Abstract:High‐sensitivity capillary electrophoresis‐mass spectrometry (CE–MS) method to quickly characterize ≈1 MDa GroEL14 multimeric protein assembly under near‐physiological conditions is presented. The CE–MS method enables assessment of non‐covalent binding of substrate proteins to GroEL14 chaperon and its conformational changes upon complexation with nucleotides and GroES7 involved in a protein folding cycle, and in‐depth structural characterization of wild‐type and mutant GroEL14 complexes. Protein complexes are essential forproteins' folding and biological function. Currently, native analysis of largemultimeric protein complexes remains challenging. Structural biology techniquesare time‐consuming and often cannot monitor the proteins' dynamics in solution. Here, a capillary electrophoresis‐mass spectrometry (CE–MS) method is reportedto characterize, under near‐physiological conditions, the conformationalrearrangements of ∽1 MDa GroEL upon complexation with binding partners involvedin a protein folding cycle. The developed CE‐MS method is fast (30min per run), highly sensitive (low‐amol level), and requires ∽10 000‐foldfewer samples compared to biochemical/biophysical techniques. The methodsuccessfully separates GroEL14 (∽800 kDa), GroEL7 (∽400 kDa), GroES7 (∽73 kDa), and NanA4 (∽130 kDa) oligomers. The non‐covalent binding of naturalsubstrate proteins with GroEL14 can be detected and quantified.The technique allows monitoring of GroEL14 conformational changesupon complexation with (ATPγS)4–14 and GroES7 (∽876 kDa). NativeCE‐pseudo‐MS3 analyses of wild‐type (WT) GroEL and two GroEL mutants resultin up to 60% sequence coverage and highlight subtle structural differences between WT and mutated GroEL. The presented results demonstrate the superior CE–MS performance for multimeric complexes' characterization versus directinfusion ESI–MS. This study shows the CE–MS potential to provide information onbinding stoichiometry and kinetics for various protein complexes.

Nucleotide-Dependent Complex Formation between the Escherichia coli Chaperonins GroEL and GroES Studied under Equilibrium Conditions

The crystal structure of the asymmetric GroEL–GroES–(ADP)7 chaperonin complex

GroEL/GroES: Structure and Function of a Two-Stroke Folding Machine

Novel cryo-EM structure of an ADP-bound GroEL–GroES complex

Multivalent Binding of Nonnative Substrate Proteins by the Chaperonin GroEL

Chaperonin GroEL uses asymmetric and symmetric reaction cycles in response to the concentration of non-native substrate proteins

Toward a mechanism for GroEL.GroES chaperone activity: an ATPase-gated and -pulsed folding and annealing cage.

Chaperonin GroEL Reassembly: An Effect of Protein Ligands and Solvent Composition

Chaperonin-assisted folding of glutamine synthetase under nonpermissive conditions: off-pathway aggregation propensity does not determine the co-chaperonin requirement

Native Capillary Electrophoresis–Mass Spectrometry of Near 1 MDa Non‐Covalent GroEL/GroES/Substrate Protein Complexes

From Minichaperone to GroEL 3: Properties of an Active Single-ring Mutant of GroEL

Visualizing chaperonin function in situ by cryo-electron tomography

GroEL/ES chaperonin unfolds then encapsulates a nascent protein on the ribosome

Reaction Cycle of Chaperonin GroEL via Symmetric “Football” Intermediate

Characterisation of a GroEL single-ring mutant that supports growth of Escherichia coli and has GroES-dependent ATPase activity

GroEL Ring Separation and Exchange in the Chaperonin Reaction

Substrate protein dependence of GroEL–GroES interaction cycle revealed by high-speed atomic force microscopy imaging

Protein folding: How the mechanism of GroEL action is defined by kinetics

Structural insights into thermophilic chaperonin complexes

GroEL Mediates Protein Folding with a Two Successive Timer Mechanism

GroEL/GroES-Mediated Folding of a Protein Too Large to Be Encapsulated