Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M000032200 on April 3, 2000
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 23, 17886-17893, June 9, 2000
Interaction of Drosophila melanogaster Prohormone
Convertase 2 and 7B2
INSECT CELL-SPECIFIC PROCESSING AND SECRETION*
Jae Ryoung
Hwang
,
Daria E.
Siekhaus§¶,
Robert S.
Fuller
,
Paul H.
Taghert**, and
Iris
Lindberg

From the
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular
Biology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New
Orleans, Louisiana 70112, § Department of Biochemistry,
Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
94305-5307,
Department of Biological Chemistry, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, and ** Department of Anatomy and
Neurobiology, Washington University Medical School,
St. Louis, Missouri 63110
Received for publication, January 5, 2000, and in revised form, March 22, 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
The prohormone convertases (PCs) are an
evolutionarily ancient group of proteases required for the maturation
of neuropeptide and peptide hormone precursors. In Drosophila
melanogaster, the homolog of prohormone convertase 2, dPC2
(amontillado), is required for normal hatching behavior,
and immunoblotting data indicate that flies express 80- and 75-kDa
forms of this protein. Because mouse PC2 (mPC2) requires 7B2, a helper
protein for productive maturation, we searched the fly data base for
the 7B2 signature motif PPNPCP and identified an expressed sequence tag
clone encoding the entire open reading frame for this protein. dPC2 and
d7B2 cDNAs were subcloned into expression vectors for transfection into HEK-293 cells; mPC2 and rat 7B2 were used as controls. Although active mPC2 was detected in medium in the presence of either d7B2 or
r7B2, dPC2 showed no proteolytic activity upon coexpression of either
d7B2 or r7B2. Labeling experiments showed that dPC2 was synthesized but
not secreted from HEK-293 cells. However, when dPC2 and either d7B2 or
r7B2 were coexpressed in Drosophila S2 cells, abundant
immunoreactive dPC2 was secreted into the medium, coincident with the
appearance of PC2 activity. Expression and secretion of dPC2 enzyme
activity thus appears to require insect cell-specific posttranslational
processing events. The significant differences in the cell biology of
the insect and mammalian enzymes, with 7B2 absolutely required for
secretion of dPC2 and zymogen conversion occurring intracellularly in
the case of dPC2 but not mPC2, support the idea that the
Drosophila enzyme has specific requirements for maturation
and secretion that can be met only in insect cells.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Peptide hormones and neuropeptides are frequently synthesized as
precursors that are biologically inactive until cleaved and modified
through multiple posttranslational processing steps (reviewed in Ref.
1). Many of the proteases involved in these processing steps have been
identified and are related to the yeast subtilisin-like endoprotease
Kex2. These proprotein or prohormone convertases (PCs)1 cleave proproteins at
pairs of basic amino acids or occasionally at monobasic sites (reviewed
in Refs. 2 and 3). To date, seven vertebrate PCs have been reported,
namely furin, PACE 4 (paired amino
acid-cleaving enzyme 4), PC1/PC3,
PC2, PC4, PC5/PC6, and PC7/lymphoma PC/PC8. These proteases have
different distributions. Although furin and PACE4 are expressed
ubiquitously (4, 5), PC5/PC6 is found mostly in gastrointestinal
tissues (6, 7). PC4 is expressed in testes (8), and PC7/lymphoma PC/PC8
is found in lymphoid tissue (9, 10). On the other hand, PC1 and PC2 are
most highly expressed in neuroendocrine cells (11-14). PC1 and PC2 are
required in the processing of critical peptide hormone precursors and
neuropeptide precursors such as proenkephalin (15, 16), proglucagon
(17-20), proopiomelanocortin (21-24), and insulin (25-28). PC2 is
unique among proprotein convertases in requiring association with the
neuroendocrine-specific protein 7B2 (29) for maturation and activation
(30-32).
After removal of the signal peptide, 7B2 is a 185-residue secretory
protein (33, 34) composed of two different functional domains that
interact with PC2: an N-terminal portion (21-kDa domain), which is
involved in proPC2 maturation and activation (30, 35), and a C-terminal
31 amino acid peptide (CT peptide), which is a potent inhibitor of PC2
(36-38). The two domains are separated by a string of five basic amino
acids, a recognition site for the proprotein convertase furin (39-41).
In AtT-20 cells, 7B2 binds to proPC2 in the endoplasmic reticulum
following folding of proPC2 and facilitates transport to the
trans-Golgi network as well as the autocatalytic cleavage of the PC2
propeptide (42). Cellular proPC2 synthesis in the absence of 7B2 can
also result in propeptide cleavage but yields inactive PC2 even in the
presence of exogenously added 7B2 in vitro (30, 43).
Recently, a 7B2 null mouse was shown to completely lack PC2 activity in
brain extracts (44). This 7B2 null mouse confirms the requirement of
vertebrate PC2 for 7B2 in an in vivo model.
Neuropeptides play key roles in a wide range of functions in the
metazoa (45). In insects, they are found in numerous neuronal cell
types (reviewed in Ref. 46). Neuropeptide biosynthesis in
Drosophila is largely undescribed with the exception of
enzymes required for C-terminal
-amidation (47). In keeping with
their important roles in neuropeptide synthesis, the functional domains of both PC2 and 7B2 are highly conserved throughout evolution. Homologs
of PC2 and/or 7B2 have been described in invertebrates such as the
mollusc Lymnaea stagnalis (48, 49), the worm
Caenorhabditis elegans (50, 51), and Aplysia
californica (52). Recently, a homolog of PC2 from Drosophila
melanogaster has been identified and termed
amontillado; expression of this gene was found to be essential in the production of the movements that result in hatching (53), presumably to generate bioactive peptides required for this
behavior. We wanted to determine whether amontillado truly encoded a functional protease, implying protease control of behavior in
Drosophila. Because PC2 activity is dependent on 7B2
expression in vertebrates, the question of whether
Drosophila 7B2 can modulate PC2 activity was also of
interest. To this end we identified and cloned Drosophila
7B2 (d7B2). In the present study, we characterize the intracellular
interaction of Drosophila PC2 (dPC2) with d7B2 and
demonstrate specific differences in the cellular handling of the
Drosophila enzyme as compared with a vertebrate homolog.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Antisera--
Antiserum to dPC2 was raised in rabbits by Covance
(Denver, PA) by injecting a conjugate composed of the last 10 residues of dPC2 (53) linked to keyhole limpet hemocyanin (Pierce) using 1-ethyl
3-(dimethylaminopropyl) carbodiimide. The fourth and fifth bleeds were
used for the Western blotting, immunopurification, and
immunoprecipitation procedures described here. Because the C-terminal
segments of PC2s from various species are not well conserved, this
antiserum did not cross-react with mPC2, nor did mPC2 antiserum
cross-react with dPC2 (as assessed by Western blotting).
Preparation of Drosophila Tissues and Western
Blotting--
Drosophila tissues of the stock yw[67c23]
were homogenized in an extraction buffer (20 mM NaTES, 10 mM mannitol, pH 7.4) that also contained 1% Triton X-100
(Pierce), 30 µg/ml phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 0.2 µg/ml
leupeptin, 0.2 µg/ml pepstatin, 5.0 µg/ml lima bean trypsin
inhibitor, 1.6 µg/ml benzamidine, and 20% 5× sample loading buffer
(310 mM Tris-HCl, pH 6.8, 5% sodium dodecyl sulfate, 50%
glycerol, 0.1%
-mercaptoethanol, and 0.1% bromphenol blue).
Samples (one adult head or body or the anterior or posterior half of a
third instar) were extracted in 20 µl of buffer each. Samples were
boiled for 3 min, chilled, and centrifuged to remove debris. Proteins
were separated on 8% gels, transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride
membranes, and incubated with an antiserum (bleed 4, diluted 1:1500)
against the C terminus of dPC2. Antisera were mixed in 10 mM phosphate buffer, pH 7.4, containing 150 mM
NaCl, 5% nonfat dry milk, 0.1% Tween 20, and 0.01% sodium azide.
Preincubation was performed in the same buffer without antibody.
Membranes were then washed and incubated with the secondary antibody
(alkaline phosphatase-conjugated goat anti-rabbit IgG (Sigma) at
1:5000). After washing, alkaline phosphatase activity was detected
using nitroblue tetrazolium and 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl phosphate as
a substrate (Roche Molecular Biochemicals).
Western Blotting of Cell Samples--
Proteins were separated by
SDS-PAGE on 8.8% gels, transferred to nitrocellulose membranes, and
incubated with a 1:1000 dilution of antiserum against the C terminus of
dPC2 in TBS buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, with 150 mM NaCl) containing 5% nonfat dry milk (following
preincubation in the same buffer lacking antiserum). Membranes were
washed well with TBS buffer containing 0.05% Tween 20 and incubated
with the secondary antibody, alkaline phosphatase-conjugated goat
anti-rabbit IgG (Sigma) at 1:10,000 in milk/TBS. After washing the
membranes extensively, alkaline phosphatase activity was detected using
nitroblue tetrazolium and 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl phosphate as a
substrate (Sigma).
Construction of PC2 and 7B2-encoding Vectors--
The dPC2
expression vector was created by polymerase chain reaction using the
number 5-8 dPC2 cDNA (described in Ref. 53) as a template with a
5' primer containing a new Kozak translational start site (54)
(5'-CGGGATCCAAAATGGCAGCAGCCACATG-3') and a 3' primer matching the
dPC2 sequence (5'-GCTCTAGACCCTCTGCGCGACCCG-3'). This product was
digested and ligated into the BamHI and XbaI sites of the pCDNA3 vector (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA), and the insert sequenced to verify the construction. Drosophila PC2
in pCDNA3 was digested with BamHI, blunt-ended with
Klenow fragment, digested with XbaI, and subcloned into the
pAc5.1/V5-HisB vector predigested with EcoRV and
XbaI. Drosophila 7B2 in pBluescript (obtained
from Genome Systems) was subcloned directly into the EcoRI
and XhoI sites of the pAc5.1/V5-HisB vector (Invitrogen).
Preparation of Recombinant His-tagged d7B2--
Recombinant
His-tagged d7B2 was prepared using the QIAexpress system (Qiagen Inc.,
Chatsworth, CA). The DNA encoding d7B2 was generated by polymerase
chain reaction using an N-terminal primer
(5'-CGGCCGGATCCTACCAGGTGCAGTCCTAT-3') and a C-terminal primer
(5'-CGGCCGAAGCTTTTAGTGGAATAAAAGGTT-3'). The polymerase chain
reaction fragment was cloned in pQE30 at the BamHI and
HindIII restriction sites. The His-tagged d7B2 construct was
verified by DNA sequencing. Proteins were expressed in
Escherichia coli XL-1 Blue (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA),
induced with 1 mM
isopropyl-1-thio-
-D-galactopyranoside (final
concentration) and purified based on the guanidine-HCl extraction
method (55). Briefly, cells from a 500-ml culture were lysed in 20 ml
of buffer A (10 mM Hepes, pH 7.5, containing 6 M guanidine HCl) for 1 h in the cold room, centrifuged
for 15 min at 10,000 × g, and loaded onto a
nickel-nitrilotriacetic acid column (1.5 ml of resin) previously
equilibrated with buffer A and washed with buffer A using a Waters fast
protein liquid chromatograph. The denatured protein was renatured using
a linear gradient of buffer A and buffer B (10 mM Hepes, pH
7.5, and 0.1 M NaCl) with a flow rate of 0.4 ml/min over
130 min. After washing with 10 column volumes of 10 mM
Hepes, pH 7.5, containing 50 mM NaCl, proteins were eluted
from the column with 30 ml of buffer C (10 mM Hepes, pH
7.5, containing 250 mM imidazole, 50 mM NaCl,
and 0.02% NaN3) at a flow rate of 0.3 ml/min. Fractions
were stored at
70 °C; an aliquot of each was analyzed on a 15%
SDS-PAGE gel using Coomassie staining. A predominant band was observed
on a SDS-PAGE gel with the expected molecular mass and an estimated purity of greater than 90%.
Transient Transfection of Drosophila S2 Cells--
Transient
transfection of dPC2 and/or d7B2 into S2 cells was performed as
described in the Drosophila expression system instruction manual from Invitrogen (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA). Briefly, 1 × 106 S2 cells per ml were seeded into a 35 mm plate in 2.5 ml complete Drosophila expression system expression medium
and were grown overnight at 24 °C. A total of 19 µg DNA per plate
were transfected in the presence of the CaCl2 and
Hepes-buffered saline (HBS) solutions provided by Invitrogen.
Twenty-four hours after transfection, the cells were washed with
Drosophila expression system serum-free medium and were
incubated in 1 ml of Drosophila expression system serum-free
medium overnight at 24 °C. The overnight medium was then used for
PC2 activity assays and for Western blotting.
Transient Transfection, Metabolic Labeling, and
Immunopurification--
CHO cells expressing mPC2 (43) were split to
3 × 105 cells/well to a 6-well plate on the day
before transfection and transiently transfected using 2 µg of DNA
encoding either vector, r7B2 or d7B2, and 5 µl of LipofectAMINE (Life
Technologies Inc.) in 1 ml/well. The medium was changed to Opti-MEM
(Life Technologies Inc.) 24 h after transfection, incubated
overnight at 37 °C, centrifuged to remove floating cells, and tested
for PC2 activity. For double transient transfections, HEK-293 cells
were transfected using 2 µg of each DNA and 10 µl of LipofectAMINE
(Life Technologies) in 1 ml/well. 36 h after transfection, cells
were labeled with 0.3 mCi/ml of [35S]Met and Cys Promix
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) for 20 min and chased for 2 h in
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing 2% fetal bovine serum.
The cells were then lysed in buffer A (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH
7.5), containing 150 mM NaCl, 1% Nonidet P-40, 0.5%
sodium deoxycholate, 1 mM EDTA, and protease inhibitors (1 µM pepstatin, 1 µM trans-epoxysuccinic
acid, 280 µM tosylphenylalanine chloromethyl ketone, and
140 µM tosylysyl chloromethyl ketone). The homogenate was
centrifuged at 14,000 rpm for 20 min at 4 °C, and the supernatant
was collected. Supernatants were incubated for 3 h with 75 µl of
50% anti-PC2 IgG-coupled protein A-Sepharose. Antisera used were
directed against the C termini of either dPC2 or mPC2 (43).
Immunopurified PC2s were washed once with the extraction buffer and
twice with 1× PBS. The beads were then resuspended to a 25% slurry in
PBS. The beads were then either collected by centrifugation and boiled
in Laemmli sample buffer for polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis or were
assayed directly for PC2 activity. Radioactive proteins were analyzed
using a Storm PhosphorImager (Molecular Dynamics, Sunnyvale, CA).
Metabolic labeling of Drosophila S2 cells was performed
using the same method described above except that Drosophila
expression system serum-free medium was used for the chase medium.
Metabolic labeling of Drosophila S2 cells was performed at
room temperature.
Preparation of Golgi-enriched Subcellular
Fractions--
Golgi-enriched subcellular fractions were prepared from
CHO cells overexpressing mouse proPC2 (CHO/mPC2 cells) as described previously (42). Briefly, CHO/mPC2 cells were grown in four 850-cm2 rollers for each membrane preparation. All of the
following steps were performed on ice or at 4 °C. After washing with
calcium-free PBS, cells were scraped in this buffer and pelleted at low
speed. Cells were then resuspended in 6 ml of 0.25 M
sucrose in 10 mM Tris, pH 7.4, and gently homogenized with
a ball-bearing homogenizer. The homogenate was centrifuged for 20 min
at 8,000 × g, and the supernatant was pelleted at
56,000 rpm in a Beckman TL 100.4 rotor for 35 min. Pellets were
resuspended in 1.5 ml of 1.15 M sucrose in 10 mM Tris, pH 7.4, and loaded on the bottom of a
discontinuous sucrose gradient composed of 1.5 ml of 0.86 M
sucrose in 10 mM Tris, pH 7.4, and 1.5 ml of 0.25 M sucrose. The gradient was centrifuged at 46,000 rpm in
the same rotor for 140 min. Five fractions were collected, and each
fraction was assayed using membrane markers as described previously
(42).
In Vitro Activation of PC2--
Golgi-enriched fractions (15 µg protein) were incubated with 200 nM of purified
His-tagged 7B2s in 100 mM sodium acetate, pH 5, in the
presence of 0.2% Triton X-100, 5 mM CaCl2, and
a protease inhibitor mixture composed of 1 µM
trans-epoxysuccinic acid, 1 µM pepstatin, 280 µM tosylphenylalanine chloromethyl ketone, and 140 µM tosyllysyl chloromethyl ketone. Incubations were
conducted at 37 °C for 6 h. PC2 activity was estimated using
200 µM Pyr-Glu-Arg-Thr-Lys-Arg-methylcoumarin amide as a
substrate as described below. The identification of enzymatic activity
as PC2-specific was assessed by measuring the extent of inhibition with
1 µM hCT peptide, a PC2-specific inhibitor that
corresponds to the C terminus of human 7B2 (36). Experiments were
performed with Golgi fractions obtained from three different preparations.
PC2 Enzyme Assay--
The PC2 enzyme assay was performed as
described previously (36). Briefly, PC2 activity was measured in 100 mM sodium acetate, pH 5.0, containing 5 mM
CaCl2, 0.4% octyl glucoside, and a proteinase inhibitor
mixture indicated above, using 25 µl of the 25% protein A-Sepharose
bead slurry containing immunopurified proteins or overnight medium
(Opti-MEM, Life Technologies, Inc.) obtained from transfected cells. 1 µM hCT peptide (final concentration), a PC2-specific
inhibitor (36), was added to some samples to assess specificity. The
incubations were conducted at 37 °C using Pyr-Glu-Arg-Thr-Lys-Arg-methylcoumarinamide as a substrate; the fluorescence of the product was quantified by reference to a free aminomethylcoumarin standard.
Immunoprecipitation--
For immunoprecipitation under
denaturing conditions, cells were boiled for 5 min in 0.1 ml of boiling
buffer (50 mM sodium phosphate, pH 7.4, 1% SDS, 50 mM
-mercaptoenthanol, and 2 mM EDTA). Cells
were then diluted with 0.9 ml of AG buffer (0.1 M sodium
phosphate, pH 7.4, 1 mM EDTA, 0.1% Triton X-100, 0.5%
Nonidet P-40, and 0.9% NaCl). For nondenaturing immunoprecipitation,
cells were extracted as described previously (42). 500 µl of each sample were preincubated with 0.1 ml of 20% protein A-Sepharose CL-4B
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) hydrated, washed with AG buffer at 4 °C
for 1 h, and then centrifuged. 5 µl of PC2 antiserum were then
added to the supernatant, along with 0.5 mM
p-chloromercuriphenylsulfonic acid (Sigma) and 0.5 mM phenylmethanesulfonyl fluoride (Roche Molecular
Biochemicals), and samples were incubated overnight at 4 °C with
agitation. 100 µl of 20% protein A-Sepharose, hydrated and washed
three times with AG buffer, were then added, and the samples were
rocked at 4 °C for 1 h. The beads were washed twice with AG
buffer, once with 0.5 M NaCl in PBS, and twice with PBS. Immunoprecipitates were resuspended in Laemmli sample buffer and analyzed using 8.8% SDS-PAGE. After electrophoresis, gels were fixed
with 25% methanol containing 10% acetic acid for 30 min and exposed
to a Storm PhosphorImager screen and analyzed with ImageQuant.
 |
RESULTS |
Drosophila Tissues Express PC2 Protein--
To assess the
molecular mass of dPC2 in insect tissues, polyclonal antiserum against
dPC2 was prepared using a synthetic peptide corresponding to the last
10 residues of dPC2 coupled to keyhole limpet hemocyanin. By Western
blot analysis (n = 10), we detected two prominent dPC2
immunoreactive bands of 80 and 75 kDa (Fig. 1a) in insect tissues. The
larger band co-migrated with proPC2 synthesized in
Drosophila S2 cells (data not shown). A prominent 35-kDa
band was also present, presumably representing a C-terminal fragment of
dPC2, because the antiserum is directed toward this terminus. A 45-kDa
N-terminally truncated protein has been observed in mammalian
PC2-expressing tissues (43); the significance of this cleavage event is
unknown, but it would be expected to destroy catalytic activity.
Preimmune serum used at the same dilution did not detect any of these
bands (results not shown), suggesting that these bands indeed represent
three different forms of Drosophila PC2. The anterior
section of third instar contained much more material than did posterior
sections. From analysis of dissected tissues, we determined that the
source of most larval signals was the anterior midgut, although
material was also detected in CNS and salivary gland (data not shown).
Drosophila PC2 was found in larval, pupal, and adult
developmental stages but was rarely detected in adult heads (Fig.
1b).

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Expression of immunoreactive
Drosophila PC2 forms in Drosophila
tissues. Western blot analysis of Drosophila
tissues is shown. a, lane 1, analysis of one
third instar larva (wet weight, ~1.5 mg) displaying two prominent
immunoreactive bands (arrows) at ~80 and 75 kDa. Another
prominent band is seen at ~35 kDa. These bands were not seen in
similar analyses using preimmune serum. The 80-kDa species co-migrates
with an immunoreactive band in homogenates of dPC2-expressing S2 cells.
b, lane 2, one adult head (~0.4 mg); lane
3, one adult body (~2 mg); lane 4, anterior half of
one third instar larva. All samples display the ~35-kDa species, but
only larval samples contain the ~75-kDa doublet
(arrows).
|
|
A 7B2-like Sequence Is Present in Drosophila--
Because 7B2 is
co-expressed with PC2 in mammalian tissues and because 7B2 expression
is known to be critical to PC2 activity, we searched for this protein
in the D. melanogaster expressed sequence tag data base
using the PPNPCP consensus sequence, conserved in all known 7B2s (51).
A cDNA encoding 261 amino acids was identified that contained this
sequence; it was obtained from Genome Systems and sequenced from both
directions. A notable feature is the conservation of the
86-121-residue sequence containing a proline-rich region, the minimum
sequence required for r7B2 in facilitating proPC2 activation (35).
Conservation of a CT peptide-like sequence in the C terminus is also
apparent (Fig. 2). Interestingly, the
encoded protein appeared to lack a furin consensus sequence for
cleavage into the 21-kDa and CT peptide domains; it is the second 7B2
sequence cloned thus far that lacks this feature (Lymnaea
7B2 also lacks a furin consensus cleavage site; Ref. 49). The lack of
this site in two species may imply that furin cleavage into two domains
is not required for d7B2 function. Drosophila 7B2 also
contains an inhibitory CT peptide-like sequence containing the highly
conserved heptapeptide (V/I)NP(Y/F)LQG as well as the KK pair observed
in all 7B2s cloned thus far (Ref. 51; reviewed in Ref. 56).

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Sequence of d7B2 compared with that of
r7B2. Black boxes represent perfectly matched amino
acids between Drosophila and rat. Note the high conservation
of the CT-like peptide (underlined) as well as the 36-amino
acid segment that includes the polyproline-rich region and the
-helix required for PC2 activity (in open box). The furin
cleavage consensus sequence in r7B2 is represented by
asterisks.
|
|
Drosophila 7B2 Can Confer Activatability upon Mouse proPC2--
To
assess the functional conservation of d7B2, we examined the ability of
Drosophila 7B2 (d7B2) to produce active PC2 from mouse
proPC2 using two different functional tests, one in vivo and
one in vitro. In the first series, we transiently
transfected into CHO/mPC2 cells: 1) the backbone vector as a control;
2) rat 27-kDa 7B2 (r27 kDa); 3) rat 21-kDa 7B2 (r21 kDa); or 4) d7B2 (full length; corresponding to rat 27-kDa 7B2). The overnight conditioned medium was then tested for PC2 activity.
Drosophila 7B2 was capable of activating mouse proPC2 in
CHO/mPC2 cells, although not as efficiently as r27 kDa and r21 kDa 7B2
(Table I). The difference in potency
between rat and Drosophila 7B2s may be due to species
specificity or to differential expression of 7B2s in transfections;
however, we tested for the latter possibility by coimmunoprecipitation
with PC2 antisera and observed roughly comparable expression of all
7B2s (results not shown).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
PC2 enzymatic activity of transfected CHO/mPC2 cells
Plasmids encoding several types of 7B2 as well as the empty vector were
transiently transfected into CHO cells expressing mouse proPC2, which
were plated in a 6-well plate on the day before transfection. 20 µl
of the overnight medium were used for PC2 enzymatic activity assay, as
described under "Materials and Methods."
|
|
Although the mechanism of facilitation of proPC2 activation by 7B2 is
unknown, we have previously observed that proPC2 activation can be
reconstituted in Golgi-enriched fractions by the addition of
recombinant 7B2 (42). To study the ability of d7B2 to facilitate mPC2
activation in an in vitro system, we purified
recombinant His-tagged d7B2 from E. coli and assayed its
intrinsic activity by incubating recombinant d7B2 with a Golgi
membrane-enriched fraction from CHO/mPC2 cells; this Golgi fraction is
enzymatically inactive unless exposed to recombinant 7B2 (42).
Recombinant d7B2, which corresponds to r27 kDa 7B2, was 12% as active
on Golgi-derived mouse proPC2 as compared with recombinant r21 kDa 7B2
(Table II). The enzymatic activity
generated by d7B2 was completely inhibited by 1 µM hCT
peptide 1-31, a potent and specific inhibitor of PC2, suggesting that
it indeed results from mouse proPC2 activation. A comparison of PC2
activity in the presence of recombinant d7B2 and r27 kDa 7B2 confirmed
that d7B2 was able to facilitate the activation of Golgi-derived mouse
proPC2 (Table II). The apparently lower activity of d7B2 compared with
r21 kDa 7B2 is likely to be at least in part an artifact caused by
inhibition of the inhibitory CT peptide sequence present in the d7B2
construct but lacking in the r21 kDa 7B2 construct. Indeed, purified
His-tagged d7B2 inhibited purified recombinant mPC2 with an
IC50 of 3 µM (data not shown), supporting the
ability of d7B2 to inhibit mPC2. The ability of d7B2 to facilitate the
activation of mouse proPC2 is not surprising because the
polyproline-containing segment critical for conferring facilitation of
proPC2 activation (amino acids 86-121 in rat 7B2; Ref. 35) is highly
conserved in the Drosophila 7B2 molecule (see the alignment
of 7B2s in Fig. 2).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II
PC2 enzymatic activity in vitro
Golgi-enriched fractions (15 µg of protein) from CHO cells expressing
mouse proPC2 were incubated with 200 nM of purified
recombinant 7B2s for 6 h, and the mPC2 activity was measured as
described under "Materials and Methods."
|
|
Drosophila PC2 Is Inactive When Expressed in CHO/r7B2
Cells--
To examine the enzymatic activity of dPC2, plasmids
encoding either mPC2 or dPC2 were transiently transfected into CHO
cells overexpressing r21 kDa 7B2 (CHO/r7B2) cells. The overnight
conditioned medium from each transfection was assayed for PC2 activity
in vitro, as has been previously described for mPC2 (30).
Surprisingly, medium obtained from cells transfected with dPC2 plasmid
was completely enzymatically inactive, although medium obtained from
control mPC2-transfected cells exhibited PC2 activity (Fig.
3). Several possibilities exist to
explain these results. One explanation is that dPC2 may not be well
expressed or secreted in CHO/r7B2 cells. Alternatively, dPC2 may
exhibit a strict requirement for its own Drosophila 7B2, for
an insect cell line host, or both, to exhibit activity.

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Transfection of Drosophila
PC2 constructs into CHO/r7B2 cells does not result in the
expression of dPC2 enzymatic activity. Plasmids encoding PC2s from
Drosophila (open triangles) and mouse
(closed diamonds) were transiently transfected into r21 kDa
7B2-expressing CHO cells. The overnight conditioned media from each
transfection were used to assess PC2 activity. The pCDNA3 vector
served as a negative control (closed circles). Values are
the means ± S.D. (n = 3; error bars
smaller than the symbols are not shown).
|
|
Drosophila proPC2 Is Synthesized in HEK-293 Cells but Is
Enzymatically Inactive and Cannot Be Secreted--
We assessed whether
dPC2 was well expressed from our mammalian expression vector using
pulse-chase analyses after transient cotransfection with d7B2 or r7B2
in HEK-293 cells; we used HEK-293 cells because of their high protein
expression levels in transient transfections. After transfection, cells
were labeled with [35S]Met/Cys for 20 min and chased for
2 h in methionine/cysteine-containing medium. Labeled cells and
chase media were then subjected to immunoprecipitation under denaturing
or nondenaturing conditions. As shown in Fig. 4a, dPC2 cotransfected with
d7B2, r21 kDa, or r27 kDa 7B2 was not secreted into the medium, which
also tested negatively for PC2 activity (data not shown). This apparent
lack of secretion of dPC2 in HEK-293 cells is consistent with the
absence of dPC2 activity in CHO/r7B2 cell medium (Fig. 3). In contrast,
mPC2 cotransfected with either r27 kDa 7B2 or d7B2 was successfully
secreted (Fig. 4a). Physical interaction between mPC2 and
d7B2 was confirmed by co-immunoprecipitation and SDS-PAGE on 15% gels
(data not shown).

View larger version (60K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Drosophila proPC2 is synthesized but
cannot be secreted and is enzymatically inactive when expressed in
HEK-293 cells together with d7B2 or rat 7B2. a,
Drosophila proPC2 cannot be secreted in HEK-293 cells. dPC2
and mPC2 constructs were transiently transfected into HEK-293 cells
together with either the control vector (pCEP4), r27 kDa, r21 kDa 7B2,
or d7B2. Transfected cells were labeled with [35S]Met/Cys
and chased for 2 h. The chase media were immunoprecipitated using
either anti-dPC2 or anti-mPC2 antiserum and analyzed on a 8.8%
SDS-PAGE gel. 14C-labeled bovine serum albumin was used as
a size marker (66 kDa). Following transient transfection of dPC2 and
mPC2 together with 7B2s from either Drosophila or rat into
HEK-293 cells, radiolabeled cell extracts were immunoprecipitated with
antiserum against either dPC2 or mPC2 under denaturing conditions
(b) or nondenaturing conditions (c),
respectively. b, HEK-293 cells synthesize
Drosophila proPC2. Immunoprecipitates were analyzed for
radiolabeled proPC2 expression on 8.8% gels. c,
immunopurified Drosophila PC2 is enzymatically inactive.
Immunopurified PC2s were used for PC2 enzyme assays under standard
conditions (see "Materials and Methods"). The activity of dPC2
immunopurified from cells transfected with d7B2 is represented by
open squares; dPC2 transfected together with r27 kDa 7B2 is
shown by open triangles (which overlap with the open
squares); mPC2 transfected together with d7B2 is represented by
closed triangles; and mPC2 transfected together with r27 kDa
7B2 is represented by closed circles. Values are the
means ± S.D. (n = 3; error bars
smaller than the symbols are not shown).
|
|
We then examined the level of intracellular expression of dPC2 in
HEK-293 cells by performing immunoprecipitation of labeled cells under
denaturing conditions after transfection with plasmids encoding dPC2,
mPC2, d7B2, and r27 kDa 7B2. Drosophila PC2 transfected together with either d7B2 or r27 kDa 7B2 was found to be almost as well
expressed as mPC2 in HEK-293 cells (Fig. 4b). We assayed these cell extracts for PC2 activity using an immunopurification procedure (Fig. 4c). Following immunopurification of all
forms of PC2 from HEK-293 cell extracts using protein A beads bound to
either anti-dPC2 or anti-mPC2 antibodies, immunopurified PC2s were
directly assayed for PC2 activity after lowering the pH to 5.0, which
efficiently activates immunopurified mouse proPC2 obtained from cells
expressing r7B2 (42). Surprisingly, under all conditions, immunopurified dPC2s consistently failed to exhibit enzymatic activity
(Fig. 4c). In contrast, mPC2-containing beads obtained from
coexpressions with either r27 kDa 7B2 or d7B2 were enzymatically active
(Fig. 4c).
The complete lack of activity of dPC2 expressed in HEK-293 cells
together with d7B2 was unexpected given the previously demonstrated ability of d7B2 to function properly with mPC2. We considered the
possibility that the lack of activity of dPC2 might result from
suboptimal assay conditions for this enzyme. To assess this possibility, we performed PC2 assays of immunopurified dPC2 at several
different pHs values (pH 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, and 7), but dPC2 activity was
not detected (data not shown). The lack of dPC2 activity in HEK-293 and
CHO/r7B2 cells was therefore considered most likely to be due to
improper intracellular conditions that resulted in a lack of proper
folding (and therefore secretion) of dPC2 in these mammalian cell
types. We hypothesize that Drosophila proPC2 might require
particular host cell maturation conditions that cannot be supplied by
mammalian cells.
Drosophila PC2 Is Successfully Activated by d7B2 and Secreted in
Drosophila S2 Cells--
To investigate the possibility that dPC2
might require species-specific factors for production of an activable
zymogen, we subcloned dPC2 and d7B2 into insect expression vectors and
transiently transfected either plasmids encoding dPC2 and d7B2 alone,
or dPC2 and d7B2 together, into Drosophila S2 cells. We
assayed the overnight conditioned medium for PC2 activity in the
presence or absence of 1 µM hCT peptide 1-31. As shown
in Fig. 5a, medium from S2 cells cotransfected with dPC2 and 7B2 cDNAs exhibited much higher enzymatic activity compared with medium obtained from cells transfected with only dPC2 or only d7B2. Drosophila PC2 activity could
not be inhibited by hCT peptide at 1 µM, a concentration
that results in total inhibition of mPC2 (data not shown and Refs. 37
and 36). However, 50 µM hCT inhibited dPC2 activity
7-fold (data not shown), indicating weak inhibitory activity of the
mammalian CT peptide against the insect enzyme.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Drosophila PC2 is enzymatically active
and is secreted only as mature dPC2 in Drosophila S2
cells. a, enzymatic activity assay of dPC2. Plasmids
encoding Drosophila PC2 and 7B2 were transfected into S2
cells. Data depict either PC2 alone (closed triangles), 7B2
alone (open inverted triangles), or dPC2 and d7B2 together
(open circles). After transfection, the overnight medium was
tested for PC2 activity under standard assay conditions. Values are the
means ± S.D. (n = 3; error bars
smaller than the symbols are not shown). b, Western blot
analysis of the conditioned medium from S2 cells. 40 µl of each
overnight conditioned medium were subjected to SDS-PAGE (8.8% gel),
transferred to nitrocellulose, and blotted with antiserum against the
C-terminal region of dPC2.
|
|
We used Western blotting to confirm the presence of secreted dPC2 forms
in the medium. In accordance with the observation of PC2 activity,
media obtained from cells cotransfected with dPC2 and d7B2 contained
high levels of secreted dPC2 protein (Fig. 5b).
Interestingly, Drosophila proPC2 found in the medium
consisted entirely of the mature lower molecular mass form, indicating
complete propeptide cleavage prior to secretion. Medium obtained from
S2 cells transfected only with dPC2 in the absence of d7B2 exhibited neither secreted PC2 protein nor enzymatic activity. Western blot analysis of dPC2 from the latter cell extracts showed high
intracellular expression of proPC2 (data not shown). It therefore
appears that coexpression with d7B2 is absolutely required for
secretion of dPC2 and, further, that in the presence of 7B2, S2 cells
are able to carry out intracellular conversion of Drosophila
proPC2. These data point to significant differences in the cell biology
of Drosophila proPC2 as compared with mouse proPC2, which in
constitutive cell lines is only poorly converted prior to secretion and
has no requirement for 7B2 for secretion (32, 43, 57).
We confirmed these results using pulse-chase metabolic labeling of S2
cells transiently transfected with dPC2/d7B2 and mPC2/r7B2 (Fig.
6). 90% of newly synthesized dPC2 was
secreted into the medium during a 1-h chase, and immunoreactive
secreted PC2 consisted entirely of the lower molecular mass form (Fig.
6a). Drosophila PC2 from S2 cells transfected
with dPC2 in the absence of 7B2 remained intracellular during the chase
period. We also could not detect secreted dPC2 when transfected without
7B2 in the 2-h chase medium (data not shown). In contrast, mPC2 was
secreted into the medium in a 7B2-independent fashion during a 2-h
chase (see below). Drosophila PC2 transfected together with
r27 kDa 7B2 behaved identically to Drosophila PC2
transfected together with Drosophila 7B2 (Fig.
6a), indicating that the Drosophila and mouse
7B2s were interchangeable.

View larger version (85K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Conversion and secretion of
Drosophila proPC2 in S2 cells requires 7B2.
a, pulse-chase metabolic labeling of S2 cells after
transient transfection. Plasmids encoding dPC2 alone or dPC2 with
either d7B2 or r27 kDa 7B2 were transiently transfected into S2 cells.
After 36 h, cells were labeled with [35S]Met/Cys for
20 min and chased for 0 or 1 h in Met/Cys-containing medium. dPC2s
from cell extracts and media were immunoprecipitated under denaturing
conditions. Note the absence of secreted PC2 in the absence of 7B2, and
the complete intracellular cleavage of Drosophila proPC2 to
PC2. Both d7B2 and r7B2 facilitated dPC2 in an identical manner.
T0 represents 0 h chase time;
T1 represents 1 h chase time. b, a
similar experiment was performed using mPC2 except that chase times
were 0 h (T0) or 2 h
(T2). The asterisk represents the
intermediate form of proPC2s. C represents cell extracts;
M represents medium.
|
|
The absolute requirement of dPC2 for 7B2 for secretion could represent
a property of S2 cells or could be specific to the dPC2 sequence. To
distinguish between these possibilities, mPC2 was also transiently
transfected with r21 kDa 7B2 into S2 cells, labeled under the same
conditions as for dPC2 labeling, and chased for 2 h. The chase
medium as well as the cell extracts were then immunoprecipitated using
antiserum against the C terminus of mPC2 (Fig. 6b). As shown
in Fig. 6b, mPC2 was secreted into the medium, independent
of the presence of 7B2, and was secreted as a mixture of proPC2 and the
cleaved form. Mouse PC2 cotransfected with r27 kDa 7B2 also yielded the
same result as in Fig. 6b (data not shown). These data
indicating that dPC2, but not mPC2, absolutely requires 7B2 for
secretion are unique because inactive mPC2 forms, both proPC2 as well
as processed forms, can be well secreted from CHO cells in the absence
of 7B2 (43).2
We conclude that although both dPC2 and mPC2 share the absolute
requirement for 7B2 for expression of enzymatic activity, the
maturation of dPC2 differs substantially from that of mPC2 in three
respects: (1) the ability of the zymogen to mature intracellularly in
constitutive cells; (2) the absolute requirement for 7B2 for secretion
of dPC2; and (3) the secretion of only mature forms.
 |
DISCUSSION |
In this paper we present the characterization of an important
prohormone converting enzyme in Drosophila, dPC2
(amontillado). Drosophila PC2 RNA is found in a
stereotyped pattern in the embryonic CNS (53) and is necessary for the
production of the movements that allow hatching. Drosophila
PC2 may contribute to the processing of various neuropeptide
precursors (e.g. those resulting in FMRFamide (58),
dromyosuppressin (59), and corazonin (60)). The mature peptides then
act as neurotransmitters and hormones in the regulation of physiology
(61) and the organization of behavior (62, 63). Like its mammalian
counterpart, Drosophila proPC2 requires the aid of the
helper protein 7B2 for expression of enzymatic activity; however, as
detailed below, the insect enzyme exhibits significant differences in
its cell biology from the mammalian homologs.
Drosophila 7B2 Is Interchangeable between Mammalian and Insect
Cells--
The neuroendocrine-specific protein 7B2 possesses a
signature hexapeptide present in all species cloned thus far, PPNPCP
(51). We used this sequence to identify d7B2 in the
Drosophila expressed sequence tag data base. Sequence
analysis of d7B2 demonstrates only 20% overall homology with r7B2.
Nonetheless, 7B2s from Drosophila and rat were functionally
interchangeable, because our data indicate that Drosophila
and rat 7B2s can confer activity, albeit reduced, upon mPC2 and
dPC2, respectively. Note that the 36-residue segment found in r7B2,
which is necessary and sufficient to permit proPC2 activation, is well
conserved in d7B2 (35). Our results therefore provide general
confirmation of the critical role of this region for proPC2 activation.
Drosophila 7B2 also possesses a well conserved CT peptide
((V/I)NP(Y/F)LQG motif and KK). This conserved CT peptide sequence is
likely to be responsible for the observed inhibition of mPC2 by d7B2.
Indeed, human CT peptide 1-31 weakly inhibited dPC2 activity with an IC50 of 4.6 µM (results not shown),
about 100 times less potently than inhibition of mPC2 activity (36).
Cross-species inhibition has been previously observed; even though the
two Lymnaea CT peptide sequences have several substitutions
as compared with the rodent CT peptide, segments of the
Lymnaea CT peptides, LCT1 and LCT2, inhibit mPC2 activity
weakly (IC50 values of 154 and 36 µM,
respectively; Ref. 49). These Lymnaea peptides were, however, completely unable to inhibit dPC2 activity (results not shown). Taken together, the CT inhibition data suggest that the nonconserved CT peptide sequences flanking the conserved heptapeptide and the KK pair may confer species-specific inhibition, most likely by
binding to nonconserved sites within the various PC2s. To confirm this hypothesis, the inhibition of dPC2 and mPC2 activity by d7B2 CT-related peptides would need to be tested.
Some controversy exists in the identification of regions required for
the 7B2-PC2 interaction. Benjannet et al. (32) have demonstrated that the pentabasic furin cleavage site in 7B2 is important for binding to PC2. However, we have shown that binding of
the 21-kDa form of 7B2, which lacks the pentabasic sequence, is
sufficient to effect proPC2 activation (35). Like Lymnaea 7B2, d7B2 has no furin cleavage site and is nonetheless active in
facilitating the activation of proPC2. Thus the presence of a furin
cleavage site may not be critical for the role of 7B2 in proPC2
activation. Drosophila 7B2 has a dibasic amino acid site
(Lys223-Lys224) near the beginning of the CT
peptide that could conceivably substitute for the furin site; however,
another enzyme rather than furin must necessarily perform this cleavage
because furin cannot cleave at paired lysines (Ref. 64; reviewed in
Ref. 65).
Drosophila proPC2 Requires an Insect Cell Host for
Activation--
In the present study, we show that
Drosophila PC2 cannot be synthesized in an activable form in
mammalian cells even in the presence of its cognate 7B2, whereas this
insect enzyme is both secreted and is proteolytically processed in
insect cells. Unlike immunopurified mouse proPC2, Drosophila
proPC2 immunopurified from HEK-293 cells coexpressing 7B2 was unable to
undergo conversion to active PC2. Therefore, Drosophila
proPC2 may not fold properly in HEK-293 cells. Although the relatively
low expression level of dPC2 observed in HEK-293 cells is a concern
(potentially because of degradation of unfolded protein), our data
support the idea that this insect protease cannot be made in active
form in mammalian cells. By contrast, a constitutively secreting insect
cell line, S2, was able to support the expression of enzymatically
active dPC2, if cotransfected with 7B2.
Drosophila PC2 has an Absolute Requirement for 7B2 for
Secretion--
In the present study, we show that dPC2 secretion is
dependent on the coexpression of 7B2. This is quite dissimilar to
mammalian PC2s, which can be secreted in the absence of 7B2 in
constitutively secreting mammalian cells such as CHO (43), COS-7 (57),
and BSC-40 (66) cells, although under these circumstances the secreted PC2 forms are enzymatically inactive and incompetent for activation (30, 43). Overexpression of 7B2 is not required for secretion of
proPC2/PC2 from neuroendocrine cells such as AtT-20 (30), rMTC 6-23
(67), and SK-N-MCIXC (68), although overexpression of 7B2 has been
observed to facilitate the secretion of PC2 from neuroendocrine cells
(30). The absolute requirement of dPC2 for 7B2 for secretion is thus
unprecedented and suggests a curious additional role for 7B2 in the
secretion of dPC2 in S2 cells.
Drosophila proPC2 Is Fully Processed Prior to
Secretion--
Interestingly, Drosophila proPC2 apparently
cannot be secreted as such but is completely cleaved to the mature form
prior to secretion. In contrast, a mixture of proPC2 and mature PC2 is
secreted from mammalian cells, both non-neuroendocrine and neuroendocrine cell lines, with non-neuroendocrine cells secreting predominantly proPC2 (32, 42, 43, 57, 68, 69).2 Because
r7B2 also exhibits the same facilitatory effect on
Drosophila proPC2 cleavage, these results cannot be due to
the specific interaction of d7B2 with dPC2 but represent a property of
S2 cells and/or the Drosophila proPC2 sequence. Considering
that S2 cells represent a constitutive cell line (70) lacking the
regulated secretory compartment known to be required for productive
intracellular maturation of vertebrate proPC2s (24, 56, 71),
Drosophila proPC2 conversion in S2 cells is likely to take
place within late secretory compartments, such as the trans-Golgi
network. However, the S2 trans-Golgi network compartment apparently
does not offer a comparably hospitable environment for the complete
maturation of mouse proPC2, which is secreted from S2 cells in a manner
similar to HEK-293 cells, i.e. predominantly, although not
entirely, uncleaved. The S2 host cell environment cannot therefore be
solely responsible for the differences in maturation of the mammalian
versus the insect zymogens; sequence differences between the
two types of PC2s must play a major role.
An inspection of the primary sequence of all known PC2s reveals that
invertebrate PC2s exhibit glycosylation site patterns that differ
radically from those of vertebrates. Fig.
7 shows a schematic comparison of the
sequences encoding PC2s from Drosophila, C. elegans, and mouse. Compared with mPC2, Drosophila PC2
possesses a completely different pattern of putative glycosylation
sites (other vertebrate PC2s contain the same glycosylation pattern as
mouse). Note that C. elegans PC2 (ePC2) has two additional putative glycosylation sites as compared with dPC2, as well as the
three glycosylation sites represented in dPC2. These different glycosylation patterns among vertebrates and invertebrates might be
responsible for the failure of proper folding and of activation of dPC2
in mammalian cell lines such as CHO and HEK-293. This speculation is
supported by our finding that we were also unable to detect ePC2
activity upon transfection of ePC2 cDNA into r21 kDa 7B2-expressing
CHO cells.3 Others have
previously observed that glycosylation is key to proper maturation of
proPC2 in neuroendocrine cells; conversion of proPC2 to PC2 apparently
occurs so rapidly upon acquisition of endoglycosidase H (endo H)
resistance that cells contain no endo H-resistant proPC2 nor endo
H-sensitive PC2 (71, 72). We have previously observed that mutation of
all three glycosylation sites in the catalytic and P domains of mPC2
from Asn to Gln causes the protein to be retained in the endoplasmic
reticulum and to be subjected to degradation
(42).4 A similar result
occurs if the glycosylation site in the catalytic domain is
spared.4 Considering the importance of correct
N-linked glycosylation for mPC2, one explanation for the
lack of proper maturation of dPC2 in mammalian cells might be that
mammalian cells fail to properly glycosylate the Drosophila
enzyme. However, we were unable to detect a difference in molecular
mass of the pro form of dPC2 from HEK-293 and S2 cells as judged by
SDS-PAGE (data not shown), suggesting strongly that the total number of
sites used is the same in both the mammalian and insect cells.
Intracellular proPC2s from both Drosophila and rat were
similarly sensitive to endo H when expressed in HEK-293 cells (data not
shown), which implies that both species of proPC2 undergo endoplasmic
reticulum glycosylation (and also that translocation into the secretory
pathway has successfully occurred). It is possible that insect
cell-specific differences in Golgi modifications of the
N-linked oligosaccharides are critical for activation and
secretion of Drosophila proPC2. Alternatively, Drosophila proPC2 may require insect cell-specific factors
for either folding in or exit from the endoplasmic reticulum.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
PC2s from various species contain different
patterns of potential glycosylation sites. mPC2
represents PC2 from mouse; Drosophila PC2 is represented by
dPC2; ePC2 represents PC2 from C. elegans. All vertebrate PC2s cloned to date exhibit the same
pattern as mouse. The multibasic cleavage sites, the catalytic triad
( ), and the oxyanion hole ( ) are indicated. SP corresponds to the
signal peptide. N-linked oligosaccharides are represented by
.
|
|
It is interesting to note that despite the lack of regulated secretory
vesicles in S2 cells, the cell biology of dPC2 in S2 cells is actually
more similar to mPC2s expressed in neuroendocrine cells than to mPC2s
expressed in constitutively secreting cells; i.e. proPC2
matures within the cell, and 7B2 enhances secretion of the mature form
(30, 67, 68). We hypothesize that the ability of Drosophila
proPC2 to become activated in constitutive cells constitutes a
functionally loose expression of activity that may be important to the
production of biologically important peptides in Drosophila.
Additionally, our results provide interesting evolutionary
differences in the cell biology of this protein that may be applicable
to the maturation of other regulated secretory proteins.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank members of the Lindberg laboratory
and Laurent Muller for helpful comments, Bin Tu for construction of the
C. elegans PC2 expression vector, and Joelle Finley for
assistance with cell culture.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health
Grants DK49703 (to I. L.), NS21749 (to P. H. T.), and
GM39697 (to R. S. F.).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.
¶
Present address: Dept. of Molecular and Cell Biology, 401 Barker Hall, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-3202.

Supported by National Institutes of Health Grant DA00204. To
whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center,
1901 Perdido St., New Orleans, LA 70112. Tel.: 504-568-4799; Fax:
504-568-6598; E-mail: ilindb@lsumc.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, April 3, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M000032200
2
I. Lindberg, unpublished results.
3
B. Tu and I. Lindberg, unpublished results.
4
J. R. Hwang and I. Lindberg, unpublished results.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
PC, prohormone
convertase;
CHO, Chinese hamster ovary;
CHO/mPC2 cells, CHO cells
stably expressing mouse proPC2;
ePC2, C. elegans prohormone
convertase;
CT peptide, C-terminal 31 residues of 7B2;
hCT peptide, human CT peptide;
dPC2, Drosophila prohormone convertase 2;
d7B2, full-length Drosophila 7B2;
endo H, endoglycosidase H;
mPC2, mouse prohormone convertase 2;
PAGE, polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis;
r7B2, rat 7B2;
S2, Schneider 2;
TES, 2-{[2-hydroxy-1,1-bis(hydroxymethyl)ethyl]amino}ethanesulfonic
acid;
PBS, phosphate-buffered saline.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Steiner, D. F.
(1998)
Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol.
2,
31-39
|
| 2.
|
Seidah, N. G.,
and Chretien, M.
(1997)
Curr. Opin. Botechnol.
8,
602-607
|
| 3.
|
Zhou, A.,
Webb, G.,
Zhu, X.,
and Steiner, D. F.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
20745-20748
|
| 4.
|
Lam, K. S.,
Salmon, E. S.,
Hersh, E. M.,
Hruby, V. J.,
Kazmierski, W. M.,
and Knapp, R. J.
(1991)
Nature
354,
82-84
|
| 5.
|
Kiefer, M. C.,
Tucker, J. E.,
Joh, R.,
Landsberg, K. E.,
Saltman, D.,
and Barr, P. J.
(1991)
DNA Cell Biol.
10,
757-769
|
| 6.
|
Seidah, N. G.,
Benjannet, S.,
Pareek, S.,
Savaria, D.,
Hamelin, J.,
Goulet, B.,
Laliberte, J.,
Lazure, C.,
Chretien, M.,
and Murphy, R. A.
(1996)
Biochem J.
314,
951-960
|
| 7.
|
Nakagawa, T.,
Hosaka, M.,
Torii, S.,
Watanabe, K.,
Murakami, K.,
and Nakayama, K.
(1993)
J. Biochem. (Tokyo)
113,
132-135
|
| 8.
|
Mbikay, M.,
Raffin-Sanson, M. L.,
Tadros, H.,
Sirois, F.,
Seidah, N. G.,
and Chretien, M.
(1994)
Genomics
20,
231-237
|
| 9.
|
Meerabux, J.,
Yaspo, M. L.,
Roebroek, A. J.,
Van de Ven, W. J.,
Lister, T. A.,
and Young, B. D.
(1996)
Cancer Res.
56,
448-451
|
| 10.
|
Bruzzaniti, A.,
Goodge, K.,
Jay, P.,
Taviaux, S. A.,
Lam, M. H.,
Berta, P.,
Martin, T. J.,
Moseley, J. M.,
and Gillespie, M. T.
(1996)
Biochem. J.
314,
727-731
|
| 11.
|
Seidah, N. G.,
Gaspar, L.,
Mion, P.,
Marcinkiewicz, M.,
Mbikay, M.,
and Chretien, M.
(1990)
DNA Cell Biol.
9,
415-424
|
| 12.
|
Seidah, N. G.,
Marcinkiewicz, M.,
Benjannet, S.,
Gaspar, L.,
Beaubien, G.,
Mattei, M. G.,
Lazure, C.,
Mbikay, M.,
and Chretien, M.
(1991)
Mol. Endocrinol.
5,
111-122
|
| 13.
|
Smeekens, S. P.,
Avruch, A. S.,
LaMendola, J.,
Chan, S. J.,
and Steiner, D. F.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
340-344
|
| 14.
|
Day, R.,
Schafer, M. K. H.,
Watson, S. J.,
Chretien, M.,
and Seidah, N. G.
(1992)
Mol. Endocrinol.
6,
485-497
|
| 15.
|
Breslin, M. B.,
Lindberg, I.,
Benjannet, S.,
Mathis, J. P.,
Lazure, C.,
and Seidah, N. G.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
27084-27093
|
| 16.
|
Johanning, K.,
Mathis, J. P.,
and Lindberg, I.
(1996)
J. Neurochem.
66,
898-907
|
| 17.
|
Rouille, Y.,
Westermark, G., M. S. K.,
and Steiner, D. F.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
3242-3246
|
| 18.
|
Rouille, Y.,
Bianchi, M.,
Irminger, J. C.,
and Halban, P. A.
(1997)
FEBS Lett.
413,
119-123
|
| 19.
|
Rouille, Y.,
Kantengwa, S.,
Irminger, J.-C.,
and Halban, P. A.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
72,
32810-32816
|
| 20.
|
Mineo, I.,
Matsumura, T.,
Shingu, R.,
Namba, M.,
Kuwajima, M.,
and Matsuzawa, Y.
(1995)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
207,
646-651
|
| 21.
|
Benjannet, S.,
Rondeau, N.,
Day, R.,
Chretien, M.,
and Seidah, N. G.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
3564-3568
|
| 22.
|
Thomas, L.,
Leduc, R.,
Thorne, B. A.,
Smeekens, S. P.,
Steiner, D.,
and Thomas, G.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
5297-5301
|
| 23.
|
Zhou, A.,
Bloomquist, B. T.,
and Mains, R. E.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
1763-1769
|
| 24.
|
Zhou, A.,
and Mains, R. E.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
17440-17447
|
| 25.
|
Davidson, H.,
Rhodes, C.,
and Hutton, J.
(1988)
Nature
333,
93-96
|
| 26.
|
Bailyes, E.,
Shennan, K. I. J.,
Seal, A. J.,
Smeekens, S. P.,
Steiner, D. F.,
Hutton, J. C.,
and Docherty, K.
(1992)
Biochem. J.
285,
391-394
|
| 27.
|
Bennett, D. L.,
Bailyes, E. M.,
Nielsen, E.,
Guest, P. C.,
Rutherford, N. G.,
Arden, S. D.,
and Hutton, J. C.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
15229-15236
|
| 28.
|
Smeekens, S.,
Montag, A. G.,
Thomas, G.,
Albiges-Rizo, C.,
Carrol, R.,
Benig, M.,
Phillips, L. A.,
Martin, S.,
Ohagi, S.,
Gardner, P.,
Swift, H. H.,
and Steiner, D. F.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
8822-8826
|
| 29.
|
Hsi, K. L.,
Seidah, N. G.,
De Serres, G.,
and Chretien, M.
(1982)
FEBS Lett.
147,
261-6
|
| 30.
|
Zhu, X.,
and Lindberg, I.
(1995)
J. Cell Biol.
129,
1641-1650
|
| 31.
|
Lamango, N. S.,
Zhu, X.,
and Lindberg, I.
(1996)
Arch. Biochem. Biophys.
330,
238-250
|
| 32.
|
Benjannet, S.,
Savaria, D.,
Chretien, M.,
and Seidah, N. G.
(1995)
J. Neurochem.
64,
2303-2311
|
| 33.
|
Martens, G. J.,
Bussemakers, M. J.,
and Jenks, B. G.
(1989)
Eur. J. Biochem.
181,
75-79
|
| 34.
|
Braks, J. A. M.,
and Martens, G. J. M.
(1994)
Cell
78,
263-273
|
| 35.
|
Muller, L.,
Zhu, P.,
Juliano, M. A.,
Juliano, L.,
and Lindberg, I.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
21471-21477
|
| 36.
|
Lindberg, I.,
Van den Hurk, W. H.,
Bui, C.,
and Batie, C. J.
(1995)
Biochemistry
34,
5486-5493
|
| 37.
|
Van Horssen, A. M.,
Van den Hurk, W. H.,
Bailyes, E. M.,
Hutton, J. C.,
Martens, G. J. M.,
and Lindberg, I.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
14292-14296
|
| 38.
|
Fortenberry, Y.,
Liu, J.,
and Lindberg, I.
(1999)
J. Neurochem.
73,
994-1003
|
| 39.
|
Ayoubi, T. A. Y.,
van Duijnhoven, H. L. P.,
van de Ven, W. J. M.,
Jenks, B. G.,
Roubos, E. W.,
and Martens, G. J. M.
(1990)
J. Biol. Chem.
265,
15644-15647
|
| 40.
|
Paquet, L.,
Rondeau, N.,
Seidah, N. G.,
Lazure, C.,
Chretien, M.,
and Mbikay, M.
(1991)
FEBS Lett.
294,
23-26
|
| 41.
|
Paquet, L.,
Bergeron, F.,
Boudreault, A.,
Seidah, N. G.,
Chretien, M.,
Mbikay, M.,
and Lazure, C.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
19279-19285
|
| 42.
|
Muller, L.,
Zhu, X.,
and Lindberg, I.
(1997)
J. Cell Biol.
139,
625-638
|
| 43.
|
Shen, F.-S.,
Seidah, N. G.,
and Lindberg, I.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
24910-24915
|
| 44.
|
Westphal, C. H.,
Muller, L.,
Zhou, A.,
Bonner-Weir, S.,
Schambelan, M.,
Steiner, D. F.,
Lindberg, I.,
and Leder, P.
(1999)
Cell
96,
689-700
|
| 45.
|
Ottaviani, E.,
and Franceschi, C.
(1996)
Prog. Neurobiol.
48,
421-440
|
| 46.
|
Nassel, D. R.
(1998)
Curr. Opin. Neurobiol.
6,
842-850
|
| 47.
|
Hu, N.,
Gutsmann, A.,
Herbert, D. C.,
Bradley, A.,
and Lee, W. H.
(1994)
Oncogene
9,
1021-1027
|
| 48.
|
Smit, A. B.,
Spijker, S.,
and Geraerts, W. P. M.
(1992)
FEBS Lett.
312,
213-218
|
| 49.
|
Spijker, S.,
Smit, A. B.,
Martens, G. J. M.,
and Geraerts, W. P. M.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
4116-4120
|
| 50.
|
Gomez-Saladin, E.,
Wilson, D. L.,
and Dickerson, I. M.
(1994)
Cell. Mol. Neurobiol.
14,
9-25
|
| 51.
|
Lindberg, I.,
Tu, B.,
Muller, L.,
and Dickerson, I.
(1998)
DNA Cell Biol.
17,
727-734
|
| 52.
|
Nagle, G. T.,
Garcia, A. T.,
Gorham, E. L.,
Knock, S. L.,
van Heumen, W. R.,
Spijker, S.,
Smit, A. B.,
Geraerts, W. P.,
and Kurosky, A.
(1995)
DNA Cell Biol.
14,
431-443
|
| 53.
|
Siekhaus, D. E.,
and Fuller, R. S.
(1999)
J. Neurosci.
19,
6942-6954
|
| 54.
|
Kozak, M.
(1984)
Nuc. Acids Res.
12,
857-872
|
| 55.
|
Martens, G. J. M.,
Braks, J. A. M.,
Eib, D. W.,
Zhou, Y.,
and Lindberg, I.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
5784-5785
|
| 56.
|
Muller, L.,
and Lindberg, I.
(1999)
Prog. Nucleic Acids Res. Mol. Biol.
63,
69-108
|
| 57.
|
Taylor, N. A.,
Shennan, K. I. J.,
Cutler, D. F.,
and Docherty, K.
(1997)
Biochem. J.
312,
367-373
|
| 58.
|
Schneider, L. E.,
Sun, E. T.,
Garland, D. J.,
and Taghert, P. H.
(1993b)
J. Comp. Neurol.
337,
446-460
|
| 59.
|
McCormick, J.,
and Nichols, R.
(1993)
J. Comp. Neurol.
338,
278-288
|
| 60.
|
Veenstra, J. A.
(1994)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
204,
292-296
|
| 61.
|
Hewes, R. S.,
Snowdeal III, E. C.,
Saitoe, M.,
and Taghert, P. H.
(1998)
J. Neurosci.
18,
7138-7151
|
| 62.
|
McNabb, S. L.,
Baker, J. D.,
Agapite, J.,
Steller, H.,
Riddiford, L. M.,
and Truman, J. W.
(1997)
Neuron
19,
813-823
|
| 63.
|
Renn, S. C.,
Park, J. H.,
Rosbash, M.,
Hall, J. C.,
and Taghert, P. H.
(1999)
Cell
99,
791-802
|
| 64.
|
Molloy, S. S.,
Bresnahan, P. A.,
Leppla, S. H.,
Klimpel, K. R.,
and Thomas, G.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
16396-16402
|
| 65.
|
Nakayama, K.
(1997)
Biochem. J.
327,
625-635
|
| 66.
|
Benjannet, S.,
Reudelhuber, T.,
Mercure, C.,
Rondeau, N.,
Chretien, M.,
and Seidah, N. G.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
11417-11423
|
| 67.
|
Barbero, P.,
and Kitabgi, P.
(1999)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
257,
473-479
|
| 68.
|
Seidel, B.,
Dong, W.,
Savaria, D.,
Zheng, M.,
Pintar, J. E.,
and Day, R.
(1998)
DNA Cell Biol
12,
1017-1029
|
| 69.
|
Zhu, X.,
Mulller, L.,
Mains, R. E.,
and Lindberg, I.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
1158-1164
|
| 70.
|
Schneider, I.
(1972)
J. Embryol. Exp. Morph.
27,
353-365
|
| 71.
|
Benjannet, S.,
Rondeau, N.,
Paquet, L.,
Boudreault, A.,
Lazure, C.,
Chretien, M.,
and Seidah, N. G.
(1993)
Biochem. J.
294,
735-743
|
| 72.
| |