CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 11Complement system in diseasesVector-borne infectious diseasesBacterial Infections and Vaccines

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Outer surface lipoproteins from the Lyme disease spirochete exploit the molecular switch mechanism of the complement protease C1s

Open access
Garrigues, Ryan J., Thomas, Sheila, Leong, John M., Garcia, Brandon L.·2022·Journal of Biological Chemistry
DOI 10.1016/j.jbc.2022.102557PMC PMC9637899

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Proteolytic cascades comprise several important physiological systems, including a primary arm of innate immunity called the complement cascade. To safeguard against complement-mediated attack, the etiologic agent of Lyme disease, Borreliella burgdorferi, produces numerous outer surface-localized lipoproteins that contribute to successful complement evasion. Recently, we discovered a pair of B. burgdorferi surface lipoproteins of the OspEF-related protein family-termed ElpB and ElpQ-that inhibit antibody-mediated complement activation. In this study, we investigate the molecular mechanism of ElpB and ElpQ complement inhibition using an array of biochemical and biophysical approaches. In vitro assays of complement activation show that an independently folded homologous C-terminal domain of each Elp protein maintains full complement inhibitory activity and selectively inhibits the classical pathway. Using binding assays and complement component C1s enzyme assays, we show that binding of Elp proteins to activated C1s blocks complement component C4 cleavage by competing with C1s-C4 binding without occluding the active site. C1s-mediated C4 cleavage is dependent on activation-induced binding sites, termed exosites. To test whether these exosites are involved in Elp-C1s binding, we performed site-directed mutagenesis, which showed that ElpB and ElpQ binding require C1s residues in the anion-binding exosite located on the serine protease domain of C1s. Based on these results, we propose a model whereby ElpB and ElpQ exploit activation-induced conformational changes that are normally important for C1s-mediated C4 cleavage. Our study expands the known complement evasion mechanisms of microbial pathogens and reveals a novel molecular mechanism for selective C1s inhibition by Lyme disease spirochetes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jbc.2022.102557

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Complement inhibition assays using truncations of ElpQ and ElpB.A and B, classical pathway ELISA inhibition assays were performed using C4b deposition as a marker for complement activation. A concentration series of each ElpQ and ElpB truncation protein were evaluated in triplicate and shown with SD. IC50 values are presented in Table 1. A qualitative schematic of ElpQ and ElpB truncation inhibitory activities is shown on the bottom panels: wildtype-like inhibition (green), non–wildtype-like inhibition (yellow), and no detectable inhibition (red). C, sequence alignment of ElpQ181–343 and ElpB182–378 with the N-terminal and C-terminal residue numbers indicated above (ElpQ) and below (ElpB). Alignment was performed with EMBOSS Needle and rendering performed with ESPript 3.0 (65, 66). D and E, 2 μM concentration of (D) ElpQ or (E) ElpB proteins in classical pathway (CP), lectin pathway (LP), and alternative pathway (AP) ELISA complement activation assays. Deposition products C4b (CP–LP) and C3b (AP) are presented as a function of no inhibitor controls with error bars denoting SD.
Figure 1 Complement inhibition assays using truncations of ElpQ and ElpB.A and B, classical pathway ELISA inhibition assays were performed using C4b deposition as a marker for complement activation. A concentration series of each ElpQ and ElpB truncation protein were evaluated in triplicate and shown with SD. IC50 values are presented in Table 1. A qualitative schematic of ElpQ and ElpB truncation inhibitory activities is shown on the bottom panels: wildtype-like inhibition (green), non–wildtype-like inhibition (yellow), and no detectable inhibition (red). C, sequence alignment of ElpQ181–343 and ElpB182–378 with the N-terminal and C-terminal residue numbers indicated above (ElpQ) and below (ElpB). Alignment was performed with EMBOSS Needle and rendering performed with ESPript 3.0 (65, 66). D and E, 2 μM concentration of (D) ElpQ or (E) ElpB proteins in classical pathway (CP), lectin pathway (LP), and alternative pathway (AP) ELISA complement activation assays. Deposition products C4b (CP–LP) and C3b (AP) are presented as a function of no inhibitor controls with error bars denoting SD.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 SPR binding assays using activated full-length C1s.A and B, ElpQ181–343 and ElpB182–378 were immobilized on an SPR sensor chip by amine coupling chemistry. Multicycle SPR experiments were performed using a twofold dilution series (200–0.4 nM) of purified full-length activated C1s. Reference-subtracted sensorgrams are shown as black lines. A representative injection series is shown. Each experiment was performed in triplicate. Sensorgrams were fit to steady-state (KD, ss, blue circles) and kinetic models (KD, kin, red traces) of binding using Biacore T200 Evaluation software, and calculated KD values are shown in Table 2. SPR, surface plasmon resonance.
Figure 2 SPR binding assays using activated full-length C1s.A and B, ElpQ181–343 and ElpB182–378 were immobilized on an SPR sensor chip by amine coupling chemistry. Multicycle SPR experiments were performed using a twofold dilution series (200–0.4 nM) of purified full-length activated C1s. Reference-subtracted sensorgrams are shown as black lines. A representative injection series is shown. Each experiment was performed in triplicate. Sensorgrams were fit to steady-state (KD, ss, blue circles) and kinetic models (KD, kin, red traces) of binding using Biacore T200 Evaluation software, and calculated KD values are shown in Table 2. SPR, surface plasmon resonance.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 ElpQ and ElpB bind to the C-terminal domains of activated C1s.A, an AlphaFold (42) model of full-length human C1s lacking the N-terminal signal sequence is shown (UniProt ID: P09871). The domain architecture of C1s and the C4-binding site on C1s are highlighted. B, ElpQ19–343 was immobilized on an SPR sensor chip. Selected C1s truncation proteins containing CUB2, CCP1, CCP2, and SP domains were injected over the ElpQ biosensor at 500 nM. Representative curves from a single injection are shown from an experiment performed in triplicate. C, Alpha (amplified luminescence proximity homogenous assay) competition experiment schematic. Donor beads conjugated with glutathione bound to 50 nM GST-ElpQ were added to anti-c-Myc antibody–conjugated acceptor beads bound to 500 nM activated c-Myc-C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SPS632A to produce an Alpha signal (Fig. S4). D, untagged ElpQ181–343 or ElpB182–378 was titrated (2200–1 nM) and incubated for 1 h at room temperature in the dark. Alpha signal was obtained with excitation at 680 nm, and emission was at 615 nm. Alpha signals were normalized to wells containing no competitor (100%) and no C1s (0%). Curves were fit using nonlinear regression, and IC50 values and 95% confidence intervals are reported in Table 3. Experiments were performed in triplicate, and error bars are reported with SD. CCP, complement control protein; CUB, C1r/C1s, Uegf, Bmp1; GST, glutathione-S-transferase; SP, serine protease; SPR, surface plasmon resonance.
Figure 3 ElpQ and ElpB bind to the C-terminal domains of activated C1s.A, an AlphaFold (42) model of full-length human C1s lacking the N-terminal signal sequence is shown (UniProt ID: P09871). The domain architecture of C1s and the C4-binding site on C1s are highlighted. B, ElpQ19–343 was immobilized on an SPR sensor chip. Selected C1s truncation proteins containing CUB2, CCP1, CCP2, and SP domains were injected over the ElpQ biosensor at 500 nM. Representative curves from a single injection are shown from an experiment performed in triplicate. C, Alpha (amplified luminescence proximity homogenous assay) competition experiment schematic. Donor beads conjugated with glutathione bound to 50 nM GST-ElpQ were added to anti-c-Myc antibody–conjugated acceptor beads bound to 500 nM activated c-Myc-C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SPS632A to produce an Alpha signal (Fig. S4). D, untagged ElpQ181–343 or ElpB182–378 was titrated (2200–1 nM) and incubated for 1 h at room temperature in the dark. Alpha signal was obtained with excitation at 680 nm, and emission was at 615 nm. Alpha signals were normalized to wells containing no competitor (100%) and no C1s (0%). Curves were fit using nonlinear regression, and IC50 values and 95% confidence intervals are reported in Table 3. Experiments were performed in triplicate, and error bars are reported with SD. CCP, complement control protein; CUB, C1r/C1s, Uegf, Bmp1; GST, glutathione-S-transferase; SP, serine protease; SPR, surface plasmon resonance.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 C1s–CCP1–CCP–-SP enzyme inhibition assays. Enzymatic cleavage of C4 by C1s at 37 °C for 1 h results in four chains: C4α (∼95 kDa), C4α’ (∼85 kDa), C4β (∼75 kDa), and C4γ (∼35 kDa) that can be resolved by SDS-PAGE analysis. A, M: marker (kilodalton). Lanes 1 to 2: SDS-PAGE gel of C4 cleavage in the presence (“+”) or the absence (“−”) of 6.25 nM C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SP and 620 nM C4. Lanes 3 to 10: C4 cleavage profile in the presence of 6.25 nM C1s, 620 nM C4, and a twofold dilution series (from 25 to 0.20 μM) of ElpQ181–343. B, the fraction of C4α′ relative to input C4β in the same lane and normalized to C1s + C4 positive control (lane 2) and negative control C4 (lane 1) was determined by densitometry analysis. A representative gel of three independent experiments is shown with error calculated by SD. C, enzymatic cleavage by C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SP of the small peptide substrate Z-L-Lys-sBzl was assayed with 5,5′-dithiobis-(2-nitrobenzoic acid) (Ellman's reagent) in the presence of 25 μM ElpQ181–343 or Futhan (a small-molecule C1s inhibitor). Absorbance was read at 412 nm, and signals were normalized to negative control no-enzyme wells. Data were collected in triplicate with SD error bars shown. CCP, complement control protein; SP, serine protease.
Figure 4 C1s–CCP1–CCP–-SP enzyme inhibition assays. Enzymatic cleavage of C4 by C1s at 37 °C for 1 h results in four chains: C4α (∼95 kDa), C4α’ (∼85 kDa), C4β (∼75 kDa), and C4γ (∼35 kDa) that can be resolved by SDS-PAGE analysis. A, M: marker (kilodalton). Lanes 1 to 2: SDS-PAGE gel of C4 cleavage in the presence (“+”) or the absence (“−”) of 6.25 nM C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SP and 620 nM C4. Lanes 3 to 10: C4 cleavage profile in the presence of 6.25 nM C1s, 620 nM C4, and a twofold dilution series (from 25 to 0.20 μM) of ElpQ181–343. B, the fraction of C4α′ relative to input C4β in the same lane and normalized to C1s + C4 positive control (lane 2) and negative control C4 (lane 1) was determined by densitometry analysis. A representative gel of three independent experiments is shown with error calculated by SD. C, enzymatic cleavage by C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SP of the small peptide substrate Z-L-Lys-sBzl was assayed with 5,5′-dithiobis-(2-nitrobenzoic acid) (Ellman's reagent) in the presence of 25 μM ElpQ181–343 or Futhan (a small-molecule C1s inhibitor). Absorbance was read at 412 nm, and signals were normalized to negative control no-enzyme wells. Data were collected in triplicate with SD error bars shown. CCP, complement control protein; SP, serine protease.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 C4 competes with ElpQ binding of C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SPS632A. The Alpha competition experiment described for Figure 3C was used to assess C4 competition. Purified C4 (1000–0.5 nM) or an untagged ElpQ19–343 control (6100–3 nM) was titrated and incubated for 1 h at room temperature in the dark. Alpha signal was obtained with excitation at 680 nm, and emission was at 615 nm. Alpha signals were normalized to wells containing no competitor (100%) and no C1s (0%). Curves were fit using nonlinear regression. Experiments were performed in triplicate, and error was reported using SD. CCP, complement control protein; SP, serine protease.
Figure 5 C4 competes with ElpQ binding of C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SPS632A. The Alpha competition experiment described for Figure 3C was used to assess C4 competition. Purified C4 (1000–0.5 nM) or an untagged ElpQ19–343 control (6100–3 nM) was titrated and incubated for 1 h at room temperature in the dark. Alpha signal was obtained with excitation at 680 nm, and emission was at 615 nm. Alpha signals were normalized to wells containing no competitor (100%) and no C1s (0%). Curves were fit using nonlinear regression. Experiments were performed in triplicate, and error was reported using SD. CCP, complement control protein; SP, serine protease.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SP exosite mutagenesis SPR-binding studies.A, ribbon diagram of crystal structures of CCP1–CCP2–SP in a proenzyme (gray, Protein Data Bank [PDB] ID: 4J1Y) and activated form (blue, PDB ID: 5UBM). The catalytic triad is marked in yellow on each structure. Site-directed alanine mutagenesis was performed on residues in each of the C4 exosites: the anion-binding exosite (ABE, red loop) consisting of K575–R576–R581–K583 (magenta sticks), the region between CCP1 and CCP2 termed the CCP exosite (CCPE) consisting of E326–D358 (green sticks), or simultaneous mutation of both (CCPE/ABE). Surface representations of each site, denoted proexosites for C1s proenzyme models, are shown from another vantage with the mutated residues highlighted. B and C, ElpQ181–343 and ElpB182–378 were immobilized on an SPR sensor chip, and activated C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SP constructs were injected as a twofold dilution curve (200–0.8 nM). Symbols represent steady-state values at each concentration. D, steady-state fits are shown of the raw sensorgrams presented in B and C with colored circles corresponding to the steady-state RU. Representative curves are shown, and each injection series was performed in triplicate. Fits (solid lines) were performed using Biacore T200 Evaluation software, and KD values are presented in Table 2. ABE and CCPE/ABE mutants could not be fit and are shown as dashed lines. CCP, complement control protein; CCPE, CCP exosite; SP, serine protease; SPR, surface plasmon resonance.
Figure 6 C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SP exosite mutagenesis SPR-binding studies.A, ribbon diagram of crystal structures of CCP1–CCP2–SP in a proenzyme (gray, Protein Data Bank [PDB] ID: 4J1Y) and activated form (blue, PDB ID: 5UBM). The catalytic triad is marked in yellow on each structure. Site-directed alanine mutagenesis was performed on residues in each of the C4 exosites: the anion-binding exosite (ABE, red loop) consisting of K575–R576–R581–K583 (magenta sticks), the region between CCP1 and CCP2 termed the CCP exosite (CCPE) consisting of E326–D358 (green sticks), or simultaneous mutation of both (CCPE/ABE). Surface representations of each site, denoted proexosites for C1s proenzyme models, are shown from another vantage with the mutated residues highlighted. B and C, ElpQ181–343 and ElpB182–378 were immobilized on an SPR sensor chip, and activated C1s–CCP1–CCP2–SP constructs were injected as a twofold dilution curve (200–0.8 nM). Symbols represent steady-state values at each concentration. D, steady-state fits are shown of the raw sensorgrams presented in B and C with colored circles corresponding to the steady-state RU. Representative curves are shown, and each injection series was performed in triplicate. Fits (solid lines) were performed using Biacore T200 Evaluation software, and KD values are presented in Table 2. ABE and CCPE/ABE mutants could not be fit and are shown as dashed lines. CCP, complement control protein; CCPE, CCP exosite; SP, serine protease; SPR, surface plasmon resonance.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 65

  1. Merle, 2015, Complement system part I - molecular mechanisms of activation and regulation, Front. Immunol., 6, 262, 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00262 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Merle, 2015, Complement system part II: role in immunity, Front. Immunol., 6, 257, 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00257 · DOI
  3. Walport, 2001, Complement. First of two parts, N. Engl. J. Med., 344, 1058, 10.1056/NEJM200104053441406 · DOI
  4. Walport, 2001, Complement. Second of two parts, N. Engl. J. Med., 344, 1140, 10.1056/NEJM200104123441506 · DOI
  5. Schechter, 1967, On the size of the active site in proteases. I. Papain, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun., 27, 157, 10.1016/S0006-291X(67)80055-X · DOI
  6. Duncan, 2012, Identification of a catalytic exosite for complement component C4 on the serine protease domain of C1s, J. Immunol., 189, 2365, 10.4049/jimmunol.1201085 · DOI
  7. Perry, 2013, A molecular switch governs the interaction between the human complement protease C1s and its substrate, complement C4, J. Biol. Chem., 288, 15821, 10.1074/jbc.M113.464545 · DOI
  8. Gaboriaud, 2000, Crystal structure of the catalytic domain of human complement c1s: a serine protease with a handle, EMBO J., 19, 1755, 10.1093/emboj/19.8.1755 · DOI
  9. Kidmose, 2012, Structural basis for activation of the complement system by component C4 cleavage, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 109, 15425, 10.1073/pnas.1208031109 · DOI
  10. Bock, 2007, Exosites in the substrate specificity of blood coagulation reactions, J. Thromb. Haemost., 5 Suppl 1, 81, 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2007.02496.x · DOI
  11. Schmidt, 2016, Protection of host cells by complement regulators, Immunol. Rev., 274, 152, 10.1111/imr.12475 · DOI
  12. Ricklin, 2013, Complement in immune and inflammatory disorders: therapeutic interventions, J. Immunol., 190, 3839, 10.4049/jimmunol.1203200 · DOI
  13. Lambris, 2008, Complement evasion by human pathogens, Nat. Rev. Microbiol., 6, 132, 10.1038/nrmicro1824 · DOI
  14. Garcia, 2016, Novel evasion mechanisms of the classical complement pathway, J. Immunol., 197, 2051, 10.4049/jimmunol.1600863 · DOI
  15. Kugeler, 2021, Estimating the frequency of Lyme disease diagnoses, United States, 2010-2018, Emerg. Infect. Dis., 27, 616, 10.3201/eid2702.202731 · DOI
  16. Skare, 2020, Complement evasion by Lyme disease spirochetes, Trends Microbiol., 28, 889, 10.1016/j.tim.2020.05.004 · DOI
  17. Coburn, 2021, Lyme disease pathogenesis, Curr. Issues Mol. Biol., 42, 473
  18. Kraiczy, 2013, Complement regulator-acquiring surface proteins of Borrelia burgdorferi: structure, function and regulation of gene expression, Ticks Tick Borne Dis., 4, 26, 10.1016/j.ttbdis.2012.10.039 · DOI
  19. Lin, 2020, New insights into CRASP-mediated complement evasion in the Lyme disease enzootic cycle, Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol.
  20. Kraiczy, 2001, Mechanism of complement resistance of pathogenic Borrelia burgdorferi isolates, Int. Immunopharmacol., 1, 393, 10.1016/S1567-5769(00)00041-2 · DOI
  21. Hartmann, 2006, Functional characterization of BbCRASP-2, a distinct outer membrane protein of Borrelia burgdorferi that binds host complement regulators factor H and FHL-1, Mol. Microbiol., 61, 1220, 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2006.05318.x · DOI
  22. McDowell, 2006, Evidence that the BBA68 protein (BbCRASP-1) of the Lyme disease spirochetes does not contribute to factor H-mediated immune evasion in humans and other animals, Infect. Immun., 74, 3030, 10.1128/IAI.74.5.3030-3034.2006 · DOI
  23. McDowell, 2003, Comprehensive analysis of the factor H binding capabilities of Borrelia species associated with Lyme disease: delineation of two distinct classes of factor H binding proteins, Infect. Immun., 71, 3597, 10.1128/IAI.71.6.3597-3602.2003 · DOI
  24. Bykowski, 2008, Borrelia burgdorferi complement regulator-acquiring surface proteins (BbCRASPs): expression patterns during the mammal-tick infection cycle, Int. J. Med. Microbiol., 298, 249, 10.1016/j.ijmm.2007.10.002 · DOI
  25. Kenedy, 2009, CspA-mediated binding of human factor H inhibits complement deposition and confers serum resistance in Borrelia burgdorferi, Infect. Immun., 77, 2773, 10.1128/IAI.00318-09 · DOI
  26. Rogers, 2009, Comparative analysis of the properties and ligand binding characteristics of CspZ, a factor H binding protein, derived from Borrelia burgdorferi isolates of human origin, Infect. Immun., 77, 4396, 10.1128/IAI.00393-09 · DOI
  27. Hallström, 2013, CspA from Borrelia burgdorferi inhibits the terminal complement pathway, mBio, 4, 10.1128/mBio.00481-13 · DOI
  28. Garcia, 2016, Borrelia burgdorferi BBK32 inhibits the classical pathway by blocking activation of the C1 complement complex, PLoS Pathog., 12, 10.1371/journal.ppat.1005404 · DOI
  29. Xie, 2019, Structural determination of the complement inhibitory domain of Borrelia burgdorferi BBK32 provides insight into classical pathway complement evasion by Lyme disease spirochetes, PLoS Pathog., 15, 10.1371/journal.ppat.1007659 · DOI
  30. Garrigues, 2021, A structural basis for inhibition of the complement initiator protease C1r by Lyme disease spirochetes, J. Immunol., 207, 2856, 10.4049/jimmunol.2100815 · DOI
  31. Pereira, 2022, Lipoproteome screening of the Lyme disease agent identifies inhibitors of antibody-mediated complement killing, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 119, 10.1073/pnas.2117770119 · DOI
  32. Dowdell, 2017, Comprehensive spatial analysis of the Borrelia burgdorferi lipoproteome reveals a compartmentalization bias toward the bacterial surface, J. Bacteriol., 199, 10.1128/JB.00658-16 · DOI
  33. Stevenson, 1996, A family of genes located on four separate 32-kilobase circular plasmids in Borrelia burgdorferi B31, J. Bacteriol., 178, 3508, 10.1128/jb.178.12.3508-3516.1996 · DOI
  34. Akins, 1999, Molecular and evolutionary analysis of Borrelia burgdorferi 297 circular plasmid-encoded lipoproteins with OspE- and OspF-like leader peptides, Infect. Immun., 67, 1526, 10.1128/IAI.67.3.1526-1532.1999 · DOI
  35. Marconi, 1996, Molecular and evolutionary analyses of a variable series of genes in Borrelia burgdorferi that are related to ospE and ospF, constitute a gene family, and share a common upstream homology box, J. Bacteriol., 178, 5615, 10.1128/jb.178.19.5615-5626.1996 · DOI
  36. Brissette, 2008, Lyme borreliosis spirochete Erp proteins, their known host ligands, and potential roles in mammalian infection, Int. J. Med. Microbiol., 298 Suppl 1, 257, 10.1016/j.ijmm.2007.09.004 · DOI
  37. Stevenson, 2022, The consistent tick-vertebrate infectious cycle of the lyme disease spirochete enables Borrelia burgdorferi to control protein expression by monitoring its physiological status, J. Bacteriol., 204, 10.1128/jb.00606-21 · DOI
  38. Brissette, 2009, The Borrelia burgdorferi outer-surface protein ErpX binds mammalian laminin, Microbiology (Reading), 155, 863, 10.1099/mic.0.024604-0 · DOI
  39. Stevenson, 1998, Borrelia burgdorferi Erp proteins are immunogenic in mammals infected by tick bite, and their synthesis is inducible in cultured bacteria, Infect. Immun., 66, 2648, 10.1128/IAI.66.6.2648-2654.1998 · DOI
  40. Bielefeld-Sevigny, 2009, AlphaLISA immunoassay platform- the “no-wash” high-throughput alternative to ELISA, Assay Drug Dev. Technol., 7, 90, 10.1089/adt.2009.9996 · DOI
  41. Hart, 2021, Host tropism determination by convergent evolution of immunological evasion in the Lyme disease system, PLoS Pathog., 17, 10.1371/journal.ppat.1009801 · DOI
  42. Bhattacharjee, 2013, Structural basis for complement evasion by Lyme disease pathogen Borrelia burgdorferi, J. Biol. Chem., 288, 18685, 10.1074/jbc.M113.459040 · DOI
  43. Brangulis, 2015, Crystal structures of the Erp protein family members ErpP and ErpC from Borrelia burgdorferi reveal the reason for different affinities for complement regulator factor H, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1854, 349, 10.1016/j.bbapap.2014.12.025 · DOI
  44. Zückert, 2014, Secretion of bacterial lipoproteins: through the cytoplasmic membrane, the periplasm and beyond, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1843, 1509, 10.1016/j.bbamcr.2014.04.022 · DOI
  45. Zückert, 2019, Protein secretion in spirochetes, Microbiol. Spectr., 10.1128/microbiolspec.PSIB-0026-2019 · DOI
  46. Booth, 2022, Borrelia miyamotoi FbpA and FbpB are immunomodulatory outer surface lipoproteins with distinct structures and functions, Front. Immunol., 13, 886733, 10.3389/fimmu.2022.886733 · DOI
  47. Clark, 2011, A structural basis for Staphylococcal complement subversion: X-ray structure of the complement-binding domain of Staphylococcus aureus protein Sbi in complex with ligand C3d, Mol. Immunol., 48, 452, 10.1016/j.molimm.2010.09.017 · DOI
  48. Hammel, 2007, Characterization of Ehp, a secreted complement inhibitory protein from Staphylococcus aureus, J. Biol. Chem., 282, 30051, 10.1074/jbc.M704247200 · DOI
  49. Hammel, 2007, A structural basis for complement inhibition by Staphylococcus aureus, Nat. Immunol., 8, 430, 10.1038/ni1450 · DOI
  50. Ricklin, 2008, Cutting edge: members of the Staphylococcus aureus extracellular fibrinogen-binding protein family inhibit the interaction of C3d with complement receptor 2, J. Immunol., 181, 7463, 10.4049/jimmunol.181.11.7463 · DOI
  51. Amdahl, 2013, Staphylococcal Ecb protein and host complement regulator factor H enhance functions of each other in bacterial immune evasion, J. Immunol., 191, 1775, 10.4049/jimmunol.1300638 · DOI
  52. Rooijakkers, 2009, Structural and functional implications of the alternative complement pathway C3 convertase stabilized by a staphylococcal inhibitor, Nat. Immunol., 10, 721, 10.1038/ni.1756 · DOI
  53. Takacs, 2020, A CRISPR interference platform for selective downregulation of gene expression in Borrelia burgdorferi, Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 87, e02519
  54. Gaboriaud, 2013, The serine protease domain of MASP-3: enzymatic properties and crystal structure in complex with ecotin, PLoS One, 8, 10.1371/journal.pone.0067962 · DOI
  55. Nagy, 2022, Synergy of protease-binding sites within the ecotin homodimer is crucial for inhibition of MASP enzymes and for blocking lectin pathway activation, J. Biol. Chem., 298, 101985, 10.1016/j.jbc.2022.101985 · DOI
  56. Farady, 2010, Mechanisms of macromolecular protease inhibitors, Chembiochem, 11, 2341, 10.1002/cbic.201000442 · DOI
  57. Troisi, 2021, Exosite binding in thrombin: a global structural/dynamic overview of complexes with aptamers and other ligands, Int. J. Mol. Sci., 22, 10803, 10.3390/ijms221910803 · DOI
  58. Fuentes-Prior, 1997, Structure of the thrombin complex with triabin, a lipocalin-like exosite-binding inhibitor derived from a triatomine bug, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 94, 11845, 10.1073/pnas.94.22.11845 · DOI
  59. Skrzypczak-Jankun, 1991, Structure of the hirugen and hirulog 1 complexes of α-thrombin, J. Mol. Biol., 221, 1379, 10.1016/0022-2836(91)90939-4 · DOI
  60. Geisbrecht, 2006, An optimized system for expression and purification of secreted bacterial proteins, Protein Expr. Purif., 46, 23, 10.1016/j.pep.2005.09.003 · DOI
  61. Rushing, 2020, Targeting the initiator protease of the classical pathway of complement using fragment-based drug discovery, Molecules, 25, 4016, 10.3390/molecules25174016 · DOI · Paper page
  62. Rossi, 1998, Baculovirus-mediated expression of truncated modular fragments from the catalytic region of human complement serine protease C1s: evidence for the involvement of both complement control protein modules in the recognition of the C4 protein substrate, J. Biol. Chem., 273, 1232, 10.1074/jbc.273.2.1232 · DOI
  63. Yung-Chi, 1973, Relationship between the inhibition constant (K1) and the concentration of inhibitor which causes 50 per cent inhibition (I50) of an enzymatic reaction, Biochem. Pharmacol., 22, 3099, 10.1016/0006-2952(73)90196-2 · DOI · Paper page
  64. Madeira, 2022, Search and sequence analysis tools services from EMBL-EBI in 2022, Nucleic Acids Res., 50, W276, 10.1093/nar/gkac240 · DOI
  65. Robert, 2014, Deciphering key features in protein structures with the new ENDscript server, Nucleic Acids Res., 42, W320, 10.1093/nar/gku316 · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Garrigues, R. J., Thomas, S., Leong, J. M., & Garcia, B. L.
Affiliations
  • East Carolina University (US)
  • Tufts University (US)
Corresponding author
Garcia, Brandon L.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Biological Chemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-11
Volume
298
Issue
11
Pages
102557
ISSN
0021-9258 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jbc.2022.102557
PMC
PMC9637899
OpenAlex
W4298009040
Cited by
11
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Biological Chemistry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • The Scholarship East Carolina University's Institutional Repository (East Carolina University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Public Health Service (R01-AI146930)
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R01-AI121401)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Complement system in diseases
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Parasitology › Vector-borne infectious diseases
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Bacterial Infections and Vaccines
Keywords
Borrelia burgdorferi, Lyme disease, complement evasion, complement C1, surface lipoproteins, exosite, anion-binding exosite, serine protease, classical complement pathway, antibody-mediated complement activation, complement inhibition
MeSH terms
Complement System Proteins, Complement C1s, Complement C4, Humans, Lipoproteins, Lyme Disease, Endopeptidases, Borrelia burgdorferi, Serine Proteases

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review