|
J Biol Chem, Vol. 273, Issue 31, 19391-19397, July 31, 1998
Three Thiol Groups Are Important for the Activity of the Liver
Microsomal Glucose-6-phosphatase System
UNUSUAL BEHAVIOR OF ONE THIOL LOCATED IN THE GLUCOSE-6-PHOSPHATE
TRANSLOCASE*
Eric
Clottes and
Ann
Burchell
From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Ninewells
Hospital and Medical School, Dundee University, Dundee, DD1 9SY,
Scotland
 |
ABSTRACT |
Liver microsomal glucose-6-phosphatase
(Glc-6-Pase) is a multicomponent system involving both substrate and
product carriers and a catalytic subunit. We have investigated the
inhibitory effect of N-ethylmaleimide (NEM), a rather
specific sulfhydryl reagent, on rat liver Glc-6-Pase activity. Three
thiol groups are important for Glc-6-Pase system activity. Two of them
are located in the glucose-6-phosphate (Glc-6-P) translocase, and one
is located in the catalytic subunit. The other transporters (phosphate
and glucose) are not affected by NEM treatment. The NEM alkylation of
the catalytic subunit sulfhydryl residue is prevented by preincubating the disrupted microsomes with saturating concentrations of substrate or
product. This suggests either that the modified cysteine is located in
the protein active site or that substrate binding hides the thiol group
via a conformational change in the enzyme structure. Two other thiols
important for the Glc-6-Pase system activity are located in the Glc-6-P
translocase and are more reactive than the one located in the catalytic
subunit. The study of the NEM inhibition of the translocase has
provided evidence of the existence of two distinct areas in the protein
that can behave independently, with conformational changes occurring
during Glc-6-P binding to the transporter. The recent cloning of a
human putative Glc-6-P carrier exhibiting homologies with bacterial
phosphoester transporters, such as Escherichia coli UhpT (a
Glc-6-P translocase), is compatible with the fact that two cysteine
residues are important for the bacterial Glc-6-P transport.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The strategic position of
Glc-6-Pase1 (EC 3.1.3.9) in
carbohydrate metabolism, at the connection between gluconeogenesis and
glycogenolysis, makes it a key enzyme in blood glucose homeostasis (1).
The enzyme is a nonspecific phosphohydrolase tightly associated with
the endoplasmic reticulum and nuclear membranes of liver and kidney
cells (1). It has been identified as a 38-kDa protein (2, 3) and has
been cloned in several animal species
(4-7).2 The active site of
the enzyme is located in the endoplasmic reticulum lumen (8). In
vitro, with the use of microsomes (small endoplasmic reticulum
vesicles), the protein activity exhibits a phenomenon termed latency,
with part of its activity expressed only when the membrane is
disrupted, increasing both activity and affinity (9). To explain the
role of the membrane in the function of Glc-6-Pase, two models have
been proposed, the conformational model (10, 11) and the transport
model (12, 13).
The conformational model (10, 11, 14-18) explains all of the kinetic
observations by assuming that the protein can be found in several
active conformations, each one possessing particular properties. The
transport model involves specific permeases termed T1 (Glc-6-P), T2
(phosphate), and T3 (glucose). These carriers allow the translocation
of the substrate molecules (Glc-6-P) through the membrane into the
endoplasmic reticulum lumen, followed by its hydrolysis by the
Glc-6-Pase catalytic subunit and then the elimination of the reaction
products (phosphate and Glc) from the endoplasmic reticulum
cisternae (Fig. 1; for review
see Ref. 19). However, direct evidence, such as the unequivocal
identification of one of the transporters, has to be produced.
Recently, an elegant study using a very specific Glc-6-Pase inhibitor
has provided compelling evidence for the existence of T1 (20). The
first indications for the existence of such a Glc-6-P translocase
were provided using chemical modification of thiol groups of the
Glc-6-Pase system. Although the presence of an accessible sulfhydryl
residue(s) necessary for the transport activity of the Glc-6-P
translocase T1 is clearly established (21-24), the number of such
residues is still to be elucidated. The difficulty with determining
this is that the catalytic subunit can also be inhibited by thiol
reagents (25, 11).

View larger version (68K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Schematic diagram of the microsomal
Glc-6-Pase transport model. The Glc-6-P, phosphate
(Pi), and Glc carriers are termed T1, T2, and T3,
respectively. SP denotes stabilizing protein.
|
|
In this paper, we demonstrate that two thiol groups of the Glc-6-P
translocase and one in the Glc-6-Pase catalytic subunit are important
for the activity of the system. We also show that conformational
changes in the translocase protein are triggered by Glc-6-P
binding.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Chemicals--
Glc-6-P (sodium salt), mannose 6-phosphate
(disodium salt), glucose, alamethicin, histone IIA, NEM, bovine serum
albumin (free fatty acid), and orthovanadate were from Sigma. Mannose,
potassium phosphate, PIPES, sucrose, EDTA, -mercaptoethanol,
ascorbic acid, ammonium molybdate, HEPES, and sodium dodecylsulfate
were from Merck.
Preparation of Rat Liver Microsomes--
Fed Wistar rats
(220-250 g) were used. Liver microsomes were made as described
elsewhere (26). The microsomes were resuspended in a 0.25 M
sucrose, 5 mM HEPES buffer, pH 7.4; quickly frozen; and
kept at 70 °C until used. The protein concentrations were determined using the Lowry method (27) as modified by Peterson (28)
using bovine serum albumin as standard. The intactness of the
microsomal vesicles was estimated using the latency of mannose
6-phosphate (29) and was greater than 90% in all the microsomal
preparations.
Activity Measurements--
A 96-well microplate assay derived
from the colorimetric technique previously described was used (30). The
substrates were dissolved at various concentrations in a 24 mM HEPES, 3 mM EDTA buffer, pH 6.5. In some
substrate sets, histone IIA at a 1 mg/ml final concentration was added
in order to measure the Glc-6-Pase activity in disrupted vesicles (31).
In the assay, 5 µl of microsomal suspension were incubated with 25 µl of substrate stock solutions for time periods between 10 and 30 min (depending on the substrate concentration) at 30 °C. Then, 250 µl of a stop solution (0.28% ammonium molybdate, 2.2% SDS, 1.1%
ascorbic acid in 0.33 M sulfuric acid) were added in order
to measure colorimetrically the amount of phosphate formed. Under our
conditions, at least three identical measurements were made, and
blanks, in which stop solution was added before the substrates, were
used to correct the assay values. A standard curve with known amounts
of phosphate was made under identical conditions. The microplates were
then incubated at 46 °C for 20 min and read in an ELISA plate reader
at 820 nm. The microsomal intactness was measured using 1.67 mM mannose 6-phosphate ± histones. The activity was
corrected for intactness using the following equation (32, 33),
|
(Eq. 1)
|
where SAH is the Glc-6-Pase specific activity
measured without histones, SAH+ is the Glc-6-Pase specific
activity measured with histones, and M6PH and
M6PH+ are the activity measured with mannose 6-phosphate as
a substrate in absence or presence of histones, respectively.
NEM Chemical Modification--
A 0.25 M stock
solution of NEM in sucrose/HEPES buffer, pH 7.4, was prepared by
warming up the mixture at 46 °C for 5 min. This solution or
dilutions of this stock solution were used to modify rat liver
microsomes. In a typical experiment, a pool of microsomal vesicles (1 mg/ml) was incubated in sucrose/HEPES buffer, pH 7.4, at room
temperature, in the presence of various concentrations of NEM. Then, at
different times, aliquots were withdrawn, and a 2-fold molar excess
(with respect to NEM concentration) of -mercaptoethanol was added in
order to prevent further modification by the alkylating reagent. The
samples were kept on ice until assayed for activity or for
transport.
Calculations of Inhibition Kinetics--
With nondisrupted
microsomes (chemical modification performed in absence of histones),
the Glc-6-Pase activity inhibition curves observed were fitted to the
following equation (34),
|
(Eq. 2)
|
where k1 and k2 are the first order rate
constants of the quickly and slowly NEM-modified sites, respectively,
and t is the time in minutes. The representation ln
Aobs = f(time) gave us two straight
lines and allowed us to estimate both constant values. k1
and k2 were both found to be NEM
concentration-dependent. Consequently, the NEM inhibition
was a second order mechanism.
Moreover, and surprisingly, the first order rate constant
k1, in contrast to k2, was also dependent on the
Glc-6-P concentration used to assay the Glc-6-Pase residual activity.
Here, k1 was an apparent constant
(k1app). The logarithm of the
k1app values was plotted against the Glc-6-P
concentration in order to estimate the value of k1 at 0 mM Glc-6-P and is be referred to below as k1extrapolated. For all the NEM concentrations
used, values of k1extrapolated and k2
were measured and plotted against the NEM concentration in order to
calculate kI and kII, the second-order rate
constants of the reactions for the quickly and slowly modified sites, respectively.
For a given NEM concentration, the dependence on Glc-6-P concentrations
of k1app values allowed us to estimate the
affinity of this compound for the first site modified by NEM using the following relationship,
|
(Eq. 3)
|
where k1x is the k1app
for a Glc-6-P concentration x, and
k1 equals the k2 value found for
the NEM concentration considered. The saturation curve obtained can be
linearized via a double reciprocal plot. The intercept with the
abscissa axis gave us 1/KD, with
KD being the affinity constant of Glc-6-P for the
first (quickly) NEM-modified site.
With disrupted microsomes (modification performed in presence of
histones), the Glc-6-Pase activity inhibition curves obtained were
fitted to the following equation (35),
|
(Eq. 4)
|
where k is the first order rate constant of the
mechanism, A0 is the starting specific activity,
and t is the time in minutes. As described previously,
k was dependent on the NEM concentration used to inhibit the
enzyme activity, indicating that the NEM inhibition of Glc-6-Pase
activity in "disrupted" microsomes was also a second order
mechanism.
Light Scattering Experiments--
Changes in microsomal vesicle
size and shape induced by osmotic modification in the medium were
monitored using a Hitachi F-4500 spectrofluorometer equipped with a
temperature-controlled cuvette holder (30 °C) and a magnetic
stirrer. The mV output signals were acquired at 0.1-s intervals. Both
excitation and emission wavelength were 400 nm; the slits were 1 nm for
excitation and 5 nm for emission. Stock solutions of sucrose (1 M), Glc-6-P (0.3 M), phosphate (1 M), and glucose (1 M) were prepared in 4 mM PIPES, pH 7.1. NEM-treated and untreated rat liver
microsomes were diluted in the same PIPES buffer to a final protein
concentration of 0.2 mg/ml. Then, 500 µl of the microsomal vesicle
suspension were placed in a cuvette to equilibrate at 30 °C until a
stable baseline was obtained. With the use of a Hamilton syringe, 25 µl of substrate stock solutions were added to the cuvette through a
hole in the cuvette holder lid. After the trace recovered a baseline
level, 5 µl of a 1 mg/ml solution of alamethicin (in ethanol) were
added in order to fully permeabilize the microsomes (36-38).
 |
RESULTS |
Determination of the NEM Concentration Suitable for Glc-6-Pase
Activity Inhibition in "Untreated" (Absence of Histones)
Microsomes--
Liver microsomes were incubated in a sucrose/HEPES
buffer with different NEM concentrations at room temperature for 1 h and then blocked with -mercaptoethanol. Glc-6-Pase activity
assayed in nondisrupting conditions started to be inhibited at a NEM
concentration higher than 100 µM; the IC50
was 500 µM (not shown). When the activity was measured in
NEM-modified vesicles in the presence of histones (permeabilized
membranes), the activity loss was very low; the residual activity
slightly decreased after 1-2 mM NEM. In the presence or
absence of 0.1 mM vanadate, a competitive inhibitor of the
Glc-6-Pase catalytic subunit (39), the inhibition in intact vesicles
was identical to the control (without vanadate), and when the activity
was assayed in the presence of histones, no significant loss of
activity was observed (with 1-2 mM NEM concentrations).
NEM Kinetic Inhibition in Untreated Microsomes--
Nondisrupted
microsomes in sucrose/HEPES buffer, pH 7.4 (Fig.
2), were incubated at room temperature
with various concentrations of NEM (between 0.1 and 1 mM).
At different times, an aliquot was withdrawn, and a 2-fold molar excess
of -mercaptoethanol (with respect to NEM concentration) was added.
The microsomal intactness remained unchanged and was between 90 and
95% whatever the NEM concentration and incubation time used (not
shown). A logarithmic representation of Glc-6-Pase activity in intact
microsomes, modified with 0, 0.25, 0.5, or 1 mM NEM and
assayed with 15 mM Glc-6-P as substrate (Fig.
2A), shows two inhibition phases (chemical modification of
two different sites), one faster than the other, both of which are
dependent on NEM concentration (second order inhibition mechanism).

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Inhibition of Glc-6-Pase activity by NEM in
intact microsomes. Microsomes were incubated at room temperature
in a sucrose/HEPES buffer, pH 7.4 (identical results were obtained with
4 mM PIPES buffer, pH 7.1). NEM was then added, and at the
time indicated in the figure, an aliquot was withdrawn and mixed with a
2-fold excess of -mercaptoethanol. The activity was measured using
different concentrations of substrate in the absence or presence of
histones. A, Glc-6-Pase residual activity was assayed in
nondisrupted conditions with 15 mM Glc-6-P as substrate for
three sets of NEM-modified rat liver microsomes ( , 0; , 0.25;
, 0.5; , 1 mM). The logarithm of the residual
specific activity corrected for intactness is plotted against time.
B, the residual specific activity in nondisrupted microsomes
modified by 0.5 mM NEM was measured using different
concentrations of Glc-6-P ( , 0.6; , 2; , 5; , 20 mM). The logarithm of the residual specific activity
corrected for intactness is plotted against time. C, the
same 0.5 mM NEM-treated microsomes were subsequently
assayed for activity using the same concentrations of Glc-6-P as
reported in B but in the presence of histones ( , 0.6;
, 2; , 5; , 20 mM). The logarithm of the residual
specific activity is plotted against time.
|
|
Usually, when an irreversible inhibition occurs, whatever the substrate
concentration used to measure the activity decrease, the rate constants
remain unchanged. From measurements using microsomes modified with a
given NEM concentration (0.5 mM in the case of Fig.
2B) and assayed with different concentrations of Glc-6-P, we
can observe that, as expected, the second (slow) inhibition phase is
not affected by the Glc-6-P concentration used to monitor the residual
activity. However the first (fast) phase is greatly accentuated for low
concentration of substrate and tends to disappear for high substrate
concentrations ( 20 mM). The k1 rate constants are apparent rate constants (k1app), dependent
on substrate concentrations, whereas k2 (rate constant of
the second inhibition phase) are not. The activity measured with the
same NEM-modified microsomes, which have subsequently been
permeabilized by histones, remains constant with time whatever the
Glc-6-P concentration used for assaying the residual activity (Fig.
2C).
Kinetic Constants of NEM Modification in Untreated
Microsomes--
We calculated the k1app and
k2 values for various NEM concentrations. Because
k1app values are dependent on the Glc-6-P
concentration used to measure the residual activity, we plotted the
logarithm base 10 of the k1app values against
the Glc-6-P concentration for various NEM concentrations (Fig.
3A). The straight lines
obtained allowed us to extrapolate the value of
k1app for 0 mM Glc-6-P (k1extrapolated). On the contrary, k2
values were not sensitive to the Glc-6-P concentration (Fig.
3B). The plots of rate constant as a function of inhibitor
concentration gave a linear relationship (Fig. 3, C and
D), consistent with the idea that NEM was reacting (at each
site) with one or a small number of cysteines (if more than one, the
modification rates must be very similar). The values of the second
order kinetic constant for the quickly (kI) and the slowly
(kII) modified sites are 2360 and 33 min 1
M 1, respectively.

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Estimation of the second order rate constant
of the two NEM inhibition phases. A, from the curve
sets (some are shown in Fig. 2, A and B), using
the mathematical relation for two category sites each with second order
kinetics described under "Experimental Procedures," we calculated
the apparent values of the first (fast) phase
k1app for each Glc-6-P concentration used for
assaying the activity and plotted the log of these values against the
Glc-6-P concentration. [NEM]: , 0.25; , 0.5; , 1 mM. B, an identical representation was made with
the values (k2) calculated for the (slow) inhibition phase.
The NEM concentrations used to modify the microsomes were identical to
those used in A. C, the values of
k1app (A) were extrapolated to 0 mM Glc-6-P. Then, the k1extrapolated
values were plotted against the concentration of NEM (second order rate
constant kI = 2300 min 1
M 1). D, the second order constant
of the second inhibition phase is independent of the Glc-6-P
concentration (B). The calculated value of kII is
33 min 1 M 1.
|
|
Dissociation Constant Value of Glc-6-P for the First NEM-modified
Site--
From the data shown in Fig. 3A, we calculated the
dissociation constant between Glc-6-P and the quickly modified site
using the relation described under "Experimental Procedures." A
saturation curve was obtained (Fig. 4,
inset). The double reciprocal representation of the data
gives a straight line that allows the calculation of the
KD value of Glc-6-P for the fast NEM-modified site.
The affinity constant is 2.02 ± 0.26 mM.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Estimation of the affinity constant for
Glc-6-P of the first NEM-modified site. From the curves like those
shown in Fig. 2A, we calculated the percentage of variation
in the first inhibition phase due to Glc-6-P. The Lineweaver-Burk
representation shown gives an estimate of the dissociation constant of
Glc-6-P for the first NEM-modified site of 2.02 ± 0.26 mM (n = 3; each data point (0) is the
average value of the saturation curves obtained with three or four NEM
concentrations). The inset presents the saturation curve
obtained from the calculation (Equation 3) described under
"Experimental Procedures."
|
|
Protection by Glc-6-P and Vanadate--
NEM inhibition experiments
were performed in the presence of 50 mM Glc-6-P or 100 µM vanadate as described in Table
I (legend). The rate constant of the
second (slow) NEM-modified site is not dependent on the Glc-6-P
concentration used to assay the Glc-6-Pase residual activity. However,
when the microsomes were incubated in the presence of both 0.5 mM NEM and 50 mM Glc-6-P, then there was a
2-fold decrease of k2 (p < 0.005 compared
with control), showing a protection from NEM (Table I). The
k2 was unchanged (not significantly different compared with
control) when 100 µM vanadate was added to the
microsomes. The first (fast) NEM-modified site rate constant
(k1extrapolated) was doubled when the microsomes were incubated with 50 mM Glc-6-P but unchanged (compared
with control) when 100 µM vanadate was used (Table
I).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Effect of Glc-6-P and vanadate on Glc-6-Pase activity inhibition by
NEM in nondisrupted microsomes
Fed rat liver microsomes (1 mg/ml) were incubated in a 0.25 M sucrose, 5 mM HEPES buffer, pH 7.4, in the
absence or the presence of 50 mM Glc-6-P or 100 µM vanadate for 2 min at room temperature. 0.5 mM NEM was then added. At different times, aliquots were
withdrawn and a 2-fold molar excess of -mercaptoethanol was added.
The microsomes were pelleted by centrifugation in order to eliminate
the added ligands (Glc-6-P or vanadate). The supernatant was discarded
and an equal volume of sucrose/HEPES buffer was used to resuspend the
microsomal pellet. Thereafter, the residual specific activity
(corrected for intactness) was measured for various Glc-6-P
concentrations. From the curves obtained (ln (residual specific
activity) = f(time)), we calculated the constant rates of
the two inhibition phases (see under "Experimental Procedures").
k2 was in all cases independent of the Glc-6-P
concentrations used to assay the residual enzyme activity, whereas
k1 was dependent on the Glc-6-P concentration.
k1extrapolated values were then determined as
described in Fig. 3A. The values of k2 are
mean ± S.D. (n = 5).
|
|
Effect of NEM on Microsomal Transport of Glc-6-P, Phosphate, and
Glucose--
We investigated the transport of both substrate (Glc-6-P)
and products (phosphate and glucose) from Glc-6-Pase reaction, in untreated microsomes incubated for various time periods with 1 mM NEM (Fig. 5). Typical
traces are presented for sucrose (Fig. 5a), a nonpermeating
compound, Glc-6-P (Fig. 5b), phosphate (Fig. 5c),
and glucose (Fig. 5d) with microsomes incubated with 2 mM -mercaptoethanol. The same type of traces are shown
for microsomes treated for 1 h with 1 mM NEM and in
which 2 mM -mercaptoethanol was added in order to stop
the NEM alkylation reaction (Fig. 5, e-h). Traces for
sucrose (Fig. 5e), phosphate (Fig. 5g), and
glucose (Fig. 5h) were identical to those obtained in normal
(no NEM) microsomes (Fig. 5, a, c, and
d). The Glc-6-P transport traces obtained with 1 mM NEM-treated microsomes for 2, 20, 30, and 60 min are
shown in Fig. 5f. In that case, both half-lives and light scattering variations (from the top of the trace to the recovered baseline; see Fig. 5h, double arrow line) are
modified. To monitor the NEM modification of the different transport
systems, we chose to use the light scattering variation (as shown in
Fig. 5h) as a parameter reflecting the percentage of
microsomal vesicles still exhibiting transport. Then we plotted the
logarithm of these values against time for the three different
transport systems (Fig. 6). The phosphate
and glucose transport were not affected by NEM-microsome alkylation.
However, Glc-6-P transport was reduced in a first order manner. The
value of the inhibition rate constant (0.025 min 1) is not
significantly different from the value of the rate constant obtained
from Glc-6-Pase activity measurements with the same NEM-treated microsomes: 0.028 min 1 (corresponds to the second
inhibition phase rate constant, k2).

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Influx of various compounds into liver
microsomal vesicles modified or not with 1 mM
NEM evaluated by a light scattering technique. Liver
microsomes (1 mg/ml) were modified with 1 mM NEM in 4 mM PIPES, pH 7.1. At various times, aliquots were withdrawn
and NEM modification was stopped by adding 2 mM
-mercaptoethanol. During this procedure, microsomes were kept on ice
and, before being used for light scattering experiments, were diluted
5-fold (in 4 mM PIPES, pH 7.1). Osmotically induced changes
in microsomal vesicle size and shape were induced by addition of 25 µl (black arrowhead) (in a microsome volume of 500 µl)
of 4 mM PIPES (a, bottom trace) or of
concentrated solutions of sucrose (a and e),
Glc-6-P (b and f), phosphate (c and
g), and glucose (d and h), leading to
final concentrations of 50, 15, 50, and 50 mM,
respectively. Alamethicin was added to fully permeabilize the
microsomal vesicles (open arrowhead). Traces are
representations of two separate experiments: traces a, b, c,
and d were observed with untreated microsomes, and traces
e, f, g, and h were observed with 1 mM NEM-modified microsomes (e, g, and
h, 60-min incubation; f, 2, 20, 30, and 60 min
incubation). In h, the double arrow line shows a
light scattering variation that is proportional to the number of
microsomal vesicles transporting the substrate.
|
|

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Evidence that translocase for Glc-6-P
transport but not for phosphate or glucose is affected by NEM
modification. The traces (some are shown in Fig. 5) obtained both
with substrate (15 mM Glc-6-P) and products (50 mM phosphate and 50 mM glucose) of Glc-6-Pase
reaction were analyzed as follows. The light scattering intensity
variations, comprising the difference between the top of the trace
(initiation of the transport) and the recovered baseline (when the
compound concentrations outside and inside the vesicles are presumed to
be identical) were measured (see double arrow in Fig.
5h) and normalized to the value obtained for time 0. We
assumed that these values are proportional to the number of microsomal
vesicles that are still able to exhibit transport (i.e. to
the number of still functional transporters). We plotted the logarithm
of these values against time. Each point is the average of
two separate experiments ( , Glc-6-P; , phosphate; ,
glucose).
|
|
Determination of the NEM Concentration Suitable for Glc-6-Pase
Inhibition in Disrupted Microsomes--
Liver microsomes (1 mg/ml)
previously permeabilized for 30 min with 1 mg/ml of histones were
incubated at room temperature with various amounts of NEM. After 1 h, a 2-fold excess (over NEM) of -mercaptoethanol was added to
prevent further modification. The residual Glc-6-Pase specific activity
was assayed using 20 mM Glc-6-P and plotted against NEM
concentration (not shown). Inhibition of Glc-6-Pase activity was
observed for NEM concentration values higher than 1-2 mM
and is maximal for concentrations over 20-25 mM. The
IC50 measured in these conditions was 7-8
mM.
NEM Kinetic Inhibition in "Disrupted"
Microsomes--
Disrupted microsomes were subjected to different
concentrations of NEM and then assayed for residual Glc-6-Pase activity
with different concentrations of Glc-6-P. The activities were
normalized to the value obtained for time 0 and plotted against time
(Fig. 7A). The figure shows
that there was no effect (within the experimental error) of Glc-6-P
concentration on the inhibition rate constant for a given NEM
concentration. Moreover, the NEM inhibition is a pseudo-first order
mechanism with one modified site. The second-order rate constant was
calculated plotting the first order rate constant against NEM
concentration; its value is 1.1 min 1
M 1 (see Fig. 7A, inset). A
protection experiment with a broad range of substrates and products of
Glc-6-Pase catalytic subunit from NEM inhibition is presented in Fig.
7B. All of the compounds tested had a protection effect. We
must note that glucose and mannose can both protect, but only if they
are used at a high concentration (>200-250 mM), which is
in agreement with the dissociation constant of these two sugars with
the Glc-6-Pase catalytic subunit (40).

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Chemical modification by NEM of Glc-6-Pase in
disrupted microsomes. The microsomes (1 mg/ml) were treated as
described under "Experimental Procedures." A,
representation of the logarithm of the normalized residual specific
activity against time (assuming that the activity at time 0 = 1).
The NEM concentrations used were 2 ( ), 10 ( ), 20 ( ), and 30 ( ) mM. A stability control without NEM was also
performed ( ). The Glc-6-P concentrations used to assay the activity
were 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 2 and 10 mM. In the inset,
the slopes of the straight lines obtained in A were plotted against NEM
concentration to give a second order constant value of 1.1 min 1.M 1. B, the effect of
substrates on NEM modification. The microsomes (1 mg/ml) were incubated
with 30 mM NEM by itself ( ) and with 30 mM
Glc-6-P ( ), 30 mM mannose 6-phosphate ( ), 30 mM phosphate ( ), 300 mM glucose ( ), 300 mM mannose ( ), or 0.1 mM vanadate ( ). A
stability control without NEM was also carried out ( ). In order to
eliminate the substrates, the microsomes were centrifuged at
30,000 × g for 30 min at 4 °C, the supernatant was
discarded, and the pellet was resuspended in the previous volume of
sucrose/HEPES buffer. The residual specific activity was then measured
using 10 mM Glc-6-P. The logarithm of the normalized
residual activity (activity for time 0 = 1) is plotted against
time.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
NEM is a relatively specific sulfhydryl reagent commonly used to
assess the structure of proteins (35, 41, 42). We have to note that
reactions with amino groups can occur (43, 44) but need high pH
conditions (>8.5-9.0). NEM can cross phospholipid membranes. Thus,
studying the topology of a membrane protein using only this reagent is
difficult. However in our case, the high reactivity of this compound
toward cysteine residues makes it a good tool to examine the structure
of the liver microsomal Glc-6-Pase system.
Relatively low concentrations of NEM (<1-2 mM) inhibited
the activity of the Glc-6-Pase system when microsomes were incubated in
nondisrupting conditions. However, when the membrane was subsequently treated with histones, the activity measured was identical to those of
the NEM-unmodified controls (Fig. 2C), showing that the catalytic subunit activity is not affected by an alkylation by 1-2
mM NEM of one or more of its cysteine residues. When an
inhibition time course is made in nondisrupted microsomes (Fig. 2,
A and B), a two site (two different thiol
groups), first order kinetic inhibition is demonstrated; the first site
was modified after only 2 min, and the second site needed more time to
be alkylated by NEM. The modification rate of the two sites depends on
NEM concentration (Fig. 2A). The rate constant for the
second modified site was unchanged, whatever the Glc-6-P concentration
used to assay the residual activity (Figs. 2B and
3B), but surprisingly, the rate constant of the first
modified site depends on the substrate concentration used to determine
residual activity (Figs. 2B and 3A). Indeed, the
inhibition was released when the concentration of Glc-6-P used was
higher than 20 mM (Figs. 2B and 3A).
Here in the first phase, the rate constants (k1) are
apparent constants. An extrapolation of the
k1app to 0 mM Glc-6-P has been done
to calculate the second order constant of the reaction. The value of
the second order rate constant kI for the first (quickly)
modified thiol is 2360 min 1 M 1
(Fig. 3C), whereas the calculated value for the second site
is 33 min 1 M 1.
A light scattering technique (36) has demonstrated that the Glc-6-P
translocase was the only transporter inhibited by NEM alkylation (Figs.
5 and 6) and that the Glc-6-P transport inhibition was closely
correlated to the activity loss. Therefore, the two thiol groups,
modified with different velocities, are in the T1 protein.
The extent of inhibition due to the NEM alkylation of the T1 first
reactive site depends on the Glc-6-P concentration used to assay the
residual activity (Fig. 2B). This dependence is a saturation
process (Fig. 4). We explain the effect of Glc-6-P on the first
inhibition phase by the binding of this compound to T1, which causes a
conformational change releasing the effects of NEM modification.
Whether this Glc-6-P molecule is regulatory and/or transported is still
unclear. In 1991, Nordlie and co-workers reported that T1 could be
regulated by intramicrosomal levels of Glc-6-P (45). The conformational
change observed in our conditions could be the reflection of such a
regulation.
Protection experiments, performed with nondisrupted vesicles in the
presence of Glc-6-P or vanadate, have shown that vanadate has no effect
on the inhibition process (Table I). However, a high concentration of
Glc-6-P, the transported compound, partially prevents the second site
from NEM modification and increases the reactivity of the first site,
by improving its accessibility to NEM. From these observations, it
seems that two areas or domains, each containing a reactive cysteine
residue, can be found in T1. A description of their particular features
is attempted in the working model proposed in Fig.
8.

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Model of Glc-6-P translocase states during
its modification by NEM. T1 is represented as a two domain
protein, with each domain containing an NEM-modifiable cysteine
residue. The protein can be found in two interconvertible states (I and
I'), with Glc-6-P being the ligand that allows their interconversion.
In the state I', the first (fast) NEM-alkylated site is even more
reactive (more accessible) than in state I, whereas the second (slow)
site is less reactive (buried) than in state I. Then, when the NEM
alkylation occurs, the number of transporter molecules modified at the
first site will be higher in the presence of Glc-6-P. The modification
of the first site has an inhibitory effect that can be released by
using high concentrations of Glc-6-P (II II'). Therefore, at high
substrate concentrations, Glc-6-Pase system activity loss in the assay
with NEM alone is similar to that in the presence of 50 mM
Glc-6-P. However, for longer incubation times, the second site, which
can be partially protected by Glc-6-P, is more modified in the
conditions where NEM is used alone (III and III'). The states III and
III' are inactive even though high concentrations of Glc-6-P are used
to assay the residual activity.
|
|
Recently, a human membrane protein that exhibits sequence similarities
with bacterial phosphoester transporters, such as UhpT (the sugar
phosphate carrier of Escherichia coli), and that is mutated
in patients suffering from glycogen storage disease 1b (no Glc-6-P
transport), has been cloned (46). In bacteria, two UhpT cysteines can
be modified by sulfhydryl reagents leading to an inactive protein (47,
48). The behavior of the mammalian T1 reported in this paper is rather
close to that observed with UhpT. Hence, it seems possible that the
putative Glc-6-P translocase recently cloned is T1.
Experiments performed with histone-disrupted microsomes allow us to
look directly at the effects of NEM on the Glc-6-Pase catalytic subunit
activity without the rate limitations imposed by the translocases. The
catalytic subunit loses its activity at NEM concentration higher than
those used to inhibit the whole system in nondisrupting conditions
(IC50 = 7-8 mM instead of 0.5 mM).
The incubation of the histones with dithionitrobenzoate (Ellman's reagent) did not result in a yellow coloration mark of titrable cysteines. Thus, the higher IC50 cannot be attributed to
the presence of cysteines in the histones. We therefore have to assume
that a thiol group of the Glc-6-Pase catalytic subunit can be modified but needs rather high NEM concentrations.
The NEM inhibition of the Glc-6-Pase catalytic subunit (Fig.
7A) is a second order mechanism (k = 1.1 min 1 M 1).The presence of
substrates in the NEM incubation assay fully protects the enzyme from
the inhibition, which suggests that the modified cysteine is located in
the protein active site or that substrate binding hides the thiol group
via a conformational change in the Glc-6-Pase structure. The
identification of the residue alkylated by NEM would be helpful for
completing the recently proposed Glc-6-Pase topology (49, 50) and
improving our knowledge of the Glc-6-Pase active site.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT |
We thank Dr. Peter E. Ross for access to his
Hitachi spectrofluorometer.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by grants from the Medical Research
Council and the Royal Society (to A. B.).The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.:
44-1382-632445; Fax.: 44-1382-633847; E-mail:
aburchell{at}ninewells.dundee.ac.uk.
1
The abbreviations used are: Glc-6-P,
glucose-6-phosphate; Glc-6-Pase, glucose-6-phosphatase; NEM,
N-ethylmaleimide; PIPES, piperazine-N,N'-bis(2-ethanesulfonic acid).
2
Glc-6-Pase sequence from fish: S. Nagl, W. E. Mayer, and J. Klein, GenBankTM accession number
AF008945.
 |
REFERENCES |
-
Nordlie, R. C.,
and Sukalski, K. A.
(1985)
in
The Enzymes of Biological Membranes (Martonosi, A. N., ed), Vol. 2, pp. 349-398, Plenum Publishing Corp., New York
-
Countaway, J. L.,
Waddell, I. D.,
Burchell, A.,
and Arion, W. J.
(1988)
J. Biol. Chem.
263,
2673-2678[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Burchell, A.,
Waddell, I. D.,
Countaway, J. L.,
Arion, W. J.,
and Hume, R.
(1988)
FEBS Lett.
242,
153-156[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Wada, N.,
and Chou, J. Y.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
14003-14010[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Lei, K.-J.,
Shelly, L. L.,
Pan, C.-J.,
Sidbury, J. B.,
and Chou, J. Y.
(1993)
Science
262,
580-583[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Lange, A. J.,
Argaud, D.,
El-Maghrabi, M. R.,
Pan, W.,
Maitra, S. R.,
and Pilkis, S. J.
(1994)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
201,
302-309[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Kishnanni, P. S.,
Bao, Y.,
Wu, J.-Y.,
Brix, A. E.,
Lin, J.-L.,
and Chen, Y.-T.
(1997)
Biochem. Mol. Med.
61,
168-177[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Nordlie, R. C.
(1976)
in
Glucogneogenesis: Its Regulation in Mammalian Species (Hanson, R. W., ed), pp. 93-152, John Wiley & Sons, New York
-
Arion, W. J.,
Carlson, P. W.,
Wallin, B. K.,
and Lange, A. J.
(1972)
J. Biol. Chem.
247,
2551-2557[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Stetten, M. R.,
and Burnett, F. F.
(1967)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
139,
138-147[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Shulze, H. U.,
Nolte, B.,
and Kannler, R.
(1986)
J. Biol. Chem.
261,
16571-16578[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Arion, W. J.,
Wallin, B. K.,
Lange, A. J.,
and Ballas, L. M.
(1975)
Mol. Cell. Biochem.
6,
75-83[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Arion, W. J.,
Lange, A. J.,
Walls, H. E.,
and Ballas, L. M.
(1980)
J. Biol. Chem.
255,
10396-10406[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Nordlie, R. C.
(1974)
Curr. Top. Cell Regul.
8,
33-117[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Zakim, D.,
and Dannenberg, A.
(1990)
J. Biol. Chem.
265,
201-208[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Berteloot, A.,
Vidal, H.,
and van de Werve, G.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
5497-5507[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
St Denis, J. F.,
Comte, B.,
Nguyen, D. K.,
Seidman, E.,
Paradis, K.,
Levy, E.,
and van de Werve, G.
(1994)
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.
79,
955-959[Abstract]
-
Berteloot, A.,
St-Denis, J.-F.,
and van de Werve, G.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
21098-21102[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Burchell, A.
(1992)
BioEssays
14,
395-400[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Arion, W. J.,
Canfield, W. K.,
Callaway, E. S.,
Burger, H.-J.,
Hemmerler, H.,
Schubert, G.,
Herling, A. W.,
and Oekonomopulos, R.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
6223-6227[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Wallin, B. K.,
and Arion, W. J.
(1972)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
48,
694-699[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Colilla, W.,
and Nordlie, R. C.
(1973)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
309,
328-338[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Valkili, B.,
and Banner, M.
(1981)
Biochem. J.
194,
319-325[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Arion, W. J.,
Schulz, L. O.,
Lange, A. J.,
Telford, J. N.,
and Walls, H. E.
(1983)
J. Biol. Chem.
258,
12661-12669[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Garland, R. C.,
Cori, C. F.,
and Chang, H. F. W.
(1976)
Mol. Cell. Biochem.
12,
23-31[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Arion, W. J.,
Burchell, B.,
and Burchell, A.
(1984)
Biochem. J.
220,
835-842[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Lowry, O. H.,
Rosebrough, N. J.,
Farr, A. L.,
and Randall, R. J.
(1951)
J. Biol. Chem.
193,
265-275[Free Full Text]
-
Peterson, G. L.
(1973)
Anal. Biochem.
83,
346-356
-
Arion, W. J.,
Ballas, L. M.,
Lange, A. J.,
and Wallin, B. K.
(1976)
J. Biol. Chem.
251,
4901-4907[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Burchell, A.,
Hume, R.,
and Burchell, B.
(1988)
Clin. Chim. Acta
173,
183-191[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Blair, J. N.,
and Burchell, A.
(1988)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
964,
161-167[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Arion, W. J.,
Lange, A. J.,
and Walls, H. E.
(1980)
J. Biol. Chem.
255,
10387-10395[Free Full Text]
-
Lange, A. J.,
Arion, W. J.,
and Beaudet, A. L.
(1980)
J. Biol. Chem.
255,
8381-8384[Free Full Text]
-
Hill, B. C.,
and Peterson, J.
(1998)
Arch. Biochem. Biophys.
350,
273-282[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Petrov, V. V.,
Pardo, J. P.,
and Slayman, C. W.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
1688-1693[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Meissner, G.
(1988)
Methods Enzymol.
157,
417-437[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Fulceri, R.,
Bellomo, G.,
Gamberucci, A.,
Scott, A.,
Burchell, A.,
and Benedetti, A.
(1992)
Biochem. J.
286,
813-817
-
Marcolongo, P.,
Fulceri, R.,
Giunti, R.,
Burchell, A.,
and Benedetti, A.
(1996)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
219,
916-922[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Singh, J.,
Nordlie, R. C.,
and Jorgenson, R. A.
(1981)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
678,
477-482[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Arion, W. J.,
Ballas, L. M.,
Lange, A. J.,
and Wallin, B. K.
(1976)
J. Biol. Chem.
251,
4891-4897
-
Kimura, T.,
Ohnuma, M.,
Sawai, T.,
and Yamaguchi, A.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
580-585[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Woltjer, R. L.,
and Staros, J. V.
(1997)
Biochemistry
36,
9911-9916[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Brewer, C. F.,
and Riehm, J. P.
(1967)
Anal. Biochem.
18,
248-255[CrossRef]
-
Knight, P.,
and Offer, G.
(1978)
Biochem. J.
175,
1023-1032[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Foster, J. D.,
Nelson, K. L.,
Sukalski, K. A.,
Lucius, R. W.,
and Nordlie, R. C.
(1991)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1118,
91-98[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Gerin, I.,
Veiga-da-Cunha, M.,
Achouri, Y.,
Collet, J.-F.,
and Van Schaftingen, E.
(1997)
FEBS Lett.
419,
235-238[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Yan, R. T.,
and Maloney, P. C.
(1993)
Cell
75,
37-44[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Yan, R. T.,
and Maloney, P. C.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
5973-5976[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Hemricka, W.,
and Wever, R.
(1997)
FEBS Lett.
409,
17-19[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Pan, C.-J.,
Lei, K.-J.,
Annabi, B.,
Hemrika, W.,
and Chou, J.-Y.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
6144-6148[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Copyright © 1998 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit |