.

(A) SDS-PAGE analysis of the purified proteins. (B) ATPase assays of CLPB, NBD, and NBDE425Q. Results show that NBDE425Q has nearly no ATPase activity. NBD has strong ATPase activity. ATPase activity was compared to CLPB (N = 3, individual data points shown as dots, bars show mean ± SD, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.0001) (S3 Data). (C) Disaggregase activity assay of CLPB, NBD, and NBDE425Q. The results show that NBD and NBDE425Q abolish the disaggregase activity of CLPB. Disaggregase activity was compared to CLPB (N = 3, individual data points shown as dots, bars show mean ± SD, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.0001) (S3 Data).

(TIF)

S7 Fig. The unique insertion in ANK domain mediates higher-order structure formation and directly contact the substrate.

(A) Residual densities around the ANK domains, extending towards the central channel of the CLPBE425Q complex in the substrate-bound state. The extra densities are highlighted by a dotted ellipse. The density of the substrate is shown in yellow. (B) SDS-PAGE analysis of the purified proteins. (C–E) Purification of CLPB, CLPBΔ201–232, and CLPBisoform1 complexes using size-exclusion chromatography.

(TIF)

S8 Fig. The ANK domain dimer interface in the double-heptamer and double-hexamer.

(A, B) Rigid-body fitting of the crystal structure of the ANK domain into the density maps of the double-heptamer (A) and double-hexamer (B). (C) Purification of the CLPB, CLPBR178E, and CLPBR227E complexes using size-exclusion chromatography. (D) SDS-PAGE analysis of the purified proteins. (E) Representative nsEM images of the CLPB (black line rectangle), CLPBR178E (blue line rectangle), and CLPBR227E complexes (red line rectangle).

(TIF)

S9 Fig. Sample preparation of the NBDE425Q-ATP and NBD-AMPPNP complex.

(A) Purification of NBDE425Q using size-exclusion chromatography in the presence of ATP. Corresponding fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE. (B, C) Representative nsEM image (B) and 2D classification averages of cryo-EM dataset (C) of the peak fraction in (A). (D) Purification of NBD using size-exclusion chromatography in the presence of AMPPNP. Corresponding fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE (right panel). (E, F) Representative nsEM image (E) and 2D classification averages cryo-EM dataset (F) of the peak fraction in (D). The hexameric ring is more compact than heptameric ring, and the diameter of central pore of hexamer is much smaller than that of heptamer.

(TIF)

S10 Fig. Image processing workflow of the NBDE425Q dataset.

(A) Image processing workflow of the NBDE425Q dataset. The micrographs were subjected to motion correction and CTF estimation. The auto-picked particles were subjected to multiple rounds of 2D and 3D classifications. Three different oligomeric arrangements, hexameric, heptameric, and nonameric were identified. (B–D) Local resolution estimation of the density maps of the hexamer (B), heptamer (C), and nonamer (D) in (A). (E) Fourier shell correlation (FSC) curves of the final cryo-EM maps of hexamer (blue line), heptamer (black line), and nonamer (red line), using the gold standard FSC 0.143 criteria.

(TIF)

S11 Fig. Nucleotide-binding states of the ATPase sites in the nonamer.

All the 8 ATPase sites in the nonamer are occupied by ATP. The atomic models are color-coded for different protomers. The segmented density maps of ATP were superimposed with the atomic model.

(TIF)

S1 Table. Cryo-EM data collection, refinement, and validation statistics.

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Data collection and refinement statistics of the CLPB_ANK.

(DOCX)

S3 Table. The 24 enriched mitochondrial proteins highlighted in red in Fig 6B.

(XLSX)

S4 Table. Top 20 abundant and highly enriched mitochondrial proteins located in the OM, IMS, and IM.

(XLSX)

S1 Raw image. Uncropped western blotting and SDS-PAGE gel images in this work.

(PDF)

S1 Data. The ATPase activity and disaggregase activity of CLPB-N127.

(XLSX)

S2 Data. The proportion of the hexameric and heptameric top views in the CLPB-AMPPNP, CLPBE425Q-ATP, CLPBisoform1-AMPPNP, CLPB-ATPγs, and CLPB+Casein-ATPγs datasets.

(XLSX)

S3 Data. The ATPase activity and disaggregase activity of CLPB, NBD, and NBDE425Q.

(XLSX)

S4 Data. The ATPase activity and disaggregase activity of CLPB, CLPBΔ201–232, CLPBisoform1 CLPBR178E, and CLPBR227E.

(XLSX)

S5 Data. Differential enrichment profile of mitochondrial proteins in the Strep/HA tagged ANK samples.

Mitochondrial proteins were analyzed based on a stringent screening condition (p-value < 0.01 and Fold change > 4).

(XLSX)

S6 Data. Enrichment analysis of mitochondrial proteins with OM, IMS, and IM location in the ANK and ANK-isoform1 samples.

(XLSX)

S7 Data. Enrichment analysis of mitochondrial proteins with OM, IMS, and IM location in the ANK and ANK-Δloop samples.

(XLSX)

Acknowledgments

We thank the Core Facilities at the School of Life Sciences, Peking University for help with negative staining EM; the Electron Microscopy Laboratory and Cryo-EM Platform for help with data collection; the High-performance Computing Platform for help with computation; and the National Centre for Protein Sciences at Peking University for assistance with MS.

Abbreviations

AM

ankyrin motif

AML

acute myeloid leukemia

CTF

contrast transfer function

FDR

false discovery rate

IMS

intermembrane space

LH

linker helix

MPP

mitochondrial processing peptidase

MS

mass spectrometry

MTS

mitochondrial targeting signal

NBD

nucleotide-binding domain

nsEM

negative staining electron microscopy

NTD

N-terminal domain

PARL

presenilin-associated rhomboid-like

PL

pore-loop

RT

room temperature

SCN

severe congenital neutropenia

WT

wild type

3-MGA

3-methylglutaconic aciduria

Data Availability

Data are available from the Protein Data bank and Electron Microscopy Data Bank.The cryo-EM density maps have been deposited in the Electron Microscopy Data Bank with the accession codes EMD-33105, EMD-33106, EMD-33109, EMD-33110 and EMD-33104 for the CLPB, CLPBE425Q, NBDE425Q-hexamer, NBDE425Qheptamer and NBDE425Q-nanomer, respectively. The atomic model of NBDE425Qnanomer has been deposited in Protein Data Bank with accession code PDB 7XBK.The coordinate and the structure factor of CLPB-ANK have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank with accession code 7XC5. All other relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (https://www.nsfc.gov.cn/) (32230051 to N.G., 31922036 to N.L.), the National Key Research and Development Program of China (https://service.most.gov.cn/) (2019YFA0508904 to N.G.), and the Qidong-SLS Innovation Fund to N.G. This work is also partially supported by Changping Laboratory. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Eisele YS, Monteiro C, Fearns C, Encalada SE, Wiseman RL, Powers ET, et al. Targeting protein aggregation for the treatment of degenerative diseases. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2015;14(11):759–80. Epub 2015/09/05. doi: 10.1038/nrd4593 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4628595. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Soto C, Pritzkow S. Protein misfolding, aggregation, and conformational strains in neurodegenerative diseases. Nat Neurosci. 2018;21(10):1332–40. Epub 2018/09/27. doi: 10.1038/s41593-018-0235-9 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6432913. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Kirstein J, Moliere N, Dougan DA, Turgay K. Adapting the machine: adaptor proteins for Hsp100/Clp and AAA+ proteases. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2009;7(8):589–99. Epub 2009/07/18. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro2185 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Puchades C, Sandate CR, Lander GC. The molecular principles governing the activity and functional diversity of AAA+ proteins. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2020;21(1):43–58. Epub 2019/11/23. doi: 10.1038/s41580-019-0183-6 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Erzberger JP, Berger JM. Evolutionary relationships and structural mechanisms of AAA+ proteins. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct. 2006;35:93–114. Epub 2006/05/13. doi: 10.1146/annurev.biophys.35.040405.101933 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Grimminger-Marquardt V, Lashuel HA. Structure and function of the molecular chaperone Hsp104 from yeast. Biopolymers. 2010;93(3):252–76. Epub 2009/09/22. doi: 10.1002/bip.21301 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Gates SN, Yokom AL, Lin J, Jackrel ME, Rizo AN, Kendsersky NM, et al. Ratchet-like polypeptide translocation mechanism of the AAA+ disaggregase Hsp104. Science. 2017;357(6348):273–9. Epub 2017/06/18. doi: 10.1126/science.aan1052 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5770238. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Cupo RR, Shorter J. Skd3 (human ClpB) is a potent mitochondrial protein disaggregase that is inactivated by 3-methylglutaconic aciduria-linked mutations. Elife. 2020;9. Epub 2020/06/24. doi: 10.7554/eLife.55279 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7343390. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Mroz D, Wyszkowski H, Szablewski T, Zawieracz K, Dutkiewicz R, Bury K, et al. CLPB (caseinolytic peptidase B homolog), the first mitochondrial protein refoldase associated with human disease. Biochim Biophys Acta Gen Subj. 2020;1864(4):129512. Epub 2020/01/10. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagen.2020.129512 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Wortmann SB, Zietkiewicz S, Kousi M, Szklarczyk R, Haack TB, Gersting SW, et al. CLPB mutations cause 3-methylglutaconic aciduria, progressive brain atrophy, intellectual disability, congenital neutropenia, cataracts, movement disorder. Am J Hum Genet. 2015;96(2):245–57. Epub 2015/01/20. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.12.013 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4320260. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Thevarajan I, Zolkiewski M, Zolkiewska A. Human CLPB forms ATP-dependent complexes in the mitochondrial intermembrane space. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2020;127:105841. Epub 2020/09/01. doi: 10.1016/j.biocel.2020.105841 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Saita S, Nolte H, Fiedler KU, Kashkar H, Venne AS, Zahedi RP, et al. PARL mediates Smac proteolytic maturation in mitochondria to promote apoptosis. Nat Cell Biol. 2017;19(4):318–28. Epub 2017/03/14. doi: 10.1038/ncb3488 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Capo-Chichi JM, Boissel S, Brustein E, Pickles S, Fallet-Bianco C, Nassif C, et al. Disruption of CLPB is associated with congenital microcephaly, severe encephalopathy and 3-methylglutaconic aciduria. J Med Genet. 2015;52(5):303–11. Epub 2015/02/05. doi: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2014-102952 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kanabus M, Shahni R, Saldanha JW, Murphy E, Plagnol V, Hoff WV, et al. Bi-allelic CLPB mutations cause cataract, renal cysts, nephrocalcinosis and 3-methylglutaconic aciduria, a novel disorder of mitochondrial protein disaggregation. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2015;38(2):211–9. Epub 2015/01/18. doi: 10.1007/s10545-015-9813-0 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Kiykim A, Garncarz W, Karakoc-Aydiner E, Ozen A, Kiykim E, Yesil G, et al. Novel CLPB mutation in a patient with 3-methylglutaconic aciduria causing severe neurological involvement and congenital neutropenia. Clin Immunol. 2016;165:1–3. Epub 2016/02/27. doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2016.02.008 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Saunders C, Smith L, Wibrand F, Ravn K, Bross P, Thiffault I, et al. CLPB variants associated with autosomal-recessive mitochondrial disorder with cataract, neutropenia, epilepsy, and methylglutaconic aciduria. Am J Hum Genet. 2015;96(2):258–65. Epub 2015/01/20. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.12.020 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4320254. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Warren JT, Cupo RR, Wattanasirakul P, Spencer DH, Locke AE, Makaryan V, et al. Heterozygous variants of CLPB are a cause of severe congenital neutropenia. Blood. 2022;139(5):779–91. Epub 2021/06/12. doi: 10.1182/blood.2021010762 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8814677. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Chen X, Glytsou C, Zhou H, Narang S, Reyna DE, Lopez A, et al. Targeting Mitochondrial Structure Sensitizes Acute Myeloid Leukemia to Venetoclax Treatment. Cancer Discov. 2019;9(7):890–909. Epub 2019/05/03. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-19-0117 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6606342. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Pudova EA, Krasnov GS, Kobelyatskaya AA, Savvateeva MV, Fedorova MS, Pavlov VS, et al. Gene Expression Changes and Associated Pathways Involved in the Progression of Prostate Cancer Advanced Stages. Front Genet. 2020;11:613162. Epub 2021/02/09. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2020.613162 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7859645. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Cupo RR, Rizo AN, Braun GA, Tse E, Chuang E, Gupta K, et al. Unique structural features govern the activity of a human mitochondrial AAA+ disaggregase, Skd3. Cell Rep. 2022;40(13):111408. Epub 2022/09/29. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2022.111408 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9584538. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Spaulding Z, Thevarajan I, Schrag LG, Zubcevic L, Zolkiewska A, Zolkiewski M. Human mitochondrial AAA plus ATPase SKD3/CLPB assembles into nucleotide-stabilized dodecamers. Biochem Bioph Res Co. 2022;602:21–26. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2022.02.101 WOS:000770866200005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Jumper J, Evans R, Pritzel A, Green T, Figurnov M, Ronneberger O, et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature. 2021;596(7873):583–9. Epub 2021/07/16. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8371605. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Kater L, Wagener N, Berninghausen O, Becker T, Neupert W, Beckmann R. Structure of the Bcs1 AAA-ATPase suggests an airlock-like translocation mechanism for folded proteins. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2020;27(2):142–9. Epub 2020/01/29. doi: 10.1038/s41594-019-0364-1 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Tang WK, Borgnia MJ, Hsu AL, Esser L, Fox T, de Val N, et al. Structures of AAA protein translocase Bcs1 suggest translocation mechanism of a folded protein. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2020;27(2):202–9. Epub 2020/02/12. doi: 10.1038/s41594-020-0373-0 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8482623. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Twomey EC, Ji Z, Wales TE, Bodnar NO, Ficarro SB, Marto JA, et al. Substrate processing by the Cdc48 ATPase complex is initiated by ubiquitin unfolding. Science. 2019;365(6452). Epub 2019/06/30. doi: 10.1126/science.aax1033 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6980381. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Fei X, Bell TA, Jenni S, Stinson BM, Baker TA, Harrison SC, et al. Structures of the ATP-fueled ClpXP proteolytic machine bound to protein substrate. Elife. 2020;9. Epub 2020/02/29. doi: 10.7554/eLife.52774 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7112951. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Lo YH, Sobhany M, Hsu AL, Ford BL, Krahn JM, Borgnia MJ, et al. Cryo-EM structure of the essential ribosome assembly AAA-ATPase Rix7. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1):513. Epub 2019/02/02. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-08373-0 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6355894. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Ma C, Wu D, Chen Q, Gao N. Structural dynamics of AAA + ATPase Drg1 and mechanism of benzo-diazaborine inhibition. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):6765. Epub 2022/11/10. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-34511-2 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9646744. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Cooney I, Han H, Stewart MG, Carson RH, Hansen DT, Iwasa JH, et al. Structure of the Cdc48 segregase in the act of unfolding an authentic substrate. Science. 2019;365(6452):502–5. Epub 2019/06/30. doi: 10.1126/science.aax0486 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7362759. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Pan M, Yu Y, Ai H, Zheng Q, Xie Y, Liu L, et al. Mechanistic insight into substrate processing and allosteric inhibition of human p97. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2021;28(7):614–25. Epub 2021/07/16. doi: 10.1038/s41594-021-00617-2 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Weaver CL, Duran EC, Mack KL, Lin J, Jackrel ME, Sweeny EA, et al. Avidity for Polypeptide Binding by Nucleotide-Bound Hsp104 Structures. Biochemistry. 2017;56(15):2071–5. Epub 2017/04/06. doi: 10.1021/acs.biochem.7b00225 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5649362. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Gates SN, Martin A. Stairway to translocation: AAA+ motor structures reveal the mechanisms of ATP-dependent substrate translocation. Protein Sci. 2020;29(2):407–19. Epub 2019/10/11. doi: 10.1002/pro.3743 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6954725. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Sherman BT, Hao M, Qiu J, Jiao X, Baseler MW, Lane HC, et al. DAVID: a web server for functional enrichment analysis and functional annotation of gene lists (2021 update). Nucleic Acids Res. 2022. Epub 2022/03/25. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkac194 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9252805. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Fan Y, Murgia M, Linder MI, Mizoguchi Y, Wang C, Lyszkiewicz M, et al. HAX1-dependent control of mitochondrial proteostasis governs neutrophil granulocyte differentiation. J Clin Invest. 2022;132(9). Epub 2022/05/03. doi: 10.1172/JCI153153 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9057593. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Hoffmann FT, Kim M, Beh LY, Wang J, Vo PLH, Gelsinger DR, et al. Selective TnsC recruitment enhances the fidelity of RNA-guided transposition. Nature. 2022;609(7926):384–93. Epub 2022/08/25. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05059-4 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Kim G, Lee SG, Han SS, Jung J, Jeong HS, Hyun JK, et al. ClpL is a functionally active tetradecameric AAA plus chaperone, distinct from hexameric/dodecameric ones. Faseb J. 2020;34(11):14353–14370. doi: 10.1096/fj.202000843R WOS:000570574700001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Santosh V, Musayev FN, Jaiswal R, Zarate-Perez F, Vandewinkel B, Dierckx C, et al. The Cryo-EM structure of AAV2 Rep68 in complex with ssDNA reveals a malleable AAA(+) machine that can switch between oligomeric states. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48(22):12983–12999. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkaa1133 WOS:000606018900044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Miyata T, Yamada K, Iwasaki H, Shinagawa H, Morikawa K, Mayanagi K. Two different oligomeric states of the RuvB branch migration motor protein as revealed by electron microscopy. J Struct Biol. 2000;131(2):83–9. Epub 2000/10/24. doi: 10.1006/jsbi.2000.4290 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Yu X, VanLoock MS, Poplawski A, Kelman Z, Xiang T, Tye BK, et al. The Methanobacterium thermoautotrophicum MCM protein can form heptameric rings. Embo Rep. 2002;3(8):792–797. doi: 10.1093/embo-reports/kvf160 WOS:000177585300021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Santo-Domingo J, Demaurex N. Perspectives on: SGP symposium on mitochondrial physiology and medicine: the renaissance of mitochondrial pH. J Gen Physiol. 2012;139(6):415–23. Epub 2012/05/30. doi: 10.1085/jgp.201110767 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3362525. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Olivares AO, Baker TA, Sauer RT. Mechanical Protein Unfolding and Degradation. Annu Rev Physiol. 2018;80:413–29. Epub 2018/02/13. doi: 10.1146/annurev-physiol-021317-121303 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Gao H, Li F, Ji Z, Shi Z, Li Y, Yu H. Cryo-EM structures of human p97 double hexamer capture potentiated ATPase-competent state. Cell Discov. 2022;8(1):19. Epub 2022/02/23. doi: 10.1038/s41421-022-00379-1 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Hoq MR, Vago FS, Li K, Kovaliov M, Nicholas RJ, Huryn DM, et al. Affinity Capture of p97 with Small-Molecule Ligand Bait Reveals a 3.6 A Double-Hexamer Cryoelectron Microscopy Structure. ACS Nano. 2021;15(5):8376–85. Epub 2021/04/27. doi: 10.1021/acsnano.0c10185 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Yu G, Bai Y, Li K, Amarasinghe O, Jiang W, Zhang ZY. Cryo-electron microscopy structures of VCP/p97 reveal a new mechanism of oligomerization regulation. iScience. 2021;24(11):103310. Epub 2021/11/13. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2021.103310 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8571493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Caffrey B, Zhu X, Berezuk A, Tuttle K, Chittori S, Subramaniam S. AAA+ ATPase p97/VCP mutants and inhibitor binding disrupt inter-domain coupling and subsequent allosteric activation. J Biol Chem. 2021;297(4). ARTN doi: 10.1016/j.jbc.2021.101187 .1016/j.jbc.2021.101187. WOS:000713080600005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Botham A, Coyaud E, Nirmalanandhan VS, Gronda M, Hurren R, Maclean N, et al. Global Interactome Mapping of Mitochondrial Intermembrane Space Proteases Identifies a Novel Function for HTRA2. Proteomics. 2019;19(24):e1900139. Epub 2019/10/17. doi: 10.1002/pmic.201900139 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Huttlin EL, Bruckner RJ, Navarrete-Perea J, Cannon JR, Baltier K, Gebreab F, et al. Dual proteome-scale networks reveal cell-specific remodeling of the human interactome. Cell. 2021;184(11):3022–40 e28. Epub 2021/05/08. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.04.011 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8165030. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Pronicka E, Ropacka-Lesiak M, Trubicka J, Pajdowska M, Linke M, Ostergaard E, et al. A scoring system predicting the clinical course of CLPB defect based on the foetal and neonatal presentation of 31 patients. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2017;40(6):853–60. Epub 2017/07/09. doi: 10.1007/s10545-017-0057-z . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Wortmann SB, Zietkiewicz S, Guerrero-Castillo S, Feichtinger RG, Wagner M, Russell J, et al. Neutropenia and intellectual disability are hallmarks of biallelic and de novo CLPB deficiency. Genet Med. 2021;23(9):1705–14. Epub 2021/06/19. doi: 10.1038/s41436-021-01194-x . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Li J, Mahajan A, Tsai MD. Ankyrin repeat: a unique motif mediating protein-protein interactions. Biochemistry. 2006;45(51):15168–78. Epub 2006/12/21. doi: 10.1021/bi062188q . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Lanzetta PA, Alvarez LJ, Reinach PS, Candia OA. An improved assay for nanomole amounts of inorganic phosphate. Anal Biochem. 1979;100(1):95–7. Epub 1979/11/15. doi: 10.1016/0003-2697(79)90115-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Frezza C, Cipolat S, Scorrano L. Organelle isolation: functional mitochondria from mouse liver, muscle and cultured fibroblasts. Nat Protoc. 2007;2(2):287–95. Epub 2007/04/05. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2006.478 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Chen J, Noble AJ, Kang JY, Darst SA. Eliminating effects of particle adsorption to the air/water interface in single-particle cryo-electron microscopy: Bacterial RNA polymerase and CHAPSO. J Struct Biol X. 2019;1. Epub 2019/01/01. doi: 10.1016/j.yjsbx.2019.100005 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7153306. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Zheng SQ, Palovcak E, Armache JP, Verba KA, Cheng Y, Agard DA. MotionCor2: anisotropic correction of beam-induced motion for improved cryo-electron microscopy. Nat Methods. 2017;14(4):331–2. Epub 2017/03/03. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.4193 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5494038. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Zhang K. Gctf: Real-time CTF determination and correction. J Struct Biol. 2016;193(1):1–12. Epub 2015/11/26. doi: 10.1016/j.jsb.2015.11.003 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4711343. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Zivanov J, Nakane T, Scheres SHW. Estimation of high-order aberrations and anisotropic magnification from cryo-EM data sets in RELION-3.1. IUCrJ. 2020;7(Pt 2):253–67. Epub 2020/03/10. doi: 10.1107/S2052252520000081 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7055373. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Mastronarde DN. Automated electron microscope tomography using robust prediction of specimen movements. J Struct Biol. 2005;152(1):36–51. Epub 2005/09/27. doi: 10.1016/j.jsb.2005.07.007 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Kabsch W. Xds Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr. 2010;66(Pt 2):125–32. Epub 2010/02/04. doi: 10.1107/S0907444909047337 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2815665. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Evans PR. An introduction to data reduction: space-group determination, scaling and intensity statistics. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr. 2011;67(Pt 4):282–92. Epub 2011/04/05. doi: 10.1107/S090744491003982X ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3069743. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.McCoy AJ, Grosse-Kunstleve RW, Adams PD, Winn MD, Storoni LC, Read RJ. Phaser crystallographic software. J Appl Crystallogr. 2007;40(Pt 4):658–74. Epub 2007/08/01. doi: 10.1107/S0021889807021206 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2483472. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Terwilliger TC, Grosse-Kunstleve RW, Afonine PV, Moriarty NW, Zwart PH, Hung LW, et al. Iterative model building, structure refinement and density modification with the PHENIX AutoBuild wizard. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr. 2008;64(Pt 1):61–9. Epub 2007/12/21. doi: 10.1107/S090744490705024X ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2394820. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Adams PD, Afonine PV, Bunkoczi G, Chen VB, Davis IW, Echols N, et al. PHENIX: a comprehensive Python-based system for macromolecular structure solution. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr. 2010;66(Pt 2):213–21. Epub 2010/02/04. doi: 10.1107/S0907444909052925 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2815670. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Emsley P, Cowtan K. Coot: model-building tools for molecular graphics. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr. 2004;60(Pt 12 Pt 1):2126–32. Epub 2004/12/02. doi: 10.1107/S0907444904019158 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Pettersen EF, Goddard TD, Huang CC, Couch GS, Greenblatt DM, Meng EC, et al. UCSF Chimera—a visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. J Comput Chem. 2004;25(13):1605–12. Epub 2004/07/21. doi: 10.1002/jcc.20084 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Pettersen EF, Goddard TD, Huang CC, Meng EC, Couch GS, Croll TI, et al. UCSF ChimeraX: Structure visualization for researchers, educators, and developers. Protein Sci. 2021;30(1):70–82. Epub 2020/09/04. doi: 10.1002/pro.3943 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7737788. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Richard Hodge

13 May 2022

Dear Dr gao,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript entitled "Unique Structural and Functional Properties of a Mitochondrial AAA+ Disaggregase CLPB" for consideration as a Research Article by PLOS Biology. Please accept my apologies for the delay in getting back to you as we consulted with an academic editor about your submission.

Your manuscript has now been evaluated by the PLOS Biology editorial staff, as well as by an academic editor with the relevant expertise, and I am writing to let you know that we would like to send your submission out for external peer review.

However, before we can send your manuscript to reviewers, we need you to complete your submission by providing the metadata that is required for full assessment. To this end, please login to Editorial Manager where you will find the paper in the 'Submissions Needing Revisions' folder on your homepage. Please click 'Revise Submission' from the Action Links and complete all additional questions in the submission questionnaire.

Once your full submission is complete, your paper will undergo a series of checks in preparation for peer review. Once your manuscript has passed the checks it will be sent out for review. To provide the metadata for your submission, please Login to Editorial Manager (https://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology) within two working days, i.e. by May 15 2022 11:59PM.

If your manuscript has been previously reviewed at another journal, PLOS Biology is willing to work with those reviews in order to avoid re-starting the process. Submission of the previous reviews is entirely optional and our ability to use them effectively will depend on the willingness of the previous journal to confirm the content of the reports and share the reviewer identities. Please note that we reserve the right to invite additional reviewers if we consider that additional/independent reviewers are needed, although we aim to avoid this as far as possible. In our experience, working with previous reviews does save time.

If you would like to send previous reviewer reports to us, please email me at rhodge@plos.org to let me know, including the name of the previous journal and the manuscript ID the study was given, as well as attaching a point-by-point response to reviewers that details how you have or plan to address the reviewers' concerns.

During the process of completing your manuscript submission, you will be invited to opt-in to posting your pre-review manuscript as a bioRxiv preprint. Visit http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/preprints for full details. If you consent to posting your current manuscript as a preprint, please upload a single Preprint PDF.

Feel free to email us at plosbiology@plos.org if you have any queries relating to your submission.

Kind regards,

Richard

Richard Hodge, PhD

Associate Editor, PLOS Biology

rhodge@plos.org

PLOS

Empowering researchers to transform science

Carlyle House, Carlyle Road, Cambridge, CB4 3DN, United Kingdom

ORCiD I plosbio.org I @PLOSBiology I Blog

California (U.S.) corporation #C2354500, based in San Francisco

Decision Letter 1

Richard Hodge

30 Jun 2022

Dear Dr gao,

Thank you for your patience while your manuscript "Unique Structural and Functional Properties of a Mitochondrial AAA+ Disaggregase CLPB" was peer-reviewed at PLOS Biology. Please accept my sincere apologies for the great delay in getting back to you with our decision. It has now been evaluated by the PLOS Biology editors, an Academic Editor with relevant expertise, and by four independent reviewers.

As you will see, the reviewers find your manuscript interesting and worth pursuing, however they also raise several points that will need to be addressed in order for us to consider publication of the manuscript. Reviewer #3 raises concerns that the double-heptameric and nonameric structures could be a structural artefact and asks that independent biochemical validation data is provided. In addition, the reviewers ask for further clarifications since several pieces of data contrast with previously published work, as well as raising overlapping concerns with the interpretation of the data and the proposed ANK domain binding model.

In light of the reviews, which you will find at the end of this email, we would like to invite you to revise the work to thoroughly address the reviewers' reports. Given the extent of revision needed, we cannot make a decision about publication until we have seen the revised manuscript and your response to the reviewers' comments. Your revised manuscript is likely to be sent for further evaluation by all or a subset of the reviewers.

We expect to receive your revised manuscript within 3 months. Please email us (plosbiology@plos.org) if you have any questions or concerns, or would like to request an extension.

At this stage, your manuscript remains formally under active consideration at our journal; please notify us by email if you do not intend to submit a revision so that we may withdraw it.

**IMPORTANT - SUBMITTING YOUR REVISION**

Your revisions should address the specific points made by each reviewer. Please submit the following files along with your revised manuscript:

1. A 'Response to Reviewers' file - this should detail your responses to the editorial requests, present a point-by-point response to all of the reviewers' comments, and indicate the changes made to the manuscript.

*NOTE: In your point-by-point response to the reviewers, please provide the full context of each review. Do not selectively quote paragraphs or sentences to reply to. The entire set of reviewer comments should be present in full and each specific point should be responded to individually, point by point.

You should also cite any additional relevant literature that has been published since the original submission and mention any additional citations in your response.

2. In addition to a clean copy of the manuscript, please also upload a 'track-changes' version of your manuscript that specifies the edits made. This should be uploaded as a "Revised Article with Changes Highlighted" file type.

*Re-submission Checklist*

When you are ready to resubmit your revised manuscript, please refer to this re-submission checklist: https://plos.io/Biology_Checklist

To submit a revised version of your manuscript, please go to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology/ and log in as an Author. Click the link labelled 'Submissions Needing Revision' where you will find your submission record.

Please make sure to read the following important policies and guidelines while preparing your revision:

*Published Peer Review*

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out. Please see here for more details:

https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2019/05/plos-journals-now-open-for-published-peer-review/

*PLOS Data Policy*

Please note that as a condition of publication PLOS' data policy (http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/data-availability) requires that you make available all data used to draw the conclusions arrived at in your manuscript. If you have not already done so, you must include any data used in your manuscript either in appropriate repositories, within the body of the manuscript, or as supporting information (N.B. this includes any numerical values that were used to generate graphs, histograms etc.). For an example see here: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001908#s5

*Blot and Gel Data Policy*

We require the original, uncropped and minimally adjusted images supporting all blot and gel results reported in an article's figures or Supporting Information files. We will require these files before a manuscript can be accepted so please prepare them now, if you have not already uploaded them. Please carefully read our guidelines for how to prepare and upload this data: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements

*Protocols deposition*

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Thank you again for your submission to our journal. We hope that our editorial process has been constructive thus far, and we welcome your feedback at any time. Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Richard

Richard Hodge, PhD

Associate Editor, PLOS Biology

rhodge@plos.org

------------------------------------

REVIEWS:

Reviewer #1: The human mitochondrial AAA+ ATPase CLPB (aka, HSP78 and Skd3) is attracted attentions because it can mediate disaggregation of various proteins and also is relaled with various diseases. Compared with canonical AAA+, is unique in the N terminal ankyrin repeat domain (ANK).

The manuscript describes the cryoEM structures of CLPB and studied the role of the ANK domain.

The authors found that CLPB assembled into homo-tetradecamers in apo-state and changed to homo-dodecamers upon binding to substrates. As the ANK domain located at the interface of heptamer or hexamer, the authors concluded that the ANK domain is responsible for the higher-order assembly.

The authors also suggested that the ANK domain is substrate binding site from the results of MS analysis of ANK interactomes.

The putative disaggregases, Hsp104 or ClpB, contains two NBD in a subunit. Thus it seems to be reasonable that CLPB with one NBD exists as double ring complex to take similar configuration.

The experiments were well designed and the results are persuasive. Therefore, the manuscript is valid for publication. However, I recommend the authors to consider and discuss a couple of following problems raised from the results.

The transition from tetradecamer to dodecamer requires disassembly of the complex. Thus, CLPB should take dynamic oligomeric structural chanse, possible with the dissociation to monomers. The relatively low resolution should be due to the dynamic structural change.

The ANK domain exists in the interface between the rings. Thus, it seems to be difficult to contribute to the interaction with substrates. I think the interactome analysi of the ANK domain might be artefact.

I think that the manuscript is acceptable after the revision according to the above problems.

Reviewer #2: In this study, Wu et al. present a structural characterization of the human HSP100 family protein CLPB. Although diverse conformations of the purified protein limited the resolution, the authors used rigid body fitting to model the CLPB structure. Interestingly, the authors found that CLPB assembles into homo-tetradecamers in the apo-state which are converted into dodecamers upon substrate binding. The study confirms the importance of ANK domain for the substrate recognition and suggests its importance for higher-order organization (double hexameric structure) that is critical for disaggregase cycle of CLPB.

This is interesting study which provides novel and unexpected insights into the structural organization of CLPB and which allows mapping and functional interpretation of disease-related mutations and understanding their possible implications on the CLPB function. However, the authors should consider the following points:

1. The authors refer to substrate density in the central channel of CLPB hexamers in Fig. 1D. However, it remains unclear how a substrate density is distinguished from conformational changes in CLPB that are induced by the Walker B mutation (impairing ATP hydrolysis)? Why was AMP-PNP added in these experiments? The experiments shown in Fig. 2C appears critical in this context, but it remains unclear from the description in the legend whether or not ATPyS was present in all samples. Why was ATPyS rather than AMP-PNP added? Is the hexameric state induced upon substrate binding or only upon substrate binding in the presence of ATPyS? These experiments are central as they aim to establish a substrate induced change in the stoichiometry of CLPB complexes, a central and perhaps the most intriguing finding of the manuscript.

2. The mass spectrometric analysis of CLPB interacting protein shown in Fig. 6 is not sufficiently documented and therefore difficult to assess. I could not find any description detailing the MS analysis of the data (number of biological replicates, statistical evaluation, etc). If I understood correctly, MTS-ANK-HA was used as a control in this experiment. As the authors found that the deletion of the AA 201-232 in the ANK domain significantly reduces CLPB disaggregase activity and that this part of the protein might be involved in substrate recognition and transport of the substrate to AAA+ domain, such mutant (MTS-ANK�201-232Strep) would be great negative control in a search for the specific CLPB substrates. Moreover, the experiments were seemingly performed in the presence of endogenous CLPB? Is endogenous CLPB found in the eluate? Experiments in CLPB knock-out cells would more informative.

3. The authors report that ANK motif deletion does not perturb ATPase activity (or even see higher ATPase activity of the NBD mutant). This result is in contrast to the published result by Cupo and Shorter that report lack of ATPase activity of the isolated NBD (consistent with a similar lack of activity of isolated NBD2 from yeast Hsp104 or bacterial ClpB). How do authors explain this discrepant result?

Reviewer #3: Human CLPB (aka SKD3) is a protein disaggregase found in the mitochondrial intermembrane space, which promotes the solubilization of aggregated mitochondrial proteins (1, 2). CLPB consists of an ANK domain followed by a single AAA domain. It was previously shown that the ANK domain is essential to CLPB function (1) and missense mutations throughout the CLPB gene are associated with 3-methylglutaconic aciduria (3-MGA) and severe congenital neutropenia (SCN). Here, Wu et al. presents the cryo-EM structures of CLPB in the apo and casein-bound form. The reported oligomeric structures range from tetradecamers (heptamers), dodecamers (hexamers to nonamers. Although the work is technically sound, there are several inconsistencies and stark differences with published work that must be addressed. The introduction is erroneous in many places, e.g. CLPB/SKD3 is NOT an Hsp78 homolog; the N-domain of yeast Hsp104 is dispensable for protein disaggregation and by extension substrate binding; the NBDs of Hsp100 do not elicit a power stroke. There is also substantial overlap with published work (e.g. Ref. 1) and the significance of the presented data are not always clear (e.g. Fig. EV3). On balance, while the authors present a fine structure, the paper is rather confusing and highly speculative at times (nonamer structure), which precludes publication in its current form.

Major

1. The authors present cryo-EM structures of apo CLPB (heptamer/tetradecamer) and substrate-bound CLPB (hexamer/dodecamer) at medium resolution (~6-7 Å resolution). However, the authors did not further capitalize on this finding, and how CLPB goes from a heptamer to a hexamer is unclear.

2. The proposed heptamer (or tetradecamer) structure of apo CLPB is intriguing and contrasts published work showing that CLPB forms a hexamer both without substrate (3, 4) and with substrate (4). How can this be reconciled?

3. Perhaps even more perplexing is the structural discrepancy between apo CLPB (heptamer/tetradecamer) and CLPB-WB mutant (hexamer/dodecamer) co-purified with substrate. By co-purification, do the authors imply an E. coli protein that co-purified with CLPBWB? What is the identity of the bound protein and why is the bound polypeptide not shown in Fig. 1? As stated, the logic of a co-purified substrate-bound CLPB-WB is a stretch.

4. Heptamers, incl. tetradecamers, have been reported for several AAA+ motors including Clp/Hsp100 (c.f. also extensive literature on p97), but are largely dismissed as structural artifacts. Cupo et al. (4) previously showed that heptamers are a minor species contrasting the data presented in Fig. 2C. To test whether a CLPB heptamer/tetradecamer is the predominant species, the authors need to independently verify their heptamer structure by site-specific cross-linking and gel analysis, or mass photometry.

5. In addition to the widely observed hexamer/heptamer structures, the authors also observed a highly speculative nonamer structure at 3.7-Å resolution. Although the authors state that the nonamer structure is non-physiological, it is important to validate any structural insight derived from an artifactual structure. To test whether the nonamer structure has any functional relevance, independent biochemical data using CLPB mutants must be presented. If not, the nonamer structure is confusing and does not add to the conclusion.

6. Hsp100 motors translocate substrate in a unidirectional manner and bind substrates via their N-domains (here: ANK domain). In the present structure, CLPB adopts a head-to-head oligomer held together by the ANK domains, which precludes a substrate interaction via the CLPB N-domain. Since the ANK domains mediate multiple interactions with neighboring subunits both within one oligomer and across oligomers, how do they engage with substrate (not to mention large aggregates)?

7. The mass spectrometry data presented in Fig 6C is interesting and largely consistent with published work (1, 5). However, according to MitoCarta 3.0, HAX-1 is not an IMS protein and may not even be a mitochondrial protein at all. A discussion is required.

8. There are several erroneous statements in the introduction that need to be corrected. For instance, CLPB is a single-ring oligomer while ClpB (as well as Hsp78 and Hsp104) forms a two-ring hexamer. In essence human CLPB and microbial ClpB/Hsp104/Hsp78 belong to different Hsp100 classes. Hence, the term "human CLPB" is a misnomer since the protein is both structurally and functionally unrelated to bacterial ClpB. A re-review of the revised manuscript is imperative to ensure that statements made are factually correct.

Minor

1. The Li et al., 2006 reference to support "…first protein…to contain both ANK domain and AAA+ activity" seems misplaced.

2. A Glu to Gln mutation of the Walker B does not necessarily abrogate ATP hydrolysis since a Gln is fully compatible with a nucleophilic attack. Independent biochemically verification is required.

3. Fig. EV1: It is widely appreciated that AMP-PNP introduces a structural artifact in Hsp100 proteins and is incompatible with the true "ATP-activated" state required for substrate binding. The Glu to Gln mutation in the Walker B motif is more physiological but does not necessarily abrogate ATP hydrolysis.

4. Data presented in Fig. EV3 are largely identical to published work (1).

5. Please use line and page numbers in any revision.

References

Cupo RR, Shorter J. Skd3 (human CLPB) is a potent mitochondrial protein disaggregase that is inactivated by 3-methylglutaconic aciduria-linked mutations. eLife. 2020;9:e55279.

Mróz D, Wyszkowski H, Szablewski T, Zawieracz K, Dutkiewicz R, Bury K, et al. CLPB (caseinolytic peptidase B homolog), the first mitochondrial protein refoldase associated with human disease. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2020;1864(4):129512.

Spaulding Z, Thevarajan I, Schrag LG, Zubcevic L, Zolkiewska A, Zolkiewski M. Human mitochondrial AAA+ ATPase SKD3/CLPB assembles into nucleotide-stabilized dodecamers. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2022;602:21-6.

Cupo RR, Rizo AN, Braun GA, Tse E, Chuang E, Southworth DR, et al. Unique structural features govern the activity of a human mitochondrial AAA+ disaggregase, Skd3. bioRxiv. 2022:2022.02.17.480866.

Chen X, Glytsou C, Zhou H, Narang S, Reyna DE, Lopez A, et al. Targeting mitochondrial structure sensitizes acute myeloid leukemia to venetoclax treatment. Cancer Discov. 2019;9(7):890-909.

Reviewer #4 (Christopher Hill, signs review): Structural and biochemical studies are reported of CLPB, a mitochondrial AAA disaggregase that is linked to human disease and is unusual among AAA unfoldases in having an N-terminal ANK domain.

Curiously, it is found that the ANK domain mediates face-to-face stacking of AAA ring structures, such that the active state of CLPB is proposed to be a dodecamer of two hexameric rings facing each other rather than the single hexameric ring envisioned for other AAA unfoldases. In the absence of bound substrate, CLPB is seen to form a tetradecamer in which two heptameric rings face each other in a configuration that is envisioned to be inactive.

Structures were also determined of the NBD lacking the ANK domain, and seen to bind substrate in hexameric, heptameric, and nonameric forms. Although the nonamer is envisioned to be not relevant physiologically, it gave the best structure and view of substrate interactions at 3.7Å resolution.

I do not have any technical concerns.

There are numerous instances where the use of English should be improved.

I am doubtful that the precision implied by the description of hydrogen bonding interactions is justified by the resolution of the reconstructions.

I am confused about the axial dimensions in Figure 4. Given that the substrate is modeled in an extended/beta conformation with two residues and 60° rotation per subunit, the axial displacement per subunit (24/6, 29/6, 32/6; 4-5.3Å/subunit) all seem too short. Given that the axial displacement is almost parallel to the substrate strand, I would expect axial displacements in the range of 6-7Å per subunit.

The authors propose that two hexamers may act on substrate in a coordinated manner within the dodecameric assembly. It is not clear to me, however, that an alternative and more conventional model has been disproven - specifically, that the ANK domains function to localize CLPB to substrate, perhaps by binding extended portions of protein aggregates, while single hexameric rings translocate/unfold the substrate. The authors may want to modify the discussion to acknowledge this possibility.

Decision Letter 2

Richard Hodge

26 Oct 2022

Dear Dr gao,

Thank you for your patience while we considered your revised manuscript "Unique Structural and Functional Properties of a Mitochondrial AAA+ Disaggregase CLPB" for publication as a Research Article at PLOS Biology. Please accept my sincere apologies for the long delays that you have experienced during this round of the peer review process. Your revised study has been evaluated by the PLOS Biology editors, the Academic Editor and the original reviewers.

The reviews are attached below. As you can see, whilst Reviewers #1, #2 and #4 are now satisfied with the revision, Reviewer #3 still raises outstanding concerns with the physiological relevance of the findings given the lack of biochemical validation of the double-heptamer structure, as well as the overall level of mechanistic insight into how the two CLPB subunits are ejected upon substrate binding during the transition between the double-hexamer and double-heptamer states.

After discussing the reviews at length with the Academic Editor, we feel that these experiments would improve the manuscript and are important to provide direct support for the existence of the ClpB oligomeric structures and the substrate binding model. Reviewer #3 also notes that a related paper, recently published in Cell Reports, has solved the double-hexamer ClpB structure. We ask that you please discuss and contextualize these findings in the revised manuscript. Please be assured that we will not see this paper as a precedent when considering your paper for publication.

Given the extent of revision needed, we cannot make a decision about publication until we have seen the revised manuscript and your response to the reviewers' comments. Your revised manuscript is likely to be sent for further evaluation by all or a subset of the reviewers.

We expect to receive your revised manuscript within 3 months. Please email us (plosbiology@plos.org) if you have any questions or concerns, or would like to request an extension. At this stage, your manuscript remains formally under active consideration at our journal; please notify us by email if you do not intend to submit a revision so that we may withdraw it.

**IMPORTANT - SUBMITTING YOUR REVISION**

Your revisions should address the specific points made by each reviewer. Please submit the following files along with your revised manuscript:

1. A 'Response to Reviewers' file - this should detail your responses to the editorial requests, present a point-by-point response to all of the reviewers' comments, and indicate the changes made to the manuscript.

*NOTE: In your point-by-point response to the reviewers, please provide the full context of each review. Do not selectively quote paragraphs or sentences to reply to. The entire set of reviewer comments should be present in full and each specific point should be responded to individually, point by point.

You should also cite any additional relevant literature that has been published since the original submission and mention any additional citations in your response.

2. In addition to a clean copy of the manuscript, please also upload a 'track-changes' version of your manuscript that specifies the edits made. This should be uploaded as a "Revised Article with Changes Highlighted" file type.

*Re-submission Checklist*

When you are ready to resubmit your revised manuscript, please refer to this re-submission checklist: https://plos.io/Biology_Checklist

To submit a revised version of your manuscript, please go to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology/ and log in as an Author. Click the link labelled 'Submissions Needing Revision' where you will find your submission record.

Please make sure to read the following important policies and guidelines while preparing your revision:

*Published Peer Review*

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out. Please see here for more details:

https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2019/05/plos-journals-now-open-for-published-peer-review/

*PLOS Data Policy*

Please note that as a condition of publication PLOS' data policy (http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/data-availability) requires that you make available all data used to draw the conclusions arrived at in your manuscript. If you have not already done so, you must include any data used in your manuscript either in appropriate repositories, within the body of the manuscript, or as supporting information (N.B. this includes any numerical values that were used to generate graphs, histograms etc.). For an example see here: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001908#s5

*Blot and Gel Data Policy*

We require the original, uncropped and minimally adjusted images supporting all blot and gel results reported in an article's figures or Supporting Information files. We will require these files before a manuscript can be accepted so please prepare them now, if you have not already uploaded them. Please carefully read our guidelines for how to prepare and upload this data: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements

*Protocols deposition*

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Thank you again for your submission to our journal. We hope that our editorial process has been constructive thus far, and we welcome your feedback at any time. Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Richard

Richard Hodge, PhD

Associate Editor, PLOS Biology

rhodge@plos.org

------------------------------------

REVIEWS:

Reviewer #1 (Masafumi Yohda, signs review): The authors answered to all queries from the reviewers and revised the manuscript according to the suggestions. Thus, I recommend this manuscript for publication.

Reviewer #2 (Thomas Langer, signs review): The authors have carefully considered points of criticisms on their original manuscript and significantly improved their manuscript. The newly added MS data on interaction partners of ANK domains and mutants thereof are convincing and strengthen the conclusion of the authors. This is an interesting manuscript providing new insight as to how CLPB handles its substrate, which will be of broad interest.

Reviewer #3: Wu et al reports the cryoEM structures of apo CLPB (double-heptamer) and ATP-bound CLPB with a bacterial substrate mimic (double-hexamer) at medium resolution. Based on these findings, the authors propose that the double-heptamer may represent a resting state, which is a new finding. The 3D structure of the double-hexamer with casein was recently published by Cupo et al Cell Rep, 2022. Although, both structures consist of a double-hexamer, Cupo et al favors that the active form is a hexamer consistent with other single-ring Hsp100 unfoldases, contrasting the present work.

A shortcoming of the present study is the lack of new mechanistic insight since both the 3D structure and MS data have been published by others. It is not so much that different oligomer states are observed without and with polypeptide, but how CLPB goes from a double-heptamer to a double-hexamer, which is of interest to the field. The authors propose that two CLPB subunits are "ejected" upon substrate binding, which seems implausible considering the double-ring structure. Furthermore, flexibility at the seam is very different from removal of CLPB subunits that are held within the ring complex and across rings via the ANK domain. While the presented cryoEM structures are solid, they appear to be non-physiological, of medium resolution, and more geared towards the specialist.

* Fig 2B and Rebuttal Fig 3 suggest that only CLPB(E425Q) with ATP forms a double-hexamer. ATP analogs give rise primarily to heptamers with casein driving the formation of hexamers. The latter is consistent with the published work by Cupo et al., 2022.; who only observed double-hexamers. No two 3D reconstructions are alike and whatever the correct answer might be, according to the present study, it would seem that the CLPB structures with AMP-PNP and ATPγS represent off-pathway states.

* Heptamer structures were observed with different AAA+ proteins, often at low resolution, and frequently by cryoEM, and are largely dismissed as an in vitro artifact. The fact that heptamers and other oligomeric species are being reported in the literature (lines 292-294) does not make them physiological. Of note, a bacterial homolog of Bcs1 was recently shown to be a hexamer. The authors stated that the nonamer is non-physiological and no follow-up mutational work was done. Consequently, the value the nonamer structure is unclear and undoubtedly will further clutter the literature.

* Line 106-107: As a protein disaggregase, CLPB recognizes aggregated protein as native substrate. Only because a Walker B CLPB mutant can bind an endogenous bacterial protein during protein expression does not imply that a substrate complex was obtained. Independent biochemical verification is required. Since mitochondrial CLPB is exclusively found in animal cells, casein may actually be a more physiological substrate mimic.

* Assuming that the double-hexamer structure is physiological, is it possible that a substrate is threaded from the NBD end? Since the authors captured an unknown bacterial protein during protein expression, one might expect to see additional mass density that could indicate the direction of the polypeptide bound in the axial channel.

* The authors claim that the ANK domain has no lateral interactions in the double-hexamer/heptamer (c.f. response to reviewers). Yet, Fig 3G, clearly shows lateral contacts that are also described in the text (lines 182-194). The observation that mutating R178 and/or R227 to Glu severely impaired protein disaggregation is very interesting. Both Arg are part of the lateral interactions between neighboring ANK domains but do not abolish the double hexamer/heptamer when mutated. Since R178 or R227 are not involved in mediating an inter-subunit ANK interaction nor can directly interact with substrate for steric reasons, it would argue that the double-heptamer/hexamer must dissociate and therefore is an in vitro artifact.

* According to MitoCarta 3.0 (1), none of the 20 highest scoring CLPB substrates listed in "S5-HA-Strep_top 20" are localized to the IMS. This includes OPA1 and AGK, which is surprising. The authors proposed that OPA1 is a CLPB substrate that binds to the double-heptamer to induce the structure of the double-hexamer complex with substrate. OPA1 is a protein of 111-KDa and forms large, multi-subunit tubules (2). Even if CLPB recognizes monomeric OPA1 in non-aggregated form, the protein is too large to "fit into" the double-heptamer without dissociating the oligomer.

* While several studies suggested that HAX1 is a CLPB substrate (3, 4), HAX-1 is not a mitochondrial protein (1, 5). We further note that neither PRKD2 nor HSP27 (1), whose solubility is apparently controlled by HAX1 in mitochondria (4), are mitochondrial proteins. This work is cited by the authors as evidence for a direct HAX1:CLPB interaction.

* Fig. S2A and S2E: The SEC chromatogram shows two peaks for CLPB-AMPPNP and CLPBiso1-AMPPNP of near equal height (S2E). What is the nature of the second species consisting of fractions: 16-22, which were not included in the SDS-PAGE gel?

* Line 305: "potentially thread the substrate in both directions, similar as bacterial ClpX and ClpA". This is a misleading statement. Unlike CLPB, bacterial ClpX and ClpA are stably bound to the ClpP peptidase that confers unidirectional substrate-threading from an N-to-C direction. However, this may not be the case for CLPPB.

Responses to reviewers' queries:

* (Rev 1-3): Obviously there are lateral interactions between ANK domains of neighboring subunits (c.f. Fig 3G). It is unclear what is implied by stating that "[the ANK domain] has no lateral interaction with the adjacent ANK domains within the hexamer/heptamer.

* (Rev. 2): ATP, AMP-PNP, and ATPgS are quite different and sometimes promote off-pathway conformations. They also perform differently is substrate interaction. Structurally they are quite different as well, which can be seen at atomic resolution but is beyond the resolution of the present cryoEM reconstructions. The rebuttal figure 2 is unsatisfactory because Hsp104 is an entirely different protein. The authors should perform this experiment with their CLPB protein used for structure analysis.

* (Rev. 3): "a very recent NMR study on Hsp104 has identified a substrate-binding groove in the NTD to recognize exposed hydrophobic stretches in substrates of Hsp104 (Harari et al., 2022)). The ANK domain may work in a similar fashion to bind to exposed hydrophobic sequences of the substrate." The NTD of Hsp104 and CLPB are neither related nor similar in structure. Inferring any mechanistic insights by direct comparison is wrong.

* (Rev 3): "a study employed proteinase K assay on isolated mitochondria and showed that the degradation of HAX1 (CLPB as well) requires the disruption of the outer membrane (Fan et al., 2022). Therefore, we think that it could be a mis-annotation of MitoCarta 3.0." I do not doubt that HAX-1 may mimic a substrate (as casein does), but that does not mean this interaction is physiological and needs to be taken with caution.

1. Rath S, Sharma R, Gupta R, Ast T, Chan C, Durham TJ, et al. MitoCarta3.0: an updated mitochondrial proteome now with sub-organelle localization and pathway annotations. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021;49(D1):D1541-d7.

2. Zhang D, Zhang Y, Ma J, Zhu C, Niu T, Chen W, et al. Cryo-EM structures of S-OPA1 reveal its interactions with membrane and changes upon nucleotide binding. Elife. 2020;9.

3. Chen X, Glytsou C, Zhou H, Narang S, Reyna DE, Lopez A, et al. Targeting mitochondrial structure sensitizes acute myeloid leukemia to venetoclax treatment. Cancer Discov. 2019;9(7):890-909.

4. Fan Y, Murgia M, Linder MI, Mizoguchi Y, Wang C, Łyszkiewicz M, et al. HAX1-dependent control of mitochondrial proteostasis governs neutrophil granulocyte differentiation. J Clin Invest. 2022;132:e153153.

5. Jeyaraju DV, Cisbani G, De Brito OM, Koonin EV, Pellegrini L. Hax1 lacks BH modules and is peripherally associated to heavy membranes: implications for Omi/HtrA2 and PARL activity in the regulation of mitochondrial stress and apoptosis. Cell Death Differ. 2009;16:1622-9.

Reviewer #4 (Christopher Hill, signs review): The revised manuscript seems acceptable for publication. However, it would benefit substantially from copying editing to improve the use of English.

Decision Letter 3

Richard Hodge

15 Dec 2022

Dear Ning,

Thank you for your patience while we considered your revised manuscript "Structural and functional insights into the action mode of a mitochondrial AAA+ disaggregase CLPB" for publication as a Research Article at PLOS Biology. This revised version of your manuscript has been evaluated by the PLOS Biology editors and the Academic Editor.

Based on our Academic Editor's assessment of your revision, we are likely to accept this manuscript for publication, provided you satisfactorily address the remaining data and other policy-related requests that I have provided below (A-G):

(A) We would like to suggest the following modification to the title:

“Comprehensive structural characterization of the human AAA+ disaggregase CLPB in the apo- and substrate-bound states reveals a unique mode of action driven by oligomerization"

(B) We ask that you please incorporate the following edits into the Abstract:

'The human AAA+ ATPase CLPB (SKD3) is a protein disaggregase in the mitochondrial intermembrane space and functions to promote the solubilization of various mitochondrial proteins. Loss-of-function CLPB mutations are associated with a few human diseases with neutropenia and neurological disorders. Unlike canonical AAA+ proteins, CLPB contains a unique ankyrin repeat domain (ANK) at its N-terminus. How CLPB functions as a disaggregase and the role of its ANK domain are currently unclear. Herein, we report a comprehensive structural characterization of human CLPB in both the apo- and substrate-bound states. CLPB assembles into homo-tetradecamers in apo-state and is remodeled into homo-dodecamers upon substrate binding. Conserved pore-loops on the ATPase domains form a spiral staircase to grip and translocate the substrate in a step-size of two amino acid residues. The ANK domain is not only responsible for maintaining the higher-order assembly but also essential for the disaggregase activity. Interactome analysis suggests that the ANK domain may directly interact with a variety of mitochondrial substrates. These results reveal unique properties of CLPB as a general disaggregase in mitochondria and highlight its potential as a target for the treatment of various mitochondria-related diseases.'

(C) You may be aware of the PLOS Data Policy, which requires that all data be made available without restriction: http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/data-availability. For more information, please also see this editorial: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001797

Note that we do not require all raw data. Rather, we ask that all individual quantitative observations that underlie the data summarized in the figures and results of your paper be made available in one of the following forms:

- Supplementary files (e.g., excel). Please ensure that all data files are uploaded as 'Supporting Information' and are invariably referred to (in the manuscript, figure legends, and the Description field when uploading your files) using the following format verbatim: S1 Data, S2 Data, etc. Multiple panels of a single or even several figures can be included as multiple sheets in one excel file that is saved using exactly the following convention: S1_Data.xlsx (using an underscore).

- Deposition in a publicly available repository. Please also provide the accession code or a reviewer link so that we may view your data before publication.

Regardless of the method selected, please ensure that you provide the individual numerical values that underlie the summary data displayed in the following figure panels as they are essential for readers to assess your analysis and to reproduce it:

Figure 2B, 3C-F, 6B, 6E-F, S1E-F, S6B-C

NOTE: the numerical data provided should include all replicates AND the way in which the plotted mean and errors were derived (it should not present only the mean/average values).

(D) Thank you for depositing the structural data in the PDB and EMDB databases However, I note that the data is currently on hold. We ask that you please make this data publicly available before publication.

(E) Please also ensure that each of the relevant figure legends in your manuscript include information on *WHERE THE UNDERLYING DATA CAN BE FOUND*, and ensure your supplemental data file/s has a legend.

(F) We require the original, uncropped and minimally adjusted images supporting all blot and gel results reported in the following Figures:

Figure 6A, 6D, S1A, S1C-D, S2A, S2C, S2E, S6A, S7B, S8D, S9A, S9D

We will require these files before a manuscript can be accepted so please prepare and upload them now. Please carefully read our guidelines for how to prepare and upload this data: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements

(G) Please ensure that your Data Statement in the submission system accurately describes where your data can be found and is in final format, as it will be published as written there.

-------------------------

As you address these items, please take this last chance to review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the cover letter that accompanies your revised manuscript.

We expect to receive your revised manuscript within two weeks.

To submit your revision, please go to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology/ and log in as an Author. Click the link labelled 'Submissions Needing Revision' to find your submission record. Your revised submission must include the following:

- a cover letter that should detail your responses to any editorial requests, if applicable, and whether changes have been made to the reference list

- a Response to Reviewers file that provides a detailed response to the reviewers' comments (if applicable)

- a track-changes file indicating any changes that you have made to the manuscript.

NOTE: If Supporting Information files are included with your article, note that these are not copyedited and will be published as they are submitted. Please ensure that these files are legible and of high quality (at least 300 dpi) in an easily accessible file format. For this reason, please be aware that any references listed in an SI file will not be indexed. For more information, see our Supporting Information guidelines:

https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/supporting-information

*Published Peer Review History*

Please note that you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out. Please see here for more details:

https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2019/05/plos-journals-now-open-for-published-peer-review/

*Press*

Should you, your institution's press office or the journal office choose to press release your paper, please ensure you have opted out of Early Article Posting on the submission form. We ask that you notify us as soon as possible if you or your institution is planning to press release the article.

*Protocols deposition*

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Richard

Richard Hodge, PhD

Associate Editor, PLOS Biology

rhodge@plos.org

PLOS

Empowering researchers to transform science

Carlyle House, Carlyle Road, Cambridge, CB4 3DN, United Kingdom

ORCiD I plosbio.org I @PLOSBiology I Blog

California (U.S.) corporation #C2354500, based in San Francisco

Decision Letter 4

Richard Hodge

4 Jan 2023

Dear Ning,

Thank you for submitting your revised Research Article "Comprehensive structural characterization of the human AAA+ disaggregase CLPB in the apo- and substrate-bound states reveals a unique mode of action driven by oligomerization" for publication in PLOS Biology. Please accept my apologies for the delay due to the recent Christmas holiday period.

On behalf of my colleagues and the Academic Editor, Ursula Jakob, I am pleased to say that we can accept your manuscript for publication, provided you address any remaining formatting and reporting issues. These will be detailed in an email you should receive within 2-3 business days from our colleagues in the journal operations team; no action is required from you until then. Please note that we will not be able to formally accept your manuscript and schedule it for publication until you have completed any requested changes.

Please take a minute to log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information to ensure an efficient production process.

PRESS

We frequently collaborate with press offices. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximise its impact. If the press office is planning to promote your findings, we would be grateful if they could coordinate with biologypress@plos.org. If you have previously opted in to the early version process, we ask that you notify us immediately of any press plans so that we may opt out on your behalf.

We also ask that you take this opportunity to read our Embargo Policy regarding the discussion, promotion and media coverage of work that is yet to be published by PLOS. As your manuscript is not yet published, it is bound by the conditions of our Embargo Policy. Please be aware that this policy is in place both to ensure that any press coverage of your article is fully substantiated and to provide a direct link between such coverage and the published work. For full details of our Embargo Policy, please visit http://www.plos.org/about/media-inquiries/embargo-policy/.

Thank you again for choosing PLOS Biology for publication and supporting Open Access publishing. We look forward to publishing your study. 

Best wishes,

Richard 

Richard Hodge, PhD

Associate Editor, PLOS Biology

rhodge@plos.org

PLOS

Empowering researchers to transform science

Carlyle House, Carlyle Road, Cambridge, CB4 3DN, United Kingdom

ORCiD I plosbio.org I @PLOSBiology I Blog

California (U.S.) corporation #C2354500, based in San Francisco

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Biochemical and functional characterization of CLPB proteins.

    (A) The purification of CLPB-N92, analyzing by size-exclusion chromatography (left) and SDS-PAGE (right). (B) Negative staining electron microscopy of the peak fraction in (A). Result shows that CLPB-N92 formed large aggregates and was highly heterogenous in size. (C) Time course of the C-terminal Step-tagged full-length CLPB (CLPB-FL) expression in transiently transfected HEK-293T cells. (D) CLPB-FL, CLPB-N92, and CLPB-N127 expression in transiently transfected HEK-293T cells. Data show that the CLPB-N127 has the same molecular weight as the mature form of CLPB. (E) ATPase activity of CLPB-N127 (S1 Data). (F) Disaggregase activity of CLPB-N127 (S1 Data).

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. Sample preparation of CLPB-AMPPNP, CLPBE425Q-ATP, and CLPBisoform1-AMPPNP.

    (A) Purification of CLPB using size-exclusion chromatography with AMPPNP (red line) or without AMPPNP (black line). Corresponding fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE (right panel). (B) Representative nsEM image of the peak fraction in (A). (C) Purification of CLPBE425Q using size-exclusion chromatography in the presence of ATP. Corresponding fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE (right panel). (D) Representative nsEM image of the peak fraction in (C). (E) Purification of CLPBisodorm1 using size-exclusion chromatography. Corresponding fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE (right panel). (F) Representative nsEM image of the peak fraction in (E).

    (TIF)

    S3 Fig. Image processing workflow of the CLPB-AMPPNP dataset.

    (A) Image processing workflow of the CLPB dataset (see Methods for details). (B, C) Fourier shell correlation (FSC) curves for the final cryo-EM map of the double-heptameric complex (B) or heptameric complex (C) using the gold standard FSC 0.143 criteria.

    (TIF)

    S4 Fig. Image processing workflow of the CLPBE425Q-ATP dataset.

    (A) Image processing workflow of the CLPBE425Q dataset. (B, C) Local resolution estimation of CLPBE425Q double-hexamer (B) or NBD alone (C). (D) Density map of the NBD alone. The central substrate is colored yellow. (E, F) Fourier shell correlation curve of the final map of the CLPBE425Q double-hexamer (E) and NBD (F).

    (TIF)

    S5 Fig. Conversion of the CLPB double-heptamer to double-hexamer upon substrate binding.

    (A–D) Representative 2D classification averages of CLPB (A), CLPBE425Q (B), CLPBisoform1 (C), and CLPB+Casein (D) datasets. The top views with hexameric features are indicated by red boxes.

    (TIF)

    S6 Fig. The ANK domain is essential for the disaggregase activity of CLPB.

    (A) SDS-PAGE analysis of the purified proteins. (B) ATPase assays of CLPB, NBD, and NBDE425Q. Results show that NBDE425Q has nearly no ATPase activity. NBD has strong ATPase activity. ATPase activity was compared to CLPB (N = 3, individual data points shown as dots, bars show mean ± SD, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.0001) (S3 Data). (C) Disaggregase activity assay of CLPB, NBD, and NBDE425Q. The results show that NBD and NBDE425Q abolish the disaggregase activity of CLPB. Disaggregase activity was compared to CLPB (N = 3, individual data points shown as dots, bars show mean ± SD, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.0001) (S3 Data).

    (TIF)

    S7 Fig. The unique insertion in ANK domain mediates higher-order structure formation and directly contact the substrate.

    (A) Residual densities around the ANK domains, extending towards the central channel of the CLPBE425Q complex in the substrate-bound state. The extra densities are highlighted by a dotted ellipse. The density of the substrate is shown in yellow. (B) SDS-PAGE analysis of the purified proteins. (C–E) Purification of CLPB, CLPBΔ201–232, and CLPBisoform1 complexes using size-exclusion chromatography.

    (TIF)

    S8 Fig. The ANK domain dimer interface in the double-heptamer and double-hexamer.

    (A, B) Rigid-body fitting of the crystal structure of the ANK domain into the density maps of the double-heptamer (A) and double-hexamer (B). (C) Purification of the CLPB, CLPBR178E, and CLPBR227E complexes using size-exclusion chromatography. (D) SDS-PAGE analysis of the purified proteins. (E) Representative nsEM images of the CLPB (black line rectangle), CLPBR178E (blue line rectangle), and CLPBR227E complexes (red line rectangle).

    (TIF)

    S9 Fig. Sample preparation of the NBDE425Q-ATP and NBD-AMPPNP complex.

    (A) Purification of NBDE425Q using size-exclusion chromatography in the presence of ATP. Corresponding fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE. (B, C) Representative nsEM image (B) and 2D classification averages of cryo-EM dataset (C) of the peak fraction in (A). (D) Purification of NBD using size-exclusion chromatography in the presence of AMPPNP. Corresponding fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE (right panel). (E, F) Representative nsEM image (E) and 2D classification averages cryo-EM dataset (F) of the peak fraction in (D). The hexameric ring is more compact than heptameric ring, and the diameter of central pore of hexamer is much smaller than that of heptamer.

    (TIF)

    S10 Fig. Image processing workflow of the NBDE425Q dataset.

    (A) Image processing workflow of the NBDE425Q dataset. The micrographs were subjected to motion correction and CTF estimation. The auto-picked particles were subjected to multiple rounds of 2D and 3D classifications. Three different oligomeric arrangements, hexameric, heptameric, and nonameric were identified. (B–D) Local resolution estimation of the density maps of the hexamer (B), heptamer (C), and nonamer (D) in (A). (E) Fourier shell correlation (FSC) curves of the final cryo-EM maps of hexamer (blue line), heptamer (black line), and nonamer (red line), using the gold standard FSC 0.143 criteria.

    (TIF)

    S11 Fig. Nucleotide-binding states of the ATPase sites in the nonamer.

    All the 8 ATPase sites in the nonamer are occupied by ATP. The atomic models are color-coded for different protomers. The segmented density maps of ATP were superimposed with the atomic model.

    (TIF)

    S1 Table. Cryo-EM data collection, refinement, and validation statistics.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Table. Data collection and refinement statistics of the CLPB_ANK.

    (DOCX)

    S3 Table. The 24 enriched mitochondrial proteins highlighted in red in Fig 6B.

    (XLSX)

    S4 Table. Top 20 abundant and highly enriched mitochondrial proteins located in the OM, IMS, and IM.

    (XLSX)

    S1 Raw image. Uncropped western blotting and SDS-PAGE gel images in this work.

    (PDF)

    S1 Data. The ATPase activity and disaggregase activity of CLPB-N127.

    (XLSX)

    S2 Data. The proportion of the hexameric and heptameric top views in the CLPB-AMPPNP, CLPBE425Q-ATP, CLPBisoform1-AMPPNP, CLPB-ATPγs, and CLPB+Casein-ATPγs datasets.

    (XLSX)

    S3 Data. The ATPase activity and disaggregase activity of CLPB, NBD, and NBDE425Q.

    (XLSX)

    S4 Data. The ATPase activity and disaggregase activity of CLPB, CLPBΔ201–232, CLPBisoform1 CLPBR178E, and CLPBR227E.

    (XLSX)

    S5 Data. Differential enrichment profile of mitochondrial proteins in the Strep/HA tagged ANK samples.

    Mitochondrial proteins were analyzed based on a stringent screening condition (p-value < 0.01 and Fold change > 4).

    (XLSX)

    S6 Data. Enrichment analysis of mitochondrial proteins with OM, IMS, and IM location in the ANK and ANK-isoform1 samples.

    (XLSX)

    S7 Data. Enrichment analysis of mitochondrial proteins with OM, IMS, and IM location in the ANK and ANK-Δloop samples.

    (XLSX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reviews-V7.pdf

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Rebuttal-R3-NG.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    Data are available from the Protein Data bank and Electron Microscopy Data Bank.The cryo-EM density maps have been deposited in the Electron Microscopy Data Bank with the accession codes EMD-33105, EMD-33106, EMD-33109, EMD-33110 and EMD-33104 for the CLPB, CLPBE425Q, NBDE425Q-hexamer, NBDE425Qheptamer and NBDE425Q-nanomer, respectively. The atomic model of NBDE425Qnanomer has been deposited in Protein Data Bank with accession code PDB 7XBK.The coordinate and the structure factor of CLPB-ANK have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank with accession code 7XC5. All other relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLOS Biology are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES