Our collective data show that the regulatory apparatus of Vav1 is composed of at least two thermodynamically coupled processes (). A core process, in which the inhibitory helix blocks the DH active site, provides approximately 10-fold suppression of activity and phosphorylation rate (
Li et al., 2008). Binding of the CH domain to the N-terminus of the Acidic element and to the DPZ fragment restricts the inhibitory helix, thermodynamically coupling these interactions to the core. This coupling shifts the helix-DH equilibrium ~10-fold further toward the inhibited (helix bound) state. Together, the two processes provide the high level of suppression (~100-fold) that is apparently needed for
in vivo function (since CH truncation leads to cell transformation (
Bustelo, 2001;
Katzav et al., 1991;
Llorca et al., 2005)). This 10-fold × 10-fold construction of Vav1 (rather than a single 100-fold inhibitory equilibrium) is likely functionally important, as we have shown that inhibition by the core alone can be increased to 50-fold simply by two point mutations (
Li et al., 2008). Biochemical data on other multi-domain systems suggest similar (relatively small, 2–20-fold) magnitudes of core suppression and modulatory coupling (
DiNitto et al., 2007;
Moarefi et al., 1997).
This construction has important implications for the biology of Vav1. It provides a quantitative rationale for the increased activity of CH domain truncations of the protein. In such truncations, even though the core inhibitory module is intact, the inherent thermodynamics of the module produce high levels of the active state (9–33%, , ,
S3A) when coupling to the modulatory equilibrium is lost. This effect increases both the phosphorylation rate (and likely steady-state phosphorylation level) and basal GEF activity of Vav1, explaining increased Rac activation and cell transformation (
Bustelo, 2001;
Han et al., 1998;
Llorca et al., 2005;
Lopez-Lago et al., 2000). The ability of CH interactions to modulate the AD core also implies that molecules that disrupt these contacts could partially stimulate Vav1 activity, and act cooperatively with kinases to fully activate the protein
in vivo.
The creation of suppression from multiple weak interactions also has important implications regarding the kinetics of Vav1 activation upon receptor stimulation. In many allosteric systems, it has been shown that activators gain access to their targets by recognizing the small population of active state present under basal conditions (
Henzler-Wildman and Kern, 2007). This is the case in the A
sD core of Vav1, where kinases can only recognize Tyr
174 in the helix-dissociated state (
Li et al., 2008). However, strong suppression of activity opposes this pathway, since it requires that the accessible population be very small, which would tend to make activation slow. The layered energetic and physical construction of modular proteins provides a likely general solution to this problem, which we have observed for Vav1. That is, the structure and energetics of multi-domain systems can be organized so that the modulatory elements are more accessible to activators (e.g. Tyr
142 and Tyr
160 in the CA element show significant µs-ms timescale dynamics and can be rapidly phosphorylated). This allows activation to occur in stepwise fashion, with initial events disabling the modulatory interactions, and consequently increasing access to the core. Thus, modularity enables evolution not only of strong inhibition, but also of ready routes to activation.
A variety of biochemical and structural data suggest that the energetic and kinetic mechanisms that we have found for Vav1 are likely to be widespread among multi-domain proteins. The Tim family of GEFs represents a structurally and functionally similar example (
Yohe et al., 2008). The Tim proteins have a DH domain whose activity is inhibited by an adjacent helix that binds in the active site, and that can be displaced by phosphorylation, analogous to the Vav AD core. The Tim proteins also have a C-terminal SH3 domain that further suppresses the activity of the helix-DH core through binding an internal proline-rich motif (PRM). The mechanism of suppression by the SH3 domain has not been explored, but available data would be consistent with coupling of the helix-DH and SH3-PRM equilibria. Moreover, although the kinetic pathway to Tim activation has not been examined experimentally, it has been speculated that activation may occur stepwise, with initial displacement of SH3-PRM interactions facilitating phosphorylation of the inhibitory helix (
Yohe et al., 2008). The unrelated Ras GEF, SOS, also appears to use the same regulatory logic, with the DH-PH element shifting an allosteric equilibrium in the Rem-Cdc25 element toward its inactive state (
Sondermann et al., 2004).
The broadest class of, and best characterized, proteins that appear to behave in this manner are the protein kinases. A large body of data suggests that the isolated kinase domain fluctuates between an inactive state, where the active site is not properly organized for catalysis, and an active state, where the catalytic cluster and substrate binding site are catalytically competent (e.g. (
Levinson et al., 2006;
Masterson et al., 2008;
Vogtherr et al., 2006)). Phosphorylation of residues in the so-called activation loop stabilizes the active conformation, increasing catalytic activity. While the active state is common among many kinases, the inactive states differ. Sampling of the inactive conformation has been capitalized upon in the Abl tyrosine kinase inhibitor imatinib, a widely used anti-cancer therapeutic (
Schindler et al., 2000). Imatinib distinguishes Abl from other closely related kinases by selectively binding to its unique inactive conformation. NMR analysis of fluctuations between the active an inactive states in isolated kinase domains is an active area of research. However, to date such studies have not yielded a quantitative understanding of kinase thermodynamics (populations of the states) or a detailed view of the equilibrating structures in the absence of stabilizing inhibitors (
Masterson et al., 2008;
Vajpai et al., 2008;
Vogtherr et al., 2006). Many kinases also contain additional domains that repress the activity of the catalytic domain (
Huse and Kuriyan, 2002). Disabling such domains, either by truncation or through regulatory interactions, increases the activity of kinases toward various substrates. A detailed interpretation of the biochemical data in terms of allosteric equilibria are complicated by the fact that phosphorylation of the activation loop locks the kinase in an active state, and that the activity of non-phosphorylated kinases is very low and thus hard to quantify. However, molecular dynamics simulations of the Src kinase have suggested that, at least in that system, the additional SH3 and SH2 domains suppress activity through biasing the regulatory equilibrium in the kinase domain toward the inactive state (
Faraldo-Gomez and Roux, 2007;
Young et al., 2001). As in Vav, this construction also appears to dictate that kinases are activated in stepwise fashion, with initial events that disable modulatory interactions (e.g. in Src by ligand binding to the SH3 domain (
Moarefi et al., 1997)) enabling phosphorylation of the activation loop and consequent maximum stabilization of the active state.
These various examples strongly suggest that although multi-domain proteins use a variety of structural mechanisms to achieve regulation, the underlying energetic mechanism that we have illustrated for Vav, and the requirement for an ordered activation process that arises from it, are likely to be widely observed. The NMR approach we developed here provides a means to directly measure the populations of different states across regulatory equilibria and has allowed us to quantitatively characterize the energetic landscape of Vav1. This in turn has established coupled equilibria as a major mechanism of interdomain cooperativity in this system. Application of these methods to other systems should reveal how widespread cooperative inhibition through coupled equilibria is in multi-domain proteins.