Unique Organization of Extracellular Amylases into Amylosomes in the Resistant Starch-Utilizing Human Colonic Firmicutes Bacterium Ruminococcus bromii

Xiaolei Ze, Yonit Ben David, Jenny A Laverde-Gomez, Bareket Dassa, Paul O Sheridan, Sylvia H Duncan, Petra Louis, Bernard Henrissat, Nathalie Juge, Nicole M Koropatkin, Edward A Bayer, Harry J Flint, Xiaolei Ze, Yonit Ben David, Jenny A Laverde-Gomez, Bareket Dassa, Paul O Sheridan, Sylvia H Duncan, Petra Louis, Bernard Henrissat, Nathalie Juge, Nicole M Koropatkin, Edward A Bayer, Harry J Flint

Abstract

Ruminococcus bromii is a dominant member of the human gut microbiota that plays a key role in releasing energy from dietary starches that escape digestion by host enzymes via its exceptional activity against particulate "resistant" starches. Genomic analysis of R. bromii shows that it is highly specialized, with 15 of its 21 glycoside hydrolases belonging to one family (GH13). We found that amylase activity in R. bromii is expressed constitutively, with the activity seen during growth with fructose as an energy source being similar to that seen with starch as an energy source. Six GH13 amylases that carry signal peptides were detected by proteomic analysis in R. bromii cultures. Four of these enzymes are among 26 R. bromii proteins predicted to carry dockerin modules, with one, Amy4, also carrying a cohesin module. Since cohesin-dockerin interactions are known to mediate the formation of protein complexes in cellulolytic ruminococci, the binding interactions of four cohesins and 11 dockerins from R. bromii were investigated after overexpressing them as recombinant fusion proteins. Dockerins possessed by the enzymes Amy4 and Amy9 are predicted to bind a cohesin present in protein scaffoldin 2 (Sca2), which resembles the ScaE cell wall-anchoring protein of a cellulolytic relative, R. flavefaciens. Further complexes are predicted between the dockerin-carrying amylases Amy4, Amy9, Amy10, and Amy12 and two other cohesin-carrying proteins, while Amy4 has the ability to autoaggregate, as its dockerin can recognize its own cohesin. This organization of starch-degrading enzymes is unprecedented and provides the first example of cohesin-dockerin interactions being involved in an amylolytic system, which we refer to as an "amylosome."

Importance: Fermentation of dietary nondigestible carbohydrates by the human colonic microbiota supplies much of the energy that supports microbial growth in the intestine. This activity has important consequences for health via modulation of microbiota composition and the physiological and nutritional effects of microbial metabolites, including the supply of energy to the host from short-chain fatty acids. Recent evidence indicates that certain human colonic bacteria play keystone roles in degrading nondigestible substrates, with the dominant but little-studied species Ruminococcus bromii displaying an exceptional ability to degrade dietary resistant starches (i.e., dietary starches that escape digestion by host enzymes in the upper gastrointestinal tract because of protection provided by other polymers, particle structure, retrogradation, or chemical cross-linking). In this report, we reveal the unique organization of the amylolytic enzyme system of R. bromii that involves cohesin-dockerin interactions between component proteins. While dockerins and cohesins are fundamental to the organization of cellulosomal enzyme systems of cellulolytic ruminococci, their contribution to organization of amylases has not previously been recognized and may help to explain the starch-degrading abilities of R. bromii.

Copyright © 2015 Ze et al.

Figures

FIG 1
FIG 1
Major extracellular amylases of R. bromii L2-63. Modular organization is shown for seven predicted gene products that carry GH13 catalytic modules and signal peptides (SP). The cohesin (COH) of Amy4, the CBMs from family 26 or family 48, and the dockerins (red double ellipses) are shown schematically. aa, amino acids.
FIG 2
FIG 2
Phylogenetic tree comparing GH13 enzymes from Ruminococcus bromii and seven other bacterial genomes. R. bromii L2-63 (RB) GH13 sequences (labeled Amy1, Amy2, Amy3, etc.) are compared with those from other human gut species (the starch-utilizing strains Eubacterium rectale A1-86 [ER], Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron VPI-5482 [BT], and Bifidobacterium adolescentis ATCC15703 [BfA] and two other human colonic Ruminococcaceae species, Ruminococcus champanellensis 18P13 [RC] and Faecalibacterium prausnitzii L2-6 [FP]) and also with those from two non-gut species, Bacillus halodurans C-125 (BH) and Paenibacillus terrae HPL-003 (PT), that were known from the results of BLASTp queries of the NCBI database to possess proteins that were the closest matches to R. bromii Amy4. R. bromii sequences that are predicted to possess signal peptides are underlined. Sequences with functions concerned with glycogen or trehalose metabolism (including R. bromii L2-63 Amy 13, Amy14, and Amy15) that are predicted by KEGG GH annotation have been omitted from the tree. Sequences marked with an asterisk (*) encode enzymes that have been experimentally characterized. Bootstrap values, expressed as a percentage of 1,000 replications, are given at the branching nodes. This tree is unrooted and was constructed using the maximum-likelihood method. The scale bar (center of tree) refers to the number of amino acid differences per position.
FIG 3
FIG 3
Schematic representation of cohesin-carrying proteins of Ruminococcus bromii L2-63. The four proteins are designated scaffoldins. Scaffoldin 1 (Sca1) contains a GH13 amylase module and is synonymous with the amylase Amy4. Sca2 carries a predicted C-terminal sortase signal (indicated by an arrow). The X25 domains in Sca3 show some similarity to starch-specific CBMs found in the Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron proteins SusE and SusF (10).
FIG 4
FIG 4
Detection of major R. bromii amylases by zymogram analysis and sequencing. (a) Zymogram showing activity of amylases against RS3 for R. bromii L2-63 cells grown for 24 h on 0.2% fructose or 0.2% RS3. Values on the left correspond to the molecular masses determined by staining the gel with Coomassie blue, prior to staining the gel with iodine to visualize clear zones of amylase activity. sup, supernatant proteins; cell, cell-associated proteins. Bands a to f, visible active bands. (b) Identification of amylolytic enzymes from excised bands by LC-MS/MS. In addition, a homologue of a Cna (collagen adhesion)-type protein was detected in band a, a hypothetical protein (RBR_05030) in band b, RNA polymerase subunit B in band d, and a hypothetical protein (RBR_07100) in band e.
FIG 5
FIG 5
Interactions of recombinant dockerins and cohesins from R. bromii L2-63. Selected cohesin-dockerin interactions were examined by ELISA experiments. (a and b) Amy4 (a) and Amy9 (b) dockerins interact strongly with all four cohesins of R. bromii. (c) Strong interaction of the Amy12 dockerin with Coh3, moderate interaction with Coh4, and negligible interaction with Coh1 and Coh2. CohE from R. flavefaciens FD1 was included in the experiment as a negative control. Error bars indicate the standard deviations from the means of the results determined for triplicate samples from one experiment.
FIG 6
FIG 6
Identification of native R. bromii proteins that interact with overexpressed Amy4-Coh1. Cell-associated or cell-free supernatant proteins of R. bromii L2-63 grown with boiled Novelose RS3 starch as the energy source were incubated with His6-tagged Coh1 at 37°C as described in Materials and Methods. Proteins binding to Coh1 were recovered and separated by SDS-PAGE, followed by proteomic analysis of individual bands. Protein identifiers (ID), molecular-mass values, and conserved modules for identified proteins are shown on the right of the figure. Numbers on the left indicate sizes and positions of molecular mass markers. SP, signal peptide; Amy, amylase; Coh, cohesin; Doc, dockerin; Anc, cell wall surface anchor; CBM, carbohydrate-binding module; Tri-tyrosine, triple-tyrosine motif.
FIG 7
FIG 7
Potential dockerin-mediated interactions of R. bromii amylases with cohesin-carrying proteins and with each other. On the basis of observed interactions with recombinant cohesins and dockerins (Table 4 and Fig. 5), we can predict that the Amy4 and Amy9 enzymes are likely to bind to the cell surface via the Sca2 scaffoldin protein. Further complexes are likely to form between the Amy4, Amy9, and Amy10 proteins and between Amy4, Amy9, Amy10, and Amy12 and the Sca3 and Sca4 proteins. Binding of the enzymes to Sca3 would presumably confer starch-binding features to the resultant complex. Binding of dockerin-bearing amylases Amy9 and Amy10 to the cohesin of Amy4 would result in the formation of multienzyme complexes that can be part of a cell-bound or cell-free system. Amy4 also has the potential to self-aggregate through interactions between its own cohesin and dockerin.

References

    1. Sekirov I, Russell SL, Caetano M, Antunes L, Finlay BB. 2010. Gut microbiota in health and disease. Physiol Rev 90:859–904. doi:10.1152/physrev.00045.2009.
    1. Flint HJ, Scott KP, Louis P, Duncan SH, Louis P. 2012. The role of the gut microbiota in nutrition and health. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 9:577–589. doi:10.1038/nrgastro.2012.156.
    1. Cummings JH, Macfarlane GT. 1991. The control and consequences of bacterial fermentation in the human colon. J Appl Bacteriol 70:443–459. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.1991.tb02739.x.
    1. Englyst HN, Kingman SM, Cummings JH. 1992. Classification and measurement of nutritionally important starch fractions. Eur J Clin Nutr 46(Suppl 2):S33–S50.
    1. Robertson MD, Bickerton AS, Dennis AL, Vidal H, Frayn KN. 2005. Insulin-sensitizing effects of dietary resistant starch and effects on skeletal muscle and adipose tissue metabolism. Am J Clin Nutr 82:559–567.
    1. Toden S, Bird AR, Topping DL, Conlon MA. 2007. Dose-dependent reduction of dietary protein-induced colonocyte DNA damage by resistant starch in rats correlates more highly with caecal butyrate than with other short chain fatty acids. Cancer Biol Ther 6:253–258. doi:10.4161/cbt.6.2.3627.
    1. Reeves AR, Wang GR, Salyers AA. 1997. Characterization of four outer membrane proteins that play a role in utilization of starch by Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron. J Bacteriol 179:643–649.
    1. Martens EC, Koropatkin NM, Smith TJ, Gordon JI. 2009. Complex glycan catabolism by the human gut microbiota: the Bacteroidetes Sus-like paradigm. J Biol Chem 284:24673–24677. doi:10.1074/jbc.R109.022848.
    1. Flint HJ, Bayer EA, Rincon MT, Lamed R, White BA. 2008. Polysaccharide utilization by gut bacteria: potential for new insights from genomic analysis. Nat Rev Microbiol 6:121–131. doi:10.1038/nrmicro1817.
    1. Cameron EA, Maynard MA, Smith CJ, Smith TJ, Koropatkin NM, Martens EC. 2012. Multidomain carbohydrate-binding proteins involved in Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron starch metabolism. J Biol Chem 287:34614–34625. doi:10.1074/jbc.M112.397380.
    1. Ramsay AG, Scott KP, Martin JC, Rincon MT, Flint HJ. 2006. Cell-associated α-amylases of butyrate-producing firmicute bacteria from the human colon. Microbiology 152:3281–3290. doi:10.1099/mic.0.29233-0.
    1. Scott KP, Martin JC, Chassard C, Clerget M, Potrykus J, Campbell G, Mayer CD, Young P, Rucklidge G, Ramsay AG, Flint HJ. 2011. Substrate-driven gene expression in Roseburia inulinivorans: importance of inducible enzymes in the utilization of inulin and starch. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108(Suppl 1):4672–4679. doi:10.1073/pnas.1000091107.
    1. Cockburn DW, Orlovsky NI, Foley MH, Kwiatkowski KJ, Bahr CM, Maynard M, Demeler B, Koropatkin NM. 2015. Molecular details of a starch utilization pathway in the human gut symbiont Eubacterium rectale. Mol Microbiol 95:209–230. doi:10.1111/mmi.12859.
    1. Ze X, Duncan SH, Louis P, Flint HJ. 2012. Ruminococcus bromii is a keystone species for the degradation of resistant starch in the human colon. ISME J 6:1535–1543. doi:10.1038/ismej.2012.4.
    1. Abell GC, Cooke CM, Bennett CN, Conlon MA, McOrist AL. 2008. Phylotypes related to Ruminococcus bromii are abundant in the large bowel of humans and increase in response to a diet high in resistant starch. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 66:505–515. doi:10.1111/j.1574-6941.2008.00527.x.
    1. Walker AW, Ince J, Duncan SH, Webster LM, Holtrop G, Ze X, Brown D, Stares MD, Scott P, Bergerat A, Louis P, McIntosh F, Johnstone AM, Lobley GE, Parkhill J, Flint HJ. 2011. Dominant and diet-responsive groups of bacteria within the human colonic microbiota. ISME J 5:220–230. doi:10.1038/ismej.2010.118.
    1. Martínez I, Kim J, Duffy PR, Schlegel VL, Walter J. 2010. Resistant starches types 2 and 4 have differential effects on the composition of the fecal microbiota in human subjects. PLoS One 5:e15046. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0015046.
    1. Dassa B, Borovok I, Ruimy-Israeli V, Lamed R, Flint HJ, Duncan SH, Henrissat B, Coutinho P, Morrison M, Mosoni P, Yeoman CJ, White BA, Bayer EA. 2014. Rumen cellulosomics: divergent fiber-degrading strategies revealed by comparative genome-wide analysis of six ruminococcal strains. PLoS One 9:e99221. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0099221.
    1. Ze X, Le Mougen F, Duncan SH, Louis P, Flint HJ. 2013. Some are more equal than others: the role of keystone species in the degradation of recalcitrant substrates. Gut Microbes 4:236–240. doi:10.4161/gmic.23998.
    1. El Kaoutari A, Armougom F, Gordon JI, Raoult D, Henrissat B. 2013. The abundance and variety of carbohydrate-active enzymes in the human gut microbiota. Nat Rev Microbiol 11:497–504.
    1. Flint HJ, Scott KP, Duncan SH, Louis P, Forano E. 2012. Microbial degradation of complex carbohydrates in the gut. Gut Microbes 3:289–306. doi:10.4161/gmic.19897.
    1. Stam MR, Danchin EGJ, Rancurel C, Coutinho PM, Henrissat B. 2006. Dividing the large glycosyl hydrolase family 13 into subfamilies: towards improved functional annotations of alpha-amylase-related proteins. Protein Eng Design Sel 19:555–562. doi:10.1093/protein/gzl044.
    1. Boraston AB, Healey M, Klassen J, Ficko-Blean E, Lammerts van Bueren A, Law V. 2006. A structural and functional analysis of α-glucan recognition by family 25 and 26 carbohydrate binding modules reveals a conserved mode of starch recognition. J Biol Chem 281:587–598. doi:10.1074/jbc.M509958200.
    1. Rincon MT, Dassa FHJ, Travis AJ, Jindou S, Borovok I, Lamed R, Bayer EA, Henrissat B, Coutinho PM, Antonopoulos DA, Berg Miller ME, White BA. 2010. Abundance and diversity of dockerin-containing proteins in the fiber-degrading rumen bacterium Ruminococcus flavefaciens FD1. PLoS One 5:e12476. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012476.
    1. Ben David Y, Dassa B, Borovok I, Lamed R, Koropatkin NM, Martens EC, White BA, Bernalier-Donadille A, Duncan SH, Flint HJ, Bayer EA, Moraïs S. 2015. Ruminococcal cellulosome systems from rumen to human. Environ Microbiol. doi:10.1111/1462-2920.12868.
    1. Rincon MT, Ding S-Y, McCrae SI, Martin JC, Aurilia V, Lamed R, Shoham Y, Bayer EA, Flint HJ. 2003. Novel organization and divergent dockerin specificities in the cellulosome system of Ruminococcus flavefaciens. J Bacteriol 185:703–713.
    1. Bayer EA, Lamed R, White BA, Flint HJ. 2008. From cellulosomes to cellulosomics. Chem Rec 8:364–377. doi:10.1002/tcr.20160.
    1. Rincon MT, Cepeljnik T, Martin JC, Lamed R, Barak Y, Bayer EA, Flint HJ. 2005. Unconventional mode of attachment of the Ruminococcus flavefaciens cellulosome to the bacterial cell wall. J Bacteriol 187:7569–7578. doi:10.1128/JB.187.22.7569-7578.2005.
    1. Herbeck JL, Bryant MP. 1974. Nutritional features of the intestinal anaerobe Ruminococcus bromii. J Appl Microbiol 28:1018–1022.
    1. Lopez-Siles M, Khan TM, Duncan SH, Harmsen HJ, Garcia-Gil LJ, Flint HJ. 2012. Cultured representatives of two major phylogroups of human colonic Faecalibacterium prausnitzii can utilize pectin, uronic acids, and host-derived substrates for growth. Appl Environ Microbiol 78:420–428. doi:10.1128/AEM.06858-11.
    1. Bayer EA, Coutinho PM, Henrissat B. 1999. Cellulosome-like sequences in Archaeoglobus fulgidus: an enigmatic vestige of cohesin and dockerin domains. FEBS Lett 463:277–280. doi:10.1016/S0014-5793(99)01634-8.
    1. Voronov-Goldman M, Lamed R, Noach I, Borovok I, Kwiat M, Rosenheck S, Shimon LJ, Bayer EA, Frolow F. 2011. Non-cellulosomal cohesin from the hyper-thermophilic archaeon Archaeoglobus fulgidus. Proteins 79:50–60. doi:10.1002/prot.22857.
    1. Waldemarsson J, Areschoug T, Lindahl G, Johnsson E. 2006. The streptococcal Bir and Sir proteins define a family of surface proteins with leucine-rich repeats: camouflaging by other surface proteins. J Bacteriol 188:378–388. doi:10.1128/JB.188.2.378-388.2006.
    1. Lay C, Sutren M, Violaine Rochet V, Saunier K, Doré J, Rigottier-Gois L. 2005. Design and validation of 16S rRNA probes to enumerate members of the Clostridium leptum subgroup in human faecal microbiota. Environ Microbiol 7:933–946. doi:10.1111/j.1462-2920.2005.00763.x.
    1. Walker AW, Duncan SH, Harmsen HJ, Holtrop G, Welling GW, Flint HJ. 2008. The species composition of the human intestinal microbiota differs between particle-associated and liquid phase communities. Environ Microbiol 10:3275–3283. doi:10.1111/j.1462-2920.2008.01717.x.
    1. Chassard C, Delmas E, Robert C, Bernalier-Donadille A. 2010. The cellulose-degrading microbial community of the human gut varies according to the presence or absence of methanogens. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 74:205–213. doi:10.1111/j.1574-6941.2010.00941.x.
    1. Robert C, Bernalier-Donadille A. 2003. The cellulolytic microflora of the human colon: evidence of microcrystalline cellulose-degrading bacteria in methane-excreting subjects. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 46:81–89. doi:10.1016/S0168-6496(03)00207-1.
    1. Wegmann U, Louis P, Goesmann A, Henrissat B, Duncan SH, Flint HJ. 2014. Complete genome of a new Firmicutes species belonging to the dominant human colonic microbiota (“Ruminococcus bicirculans”) reveals two chromosomes and a selective capacity to utilize plant glucans. Environ Microbiol 16:2879–2890. doi:10.1111/1462-2920.12217.
    1. Ding SY, Rincon MT, Lamed R, Martin JC, McCrae SI, Aurilia V, Shoham Y, Bayer EA, Flint HJ. 2001. Cellulosomal scaffoldin-like proteins from Ruminococcus flavefaciens. J Bacteriol 183:1945–1953. doi:10.1128/JB.183.6.1945-1953.2001.
    1. White BA, Lamed R, Bayer EA, Flint HJ. 2014. Biomass utilization by gut microbiomes. Annu Rev Microbiol 68:279–296. doi:10.1146/annurev-micro-092412-155618.
    1. Turkenburg JP, Brzozowski AM, Svendsen A, Borchert TV, Davies GJ, Wilson KS. 2009. Structure of a pullulanase from Bacillus acidopullulyticus. Proteins 76:516–519. doi:10.1002/prot.22416.
    1. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schäffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman DJ. 1997. Gapped BLAST and psi-blast: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 25:3389–3402. doi:10.1093/nar/25.17.3389.
    1. Kanehisa M, Goto S, Kawashima S, Okuno Y, Hattori M. 2004. The KEGG resource for deciphering the genome. Nucleic Acids Res 32:D277–D280. doi:10.1093/nar/gkh063.
    1. Larkin MA, Blackshields G, Brown NP, Chenna R, McGettigan PA, McWilliam H, Valentin F, Wallace IM, Wilm A, Lopez R, Thompson JD, Gibson TJ, Higgins DG. 2007. Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0. Bioinformatics 23:2947–2948. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm404.
    1. Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S. 2013. MEGA6: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 6.0. Mol Biol Evol 30:2725–2729. doi:10.1093/molbev/mst197.
    1. Vodovnik M, Duncan SH, Reid MD, Cantlay L, Turner K, Parkhill J, Lamed R, Yeoman CJ, Miller ME, White BA, Bayer EA, Marinšek-Logar R, Flint HJ. 2013. Expression of cellulosome components and type IV pili within the extracellular proteome of Ruminococcus flavefaciens 007. PLoS One 8:e65333. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0065333.
    1. Lever M. 1977. Carbohydrate determination with 4-hydroxybenzoic acid hydrazide (PAHBAH)—effect of bismuth on reaction. Anal Biochem 81:21–27. doi:10.1016/0003-2697(77)90594-2.

Source: PubMed

3
購読する