|
J Biol Chem, Vol. 273, Issue 8, 4647-4652, February 20, 1998
Localization of an Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF) Binding
Site of Bovine IGF Binding Protein-2 Using Disulfide Mapping and
Deletion Mutation Analysis of the C-terminal Domain*
Briony E.
Forbes ,
Denise
Turner,
Sam J.
Hodge,
Kerrie A.
McNeil,
Göran
Forsberg§, and
John C.
Wallace
From the Cooperative Research Centre for Tissue Growth and Repair,
P. O. Box 10065, Gouger St., Adelaide and the Department of
Biochemistry, University of Adelaide,
Adelaide, South Australia 5005, Australia
 |
ABSTRACT |
We have investigated which region(s) of bovine
insulin-like growth factor binding protein-2 (bIGFBP-2) interact with
insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) using C-terminally truncated forms
of bIGFBP-2. Initially to aid in mutant design, we defined the
disulfide bonding pattern of bIGFBP-2 C-terminal region using enzymatic
digestion. The pattern is Cys186-Cys220,
Cys231-Cys242, and
Cys244-Cys265. In addition, cyanogen bromide
cleavage of bIGFBP-2 revealed that the N- and C-terminal cysteine-rich
domains were not linked by disulfide bonds. Taking the disulfide
bonding pattern into consideration, C-terminal truncation mutants were
designed and expressed in COS-1 mammalian cells. Following IGF binding
assays, a region between residues 222 and 236 was identified as
important in IGF binding. Specifically, mutants truncated by 14, 36, and 48 residues from the C terminus bound IGFs to the same extent as
wild type (WT) bIGFBP-2. Removal of 63 residues resulted in a greatly
reduced (up to 80-fold) ability to bind IGF compared with WT bIGFBP-2.
Interestingly this mutant lacked the IGF-II binding preference of WT
bIGFBP-2. Residues 236-270 also appeared to play a role in determining
IGF binding specificity as their removal resulted in mutants with
higher IGF-II binding affinity.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The mitogenic and metabolic effects of insulin-like growth factors
(IGFs)1 are modified by a
family of six or more insulin-like growth factor binding proteins
(IGFBPs). IGF activity mediated via specific cell surface receptors can
be inhibited or enhanced when bound to IGFBPs (1). In addition, IGFBPs
are believed to play a role in IGF delivery to tissues (1, 2) and
maintenance of IGFs in circulation as an IGF·IGFBP complex.
Comparisons of IGFBPs 1-6 indicate a high degree of conservation in
the N- and C-terminal regions throughout all IGFBPs. Of particular note
in those regions are the conserved cysteine residues, 14 of which are
conserved throughout IGFBPs 1-6 of all species sequenced so far.
All of the 18 cysteines in human IGFBP-3 (hIGFBP-3) and at least 16 in
human IGFBP-1 (hIGFBP-1) are involved in disulfide bonds (3, 4). A
non-conserved region separates the N- and C-terminal domains. It is
likely that the regions of the IGFBPs which share sequence homology may
confer similar tertiary structures leading to the formation of the IGF
binding domain (5). However, relatively few studies have investigated
which regions on the IGFBPs are important for binding IGFs.
Recently an additional low affinity IGFBP has been identified (human
MAC25 (6)). Despite an overall low degree of sequence similarity to
IGFBPs 1-6 11, or possibly 12 cysteines in the N-terminal domain
remain conserved, indicating that conservation of the cysteines confers
a structure that leads to a common IGF binding region.
Identification of fragmented IGFBPs and the analysis of their IGF
binding has indicated that both the N-terminal (7-9) and the
C-terminal (10) cysteine-rich domains can bind IGF independently. Interestingly, a monoclonal antibody directed to two sites in the last
47 C-terminal residues of hIGFBP-1 inhibited IGF binding (11). In
addition, our recent chemical modification study has implicated
Tyr60 in the N-terminal region of bovine IGFBP-2 (bIGFBP-2)
as an important residue in IGF binding (12). Clearly further
investigations to determine the specific residues of both the N- and C
termini involved in IGF binding are required.
This study aims to further define the IGF binding site of bIGFBP-2 by
recombinant production of C-terminally deleted bIGFBP-2 mutants and
analysis of their IGF binding abilities. A similar approach of
C-terminal deletion analysis was previously carried out by Brinkman
et al. (13) using hIGFBP-1. Two important considerations in
design of our bIGFBP-2 mutants were highlighted by the results obtained
by Brinkman et al. (13). First, removal of 17 amino acids of
hIGFBP-1 resulted in production of a mutant protein that formed
aggregates. As the last cysteine had been removed this formation of
aggregates suggested that an unpaired cysteine had been generated as a
result of the deletion. Clearly, it is extremely difficult to design
such mutants without the knowledge of the disulfide bonding pattern.
Since there are currently no reports of the disulfide bonding pattern
of IGFBPs, our first step in design of C-terminally truncated bIGFBP-2
mutants was to define the disulfide bonding pattern of the C
terminus.
Second, despite identification of recombinant mutant protein, Brinkman
et al. (13) failed to detect 125I IGF binding by
Western ligand blotting. However, several reports (14, 15) have
highlighted that fragmented IGFBPs are capable of binding IGFs in
competitive binding assays and affinity labeling studies where binding
is not detected by Western ligand blotting. Indeed recombinant
C-terminally deleted human IGFBP-5 (hIGFBP-5) lacking the C-terminal
domain but retaining all of the central non-conserved region was shown
to bind IGF-I in charcoal binding assays (8). Therefore, in analysis of
IGF binding by our C-terminal truncation bIGFBP-2 mutants, it was
essential that purified mutants were subjected not only to Western
ligand blotting but also to charcoal binding assays.
The major outcome of this study has been the identification of a site
in the C-terminal domain of bIGFBP-2 involved in IGF binding. In
addition, in defining the disulfide bonding pattern of the C-terminal
domain, we also demonstrated that the N- and C-terminal cysteine-rich
regions of bIGFBP-2 are not linked by disulfide bonds. This indicated
that bIGFBP-2 exists as two separate cysteine-rich domains separated by
the non-conserved central region. The disulfide bonding pattern of the
C-terminal domain was shown to be
Cys186-Cys220,
Cys231-Cys242,
Cys244-Cys265.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Disulfide Bond Determination of the C-terminal Domain, Cyanogen
Bromide (CNBr) Cleavage of bIGFBP-2--
Bovine IGFBP-2 (5 µg),
prepared as described below, was cleaved in 100 µl of 100 mM HCl using 100 molar excess CNBr (Sigma, Australia) over
the number of methionines in bIGFBP-2 at room temperature overnight.
Analysis of cleavage involved separation on 12.5% SDS-polyacrylamide
gels under non-reducing conditions (16) and Coomassie staining. The
largest fragment was isolated for N-terminal amino acid sequencing
using reverse phase high performance liquid chromatography (rpHPLC) as
described by Hobba et al. (12) on a C4 analytical column
(Brownlee Aquapore BU300, 7-µm particle size, 300-Å pore size,
2.1 × 100 mm) at 40 °C with a linear acetonitrile gradient
from 0 to 50% (v/v) in 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid over 50 min at 0.5 ml/min. N-terminal amino acid sequencing was performed using Edman
degradation carried out automatically on an Applied Biosystems model
470A gas-phase sequencer with a 900A Control/Data Analysis Module. The
other three products were sequenced following transfer from gels to
polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (Millipore Corp., Bedford, MA) as
described by Matsudaira (17).
Trypsin Cleavage of bIGFBP-2--
Bovine IGFBP-2 (100 µg) was
dissolved in 100 µl of 10 mM acetic acid and diluted to
3.5 ml in 250 mM Tris, 20 mM CaCl2,
pH 7.0. Trypsin (modified, sequencer grade, Boehringer Mannheim GmbH, Mannheim, Germany) was added at a ratio of 1:10 (w/w, enzyme/substrate) for 5 h at 37 °C. A further 10 µg of trypsin was added for
18 h at 37 °C, and the reaction was stopped by acidification
with trifluoroacetic acid and stored at 20 °C.
Chymotrypsin Cleavage of bIGFBP-2--
The peptide that resulted
from the trypsin digest of bIGFBP-2 and eluted at 25.3 min on rpHPLC
was lyophilized (10 µg) and reconstituted in 50 µl of 10 mM acetic acid. The peptide was incubated for 15 min at
37 °C in 6 M urea, 100 mM Tris, 10 mM CaCl2, pH 7.4 (280 µl), to allow
unfolding. Following dilution in 100 mM Tris, 10 mM CaCl2, pH 7.4, to a final volume of 990 µl, the peptide was cleaved with chymotrypsin (sequencer grade,
Boehringer Mannheim GmbH, Mannheim, Germany) at a ratio of 1:4 (w/w,
enzyme/substrate) overnight at 25 °C. The reaction was stopped by
acidification with trifluoroacetic acid, and the digest was stored at
20 °C.
Mapping of Cleavage Products Using rpHPLC--
Peptides
generated following trypsin and chymotrypsin cleavages were separated
by rpHPLC as described above. The absorbance of the peptide backbone
bonds was monitored at 215 nm, Trp at 295 nm, and Tyr by specific
fluorescence (excitation 275 nm, emission 305 nm).
Construction of bIGFBP-2 C-terminal Deletion Mutants--
The
cDNA clone for bIGFBP-2 was isolated and characterized in this
laboratory as described previously (18). Oligonucleotides were
purchased from Bresatec Pty. Ltd., Australia. Site-directed mutagenesis
using the Muta-Gene Phagemid In Vitro Mutagenesis kit from
Bio-Rad, Australia, was performed using the oligonucleotide 5' GTC GAC
GGT ATC GAT AAG CCT CTG CAG GCC ATA TGC AGC CGA GAC TGG GCG GCC CCG CGC
TGC TGC TGC TGC C 3' and the template bIGFBP-2 cDNA
EcoRI fragment in Bluescript BKS+ (Stratagene). This
introduced a PstI site at the 5' end and cDNA encoding
the amino acids MQPRLGGPALLLLP of the signal peptide as described by
Bourner et al. (19). The full-length
PstI/EcoRI bIGFBP-2 cDNA fragment was
introduced into the pXMT-2 expression vector (20), kindly provided by
P. D. Rathjen (Department of Biochemistry, University of Adelaide)
resulting in the plasmid pGF-8. Four C-terminal deletion mutants were
created by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) mutagenesis as described by Clackson et al. (21) using pGF-8 template. The forward
primer was 5' ATG GGC AAG GGT GGC AAA CAT CAC GG 3' (corresponding to residues 61-69, Fig. 1), and the following were the reverse primers: mutant A, 5' TAC GAA TTC TAA GTT GTA GAA GAG ATG ACA CTC GGG 3' (residues 214-222); mutant B, 5' TAC GAA TTC TTA GTT AGG GTT CAC AGA
CCA GCA CTC CCC ACG CTG CCC GTT 3' (residues 223-236); mutant C, 5'
TAC GAA TTC TTA GTT CAG AGA CAT CTT GGA CTG TTT GAG GTT GTA CAG GCC ATG
C 3' (residues 236-248); mutant D, 5' TAC GAA TTC TTA CTT GTC ACA GTT
GGG GAT GTG TAG GGA 3' (residues 263-270). The PCR reaction conditions
using Taq polymerase from Promega Corp., Australia, were as
recommended by the manufacturer using 40 cycles of denaturation at
94 °C for 1 min, annealing at 65 °C for 1 min, and extension at
72 °C for 1 min. PCR products were digested with NotI and
EcoRI restriction enzymes and ligated to the pGF-8
NotI/EcoRI 5927 base pair fragment. Correct
sequences of PCR inserts were confirmed by DNA sequencing (22).
Transfection of COS-1 Cells--
COS-1 cells were maintained in
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (DMEM, Life Technologies Inc.)
containing 10% fetal calf serum. Large scale DNA preparations were
purified by Superose 6 chromatography (Pharmacia Ltd., Australia) and
transfection of 10 µg of DNA/5 × 106 cells was by
electroporation at 0.27 V using a Bio-Rad gene pulser. Cells were
cultured for 24 h in DMEM + 10% fetal calf serum and then washed
and transferred to phenol red free DMEM supplemented with insulin,
transferrin, and sodium sialate (Boehringer, Mannheim, Germany), 0.1 mM -mercaptoethanol, and glutamine. Medium was changed
and collected every 24 h for up to 5 days.
Detection of bIGFBP-2 and Truncation Mutants--
Bovine IGFBP-2
and truncation mutants were separated by 12.5% SDS-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis under non-reducing conditions (16). IGFBPs were
detected by Western ligand blotting (23) with 125I IGF-II
visualized using a Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager and ImageQuant
software, as well as by immunoblotting as described previously (24)
with anti-bIGFBP-2 antiserum produced in this laboratory.
Purification of bIGFBP-2 and Truncation Mutants from COS-1 Cell
Medium--
WT bIGFBP-2 and mutants were isolated from transfected
COS-1 cell medium by IGF-II affinity chromatography (IGF-II purchased from GroPep Pty. Ltd., Australia coupled to Affi-Prep-10 matrix as
recommended by the supplier, Bio-Rad Laboratories Pty., Ltd., Australia). Bound IGFBPs were eluted in 0.5 M acetic acid
and then applied directly to a cation exchange column (Resource S 1 ml
column, Pharmacia Ltd., Australia). Using a gradient of 50 mM ammonium acetate, pH 6.0, to 1 M ammonium
acetate, pH 7.5, over 20 min at 1 ml/min monkey IGFBP-3 was separated
from IGFBP-2. Bovine IGFBP-2 or mutants were separated from monkey
IGFBP-2 by rpHPLC using the same conditions described above for
separation of CNBr-cleaved bIGFBP-2. To confirm the correct mass for
each peptide electrospray mass spectroscopy was performed on a
Perkin-Elmer Psi-ex triple quadrupole mass spectrometer by
Yogi Hayasaka at the Australian Research Council EMS unit,
Adelaide.
Activity Assays--
IGF binding ability was determined by
charcoal binding assays as described (23). IGF peptides were kindly
provided by GroPep Pty. Ltd., Australia. 125I IGF-I and
125I IGF-II were produced by Spencer Knowles (CRC for
Tissue Growth and Repair, Adelaide, Australia) using chloramine T to a
specific activity of 29 µCi/µg (25). All IGFBPs were quantified for
assays by rHPLC using the following extinction coefficients: wild type bIGFBP-2 (WT bIGFBP-2) 10.3 × 105, mutants A
9.73 × 105, B 8.86 × 105, C
8.23 × 105, and D 7.63 × 105 (26).
 |
RESULTS |
The bIGFBP-2 C-terminal Domain Disulfide Bonding Pattern--
To
solve the disulfide bonding pattern of the C-terminal region of
bIGFBP-2 three separate cleavage steps were required. The first
involved chemical cleavage with CNBr and showed that the N- and
C-terminal regions were not linked by disulfide bonds. Subsequent
cleavage with trypsin and chymotrypsin yielded the C-terminal disulfide
bond pairing pattern. Cleavage sites for the three steps are shown in
Fig. 1.

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Cleavage sites in bIGFBP-2. The amino
acid sequence of the secreted bIGFBP-2 is shown in the single
letter code. Cys residues are boxed. CNBr ( ),
trypsin ( ), and chymotrypsin cleavage ( ) sites are indicated
above the sequence.
|
|
CNBr Cleavage--
Cleavage of bIGFBP-2 with CNBr liberated four
fragments separated by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (Fig.
2A). The largest product
(fragment I, Fig. 2A) was purified from the three other
fragments by rpHPLC for N-terminal sequencing (chromatogram not shown).
It had a single sequence corresponding to the N terminus of bIGFBP-2
(Fig. 2B). The other cleavage products were sequenced following transfer to polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (see "Experimental Procedures"). Fragment II had a single N-terminal sequence indicating cleavage after Met129. Separation of
this C-terminal fragment from the N-terminal fragment under
non-reducing conditions conclusively showed that the N- and C-terminal
domains are not linked by disulfide bonds.

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
CNBr cleavage of bIGFBP-2. A, CNBr
cleavage products were separated on 12.5% SDS-polyacrylamide gels and
Coomassie stained. Uncleaved bIGFBP-2, cleavage products
(I-IV) and molecular weights are indicated.
B, N-terminal sequences of the cleavage products are shown
in the single letter code. Unassigned residues are indicated
(?), and residues assumed to be cysteine are denoted (C).
|
|
Further analysis of fragments III and IV confirmed this conclusion.
Fragment III yielded three N-terminal sequences produced by cleavage
after Met144, Met200, and Met232
(Fig. 2B). As they are present in a single fragment we can
conclude that these cleavage products are linked by disulfide bonds.
Similarly fragment IV yielded three N-terminal sequences due to
cleavage at Met161, Met200, and
Met232, again all products being present in the one
fragment linked by disulfide bonds (Fig. 2B).
Trypsin Digestion--
Trypsin was chosen to analyze the
C-terminal disulfide bond pairing of bIGFBP-2 as four of the six
cysteines within the C terminus are in separate tryptic fragments (Fig.
1). Tryptic products were separated by rpHPLC. To locate the tryptic
fragments of interest tyrosine fluorescence and tryptophan absorbance
at 295 nm were monitored. Cys220 and Cys265 are
found within separate tryptic fragments which both contain a Tyr. In
addition a single Trp243 is within a fragment encompassing
Cys242 and Cys244 (Fig. 1).
Peak A (Fig. 3) was identified by
fluorescence detection to contain Tyr (215 nm absorbance shown only).
Following N-terminal sequencing and mass spectroscopy peak A was
identified as a single peptide containing 2 N-terminal sequences of
fragments encompassing Cys186 and Cys220 (Table
I). We could conclude that
Cys186 and Cys220 form a disulfide bond in
bIGFBP-2.

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Reverse phase HPLC of tryptic and
chymotryptic cleavage products. Tryptic (a) and
chymotryptic (b) products were separated as described
under "Experimental Procedures." Sequences of peptides corresponding to peaks indicated by arrows are shown
below the chromatograms.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
N-terminal sequencing and masses of tryptic and chymotryptic digests
N-terminal sequences are shown in the single letter code. Fragments not
sequenced completely are indicated (...). Estimated (Massest) and determined (Massdet) masses are shown.
|
|
Peak B (Fig. 3) not only contained Tyr fluorescence but also showed
absorbance at 295 nm (not shown). This suggested that Cys265, within a Tyr-containing tryptic fragment, was
linked to the fragment containing Cys242,
Trp243, and Cys244. Indeed peak B when
sequenced yielded three N termini (Table I). Mass determination
confirmed that this single product contained three peptides linked by
disulfide bonds (Table I).
Chymotrypsin Digestion--
Peak B of the trypsin digestion (Fig.
3) was cleaved by chymotrypsin to further delineate the disulfide
bonding pattern of the C-terminal region of bIGFBP-2. Cleavage at
Trp243 between Cys242 and Cys244
was achieved only in the presence of urea and was extremely
inefficient. However, peak C (Fig. 3) was identified by N-terminal
sequencing and mass spectroscopy (Table I) to contain
Cys244 and Cys265 within a single peptide. We
concluded therefore that they are disulfide linked. The peptide
containing Cys231 and Cys242 was not located,
but we could deduce that these must be disulfide bonded.
In summary the disulfide bonding pattern of bIGFBP-2 C-terminal region
is as follows: Cys186-Cys220,
Cys231-Cys242, and
Cys244-Cys265.
Expression of bIGFBP-2 Truncation Mutants--
A series of four
bIGFBP-2 C-terminal truncation mutants were designed as shown in Fig.
4. Mutant A was truncated by 14 amino acids. Mutants B and C were truncated by 36 and 48 amino acids and had
Cys244 Ser and Cys230 Ser
substitutions, respectively, to eliminate the possibility of
intermolecular disulfide bond formation. Mutant D was truncated by 62 amino acids.

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Schematic outline of bIGFBP-2 and C-terminal
deletion mutants. Bovine IGFBP-2 (WT) and mutants
A-D are shown as boxes with
N-terminal and C-terminal Cys (C) residues indicated and the
C-terminal disulfide pattern highlighted. The peptide masses and
residue lengths are shown, whereas Ser residues substituting for Cys
are underlined.
|
|
Plasmids encoding the truncated forms of bIGFBP-2 were generated by PCR
using the full-length bIGFBP-2 cDNA as a template (see
"Experimental Procedures"). PCR products were digested with NotI and EcoRI restriction enzymes and ligated to
the bIGFBP-2 pGF-8 NotI/EcoRI 5927-base pair
fragment. The four mutant constructs were expressed in COS-1 cells, and
the respective proteins were purified from endogenous monkey
IGFBP-2 and -3 as described under "Experimental
Procedures."
Recombinant bovine IGFBP-2 and the four truncated mutants were of the
expected size as determined by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis
(Fig. 5). Mass spectroscopy confirmed
that bIGFBP-2, mutant A, mutant B, and mutant C were the correct mass
within 2 mass units. Mutant D had an expected mass of 23,786, but its actual mass was measured as 23,658. N-terminal amino acid sequencing showed the correct sequence for five residues. Mutant D was digested with trypsin and the C-terminal fragment isolated and analyzed by
N-terminal sequencing. This showed that the C-terminal residue (Lys,
mass = 128) was missing which was consistent with the observed mass difference. As the cDNA sequence of the clone encoding mutant D was correct, we can conclude that deletion of Lys221
occurred subsequent to secretion into the culture medium.

View larger version (65K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Detection of bIGFBP-2 and mutants probing
with 125I IGF-II and anti-bIGFBP-2 antibody. Peptides
were separated on a 12.5% SDS-polyacrylamide gel and transferred to
nitrocellulose as outlined under "Experimental Procedures." The
filter was probed with 125I IGF-II (a) followed
by anti-bIGFBP-2 antibody (b). Lanes containing bIGFBP-2
(WT) and mutants A-D are shown, and molecular weight markers are indicated.
|
|
IGF Binding by WT bIGFBP-2 and Truncation Mutants--
The ability
of the mutants to bind IGF was analyzed initially by Western ligand
blotting. Mutants A, B, and C bound 125I IGF-II to the same
extent as bIGFBP-2 (WT, Fig. 5a). Mutant D, however, did not
bind IGF-II despite equal amounts of protein being assayed as
determined by immunoblotting the same filter (Fig. 5b).
IGF binding by bIGFBP-2 and mutants was further analyzed by charcoal
binding assays. Initially titration of 125I IGF-I and
125I IGF-II with increasing amounts of binding protein
revealed that mutants A, B, and C bound both radiolabeled ligands
essentially to the same extent as WT bIGFBP-2. Mutant D, however, had a
greatly reduced ability to bind both 125I IGF-I and
125I IGF-II (Fig. 6,
a and b).

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Charcoal binding assays of bIGFBP-2 and
mutants. Increasing amounts of WT bIGFBP-2 ( ) and mutants A
( ), B ( ), C ( ), and D ( ) were incubated with (a)
125I IGF-I (11,600 cpm) and (b) 125I
IGF-II (2500 cpm). The bound IGFBPs were separated from the unbound
IGF, and 125I radioactivity bound was quantified. The
amount of tracer bound is expressed as % of total counts added. Using
the same assay, competition of (c) IGF-I for
125I IGF-I (10,869 cpm) and (d) IGF-II for
125I IGF-II (2358) bound to WT bIGFBP-2 (0.016 pmol),
mutant A (0.017 pmol), B (0.018 pmol), C (0.019 pmol), and D (1.26 pmol) was measured. The amount of tracer bound in the absence of
competing ligand (control) is 100%. Standard errors greater than the
symbol sizes are indicated by bars.
|
|
Competition binding assays (Fig. 6, c and d)
revealed that mutant A had the same affinity as WT for 125I
IGF-I and 125I IGF-II using competing IGF-I and IGF-II,
respectively (summarized in Table II).
Interestingly, mutants B and C demonstrated a higher affinity than WT
for both IGF-I and I IGF-II in competition assays. To assess the
binding affinity of mutant D much higher amounts were used than WT
bIGFBP-2 (1.26 versus 0.016 pmol). Under these conditions
mutant D had a lower affinity for IGF-II tracer when competing with
IGF-II and a slightly higher affinity for IGF-I tracer when competing
with IGF-I.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II
Summary of competition binding assays with 125I-IGF-I and
125I-IGF-II and IGF-I and IGF-II ligands
WTbIGFBP-2 and mutants A-D were assayed in parallel (see Fig. 6). The
concentrations (nM) at which half-maximal displacement of
radiolabeled IGF was achieved are shown (ED50). The fold
difference in competition is indicated by the ratio of IGF-I:IGF-II.
|
|
Preliminary tryptic mapping of mutant D (as described under
"Experimental Procedures") suggests that alteration in binding of
mutant D is not due to a gross structural malformation as a consequence
of, for example, incorrect disulfide formation by the remaining
cysteines but rather due to a lack of crucial residues. We isolated the
peptide containing the fragments with Cys186 linked to
Cys220 as confirmed by N-terminal sequencing. In addition
the tryptic maps of unreduced mutant D and unreduced WT bIGFBP-2
appeared similar in that all Tyr-containing peaks eluted in the same
positions, except the Tyr269-containing fragment which is
not present in mutant D (data not included).
Relative binding affinities of WT bIGFBP-2 and mutants were deduced by
comparing the ED50 values in 125I IGF-I and
125I IGF-II competition assays (Table II). WT bIGFBP-2 had
a 11.75-fold preference in IGF-II binding to 125I IGF-II
over IGF-I binding to 125I IGF-I (Table II). The mutants A
and B exhibited a similar preference for IGF-II over IGF-I. Mutant C,
however, had a greater preference for IGF-II over IGF-I (21 fold) than
WT bIGFBP-2 in competition for IGF-I and IGF-II tracers. Interestingly,
mutant D exhibited an equal affinity for IGF-I and IGF-II in
competition assays.
 |
DISCUSSION |
Our investigation involved the design of bIGFBP-2 C-terminal
truncation mutants to be used as probes for identifying IGF binding sites. There is currently no information regarding disulfide mapping nor the three-dimensional structure of the IGFBPs, making the design of
truncation mutants difficult. In this study our initial cleavage using
CNBr showed that the N- and C-terminal cysteine-rich domains of
bIGFBP-2 are not linked by disulfide bonds. In addition a combination
of trypsin and chymotrypsin digestions allowed us to solve the
disulfide bonding pattern of the C-terminal region. All Cys residues in
the C-terminal region are involved in disulfide bonds, and the pattern
has been shown to be as follows: Cys186-Cys220,
Cys231-Cys242, and
Cys244-Cys265. Cleavages were carried out at pH
7.4 and below thereby reducing the probability of disulfide bond
reshuffling, and indeed no alternate bonding patterns were identified
following either the tryptic or chymotryptic digestions.
With the knowledge of the disulfide bonding pattern of the C-terminal
domain, we proceeded to design four C-terminal deletion mutants. In
those mutants with a disrupted Cys pair the remaining Cys was replaced
by Ser, thereby eliminating the possibility of dimer formation or the
formation of alternative Cys-Cys pairing. Indeed no dimers or
aggregates were observed in production of any of the four mutants.
Analysis of IGF binding ability of all mutants and particularly
comparison of mutants C and D revealed that mutant D has lost residues
between 222 and 236 crucial for IGF binding. Not only was mutant D
unable to bind on a Western ligand blot but it bound IGFs poorly in
charcoal binding assays. Its affinity for IGF-II was markedly reduced
in 125I IGF-II competition assays. In addition it showed no
preference for binding IGF-II over IGF-I, due to its greatly reduced
affinity for IGF-II in comparison with WT bIGFBP-2.
In contrast, mutant A lacking 14 C-terminal amino acids behaved
similarly to WT bIGFBP-2 in both activity assays (Western ligand
blotting and charcoal binding assays). We conclude therefore that the
last 14 amino acids do not play a major role in IGF binding by
bIGFBP-2. Mutants B and C (lacking 24 and 48 C-terminal amino acids)
also behaved similarly to WT bIGFBP-2 on Western ligand blots but
displayed a greater binding affinity for IGF-II in 125I
IGF-II competitive binding assays. Mutant B also showed a greater binding affinity for IGF-I in 125I IGF-I competition
binding assays (Table II). However, the difference in relative IGF-I
and IGF-II binding affinities for mutant B was similar to WT bIGFBP-2,
whereas mutant C had a greater divergence in relative binding affinity
for IGF-II over IGF-I. This indicates that in removing 24 or 48 amino
acids these mutants were still able to bind IGFs to the same extent as
WT bIGFBP-2, but there has been an alteration in the region of bIGFBP-2
which determines IGF binding specificity. Subsequent removal of the
amino acids 222-236 in mutant D greatly altered the IGF binding site
resulting in an IGFBP which binds IGFs poorly.
The fact that recombinantly produced C-terminally deleted bIGFBP-2
mutant D is a poorer IGF binder was not surprising. Proteolysed porcine
IGFBP-2, identified as 25- and 16-kDa fragments, did not bind on
Western ligand blots (27). Furthermore, fragments of various IGFBPs
lacking some or all of the C-terminal region, generated following
specific proteolysis or during purification procedures, have also been
shown to have greatly reduced IGF binding capacity in competitive
binding assays (8, 28). Also, recombinant production of a C-terminally
deleted hIGFBP-5 lacking the C-terminal domain but retaining all of the
central non-conserved region was shown to bind IGF-I in charcoal
binding assays (29). However, like mutant D, its ability to bind IGF-I
was greatly reduced. Indeed, N-terminally truncated rat IGFBP-2
encompassing half of the non-conserved region and all of the C-terminal
domain bound IGF-I with lower affinity than native rat IGFBP-2 in
competition assays (10). The same effect was seen with recombinantly
expressed IGFBP-1 truncated from the N terminus by 60 residues. This
mutant was unable to bind IGF on a Western ligand blot suggesting a
greatly reduced ability to bind IGF (4). A similar result was noted with recombinantly expressed hIGFBP-3 fragments (30). The results presented here and by others suggest that the individual domains of
IGFBPs are unable to exhibit full IGF binding compared with native
IGFBPs. It is likely that both domains are required for high affinity
IGF binding. Indeed it is possible that the low affinity binding of
IGFBP-3 identified by BIAcore analysis (31) results from binding to a
single domain, while high affinity binding is a consequence of
interaction of IGF with both domains.
Relating the deletion mutant information to the tertiary structure of
bIGFBP-2 and IGFBPs in general is difficult without structural
information. However, from our study it is possible to speculate that
the C-terminal residues of bIGFBP-2, particularly residues 222-236,
must lie in close proximity to the N-terminal domain to allow both
domains to interact with IGF. In addition, we believe that the
disulfide bonding pattern described for the bIGFBP-2 C-terminal domain
in this paper could be the pattern for all IGFBPs as all six cysteines
in the C terminus are present in every IGFBP 1-6 sequenced so far.
Therefore we would suggest that the C-terminal domains of all IGFBPs
are likely to have a similar disulfide bonding pattern and hence adopt
a similar structure. Thus, although the amino acid sequence in this
region of bIGFBP-2, which is totally conserved across all species
sequenced so far, has limited homology to other IGFBPs, residues
corresponding to the crucial residues 222-236 of bIGFBP-2 could be
important for IGF binding by other IGFBPs.
In summary, we have defined a site on bIGFBP-2 which is important for
IGF binding. In addition, we have demonstrated that the N- and
C-terminal domains are not connected by disulfide bonds, and we have
solved the disulfide bonding pattern of the C-terminal domain of
bIGFBP-2.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Graham Hobba, Anne Chapman-Smith,
and Melinda Lucic for valuable discussions and for reading the
manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
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: Dept. of Biochemistry,
University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, 5005. Tel.:
618-8303-5581; Fax; 618-8303-4348.
§
Present address: Lund Research Centre, Pharmacia and Upjohn, Box
724, 220 07 Lund, Sweden.
1
The abbreviations used are: IGF, insulin-like
growth factor; IGFBPs, insulin-like growth factor binding proteins;
hIGFBP, human IGFBP; bIGFBP-2, bovine IGFBP-2; WT bIGFBP-2, wild type bIGFBP-2; CNBr, cyanogen bromide; rpHPLC, reverse phase high
performance liquid chromatography; PCR, polymerase chain reaction;
DMEM, Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium.
 |
REFERENCES |
-
Zapf, J.
(1995)
Eur. J. Endocrinol.
132,
645-54[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Rechler, M. M.
(1993)
Vitam. Horm.
47,
1-114[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Sommer, A.,
Maack, C. A.,
Spratt, S. K.,
Mascarenhas, D.,
Tresse, T. J.,
Rhodes, E. T.,
Lee, R.,
Roumas, M.,
Tatsuno, G. P.,
Flynn, J. A.,
Gerber, N.,
Taylor, J.,
Cudny, H.,
Nanney, L.,
Hunt, T. K.,
Spencer, E. M.
(1991)
in
Modern Concepts of Insulin-Like Growth Factors (Spencer, E. M., ed), pp. 715-728, Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc., New York
-
Brinkman, A.,
Kortleve, D. J.,
Schuller, A. G. P.,
Zwarthoff, E. C.,
Drop, S. L. S.
(1991)
FEBS Lett.
291,
264-268[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Landale, E. C.,
Strong, D. D.,
Mohan, S.,
and Baylink, D. J.
(1995)
Growth Factors
12,
245-250[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Oh, Y.,
Nagalla, S. R.,
Yamanaka, Y.,
Kim, H.-S.,
Wilson, E.,
and Rosenfeld, R. G.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
30322-30325[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Huhtala, M. L.,
Koistinen, R.,
Palomaki, P.,
Partanen, P.,
Bohn, H.,
and Seppala, M.
(1986)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
141,
263-270[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Andress, D. L.,
and Birnbaum, R. S.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
22467-22472[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Baxter, R. C.,
Martin, J. L.,
and Beniac, V. A.
(1989)
J. Biol. Chem.
264,
11843-11848[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Wang, J. F.,
Hampton, B.,
Mehlman, T.,
Burgess, W. H.,
Rechler, M. M.
(1988)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
157,
718-726[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Schuller, A. G.,
Lindenbergh-Kortleve, D. J.,
de Boer, W. I.,
Zwarthoff, E. C.,
Drop, S. L.
(1993)
Growth Regul.
3,
32-34[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Hobba, G. D.,
Forbes, B. E.,
Parkinson, E. J.,
Francis, G. L.,
Wallace, J. C.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
30529-30536[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Brinkman, A.,
Kortleve, D. J.,
Zwarthoff, E. C.,
Drop, S. L. S.
(1991)
Mol. Endocrinol.
5,
987-994[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Guidice, L. C.,
Farrell, E. M.,
Pham, H.,
Lamson, G.,
and Rosenfeld, R.
(1990)
J. Clin. Endocrinol. & Metab.
71,
806-816[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Ocrant, I.,
Fay, C. T.,
Pham, H.,
and Rosenfeld, R. G.
(1992)
Endocrinology
131,
221-227[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Laemmli, U. K.
(1970)
Nature
227,
680-685[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Matsudaira, P.
(1987)
J. Biol. Chem.
262,
10035-10038[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Upton, F. Z.,
Szabo, L.,
Wallace, J. C.,
Ballard, F. J.
(1990)
J. Mol. Endocrinol.
5,
77-84[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Bourner, M. J.,
Busby, W. H. J.,
Siegel, N. R.,
Krivi, G. G.,
McCusker, R. H.,
Clemmons, D. R.
(1992)
J. Cell. Biochem.
48,
215-226[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Whyatt, L. M.,
Duwel, A.,
Smith, A. G.,
Rathjen, P. D.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
7971-7976[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Clackson, T.,
Gussow, D.,
and Jones, P. T.
(1993)
in
PCR: A Practical Approach (McPherson, M. J., Quirke, P., and Taylor, P., eds), p. 201, IRL Press at Oxford University Press, Oxford
-
Sanger, F.,
Nicklen, S.,
and Coulson, A. R.
(1977)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
74,
5463-5467[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Hossenlopp, P.,
Seurin, D.,
Segovia Quinson, B.,
Hardouin, S.,
Binoux, M.
(1986)
Anal. Biochem.
154,
138-143[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Forbes, B.,
Ballard, F. J.,
and Wallace, J. C.
(1990)
J. Endocrinol.
126,
497-506[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Francis, G. L.,
Upton, F. M.,
Ballard, F. J.,
McNeil, K. A.,
Wallace, J. C.
(1988)
Biochem. J.
251,
95-104[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Buck, M. A.,
Olah, T. A.,
Weitzmann, C. J.,
Cooperman, B. S.
(1989)
Anal. Biochem.
182,
295-299[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Gockerman, A.,
and Clemmons, D. R.
(1995)
Circ. Res.
76,
514-521[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Lee, C. Y.,
and Rechler, M. M.
(1995)
Endocrinology
136,
668-678[Abstract]
-
Andress, D. L.,
Loop, S. M.,
Zapf, J.,
and Kiefer, M. C.
(1993)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
195,
25-30[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Baxter, R. C.,
and Firth, S. M.
(1995)
Prog. Growth Factor Res.
6,
215-222[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Heding, A.,
Gill, R.,
Ogawa, Y.,
De Meyts, P.,
Shymko, R. M.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
13948-13952[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Copyright © 1998 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. M. Kibbey, M. J. Jameson, E. M. Eaton, and S. A. Rosenzweig
Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein-2: Contributions of the C-Terminal Domain to Insulin-Like Growth Factor-1 Binding
Mol. Pharmacol.,
March 1, 2006;
69(3):
833 - 845.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Sala, S. Capaldi, M. Campagnoli, B. Faggion, S. Labo, M. Perduca, A. Romano, M. E. Carrizo, M. Valli, L. Visai, et al.
Structure and Properties of the C-terminal Domain of Insulin-like Growth Factor-binding Protein-1 Isolated from Human Amniotic Fluid
J. Biol. Chem.,
August 19, 2005;
280(33):
29812 - 29819.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
X. Yan, B. E. Forbes, K. A. McNeil, R. C. Baxter, and S. M. Firth
Role of N- and C-terminal Residues of Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF)-binding Protein-3 in Regulating IGF Complex Formation and Receptor Activation
J. Biol. Chem.,
December 17, 2004;
279(51):
53232 - 53240.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. J. Headey, D. W. Keizer, S. Yao, G. Brasier, P. Kantharidis, L. A. Bach, and R. S. Norton
C-Terminal Domain of Insulin-Like Growth Factor (IGF) Binding Protein-6: Structure and Interaction with IGF-II
Mol. Endocrinol.,
November 1, 2004;
18(11):
2740 - 2750.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. J Headey, K. S Leeding, R. S Norton, and L. A Bach
Contributions of the N- and C-terminal domains of IGF binding protein-6 to IGF binding
J. Mol. Endocrinol.,
October 1, 2004;
33(2):
377 - 386.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. D. Payet, X.-H. Wang, R. C. Baxter, and S. M. Firth
Amino- and Carboxyl-Terminal Fragments of Insulin-Like Growth Factor (IGF) Binding Protein-3 Cooperate to Bind IGFs with High Affinity and Inhibit IGF Receptor Interactions
Endocrinology,
July 1, 2003;
144(7):
2797 - 2806.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. H. Shand, J. Beattie, H. Song, K. Phillips, S. M. Kelly, D. J. Flint, and G. J. Allan
Specific Amino Acid Substitutions Determine the Differential Contribution of the N- and C-terminal Domains of Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF)-binding Protein-5 in Binding IGF-I
J. Biol. Chem.,
May 9, 2003;
278(20):
17859 - 17866.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. M. Firth and R. C. Baxter
Cellular Actions of the Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Proteins
Endocr. Rev.,
December 1, 2002;
23(6):
824 - 854.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Vorwerk, B. Hohmann, Y. Oh, R. G. Rosenfeld, and R. M. Shymko
Binding Properties of Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 (IGFBP-3), IGFBP-3 N- and C-Terminal Fragments, and Structurally Related Proteins mac25 and Connective Tissue Growth Factor Measured Using a Biosensor
Endocrinology,
May 1, 2002;
143(5):
1677 - 1685.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. R. Clemmons
Use of Mutagenesis to Probe IGF-Binding Protein Structure/Function Relationships
Endocr. Rev.,
December 1, 2001;
22(6):
800 - 817.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. KIEPE, D. L. ANDRESS, S. MOHAN, L. STANDKER, T. ULINSKI, R. HIMMELE, O. MEHLS, and B. TONSHOFF
Intact IGF-Binding Protein-4 and -5 and Their Respective Fragments Isolated from Chronic Renal Failure Serum Differentially Modulate IGF-I Actions in Cultured Growth Plate Chondrocytes
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol.,
November 1, 2001;
12(11):
2400 - 2410.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P Vilmos, K Gaudenz, Z Hegedus, and J L Marsh
The Twisted gastrulation family of proteins, together with the IGFBP and CCN families, comprise the TIC superfamily of cysteine rich secreted factors
Mol. Pathol.,
October 1, 2001;
54(5):
317 - 323.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. C. Baxter
Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-binding proteins: interactions with IGFs and intrinsic bioactivities
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab,
June 1, 2000;
278(6):
E967 - E976.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Duan, J. Ding, Q. Li, W. Tsai, and K. Pozios
Insulin-like growth factor binding protein 2 is a growth inhibitory protein conserved in zebrafish
PNAS,
December 21, 1999;
96(26):
15274 - 15279.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
V. Hwa, Y. Oh, and R. G. Rosenfeld
The Insulin-Like Growth Factor-Binding Protein (IGFBP) Superfamily
Endocr. Rev.,
December 1, 1999;
20(6):
761 - 787.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. M. Neumann and L. A. Bach
The N-terminal Disulfide Linkages of Human Insulin-like Growth Factor-binding Protein-6 (hIGFBP-6) and hIGFBP-1 Are Different as Determined by Mass Spectrometry
J. Biol. Chem.,
May 21, 1999;
274(21):
14587 - 14594.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. M. Twigg, M. C. Kiefer, J. Zapf, and R. C. Baxter
Insulin-like Growth Factor-binding Protein 5 Complexes with the Acid-labile Subunit. ROLE OF THE CARBOXYL-TERMINAL DOMAIN
J. Biol. Chem.,
October 30, 1998;
273(44):
28791 - 28798.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. D. Hobba, A. Lothgren, E. Holmberg, B. E. Forbes, G. L. Francis, and J. C. Wallace
Alanine Screening Mutagenesis Establishes Tyrosine 60 of Bovine Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-2 as a Determinant of Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding
J. Biol. Chem.,
July 31, 1998;
273(31):
19691 - 19698.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Y. Imai, A. Moralez, U. Andag, J. B. Clarke, W. H. Busby Jr., and D. R. Clemmons
Substitutions for Hydrophobic Amino Acids in the N-terminal Domains of IGFBP-3 and -5 Markedly Reduce IGF-I Binding and Alter Their Biologic Actions
J. Biol. Chem.,
June 9, 2000;
275(24):
18188 - 18194.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. J. Horney, C. A. Evangelista, and S. A. Rosenzweig
Synthesis and Characterization of Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF)-1 Photoprobes Selective for the IGF-binding Proteins (IGFBPs). PHOTOAFFINITY LABELING OF THE IGF-BINDING DOMAIN ON IGFBP-2
J. Biol. Chem.,
January 19, 2001;
276(4):
2880 - 2889.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
F. E. Carrick, B. E. Forbes, and J. C. Wallace
BIAcore Analysis of Bovine Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF)-binding Protein-2 Identifies Major IGF Binding Site Determinants in Both the Amino- and Carboxyl-terminal Domains
J. Biol. Chem.,
July 13, 2001;
276(29):
27120 - 27128.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 1998 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|