Direct observation of proton pumping by a eukaryotic P-type ATPase

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science  25 Mar 2016:
Vol. 351, Issue 6280, pp. 1469-1473
DOI: 10.1126/science.aad6429
  • Fig. 1 Imaging proton pumping into the lumen of single surface-tethered vesicles using TIRF microscopy.

    (A) Illustration of AHA2 reconstituted vesicles tethered to a passivated glass surface and imaged on and individual basis with TIRF microscopy. Zoom: Extravesicular addition of both ATP and Mg2+ activated exclusively outward-facing AHA2 molecules, triggering H+ pumping in the vesicle lumen. We quantified changes in the vesicular H+ concentration by calibrating the response of the lipid-conjugated pH-sensitive fluorophore pHrodo. Valinomycin was always present to mediate K+/H+ exchange and prevent the buildup of a transmembrane electrical potential. (B) TIRF image of single vesicles tethered on a passivated glass slide. (C) Acidification kinetics of single vesicles upon addition of ATP and Mg2+. Red traces highlight three representative signals from single vesicles, showcasing the absence of transport activity, the continuous pumping of protons, and fluctuations in proton-transport activity. The black trace is the average of 600 single-vesicle traces. As expected, addition of the protonophore CCCP collapsed the proton gradient established by AHA2R.

  • Fig. 2

    Single-molecule observation of proton pumping reveals active and inactive states. (A) Typical examples of pH changes inside individual AHA2R reconstituted vesicles. ATP and Mg2+ (2 mM) were added to initiate proton pumping, and CCCP (5 μM) was added to collapse the pH gradients. Traces show −ΔpH defined as a difference between the initial and final pH. Images of each respective liposome at different time points are shown below each trace. At the right-hand side of the traces, we plotted histograms of pH plateaus numbered to indicate the number of active pumps per vesicle. The pH inside the majority of vesicles showed no changes indicating the absence of functional transporter molecules (top panel). For the majority of active vesicles, we observed intermittent H+ pumping, indicating the presence of single molecules (middle panels). The observation of two discrete steady-state pH plateaus in single-vesicle traces indicated the occasional presence of two active pumps per single vesicle (bottom panel). (B) Population histogram of pH plateaus for AHA2R-reconstituted vesicles (n = 3, where hereafter n is the number of independent experiments). (C and D) Same as in (A) and (B) but for full-length AHA2. For (D), n = 2. Labeling of AHA2 with Alexa Fluor 647 enabled counting on the same vesicles of both the number of labeled AHA2 proteins (E) and of the respective activity dynamics (C). (F) The histogram of active proteins per vesicle was calculated from step-bleaching analysis of the data in (E) that was corrected for labeling efficiency and the probability that a proton pump is active (12). The two independent methods for estimating the number of active molecules agreed that ~70% of vesicles containing a protein have one active proton pump.

  • Fig. 3 Modeling active, inactive, and leaky states and their role in autoinhibiting proton pumps.

    (A) The main parameters of the physical model we used to fit changes in the vesicular pH were pumping rate (Ip), protein-associated leak (PAHA2), membrane leak (Pleak), valinomycin-induced K+ permeability (PK+), buffering capacity in the interior of the vesicle (β), and electrical potential across the membrane (Ψ) (12). (B) Example of a typical proton pumping trace and respective fits without (blue) and with (red) a transprotein proton leak. A threshold in the first derivative of the pH kinetics (12) was used to define the lifetime of the active state ton and the time between pumping events toff. (C) Temporal evolution of the proton pumping rate (gray) and the proton efflux rates due to passive membrane (red) leakage and transprotein backflow (blue) for the pH trace shown in (B). (D) Histogram of proton permeability associated with the membrane, AHA2, and AHA2R. Respective counts were 95, 37, and 45. (E) Histogram of pumping rates for AHA2R and AHA2. Respective counts were 126 and 95. (F) Histogram of ton for AHA2R and AHA2. Respective counts were 241 and 134. The bar at >1200 s shows the number of traces that did not switch in the duration of the experiment. (G) Histogram of toff for AHA2R and AHA2. Respective counts were 69 and 39. For AHA2R and AHA2, respectively, the number of independent experiments was 3 and 2 and the number of individual proteoliposomes analyzed was 126 and 95.

  • Fig. 4 Regulation of proton pumping by pH gradients.

    (A and B) Relation between ton and the maximal pH gradient for AHA2R and AHA2, respectively. Each data point represents the average of three consecutive values. Error bars represent corresponding standard deviations. The decay constants from the error-weighted exponential fits to the data are 6.9 ± 2.0 s and 0.4 ± 0.1 s for (A) and (B), respectively, where uncertainties represent 95% confidence intervals from the fits. (C) Probability of observing a transprotein leak as a function of pH gradient. For AHA2R and AHA2, data were binned with 0.25 and 0.5 pH units; the number of independent experiments and individual proteoliposomes analyzed was the same as in Fig. 3. Spearman’s rank order correlation coefficients ρ (126) = 0.40, P =10−4, and ρ (95) = 0.30, P = 0.03 indicated a strong positive correlation between leakage probability and ΔpHmax for both AHA2R and AHA2.

Supplementary Materials

  • Direct observation of proton pumping by a eukaryotic P-type ATPase

    Salome Veshaguri, Sune M. Christensen, Gerdi C. Kemmer, Garima Ghale, Mads P. Møller, Christina Lohr, Andreas L. Christensen, Bo H. Justesen, Ida L. Jørgensen, Jürgen Schiller, Nikos S. Hatzakis, Michael Grabe, Thomas Günther Pomorski, Dimitrios Stamou

    Materials/Methods, Supplementary Text, Tables, Figures, and/or References

    Download Supplement
    • Materials and Methods
    • Supplementary Text
    • Figs. S1 to S12
    • Tables S1 and S2
    • References (30–47)

Navigate This Article