CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 9Insect Resistance and GeneticsInsect Pest Control StrategiesProtein Structure and Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Structural journey of an insecticidal protein against western corn rootworm

Open access
Marini, Guendalina, Poland, Brad, Leininger, Chris, Lukoyanova, Natalya, Spielbauer, Dan, Barry, Jennifer K., Altier, Dan, Lum, Amy, Scolaro, Eric, Ortega, Claudia Pérez, Yalpani, Nasser, Sandahl, Gary, Mabry, Tim, Klever, Jeffrey, Nowatzki, Timothy, Zhao, Jian-Zhou, Sethi, Amit, Kassa, Adane, Crane, Virginia, Lu, Albert L., Nelson, Mark E., Eswar, Narayanan, Topf, Maya, Saibil, Helen R.·2023·Nature Communications
DOI 10.1038/s41467-023-39891-7PMC PMC10344926

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The broad adoption of transgenic crops has revolutionized agriculture. However, resistance to insecticidal proteins by agricultural pests poses a continuous challenge to maintaining crop productivity and new proteins are urgently needed to replace those utilized for existing transgenic traits. We identified an insecticidal membrane attack complex/perforin (MACPF) protein, Mpf2Ba1, with strong activity against the devastating coleopteran pest western corn rootworm (WCR) and a novel site of action. Using an integrative structural biology approach, we determined monomeric, pre-pore and pore structures, revealing changes between structural states at high resolution. We discovered an assembly inhibition mechanism, a molecular switch that activates pre-pore oligomerization upon gut fluid incubation and solved the highest resolution MACPF pore structure to-date. Our findings demonstrate not only the utility of Mpf2Ba1 in the development of biotechnology solutions for protecting maize from WCR to promote food security, but also uncover previously unknown mechanistic principles of bacterial MACPF assembly.

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 · 10.1038/s41467-023-39891-7

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 67

  1. Iacovache, I., Bischofberger, M. & van der Goot, F. G. Structure and assembly of pore-forming proteins. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 20, 241–246 (2010). · DOI
  2. Los, F. C. O., Randis, T. M., Aroian, R. V. & Ratner, A. J. Role of pore-forming toxins in bacterial infectious diseases. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. R. 77, 173–207 (2013). · DOI
  3. Dal Peraro, M. & van der Goot, F. G. Pore-forming toxins: ancient, but never really out of fashion. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 14, 77–92 (2016). · DOI
  4. Pardo‐López, L., Soberón, M. & Bravo, A. Bacillus thuringiensis insecticidal three‐domain Cry toxins: mode of action, insect resistance and consequences for crop protection. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 37, 3–22 (2013). · DOI
  5. Jouzani, G. S., Valijanian, E. & Sharafi, R. Bacillus thuringiensis: a successful insecticide with new environmental features and tidings. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 101, 2691–2711 (2017). · DOI
  6. Xiao, Y. & Wu, K. Recent progress on the interaction between insects and Bacillus thuringiensis crops. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 374, 20180316 (2019). · DOI
  7. Barfoot, P. & Brookes, G. Key global environmental impacts of genetically modified (GM) crop use 1996–2012. GM Crop Food 5, 149–160 (2014). · DOI
  8. Brookes, G. & Barfoot, P. Farm income and production impacts of using GM crop technology 1996–2016. GM Crop Food 9, 1–31 (2018). · DOI
  9. Gray, M. E., Sappington, T. W., Miller, N. J., Moeser, J. & Bohn, M. O. Adaptation and invasiveness of Western Corn Rootworm: intensifying research on a worsening pest. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 54, 303–321 (2009). · DOI
  10. Crickmore, N. et al. A structure-based nomenclature for Bacillus thuringiensis and other bacteria-derived pesticidal proteins. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 186, 107438 (2020). · DOI
  11. Gassmann, A. J. Resistance to Bt maize by Western Corn Rootworm: effects of pest biology, the pest–crop interaction and the agricultural landscape on resistance. Insects 12, 136 (2021). · DOI
  12. Jakka, S. R. K., Shrestha, R. B. & Gassmann, A. J. Broad-spectrum resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis toxins by western corn rootworm (Diabrotica virgifera virgifera). Sci. Rep. 6, 27860 (2016). · DOI
  13. Bragard, C. et al. Pest categorisation of Diabrotica virgifera zeae. EFSA J. 17, e05858 (2019).
  14. Xu, Q. et al. Structure of a membrane-attack complex/perforin (MACPF) family protein from the human gut symbiont Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. F. Struct. Biol. Cryst. Commun. 66, 1297–1305 (2010). · DOI
  15. Pang, S. S. et al. The cryo-EM structure of the acid activatable pore-forming immune effector Macrophage-expressed gene 1. Nat. Commun. 10, 4288 (2019). · DOI
  16. Ni, T. et al. Structure and mechanism of bactericidal mammalian perforin-2, an ancient agent of innate immunity. Sci. Adv. 6, eaax8286 (2020). · DOI
  17. Li, J., Carroll, J. & Ellar, D. J. Crystal structure of insecticidal δ-endotoxin from Bacillus thuringiensis at 2.5 Å resolution. Nature 353, 815–821 (1991). · DOI
  18. Chothia, C. & Murzin, A. G. New folds for all-β proteins. Structure 1, 217–222 (1993). · DOI
  19. Rosado, C. J. et al. A common fold mediates vertebrate defense and bacterial attack. Science 317, 1548–1551 (2007). · DOI
  20. Boura, E. & Hurley, J. H. Structural basis for membrane targeting by the MVB12-associated β-prism domain of the human ESCRT-I MVB12 subunit. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 1901–1906 (2012). · DOI
  21. Zaitseva, J. et al. Structure–function characterization of an insecticidal protein GNIP1Aa, a member of an MACPF and β-tripod families. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 201815547 (2019). · DOI
  22. Kaiser-Alexnat, R. Protease activities in the midgut of Western corn rootworm (Diabrotica virgifera virgifera LeConte). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 100, 169–174 (2009). · DOI
  23. Reboul, C. F., Whisstock, J. C. & Dunstone, M. A. Giant MACPF/CDC pore forming toxins: a class of their own. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1858, 475–486 (2016). · DOI
  24. Zhang, X. C. & Han, L. How does a β-barrel integral membrane protein insert into the membrane? Protein Cell 7, 471–477 (2016). · DOI
  25. Wade, K. R. et al. An intermolecular electrostatic interaction controls the prepore-to-pore transition in a cholesterol-dependent cytolysin. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 2204–2209 (2015). · DOI
  26. Lukoyanova, N. et al. Conformational changes during pore formation by the perforin-related protein pleurotolysin. PLos Biol. 13, e1002049 (2015). · DOI
  27. Ramachandran, R., Tweten, R. K. & Johnson, A. E. Membrane-dependent conformational changes initiate cholesterol-dependent cytolysin oligomerization and intersubunit β-strand alignment. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 11, 697–705 (2004). · DOI
  28. Dudkina, N. V. et al. Structure of the poly-C9 component of the complement membrane attack complex. Nat. Commun. 7, 10588 (2016). · DOI
  29. Burns, J. R., Morton, C. J., Parker, M. W. & Tweten, R. K. An intermolecular π-stacking interaction drives conformational changes necessary to β-barrel formation in a pore-forming toxin. Mbio 10, e01017–e01019 (2019). · DOI
  30. Murzin, A. G., Lesk, A. M. & Chothia, C. Principles determining the structure of β-sheet barrels in proteins I. A theoretical analysis. J. Mol. Biol. 236, 1369–1381 (1994). · DOI
  31. Reboul, C. F., Mahmood, K., Whisstock, J. C. & Dunstone, M. A. Predicting giant transmembrane β-barrel architecture. Bioinformatics 28, 1299–1302 (2012). · DOI
  32. Schulz, G. E. The structure of bacterial outer membrane proteins. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1565, 308–317 (2002). · DOI
  33. Savva, C. G. et al. Molecular architecture and functional analysis of NetB, a pore-forming toxin from Clostridium perfringens. J. Biol. Chem. 288, 3512–3522 (2013). · DOI
  34. Bokori-Brown, M. et al. Cryo-EM structure of lysenin pore elucidates membrane insertion by an aerolysin family protein. Nat. Commun. 7, 11293 (2016). · DOI
  35. Zhao, J.-Z. et al. mCry3A-selected western corn rootworm (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) colony exhibits high resistance and has reduced binding of mCry3A to midgut tissue. J. Econ. Entomol. 109, 1369–1377 (2016). · DOI
  36. Lynn, D. E. & Stoppleworth, A. Established cell lines from the beetle, Diabrotica Undecimpunctata (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Vitro 20, 365–368 (1984). · DOI
  37. Collaborative Computational Project Number 4. The CCP4 suite: programs for protein crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. D. Biol. Crystallogr. 50, 760–763 (1994). · DOI
  38. Emsley, P., Lohkamp, B., Scott, W. G. & Cowtan, K. Features and development of Coot. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. D. Biol. Crystallogr. 66, 486–501 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  39. Murshudov, G. N. et al. REFMAC5 for the refinement of macromolecular crystal structures. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. D. Biol. Crystallogr. 67, 355–367 (2011). · DOI
  40. Ashkenazy, H. et al. ConSurf 2016: an improved methodology to estimate and visualize evolutionary conservation in macromolecules. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, W344–W350 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  41. Altschul, S. F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E. W. & Lipman, D. J. Basic local alignment search tool. J. Mol. Biol. 215, 403–410 (1990). · DOI · Paper page
  42. Goddard, T. D. et al. UCSF ChimeraX: meeting modern challenges in visualization and analysis. Protein Sci. 27, 14–25 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  43. Meier, A. & Söding, J. Automatic prediction of protein 3D structures by probabilistic multi-template homology modelling. PLos Comput. Biol. 11, e1004343 (2015). · DOI
  44. Berman, H. M. et al. The protein data bank. Nucleic Acids Res. 28, 235–242 (2000). · DOI · Paper page
  45. Cheng, K., Wilkinson, M., Chaban, Y. & Wigley, D. B. A conformational switch in response to Chi converts RecBCD from phage destruction to DNA repair. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 27, 71–77 (2020). · DOI
  46. Dubochet, J. & Lepault, J. Cryo-electron microscopy of vitrified water. J. Phys. Colloq. C7, 85–94 (1984).
  47. Punjani, A., Rubinstein, J. L., Fleet, D. J. & Brubaker, M. A. cryoSPARC: algorithms for rapid unsupervised cryo-EM structure determination. Nat. Methods 14, 290–296 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  48. Sanchez-Garcia, R. et al. DeepEMhancer: a deep learning solution for cryo-EM volume post-processing. Commun. Biol. 4, 874 (2021). · DOI
  49. Cardone, G., Heymann, J. B. & Steven, A. C. One number does not fit all: Mapping local variations in resolution in cryo-EM reconstructions. J. Struct. Biol. 184, 226–236 (2013). · DOI
  50. Zheng, S. Q. et al. MotionCor2: anisotropic correction of beam-induced motion for improved cryo-electron microscopy. Nat. Methods 14, 331–332 (2017). · DOI
  51. Rohou, A. & Grigorieff, N. CTFFIND4: fast and accurate defocus estimation from electron micrographs. J. Struct. Biol. 192, 216–221 (2015). · DOI
  52. Pintilie, G. D., Zhang, J., Goddard, T. D., Chiu, W. & Gossard, D. C. Quantitative analysis of cryo-EM density map segmentation by watershed and scale-space filtering, and fitting of structures by alignment to regions. J. Struct. Biol. 170, 427–438 (2010). · DOI
  53. Pettersen, E. F. et al. UCSF Chimera – A visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. J. Comput. Chem. 25, 1605–1612 (2004). · DOI
  54. Pandurangan, A. P. & Topf, M. Finding rigid bodies in protein structures: application to flexible fitting into cryoEM maps. J. Struct. Biol. 177, 520–531 (2012). · DOI
  55. Joseph, A. P. et al. Refinement of atomic models in high resolution EM reconstructions using Flex-EM and local assessment. Methods 100, 42–49 (2016). · DOI
  56. Burnley, T., Palmer, C. M. & Winn, M. Recent developments in the CCP-EM software suite. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. D. Struct. Biol. 73, 469–477 (2017). · DOI
  57. Croll, T. I. ISOLDE: a physically realistic environment for model building into low-resolution electron-density maps. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. D. Struct. Biol. 74, 519–530 (2018). · DOI
  58. Afonine, P. V. et al. Real‐space refinement in PHENIX for cryo‐EM and crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. D. 74, 531–544 (2018). · DOI
  59. Liebschner, D. et al. Macromolecular structure determination using X‐rays, neutrons and electrons: recent developments in Phenix. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. D. 75, 861–877 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  60. Li, F. et al. Procleave: Predicting protease-specific substrate cleavage sites by combining sequence and structural information. Genom. Proteom. Bioinform. 18, 52–64 (2020). · DOI
  61. Jurrus, E. et al. Improvements to the APBS biomolecular solvation software suite. Protein Sci. 27, 112–128 (2018). · DOI
  62. Smith, N. et al. DelPhi Web Server v2: Incorporating atomic-style geometrical figures into the computational protocol. Bioinformatics 28, 1655–1657 (2012). · DOI
  63. Sarkar, S. et al. DelPhi Web Server: a comprehensive online suite for electrostatic calculations of biological macromolecules and their complexes. Comm. Comp. Phys. 13, 269–284 (2013). · DOI
  64. Pintilie, G. et al. Measurement of atom resolvability in cryo-EM maps with Q-scores. Nat. Methods 17, 328–334 (2020). · DOI
  65. Farabella, I. et al. TEMPy: a Python library for assessment of three-dimensional electron microscopy density fits. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 48, 1314–1323 (2015). · DOI
  66. Chen, V. B. et al. MolProbity: all-atom structure validation for macromolecular crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. D. Biol. Crystallogr. 66, 12–21 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  67. Istrate, A., Wang, Z., Murshudov, G. N., Patwardhan, A. & Kleywegt, G. J. 3D-Strudel - a novel model-dependent map-feature validation method for high-resolution cryo-EM structures. Preprint at bioRxiv 2021.12.16.472999 (2021). · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Marini, G., Poland, B., Leininger, C., Lukoyanova, N., Spielbauer, D., Barry, J. K., Altier, D., Lum, A., Scolaro, E., Ortega, C. P., Yalpani, N., Sandahl, G., Mabry, T., Klever, J., Nowatzki, T., Zhao, J.-Z., Sethi, A., Kassa, A., Crane, V., Lu, A. L., Nelson, M. E., Eswar, N., Topf, M., & Saibil, H. R.
Affiliations
  • Leibniz Institute of Virology (LIV) (DE)
  • Corteva (United States) (US)
  • Syngenta (United States) (US)
  • Institute of Structural and Molecular Biology (GB)
  • Hologic (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
  • Nelson, Mark E.
  • Eswar, Narayanan
  • Topf, Maya
  • Saibil, Helen R.
ORCID
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2023-07-13
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
4171-4171
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41467-023-39891-7
PMC
PMC10344926
OpenAlex
W4384201122
Cited by
9
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • BIROn (Birkbeck, University of London) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Desy Publications Database (Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DESY Publication Database (PUBDB) (Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture
  • Iowa State University
  • Wellcome Trust (202679/Z/16/Z, Z/17/Z, 202679, 206166/Z/17/Z, 206166)
  • Corteva Agriscience
  • Agricultural Research Service
  • Plant Sciences Institute, Iowa State University
  • Leibniz-Gemeinschaft (W6/2018)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Insect Resistance and Genetics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Insect Pest Control Strategies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
Keywords
western corn rootworm, insecticidal proteins, membrane attack complex, perforin, structural state, genetically modified crops, insect resistance, Coleoptera
MeSH terms
Animals, Coleoptera, Zea mays, Endotoxins, Insecticide Resistance, Insecticides, Larva, Pest Control, Biological, Animals, Genetically Modified, Plants, Genetically Modified, Perforin

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