Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8rzl6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T09:10:47.866Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Amphipathic environments for determining the structure of membrane proteins by single-particle electron cryo-microscopy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2021

Christel Le Bon
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Biologie Physico-Chimique des Protéines Membranaires, Université de Paris, CNRS, UMR 7099, F-75005, Paris, France Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique, Fondation Edmond de Rothschild pour le développement de la recherche Scientifique, F-75005, Paris, France
Baptiste Michon
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Biologie Physico-Chimique des Protéines Membranaires, Université de Paris, CNRS, UMR 7099, F-75005, Paris, France Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique, Fondation Edmond de Rothschild pour le développement de la recherche Scientifique, F-75005, Paris, France
Jean-Luc Popot
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Biologie Physico-Chimique des Protéines Membranaires, Université de Paris, CNRS, UMR 7099, F-75005, Paris, France Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique, Fondation Edmond de Rothschild pour le développement de la recherche Scientifique, F-75005, Paris, France
Manuela Zoonens*
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Biologie Physico-Chimique des Protéines Membranaires, Université de Paris, CNRS, UMR 7099, F-75005, Paris, France Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique, Fondation Edmond de Rothschild pour le développement de la recherche Scientifique, F-75005, Paris, France
*
Author for correspondence: Manuela Zoonens, E-mail: manuela.zoonens@ibpc.fr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Over the past decade, the structural biology of membrane proteins (MPs) has taken a new turn thanks to epoch-making technical progress in single-particle electron cryo-microscopy (cryo-EM) as well as to improvements in sample preparation. The present analysis provides an overview of the extent and modes of usage of the various types of surfactants for cryo-EM studies. Digitonin, dodecylmaltoside, protein-based nanodiscs, lauryl maltoside-neopentyl glycol, glyco-diosgenin, and amphipols (APols) are the most popular surfactants at the vitrification step. Surfactant exchange is frequently used between MP purification and grid preparation, requiring extensive optimization each time the study of a new MP is undertaken. The variety of both the surfactants and experimental approaches used over the past few years bears witness to the need to continue developing innovative surfactants and optimizing conditions for sample preparation. The possibilities offered by novel APols for EM applications are discussed.

Information

Type
Review
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Distribution of unique MP structures solved by each structural approach between 1985 and January 1, 2021. (a) Number of unique MP structures deposited each year using each approach. (b) Distribution of the 1195 unique structures extracted from Stephen White's database (https://blanco.biomol.uci.edu/mpstruc/) according to the approach used to solve them. The figures were prepared using the January 8, 2021, update of MP structures from this database. Some MP structures published in 2020 may therefore not be included.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Distribution of unique MP structures according to biological origin. (a) Unique MP structures were classified into five groups (archaea, bacteria, eukaryotes, viruses, and unclassified). The latter group comprises four crystallographic structures of de novo designed MPs. (b) Repartition of mammalian versus other eukaryotic MP structures solved by either SP cryo-EM or X-ray crystallography over the past 6 years.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Family distribution of unique MP structures solved by SP cryo-EM. The groups of (a) α-helical and (b) β-barrel MPs gather 281 and 30 unique MP structures, respectively. ‘Others’, in the α-helical MP group, refers to cryo-EM structures of MPs belonging to the membrane-spanning 4-domain (MS4) family, antiporters, cellulose synthases, sterol-sensing domain (SDD) proteins, Type VII secretion systems, intramembrane proteases, adventitious MPs (α-helical pore-forming toxins), host-defense proteins, decarboxylases, novel receptors (STRA6 retinol-uptake receptor in complex with calmodulin), transhydrogenases, adenylyl cyclases, chain length determinant proteins, and glycoproteins. ‘Other transporters’ gather one cryo-EM structure of drug/metabolite transporter, two structures of H+/Cl− or F− exchange transporters, two structures of transporters belonging to the major facilitator superfamily (MFS), three structures of multi-drug efflux transporters and, finally, fourteen structures of MPs belonging to the solute carrier (SLC) transporter superfamily.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Number of unique cryo-EM MP structures and published reports analyzed in this study. Among the cryo-EM structures, SP analysis is the predominant technique, only nine unique MP structures having been solved using electron crystallography. Most cryo-EM MP structures have been solved by SP analysis applied to images of isolated MPs embedded in vitreous ice, one and two structures having been obtained by SP analysis applied to 2D crystals and helical assemblies, respectively. The list of reports analyzed comes from Stephen White's database, manually completed with 60 SP cryo-EM structures for which a PDB and/or EMDB accession number was available (see below). Two cryo-EM structures of MPs reconstituted into liposomes have been included. In addition, examination of each of the 587 studies revealed that some cryo-EM structures were missing. They have been manually integrated into the list of reports as follows: (a) in four studies, an additional cryo-EM structure of a distinct MP or MP complex was identified and added to the list of reports, (b) in 50 studies, a 3D reconstruction of a MP has been obtained in two different surfactants, yielding two distinct refined structures, generating two sets of experimental conditions that have been included in our analysis as ‘duplicates’, and (c) in two studies, the cryo-EM structure of a MP has been obtained in three different surfactants, yielding ‘triplicates’. These additional experimental conditions were gathered in three groups: ‘Duplicates 1’: distinct cryo-EM structures were obtained in two (or three) different surfactants, whereas the detergent used for the purification was unchanged; ‘Duplicates 2’: both the purification and vitrification surfactants differed; ‘Duplicates 3’: the vitrification surfactant was the same but the purification was performed in two distinct detergents.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Some of the amphipathic environments used for MP stabilization. Chemical structures of detergents: digitonin, glyco-diosgenin (GDN), n-dodecyl-β-d-maltoside (DDM) and Lauryl Maltoside-Neopentyl Glycol (LMNG); APols: A8-35, PMAL-C8, SMA, and CyclAPols C8-C0-50 and C6-C2-50; hydrosoluble cholesterol analog: cholesteryl hemisuccinate (CHS).

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Membrane protein structures established in protein-based nanodiscs. (a) Molecular model of an MSP-based ND (side view). The two MSPs are shown in red and blue, the 160 associated lipids in orange and grey. From Shih et al. (2005). (b) Molecular model of a saposin-based ND (top view). The saposin A dimer is in purple, the 26 associated lipid molecules in reddish brown. From Li et al. (2016). (c) Family distribution of MPs whose structures have been solved after reconstitution in protein-based NDs. ‘Other transporters’ comprise cryo-EM structures of three multi-drug efflux transporters, three amino acid secondary transporters, three major facilitator superfamily (MFS) transporters, and three transporters distributed among the three superfamilies of drug/metabolite transporters (DMT), CorA ion transporters and solute carrier (SLC) transporters. (d) Distribution of MSPs and lipids used to reconstitute MPs in protein-based NDs. The MSP called zap1 is derived from Zebra fish apo-lipoprotein A-1; MSP2X was constructed by linking two MSP1E3D1 chains with a two-amino acid linker; csMSP1E3D1 is a circularized version of MSP1E3D1. In three studies, the MSP used has not been clearly mentioned (‘unspecified’). When the lipids were a mix of natural and synthetic lipids, they are noted as ‘natural and synthetic lipids’; when their nature has not been clearly mentioned, as ‘natural or synthetic lipids’.

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Surfactants used at the vitrification step. (a) Distribution of all surfactants in which MP structures have been solved by SP cryo-EM to a resolution ⩽5 Å (604 reports overall, taking all duplicates into account). (b) Number of near-atomic resolution MP structures reported each year since 2013 according to the type of surfactant used at the vitrification step. ‘Others’ gather two cryo-EM structures obtained in Brij-35 and ten other structures obtained in one of the following surfactants: Tween 20, Igepal CA-630 (NP40), lauryldimethylamine oxide, MNA-C12, PCC-a-M, sodium cholate, Facade-EM (FA-3), octyl glucoside, sodium deoxycholate, and liposomes. Sixteen of the cryo-EM structures gathered in Stephen White's database are either MP fragments, toxins, or peripheral MPs vitrified in the absence of detergent.

Figure 7

Fig. 8. Addition of cholesteryl hemisuccinate (CHS) to MP samples. (a) Purification surfactants used in combination with CHS. (B) Distribution of MP structures solved in the presence of CHS among protein classes. ‘Others’ are as described in the legend to Figure 7.

Figure 8

Fig. 9. Surfactant exchange between MP purification and sample deposit onto cryo-EM grids. (a) Detergents used for MP solubilization and the initial steps of purification. In three cases (labeled ‘Maltoside or MNGs’), the detergent used for solubilization has not been clearly specified. (b) Surfactants used for vitrification, depending on which detergent was used for solubilization, namely either maltoside detergents (mainly DDM), MNGs (mainly LMNG), or digitonin. In Panel A, the analysis includes duplicates provided that the surfactants used for solubilization were different (i.e. including duplicates 2 and 3), whereas in panel (b) all duplicates leading to ⩽5 Å structures have been included. References to studies using the combinations of surfactants shown in panel (b) are given in the Supplementary Information in the legend to Table S1.

Figure 9

Fig. 10. Surfactants used for solubilization and the initial steps of purification, depending on which surfactant was used for vitrification (either digitonin, GDN, MSP-based NDs, APols, maltoside detergents, or MNGs). All duplicates are included. In one case, the detergent used for vitrification has not been clearly specified and could be either maltosides or MNGs.

Figure 10

Table 1. A comparison of resolutions achieved for a given MP or MP complex vitrified in various amphipathic environments

Figure 11

Table 2. Studies in which the addition of secondary surfactants to solubilized MP samples has been carried out before vitrification

Supplementary material: PDF

Le Bon et al. supplementary material

Le Bon et al. supplementary material

Download Le Bon et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 341.2 KB