![]()
|
|
||||||||
J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 29, 20068-20070, July 16, 1999
,
, and
From the
Department of Biochemistry, Arrhenius
Laboratory, Stockholm University, S-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden and the
§ Department of Microbiology, BioCentrum Amsterdam, De
Boelelaan 1087, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
ProW is an Escherichia coli inner
membrane protein that consists of a 100-residue-long periplasmic
N-terminal tail (N-tail) followed by seven closely spaced transmembrane
segments. N-tail translocation presumably proceeds in a C-to-N-terminal
direction and represents a poorly understood aspect of membrane protein biogenesis. Here, using an in vivo depletion approach, we
show that N-tail translocation in a ProW derivative comprising the N-tail and the first transmembrane segment fused to the globular P2
domain of leader peptidase depends both on the bacterial signal recognition particle (SRP) and the Sec-translocase. Surprisingly, however, a deletion construct with only one transmembrane segment downstream of the N-tail can assemble properly even under severe depletion of SecE, a central component of the Sec-translocase, but not
under SRP-depletion conditions. To our knowledge, this is the first
demonstration that the SRP-targeting pathway does not necessarily
deliver SRP-dependent inner membrane proteins to the
Sec-translocase. The data further suggest that N-tail translocation can
proceed in the absence of a functional Sec-translocase.
N-tail1 membrane
proteins have a translocated N-terminal segment upstream from the first
transmembrane domain and lack an N-terminal signal peptide. N-tail
proteins are quite common both in prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms
(1). In Escherichia coli, most inner membrane proteins are
targeted to the inner membrane via the SRP/SecAYEG-translocase pathway
(2-5), but the role of SRP and the Sec-translocase during N-tail
translocation is not well understood.
The E. coli N-tail inner membrane protein ProW, a
constituent of the ProU osmoregulatory system (6, 7), has seven
transmembrane segments and an unusually long N-tail of 100 residues
(7), Fig. 1, and has been established as
a convenient model protein for studying N-tail translocation. Previous
work has shown that translocation of the ProW N-tail is proton motive
force-dependent, that it can be blocked by the introduction
of positively but not negatively charged amino acids, and that it is
not affected in conditional secA and secY mutant
strains or by treatment with sodium azide (which inhibits the ATPase
activity of the preprotein translocase subunit SecA) (8, 9). It should
be noted, however, that the use of conditional mutant strains or sodium
azide to study Sec-translocase dependence has been found not to be
sufficient to prove Sec-translocase independence (3, 4).
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (12K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Topology of ProW and its derivatives ProW
Nt/TM1/3K and ProW Nt/TM1/P2. In spheroplasts, if the ProW N-tail
is translocated across the inner membrane, proteinase K degrades the
ProW N-tail. No immunoprecipitable material remains when the ProW
N-tail has been digested.
Here, we have studied the translocation of the ProW N-tail across the
inner membrane in more detail using tight SRP-4.5S RNA and
SecE-depletion strains rather than conditional mutant strains. We show
that the ProW N-tail cannot be translocated across the inner membrane
by itself but requires a C-terminal signal-anchor sequence.
Surprisingly, we find that an operational SRP-targeting pathway is
always required for translocation of the ProW N-tail, whereas the
Sec-translocase appears not to be needed for the proper membrane
insertion of a truncated ProW molecule consisting only of the N-tail
and the first transmembrane segment. This suggests that the
SRP-targeting pathway does not necessarily deliver
SRP-dependent proteins to the Sec-translocase, as has
hitherto been assumed to be the case, and that N-tail translocation can
be Sec-independent.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Strains, Plasmids, and Growth Conditions-- Strain MC4100 (11) was cultured in M9 minimal medium supplemented with 0.2% glucose. The 4.5 S RNA (SRP) conditional strain FF283 was cultured as described previously (12). To deplete cells for 4.5 S RNA, cells were grown to mid-log phase in the absence of IPTG. The SecE-depletion strain CM124 (13) was cultured in M9 minimal medium supplemented with 0.4% glucose and 0.2% L-arabinose. Over night cultures were washed once with M9 medium and backdiluted 1:20. To deplete cells for SecE, cells were, if not stated differently, grown to mid-log phase in the absence of L-arabinose. Depletion of SecE was checked by monitoring the accumulation of pro-OmpA during a short pulse labeling with [35S]methionine. Where appropriate, ampicillin (final concentration 100 µg/ml) and kanamycin (final concentration 50 µg/ml) were added to the medium.
ProW Nt (the first 92 amino acids of the ProW N-tail), ProW Nt/TM1/3K (9), and ProW Nt/TM1/P2 (8) constructs were constructed using a polymerase chain reaction-based approach. ProW N-tail constructs were expressed by L-arabinose induction from the pING1 vector (14) or from the pBAD24 vector (15) in strains MC4100 and FF283 and by IPTG induction from the pDHB5700 vector in strain CM124 (3).
Assay for Membrane Targeting and Assembly--
For all
experiments cells were grown to mid-log phase. Expression of the ProW
N-tail constructs was induced for 5 min with either IPTG (final
concentration 1 mM) or L-arabinose (final
concentration 0.2%). Cells were labeled with
[35S]methionine (150 µCi/ml, Ci = 37 GBq) for
15 s whereupon nonradioactive methionine was added (final
concentration 500 µg/ml). After labeling, cells were converted to
spheroplasts. For spheroplasting, cells were collected at 14,000 rpm
for 2 min in a microcentrifuge, resuspended in ice-cold buffer (40%
w/v sucrose, 33 mM Tris pH 8.0), and incubated with
lysozyme (final concentration 5 µg/ml) and 1 mM EDTA for 15 min on ice. Aliquots of the spheroplast suspension were incubated on
ice for 1 h either in the presence or absence of proteinase K
(final concentration 0.3 mg/ml). Subsequently, phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride was added to the spheroplast suspension (final concentration 0.33 mg/ml). After addition of phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, samples
were precipitated with trichloroacetic acid (final concentration 10%),
resuspended in 10 mM Tris, 2% SDS, immunoprecipitated with antisera to the ProW N-tail, OmpA (a periplasmic control (16) and
AraB/bandX (a cytoplasmic control (16)), washed, and analyzed by
standard SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (17). Gels were scanned
in a Fuji BAS1000 phosphoimager and quantitated using the MacBAS
software (version 2.31).
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The ProW N-tail Requires a C-terminal Signal-Anchor Sequence for
Translocation across the Inner Membrane--
To rule out the presence
of cryptic targeting signals in the ProW N-tail itself, translocation
of a deletion mutant, ProW Nt, comprising only the N-tail without any
transmembrane segments was monitored by protease treatment of
spheroplasts, Fig. 2. No translocation
was observed, indicating that the ProW N-tail cannot be translocated by
itself but requires additional information for translocation across the
inner membrane. As already shown (9), the addition of a C-terminal
signal-anchor sequence (the first ProW transmembrane segment followed
by three C-terminal lysines: ProW Nt/TM1/3K (Fig. 1)) is sufficient to
bring about efficient translocation of the N-tail across the inner
membrane, Fig. 3. Efficient N-tail
translocation was also seen when the Nt/TM1/3K construct was lengthened
at the C terminus with the globular P2 domain of leader peptidase (Ref.
8 and Figs. 1 and 4). We conclude that a
single transmembrane domain is sufficient to initiate translocation of
the ProW N-tail across the inner membrane.
|
|
|
Translocation of the ProW N-tail Requires SRP but Not Necessarily the Sec-translocase-- Translocation of the ProW N-tail was previously shown not to be affected by sodium azide or by inactivation of SecA and SecY in conditional mutant strains (8, 9). However, it was found recently that for some proteins Sec dependence may only be uncovered by the use of tight depletion strains (10, 13). Therefore, we decided to study translocation of the ProW N-tail in SRP (4.5 S RNA) and Sec-translocase (SecE) depletion strains. SecY is rapidly degraded in the absence of SecE (18, 19), and the SecE depletion strain CM124 has the strongest sec phenotype known to date (13).
The translocation of the ProW N-tail was both in Nt/TM1/3K and Nt/TM1/P2 strongly inhibited under SRP-depletion conditions, Figs. 3A and 4A, suggesting that SRP is required for targeting ProW to the inner membrane.
To our surprise, N-tail translocation in Nt/TM1/3K was not affected even after prolonged depletion of SecE, while translocation of the Sec-dependent protein OmpA was completely blocked under these conditions, Fig. 3B. In contrast, when the Nt/TM1/3K construct was extended at the C terminus with the P2-domain of leader peptidase, N-tail translocation was inhibited even upon mild depletion of SecE, Fig. 4B.
An alternative protein translocation pathway has recently been
identified: the so-called twin arginine translocation pathway found
both in thylakoids and bacteria (20, 21). To rule out the (unlikely)
involvement of the twin arginine translocation pathway in translocation
of the ProW N-tail, assembly of constructs Nt/TM1/3K and Nt/TM1/P2 was
tested in a tatC mutant strain (22). As expected, no effect
on translocation was seen in this strain (data not shown).
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In this communication we show that the ProW N-tail requires a C-terminal signal anchor sequence and an operational SRP-targeting pathway for translocation across the inner membrane. In addition, the Nt/TM1/P2 construct depends on the Sec-translocase for membrane insertion. Interestingly, however, the short Nt/TM1/3K construct inserts efficiently into the inner membrane even after severe depletion of SecE, suggesting that SRP-dependent proteins may not necessarily be targeted to the Sec pathway. Since a C-terminal lengthening of the SecE-independent Nt/TM1/3K construct renders it SecE-dependent, one possibility is that a co-translational interaction between the substrate protein and SRP is necessary (and sufficient?) for targeting to the Sec-translocase.
Recently, it has been reported that translocation of large protein
domains (
-lactamase, PhoA) across the inner membrane can be
initiated by a downstream hydrophobic targeting signal and that
translocation is both SecA- and SecB-dependent (23, 24). This is consistent with the SecE dependence noted above for the ProW
Nt/TM1/P2 construct and further underscores the surprising finding that
SecE depletion does not affect the translocation of the short Nt/TM1/3K
construct. On the other hand, the addition of just a few positively
charged residues to the ProW N-tail prevents its translocation (8, 9),
while both
-lactamase and PhoA contain many basic residues,
suggesting that there may be important differences in their mode of
translocation yet to be identified.
In yeast mitochondria an inner membrane protein, Oxa1p, has been shown to be involved in the assembly in N-tail inner membrane proteins (25, 26). In E. coli there is a homologue of this protein, Oxa1Ec (27). However, no function has yet been assigned to Oxa1Ec, and it remains to be seen if it plays a role in the assembly of N-tail inner membrane proteins.
In conclusion, we have shown that the SRP-targeting pathway does not
necessarily deliver proteins to the Sec-translocase and that N-tail
translocation can be Sec-independent.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT |
|---|
Antiserum against the ProW N-tail was a kind gift from Erhard Bremer.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by a Training and Mobility of Researchers fellowship from the European Commission (to J. W. L. de G.), a fellowship from the Basque Government (to S. C.), and by grants from the Swedish Natural Sciences Research Council, the Swedish Cancer Foundation, and the Göran Gustafsson Foundation (to G. von H.).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.
¶ Recipient of a Training and Mobility of Researchers project grant from the European Commission.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 46-8-164276;
Fax: 46-8-153679; E-mail: degier@biokemi.su.se.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are:
N-tail, N-terminal
tail;
SRP, signal recognition particle;
IPTG, isopropyl-1-thio-
-D-galactopyranoside;
OmpA, outer
membrane protein A.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Dalbey, R. D., Kuhn, A., and von Heijne, G. (1995) Trends Cell Biol 5, 380-383 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 2. | Valent, Q. A., Scotti, P. A., High, S., de Gier, J. W., von Heijne, G., Lentzen, G., Wintermeyer, W., Oudega, B., and Luirink, J. (1998) EMBO J. 17, 2504-2512[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 3. |
de Gier, J.-W. L.,
Scotti, P. A.,
Sääf, A.,
Valent, Q. A.,
Kuhn, A.,
Luirink, J.,
and von Heijne, G.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
14646-14651 |
| 4. |
Bernstein, H. D.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
14587-14589 |
| 5. |
Qi, H. Y.,
and Bernstein, H. D.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
8993-8997 |
| 6. |
Gowrishankar, J.
(1989)
J. Bacteriol.
171,
1923-1931 |
| 7. | Csonka, L. N., and Hanson, A. D. (1991) Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 45, 569-606[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 8. | Whitley, P., Zander, T., Ehrmann, M., Haardt, M., Bremer, E., and von Heijne, G. (1994) EMBO J. 13, 4653-4661[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 9. |
Whitley, P.,
Gafvelin, G.,
and von Heijne, G.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
29831-29835 |
| 10. | Pogliano, J. A., and Beckwith, J. (1994) EMBO J. 13, 554-561[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 11. | Casadaban, M. (1976) J. Mol. Biol. 104, 541-555[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 12. | Ribes, V., Römisch, K., Giner, A., Dobberstein, B., and Tollervey, D. (1990) Cell 63, 591-600[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 13. |
Traxler, B.,
and Murphy, C.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
12394-12400 |
| 14. | Johnston, S., Lee, J. H., and Ray, D. S. (1985) Gene (Amst.) 34, 137-145[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 15. |
Guzman, L. M.,
Belin, D.,
Carson, M. J.,
and Beckwith, J.
(1995)
J. Bacteriol.
177,
4121-4130 |
| 16. | de Gier, J.-W. L., Mansournia, P., Valent, Q., Phillips, G. J., Luirink, J., and von Heijne, G. (1996) FEBS Lett. 399, 307-309[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 17. | Laemmli, U. K. (1970) Nature 227, 680-685[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 18. |
Yang, Y. B., Yu, N. J.,
and Tai, P. C.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
13660-13665 |
| 19. |
Akiyama, Y.,
Kihara, A.,
Tokuda, H.,
and Ito, K.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
31196-31201 |
| 20. | Settles, A., and Martienssen, R. (1998) Trends Cell Biol. 8, 494-501 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 21. | Dalbey, R., and Robinson, C. (1999) Trends Biochem. Sci. 24, 17-22[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 22. |
Bogsch, E. G.,
Sargent, F.,
Stanley, N. R.,
Berks, B. C.,
Robinson, C.,
and Palmer, T.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
18003-18006 |
| 23. |
McMurry, J. L.,
and Kendall, D. A.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
6776-6782 |
| 24. | Mitsopoulos, C., Hashemzadeh-Bonehi, L., and Broome-Smith, J. (1997) FEBS Lett. 419, 18-22[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 25. |
Hell, K.,
Herrmann, J. M.,
Pratje, E.,
Neupert, W.,
and Stuart, R. A.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
2250-2255 |
| 26. | He, S., and Fox, T. D. (1997) Mol. Biol. Cell 8, 1449-1460[Abstract] |
| 27. |
Sääf, A.,
Monné, M.,
de Gier, J. W.,
and von Heijne, G.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
30415-30418 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
L. Baars, S. Wagner, D. Wickstrom, M. Klepsch, A. J. Ytterberg, K. J. van Wijk, and J.-W. de Gier Effects of SecE Depletion on the Inner and Outer Membrane Proteomes of Escherichia coli J. Bacteriol., May 15, 2008; 190(10): 3505 - 3525. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Bahari, R. Parlitz, A. Eitan, G. Stjepanovic, E. S. Bochkareva, I. Sinning, and E. Bibi Membrane Targeting of Ribosomes and Their Release Require Distinct and Separable Functions of FtsY J. Biol. Chem., November 2, 2007; 282(44): 32168 - 32175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Parlitz, A. Eitan, G. Stjepanovic, L. Bahari, G. Bange, E. Bibi, and I. Sinning Escherichia coli Signal Recognition Particle Receptor FtsY Contains an Essential and Autonomous Membrane-binding Amphipathic Helix J. Biol. Chem., November 2, 2007; 282(44): 32176 - 32184. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. H. Peterson, R. L. Szabady, and H. D. Bernstein An Unusual Signal Peptide Extension Inhibits the Binding of Bacterial Presecretory Proteins to the Signal Recognition Particle, Trigger Factor, and the SecYEG Complex J. Biol. Chem., April 7, 2006; 281(14): 9038 - 9048. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. A. Herskovits, E. Shimoni, A. Minsky, and E. Bibi Accumulation of endoplasmic membranes and novel membrane-bound ribosome-signal recognition particle receptor complexes in Escherichia coli J. Cell Biol., November 7, 2002; 159(3): 403 - 410. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Jiang, L. Yi, M. Moore, M. Chen, T. Rohl, K.-J. van Wijk, J.-W. L. de Gier, R. Henry, and R. E. Dalbey Chloroplast YidC Homolog Albino3 Can Functionally Complement the Bacterial YidC Depletion Strain and Promote Membrane Insertion of Both Bacterial and Chloroplast Thylakoid Proteins J. Biol. Chem., May 24, 2002; 277(22): 19281 - 19288. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Tjalsma, A. Bolhuis, J. D. H. Jongbloed, S. Bron, and J. M. van Dijl Signal Peptide-Dependent Protein Transport in Bacillus subtilis: a Genome-Based Survey of the Secretome Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev., September 1, 2000; 64(3): 515 - 547. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Nilsson, S. Witt, H. Kiefer, I. Mingarro, and G. von Heijne Distant Downstream Sequence Determinants Can Control N-tail Translocation during Protein Insertion into the Endoplasmic Reticulum Membrane J. Biol. Chem., February 25, 2000; 275(9): 6207 - 6213. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Moore, M. S. Harrison, E. C. Peterson, and R. Henry Chloroplast Oxa1p Homolog Albino3 Is Required for Post-translational Integration of the Light Harvesting Chlorophyll-binding Protein into Thylakoid Membranes J. Biol. Chem., January 21, 2000; 275(3): 1529 - 1532. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. C. Samuelson, F. Jiang, L. Yi, M. Chen, J.-W. de Gier, A. Kuhn, and R. E. Dalbey Function of YidC for the Insertion of M13 Procoat Protein in Escherichia coli. TRANSLOCATION OF MUTANTS THAT SHOW DIFFERENCES IN THEIR MEMBRANE POTENTIAL DEPENDENCE AND Sec REQUIREMENT J. Biol. Chem., September 7, 2001; 276(37): 34847 - 34852. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| All ASBMB Journals | Molecular and Cellular Proteomics |
| Journal of Lipid Research | ASBMB Today |