Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Latest Articles
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • Topics
    • Applied and Environmental Science
    • Clinical Science and Epidemiology
    • Ecological and Evolutionary Science
    • Host-Microbe Biology
    • Molecular Biology and Physiology
    • Therapeutics and Prevention
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About mBio
    • Editor in Chief
    • Board of Editors
    • AAM Fellows
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
mBio
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Latest Articles
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • Topics
    • Applied and Environmental Science
    • Clinical Science and Epidemiology
    • Ecological and Evolutionary Science
    • Host-Microbe Biology
    • Molecular Biology and Physiology
    • Therapeutics and Prevention
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About mBio
    • Editor in Chief
    • Board of Editors
    • AAM Fellows
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
Research Article | Molecular Biology and Physiology

Functional Differences between E. coli and ESKAPE Pathogen GroES/GroEL

Jared Sivinski, Andrew J. Ambrose, Iliya Panfilenko, Christopher J. Zerio, Jason M. Machulis, Niloufar Mollasalehi, Lynn K. Kaneko, Mckayla Stevens, Anne-Marie Ray, Yangshin Park, Chunxiang Wu, Quyen Q. Hoang, Steven M. Johnson, Eli Chapman
Robert A. Bonomo, Editor
Jared Sivinski
aDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrew J. Ambrose
aDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Iliya Panfilenko
aDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher J. Zerio
aDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jason M. Machulis
aDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Niloufar Mollasalehi
bDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
cCenter for Innovation in Brain Science, Tucson, Arizona, USA
dDepartment of Pharmacology, College of Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lynn K. Kaneko
aDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mckayla Stevens
eDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Anne-Marie Ray
eDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yangshin Park
eDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
fStark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
gDepartment of Neurology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Chunxiang Wu
eDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
fStark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
gDepartment of Neurology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Quyen Q. Hoang
eDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
fStark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
gDepartment of Neurology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Steven M. Johnson
eDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Eli Chapman
aDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Eli Chapman
Robert A. Bonomo
Louis Stokes Veterans Affairs Medical Center
Roles: Editor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/mBio.02167-20
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

As the GroES/GroEL chaperonin system is the only bacterial chaperone that is essential under all conditions, we have been interested in the development of GroES/GroEL inhibitors as potential antibiotics. Using Escherichia coli GroES/GroEL as a surrogate, we have discovered several classes of GroES/GroEL inhibitors that show potent antibacterial activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. However, it remains unknown if E. coli GroES/GroEL is functionally identical to other GroES/GroEL chaperonins and hence if our inhibitors will function against other chaperonins. Herein we report our initial efforts to characterize the GroES/GroEL chaperonins from clinically significant ESKAPE pathogens (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterobacter species). We used complementation experiments in GroES/GroEL-deficient and -null E. coli strains to report on exogenous ESKAPE chaperone function. In GroES/GroEL-deficient (but not knocked-out) E. coli, we found that only a subset of the ESKAPE GroES/GroEL chaperone systems could complement to produce a viable organism. Surprisingly, GroES/GroEL chaperone systems from two of the ESKAPE pathogens were found to complement in E. coli, but only in the strict absence of either E. coli GroEL (P. aeruginosa) or both E. coli GroES and GroEL (E. faecium). In addition, GroES/GroEL from S. aureus was unable to complement E. coli GroES/GroEL under all conditions. The resulting viable strains, in which E. coli groESL was replaced with ESKAPE groESL, demonstrated similar growth kinetics to wild-type E. coli, but displayed an elongated phenotype (potentially indicating compromised GroEL function) at some temperatures. These results suggest functional differences between GroES/GroEL chaperonins despite high conservation of amino acid identity.

IMPORTANCE The GroES/GroEL chaperonin from E. coli has long served as the model system for other chaperonins. This assumption seemed valid because of the high conservation between the chaperonins. It was, therefore, shocking to discover ESKAPE pathogen GroES/GroEL formed mixed-complex chaperonins in the presence of E. coli GroES/GroEL, leading to loss of organism viability in some cases. Complete replacement of E. coli groESL with ESKAPE groESL restored organism viability, but produced an elongated phenotype, suggesting differences in chaperonin function, including client specificity and/or refolding cycle rates. These data offer important mechanistic insight into these remarkable machines, and the new strains developed allow for the synthesis of homogeneous chaperonins for biochemical studies and to further our efforts to develop chaperonin-targeted antibiotics.

  • Copyright © 2021 Sivinski et al.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

View Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Functional Differences between E. coli and ESKAPE Pathogen GroES/GroEL
Jared Sivinski, Andrew J. Ambrose, Iliya Panfilenko, Christopher J. Zerio, Jason M. Machulis, Niloufar Mollasalehi, Lynn K. Kaneko, Mckayla Stevens, Anne-Marie Ray, Yangshin Park, Chunxiang Wu, Quyen Q. Hoang, Steven M. Johnson, Eli Chapman
mBio Jan 2021, 12 (1) e02167-20; DOI: 10.1128/mBio.02167-20

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this mBio article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Functional Differences between E. coli and ESKAPE Pathogen GroES/GroEL
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from mBio
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in mBio.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Functional Differences between E. coli and ESKAPE Pathogen GroES/GroEL
Jared Sivinski, Andrew J. Ambrose, Iliya Panfilenko, Christopher J. Zerio, Jason M. Machulis, Niloufar Mollasalehi, Lynn K. Kaneko, Mckayla Stevens, Anne-Marie Ray, Yangshin Park, Chunxiang Wu, Quyen Q. Hoang, Steven M. Johnson, Eli Chapman
mBio Jan 2021, 12 (1) e02167-20; DOI: 10.1128/mBio.02167-20
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • INTRODUCTION
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

antibiotic
antimicrobial
chaperone
chaperonin
ESKAPE
GroEL
GroES
HSP10
HSP60

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About mBio
  • Editor in Chief
  • Board of Editors
  • AAM Fellows
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Warranty
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #mBio

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Online ISSN: 2150-7511