Pore-forming proteins (PFTs, also known aspore-forming toxins) are usually produced bybacteria, and include a number of proteinexotoxins but may also be produced by other organisms such asapple snails that produceperivitellin-2[1][2] orearthworms, who producelysenin. They are frequentlycytotoxic (i.e., they killcells), as they create unregulatedpores in themembrane of targeted cells.
β-PFTs are so-named because of their structural characteristics: they are composed mostly ofβ-strand-based domains. They have divergent sequences, and are classified byPfam into a number of families including Leukocidins, Etx-Mtx2, Toxin-10, and aegerolysin.X-ray crystallographic structures have revealed some commonalities:α-hemolysin[6] andPanton-Valentine leukocidin S[7] are structurally related. Similarly,aerolysin[8] and clostridial epsilon-toxin.[9] and Mtx2 are linked in the Etx/Mtx2 family.[10]
The ß-PFTs include a number of toxins of commercial interest for the control of pest insects. These toxins are potent but also highly specific to a limited range of target insects, making them safe biological control agents.
Insecticidal members of the Etx/Mtx2 family include Mtx2[10] and Mtx3[11] fromLysinibacillus sphaericus that can control mosquito vectors of human diseases and also Cry15, Cry23, Cry33, Cry38, Cry45, Cry51, Cry60, Cry64 and Cry74 fromBacillus thuringiensis[12] that control a range of insect pests that can cause great losses to agriculture.
Insecticidal toxins in the Toxin_10 family show an overall similarity to the aerolysin and Etx/Mtx2 toxin structures but differ in two notable features. While all of these toxins feature a head domain and a larger, extended beta-sheet tail domain, in the Toxin_10 family, the head is formed exclusively from the N-terminal region of the primary amino acid sequence whereas regions from throughout the protein sequence contribute to the head domain in Etx/Mtx2 toxins. In addition, the head domains of the Toxin_10 proteins showlectin-like features of carbohydrate binding domains. The only reported natural targets of Toxin_10 proteins are insects. With the exception of Cry36[13] and Cry78,[12] the Toxin_10 toxins appear to act as two-part, binary toxins. The partner proteins in these combinations may belong to different structural groups, depending on the individual toxin: two Toxin_10 proteins (BinA and BinB) act together in the Bin mosquitocidal toxin ofLysinibacillus sphaericus;[14] the Toxin_10 Cry49 is co-dependent on the 3-domain toxin family member Cry48 for its activity againstCulex mosquito larvae;[15] and theBacillus thuringiensis Toxin_10 protein Cry35 interacts with the aegerolysin family Cry34 to killWestern Corn Rootworm.[16] This toxin pair has been included in insect resistant plants such asSmartStax corn.
Structural comparison of pore-form α-hemolysin (pink/red) and soluble-form PVL (pale green/green). It is postulated that the green section in PVL 'flips out' to the 'red' conformation as seen in α-haemolysin. (PDB:7AHL,1T5R)
β-PFTs are dimorphic proteins that exist as solublemonomers and then assemble to formmultimeric assemblies that constitute the pore. Figure 1 shows the pore-form of α-hemolysin, the first crystal structure of a β-PFT in its pore-form. 7 α-hemolysin monomers come together to create themushroom-shaped pore. The 'cap' of the mushroom sits on the surface of the cell, and the 'stalk' of the mushroom penetrates the cell membrane, rendering it permeable (see later). The 'stalk' is composed of a 14-strandβ-barrel, with two strands donated from each monomer.A structure of theVibrio cholerae cytolysinPDB:3O44[17] in the pore form is also heptameric; however,Staphylococcus aureus gamma-hemolysinPDB:3B07[18] reveals an octomeric pore, consequently with a 16-strand 'stalk'. The Panton-Valentine leucocidin S structurePDB:1T5R[7] shows a highly related structure, but in its soluble monomeric state. This shows that the strands involved in forming the 'stalk' are in a very differentconformation – shown in Fig 2.While the Bin toxin ofLysinibacillus sphaericus is able to form pores in artificial membranes[19] and mosquito cells in culture,[20] it also causes a series of other cellular changes including the uptake of toxin in recycling endosomes and the production of large, autophagic vesicles[21] and the ultimate cause of cell death may be apoptotic.[22] Similar effects on cell biology are also seen with other Toxin_10 activities[23][24] but the roles of these events in toxicity remain to be established.
The transition between soluble monomer and membrane-associatedprotomer to oligomer is not a trivial one: It is believed that β-PFTs, follow as similar assembly pathway as the CDCs (see§ Cholesterol-dependent cytolysins later), in that they must first assemble on the cell-surface (in a receptor-mediated fashion insome cases) in a pre-pore state. Following this, the large-scale conformational change occurs in which the membrane spanning section is formed and inserted into the membrane. The portion entering the membrane, referred to as the head, is usually apolar and hydrophobic, this produces an energetically favorable insertion of the pore-forming toxin.[3]
Some β-PFTs such as clostridial ε-toxin andClostridium perfringens enterotoxin (CPE) bind to the cell membrane via specific receptors – possibly certainclaudins for CPE,[25] possiblyGPI anchors or other sugars for ε-toxin – these receptors help raise the local concentration of the toxins, allowing oligomerisation and pore formation.
The BinB Toxin_10 component of theLysinibacillus sphaericus Bin toxin specifically recognises a GPI anchored alpha glycosidase in the midgut ofCulex[26] andAnopheles mosquitoes but not the related protein found inAedes mosquitoes,[27] hence conferring specificity on the toxin.
When the pore is formed, the tight regulation of what can and cannot enter/leave a cell is disrupted. Ions and small molecules, such asamino acids andnucleotides within the cell, flow out, and water from the surrounding tissue enters. The loss of important small molecules to the cell can disruptprotein synthesis and other crucial cellular reactions. The loss of ions, especiallycalcium, can causecell signaling pathways to be spuriously activated or deactivated. The uncontrolled entry of water into a cell can cause the cell to swell up uncontrollably: this causes a process calledblebbing, wherein large parts of the cell membrane are distorted and give way under the mounting internal pressure. In the end, this can cause the cell to burst. In particular, nuclear - free erythrocytes under the influence of alpha-staphylotoxin undergo hemolysis with the loss of a large protein hemoglobin.
There are many different types of binary toxins. The term binary toxin simply implies a two part toxin where both components are necessary for toxic activity. Several β-PFTs form binary toxins.
As discussed above, the majority of the Toxin_10 family proteins act as part of binary toxins with partner proteins that may belong to the Toxin_10 or other structural families. The interplay of the individual components has not been well studied to date. Other beta sheet toxins of commercial importance are also binary. These include the Cry23/Cry37 toxin fromBacillus thuringiensis.[28] These toxins have some structural similarity to the Cry34/Cry35 binary toxin but neither component shows a match to established Pfam families and the features of the larger Cry23 protein have more in common with the Etx/Mtx2 family than the Toxin_10 family to which Cry35 belongs.
Some binary toxins are composed of an enzymatic component and a component that is involved in membrane interactions and entry of the enzymatic component into the cell. The membrane interacting component may have structural domains that are rich in beta sheets. Binary toxins, such as anthrax lethal and edema toxins (Main article: Anthrax toxin),C. perfringensiota toxin andC. difficile cyto-lethal toxins consist of two components (hencebinary):
an enzymatic component –A
a membrane-altering component –B
In these enzymatic binary toxins, theB component facilitates the entry of the enzymatic 'payload' (A subunit) into the target cell, by forming homooligomeric pores, as shown above for βPFTs. TheA component then enters the cytosol and inhibits normal cell functions by one of the following means:
ADP-ribosylation is a common enzymatic method used by different bacterial toxins from various species. Toxins such asC. perfringens iota toxin andC. botulinum C2 toxin, attach a ribosyl-ADP moiety to surface arginine residue 177 of G-actin. This prevents G-actin assembling to form F-actin, and, thus, the cytoskeleton breaks down, resulting in cell death. Insecticidal members of the ADP-ribosyltransferase family of toxins include the Mtx1 toxin ofLysinibacillus sphaericus[29] and the Vip1/Vip2 toxin ofBacillus thuringiensis and some members of the toxin complex (Tc) toxins from gram negative bacteria such asPhotorhabdus andXenorhabdus species. The beta sheet-rich regions of the Mtx1 protein arelectin-like sequences that may be involved in glycolipid interactions.[30]
Proteolysis of mitogen-activated protein kinase kinases (MAPKK)
TheA component ofanthrax toxin lethal toxin iszinc-metalloprotease, which shows specificity for a conserved family ofmitogen-activated protein kinases. The loss of these proteins results in a breakdown of cell signaling, which, in turn, renders the cell insensitive to outside stimuli – therefore noimmune response is triggered.
Anthrax toxin edema toxin triggers acalcium ion influx into the target cell. This subsequently elevates intracellularcAMP levels. This can profoundly alter any sort of immune response, by inhibitingleucocyte proliferation,phagocytosis, and proinflammatorycytokine release.
EM reconstruction of a pneumolysin pre-porea) The structure of perfringolysin O[31] and b) the structure of PluMACPF.[32] In both proteins, the two small clusters ofα-helices that unwind and pierce the membrane are in pink. (PDB:1PFO,2QP2)
CDCs, such as pneumolysin, fromS. pneumoniae, form pores as large as 260 Å (26 nm), containing between 30 and 44 monomer units.[33]Electron microscopy studies of pneumolysin show that it assembles into large multimericperipheral membrane complexes before undergoing a conformational change in which a group ofα-helices in each monomer change into extended,amphipathicβ-hairpins that span the membrane, in a manner reminiscent of α-haemolysin, albeit on a much larger scale (Fig 3). CDCs are homologous to theMACPF family of pore-forming toxins, and it is suggested that both families use a common mechanism (Fig 4).[32] EukaryoteMACPF proteins function in immune defence and are found in proteins such as perforin and complement C9[34] thoughperivitellin-2 is aMACPF attached to a deliverylectin that hasenterotoxic andneurotoxic properties toward mice.[1][2][35]
A family of highly conserved cholesterol-dependent cytolysins, closely related to perfringolysin fromClostridium perfringens are produced by bacteria from across the order Bacillales and include anthrolysin, alveolysin and sphaericolysin.[26] Sphaericolysin has been shown to exhibit toxicity to a limited range of insects injected with the purified protein.[36]
Bacteria may invest much time and energy in making these toxins: CPE can account for up to 15% of the dry mass ofC. perfringens at the time ofsporulation.[citation needed] The purpose of toxins is thought to be one of the following:
Inside ahost, provoking a response which is beneficial for the proliferation of the bacteria, for example incholera.[37] or in the case of insecticidal bacteria, killing the insect to provide a rich source of nutrients in the cadaver for bacterial growth.
Food: After the target cell has ruptured and released its contents, the bacteria can scavenge the remains for nutrients or, as above, bacteria can colonise insect cadavers.
^abGiglio ML, Ituarte S, Milesi V, Dreon MS, Brola TR, Caramelo J, et al. (August 2020). "Exaptation of two ancient immune proteins into a new dimeric pore-forming toxin in snails".Journal of Structural Biology.211 (2) 107531.doi:10.1016/j.jsb.2020.107531.hdl:11336/143650.PMID32446810.S2CID218873723.
^Cané, Lucía; Guzmán, Fanny; Balatti, Galo; Daza Millone, María Antonieta; Pucci Molineris, Melisa; Maté, Sabina; Martini, M. Florencia; Herlax, Vanesa (24 May 2023). "Biophysical Analysis to Assess the Interaction of CRAC and CARC Motif Peptides of Alpha Hemolysin ofEscherichia coli with Membranes".Biochemistry.62 (12):1994–2011.doi:10.1021/acs.biochem.3c00164.ISSN0006-2960.PMID37224476.
^Parker MW, Buckley JT, Postma JP, Tucker AD, Leonard K, Pattus F, Tsernoglou D (January 1994). "Structure of theAeromonas toxin proaerolysin in its water-soluble and membrane-channel states".Nature.367 (6460):292–295.Bibcode:1994Natur.367..292P.doi:10.1038/367292a0.PMID7510043.S2CID4371932.
^Cole AR, Gibert M, Popoff M, Moss DS, Titball RW, Basak AK (August 2004). "Clostridium perfringens ε-toxin shows structural similarity to the pore-forming toxin aerolysin".Nature Structural & Molecular Biology.11 (8):797–8.doi:10.1038/nsmb804.PMID15258571.S2CID24508677.
^abThanabalu T, Porter AG (April 1996). "ABacillus sphaericus gene encoding a novel type of mosquitocidal toxin of 31.8 kDa".Gene.170 (1):85–89.doi:10.1016/0378-1119(95)00836-5.PMID8621095.
^Schwartz JL, Potvin L, Coux F, Charles JF, Berry C, Humphreys MJ, et al. (November 2001). "Permeabilization of model lipid membranes byBacillus sphaericus mosquitocidal binary toxin and its individual components".The Journal of Membrane Biology.184 (2):171–183.doi:10.1007/s00232-001-0086-1.PMID11719853.S2CID22113520.
^Cokmus C, Davidson EW, Cooper K (May 1997). "Electrophysiological effects ofBacillus sphaericus binary toxin on cultured mosquito cells".Journal of Invertebrate Pathology.69 (3):197–204.doi:10.1006/jipa.1997.4660.PMID9170345.
^Narva KE, Wang NX, Herman R (January 2017). "Safety considerations derived from Cry34Ab1/Cry35Ab1 structure and function".Journal of Invertebrate Pathology.142:27–33.doi:10.1016/j.jip.2016.07.019.PMID27480405.
^abSilva-Filha MH, Nielsen-LeRoux C, Charles JF (August 1999). "Identification of the receptor forBacillus sphaericus crystal toxin in the brush border membrane of the mosquitoCulex pipiens (Diptera: Culicidae)".Insect Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.29 (8):711–721.doi:10.1016/S0965-1748(99)00047-8.PMID10451923.
^Ferreira LM, Romão TP, de-Melo-Neto OP, Silva-Filha MH (August 2010). "The orthologue to the Cpm1/Cqm1 receptor inAedes aegypti is expressed as a midgut GPI-anchored α-glucosidase, which does not bind to the insecticidal binary toxin".Insect Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.40 (8):604–610.doi:10.1016/j.ibmb.2010.05.007.PMID20685335.
^Donovan WP, Donovan JC, Slaney AC (2000). "Bacillus thuringiensis cryET33 and cryET34 compositions and uses therefor".Monsanto Company (Patent).US Patent US6063756A
^Treiber N, Reinert DJ, Carpusca I, Aktories K, Schulz GE (August 2008). "Structure and mode of action of a mosquitocidal holotoxin".Journal of Molecular Biology.381 (1):150–159.doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2008.05.067.PMID18586267.
^abAlberts B, Johnson A, Lewis J, Raff M, Roberts K,Walter P (March 2002).Molecular Biology of the Cell (hardcover; weight 7.6 pounds) (4th ed.). Routledge.ISBN978-0-8153-3218-3.