|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 31, 23615-23619, August 4, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Department of Biology, Technion-Israel Institute of
Technology, Haifa 32000, Israel
Received for publication, April 13, 2000, and in revised form, May 8, 2000
The binding of the coat protein complex,
coatomer, to the Golgi is mediated by the small GTPase
ADP-ribosylation factor-1 (ARF1), whereas the dissociation of coatomer,
requires GTP hydrolysis on ARF1, which depends on a GTPase-activating
protein (GAP). Recent studies demonstrate that when GAP activity is
assayed in a membrane-free environment by employing an amino-terminal
truncation mutant of ARF1 ( ARF1 GTPases play a key
role in the regulation of vesicular trafficking of proteins among
different compartments of the eukaryotic cell. In the early secretory
system, the ARF1 protein regulates the interaction of the coatomer coat
complex with Golgi membranes (1, 2). In the active GTP-bound form, ARF1
triggers the recruitment of coatomer (3-5) apparently by direct
interaction with its Recently, Goldberg (27) presented the crystal structure of a 130-amino
acid catalytic fragment of GAP1 co-crystallized with the GDP-bound form
of an ARF1 mutant lacking the first 17 amino acids ( Our laboratory in addition to others (17, 18, 20-22, 24) has
previously noted that ARF GAPs may display high activity in the absence
of coatomer when the natural form of ARF1 (containing a myristoyl
residue at its amino terminus) is employed. Unlike Chemicals--
[ Preparation of Proteins--
Coatomer was purified from rabbit
liver according to Pavel et al. (35). The following proteins
were prepared from Escherichia coli expression systems:
myristoylated ARF1 (36), His6-tagged ARF1 lacking the first
17 amino acids ( Expression and Purification of ARF GAP Mutants--
GAP 1 mutants were generated by polymerase chain reaction and cloned into the
pKM260 T7 polymerase-driven bacterial expression vector as described
previously (18). All mutant GAPs were derived from constructs encoding
the first 257 amino acids because this part of the protein in wild-type
GAP1 retains full GAP catalytic activity, and moreover, longer
constructs cannot be expressed in E. coli (18). Proteins
were expressed in DE3 lysogens of strain BL21 by induction for
2.5 h at 37 °C in the presence of 0.4 mM
isopropyl- ARF GAP Assay--
GTP hydrolysis on myristoylated ARF1 was
assayed essentially as described previously (17). ARF1 was first loaded
with [
Hydrolysis of GTP on Coatomer Differentially Affects GTP Hydrolysis on
We also tested the effect of coatomer with ASAP1, an ARF GAP that is
distinct from GAP1 in structural features and cellular localization
(plasma membrane for ASAP1 versus Golgi for GAP1 (18, 38)).
Additionally, ASAP1 has a pleckstrin homology domain, and its activity
is stimulated by phosphoinositides that appear to act through an
allosteric mechanism (39). As shown in Fig. 2A, using Coatomer Does Not Stimulate GAP1-dependent Hydrolysis
of GTP on Myristoylated ARF1--
The experiments described above were
carried out with
The difference in coatomer sensitivity between GAP1 Contains an Essential Arginine Residue--
The mechanism by
which GAPs stimulate GTP hydrolysis on Ras and Rho GTPases was shown to
involve an arginine residue in GAP that inserts into the GTP-binding
pocket of the GTPase and assists in catalysis (42). Recently,
structural and functional studies have suggested that in the case of
ARF, coatomer rather than GAP might contribute the catalytic arginine
(27) although another study (30) has brought this conclusion into
question. All ARF GAPs described so far contain one invariant arginine
residue in a position equivalent to Arg-50 in GAP1 (30, 38).
Replacement of Arg-50 of GAP1 with alanine, as well as conservative
replacements with lysine or glutamine, completely abolished GAP
activity on myristoylated ARF1 even at very high mutant concentrations
(Fig. 6A). Similar findings
were recently reported for PAP
The Arg-50 mutants were highly soluble, had normal zinc content, and
migrated in a Resource Q column similar to the wild-type protein,
suggesting that the mutations do not adversely affect their
conformation. It was thus of interest to test whether the mutants can
compete with wild-type GAP1 for coatomer-dependent hydrolysis of GTP on ARF1. As shown in Fig. 6B, the R50K
mutant had no effect on this reaction at mutant concentrations of up to
10-fold higher than the wild-type GAP concentration. The mutant also
failed to inhibit GAP1 activity on myristoylated ARF1 (data not shown).
A possible interpretation of these findings is discussed below.
The findings presented in this paper provide further insight into
the role of coatomer in GTP hydrolysis on ARF1. We show that the effect
of coatomer depends on both the form of ARF1 employed in the assay and
on the phospholipid environment. In confirmation of the findings by
Goldberg (27), we observed strong stimulation of GTP hydrolysis on the
lipid-independent truncated ARF1 lacking the first 17 amino acids in
the presence of both full-length mammalian GAP1 and yeast Gcs1. By
contrast, GAP-dependent GTP hydrolysis on myristoylated
ARF1 preloaded with GTP in the presence of phospholipid vesicles was
coatomer-insensitive. The efficacy of ARF GAPs on myristoylated ARF1
was much higher than on The fact that GAPs can be highly active with phospholipid-bound ARF1 in
the absence of coatomer argues against the previously proposed
catalytic role of coatomer in GTP hydrolysis (27). Additionally, if
coatomer acted through a catalytic mechanism such as the contribution
of a catalytic residue to the ARF1 GTP-binding pocket (27), then one
would predict that coatomer would stimulate the activity of all ARF
GAPs. However, we found that ASAP1, which shows high similarity to GAP1
in its catalytic domain, displayed coatomer-insensitive activity (see
Fig. 2A). Lastly, all ARF GAPs contain an invariant arginine
residue, and this residue is essential for GAP1 activity either in the
presence or absence of coatomer (Fig. 5) as well as for the activity of
two additional ARF GAPs (30, 38). The observation that the gross
structure of the arginine mutants is preserved (Refs. 30 and 38 and
this study) argues that this residue in GAP plays a catalytic rather
than structural role.
If coatomer does not act catalytically, then how does it stimulate GAP
activity on ARF? The rate of GTP hydrolysis is determined by the
kinetic parameters of the interaction between ARF and GAP, as well as
by the turnover number of the GTPase reaction. Our previous studies
(34) have shown that in the presence of phospholipid vesicles of
varying compositions, GAP1 as well as Gcs1-dependent hydrolysis of GTP on myristoylated ARF1 correlates with the extent of
binding of GAP to the vesicles. These observations suggest that
phospholipid vesicles facilitate GAP activity because of a proximity
effect brought about by the binding of both GAP and its substrate
ARF1-GTP to the same vesicle. Coatomer may act in a similar manner by
interacting not only with ARF1 but also with GAP, thus generating a
tripartite complex with three pairs of protein-protein interactions.
Such interaction could be restricted to only a few GAPs, because GAPs
such as ASAP1 that do not depend on coatomer for activity (Fig.
2A) may lack a coatomer-binding domain. The finding that
coatomer does not facilitate GTP hydrolysis when ARF1 is bound to
phospholipid vesicles suggests that GAP interacts with lipids more
avidly than with coatomer. Upon disruption of the phospholipid vesicles
by detergent (Fig. 5), GAP activity decreases and becomes
coatomer-responsive. Apparently because of the small size of the mixed
detergent/phospholipid micelles, simultaneous binding of ARF and GAP to
the same micelle becomes unlikely. Thus, under these conditions, the
system behaves in a manner that is qualitatively similar to the
lipid-free In addition to its modulation by coatomer and membrane lipids in
vitro, GAP1 interacts in vivo with the Golgi receptor
for endoplasmic reticulum proteins bearing the KDEL tag (43, 44). Whereas coatomer and phospholipids affect the activity of
carboxyl-terminal truncated GAP1 (34), the KDEL receptor interacts with
GAP1 through the carboxyl-terminal segment (45). The understanding of
how each of these factors contributes to GAP1 targeting and/or
catalytic activity in vivo will be a subject of future studies.
We thank Dr. Paul Randazzo for providing an
expression vector for the PZA fragment of ASAP1 and Dr. Bruno
Antonny for the ARNO expression vector.
*
This study was supported by Grant 208/97 from the
Israel Science Foundation.The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
§
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.:
972-4-829-3408; Fax: 972-4-822-5153; E-mail:
danc@techunix.technion.ac.il.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, May 15, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M003171200
2
E. Szafer and D. Cassel, unpublished observations.
The abbreviations used are:
ARF, ADP-ribosylation factor;
GAP, GTPase-activating protein;
AMP-PNP, 5'-adenylyl-
Role of Coatomer and Phospholipids in GTPase-activating
Protein-dependent Hydrolysis of GTP by ADP-ribosylation
Factor-1*
,
,
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
17-ARF1) and a catalytic fragment of the
ARF GTPase-activating protein GAP1, GTP hydrolysis is strongly
stimulated by coatomer (Goldberg, J., (1999) Cell 96, 893-902). In this study, we investigated the role of coatomer in GTP
hydrolysis on ARF1 both in solution and in a phospholipid environment.
When GTP hydrolysis was assayed in solution using
17-ARF1, coatomer
stimulated hydrolysis in the presence of the full-length GAP1 as well
as with a Saccharomyces cerevisiae ARF GAP (Gcs1) but had
no effect on hydrolysis in the presence of the phosphoinositide
dependent GAP, ASAP1. Using wild-type myristoylated ARF1
loaded with GTP in the presence of phospholipid vesicles, GAP1 by
itself stimulated GTP hydrolysis efficiently, and coatomer had no
additional effect. Disruption of the phospholipid vesicles with
detergent resulted in reduced GAP1 activity that was stimulated by
coatomer, a pattern that resembled
17-ARF1 activity. Our
findings suggest that in the biological membrane, the proximity between
ARF1 and its GAP, which results from mutual binding to membrane
phospholipids, may be sufficient for stimulation of ARF1 GTPase activity.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
- and
-subunits (6). The subsequent
dissociation of coatomer depends on GTP hydrolysis on ARF1 (7, 8). The cycles of GTP binding and hydrolysis on ARF1 are controlled by two sets
of cytosolic regulatory proteins. Activation of ARF1 is brought about
by guanine nucleotide exchange proteins (9-16) whereas GTP hydrolysis
depends on GTPase-activating proteins (GAPs). ARF GAPs are a family of
proteins sharing a catalytic domain of 120-140 amino acids that
includes a Cys4-zinc finger motif. The first ARF GAP to be
discovered (GAP1) is a 45-kDa protein that distributes between the
cytosol and Golgi complex and functions in the regulation of membrane
traffic through this organelle (17-19). Saccharomyces
cerevisiae contains two proteins (Gcs1 and Glo3) that show high
similarity to GAP1 and possess ARF GAP activity (20, 21). The two yeast
GAPs form an essential pair with a redundant function in the
endoplasmic reticulum-Golgi shuttle. Recently, additional ARF GAPs
belonging to two subfamilies were identified in mammalian cells. GIT1
is a 95-kDa protein from rat that interacts with GRK2 and regulates
2-adrenergic receptor internalization (22) while its
mouse homologues (Cat1/2) are involved in CDC42/Rac/Pak signaling (23).
The second subfamily consists of large multidomain proteins represented
by ASAP1 and PAP (24-26). These proteins possess a pleckstrin
homology domain and show phosphoinositide-dependent ARF GAP
activity. Additionally, the proteins interact with non-receptor
tyrosine kinases through a proline-rich Src homology 3 (SH3)-binding domain. Despite distinct subcellular sites of action, all
GAPs that have been described so far are highly active on ARF1 in
vitro. Whether there is redundancy in the action of mammalian ARF
GAPs in vivo remains to be established.
17-ARF1). A
unique feature of this structure is that switch I of ARF1, thought to
comprise part of the "effector" site mediating coatomer interaction
(6, 28), does not participate in GAP binding. This model was supported
by biochemical data showing that coatomer dramatically stimulates GTP
hydrolysis on
17-ARF1, which suggests that both coatomer and GAP can
simultaneously bind to ARF1. Interestingly,
coatomer-dependent stimulation of GAP1 activity was
inhibited by a coatomer-interacting peptide of one member of the p24
transmembrane Golgi proteins (29). Based on structural and functional
observations, Goldberg suggested (27) that the "catalytic
arginine finger" mechanism that is essential for catalysis of GTP
hydrolysis by Ras and Rho GAPs may not operate in ARF GAP and that
coatomer rather than GAP may contribute a catalytic residue for the
GTPase reaction. The model of Goldberg was recently challenged by
Mandiyan et al. (30) who reported that the crystal structure
of a different ARF GAP, PAP
, may not be compatible with the
structure of the ARF1·GAP1 complex described by Goldberg (27).
17-ARF1,
which does not depend on phospholipids for GTP binding, the binding of
the nucleotide to full-length ARF1 requires phospholipids. These act by
interacting with and stabilizing the amphipathic amino-terminal peptide
that becomes solvent-exposed in the GTP state (31-33). Consequently,
GTP hydrolysis on myristoylated ARF1 has been assayed in the presence
of phospholipid vesicles whose lipid composition may influence GAP
activity (34). It was therefore of interest to investigate the relative
contribution of coatomer and phospholipids to GAP activity using normal
myristoylated ARF1 as substrate. We report that contrary to its effect
on
17-ARF1, coatomer does not affect GAP activity with myristoylated
ARF1 bound to phospholipid vesicles. This as well as additional
findings indicate that coatomer is not directly involved in the
catalysis of GTP hydrolysis. We propose that both coatomer and
phospholipids may facilitate GTP hydrolysis by bringing GAP into
proximity with its substrate ARF1.
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-32P]GTP (800 Ci/mmol) and
[
-32P]GTP (3000 Ci/mmol) were obtained from NEN Life
Science Products, and Ni2+-nitrilotriacetic acid was from
Qiagen, Valencia, CA. Phosphoinositides were purchased from Sigma
(P-6023).
17-ARF1) (27), the Sec7 domain of ARNO (10),
GAP1-(1-257) that contains the first 257 amino acids (18),
S. cerevisiae Gcs1p (20), and the pleckstrin homology, zinc
finger, and ankyrin repeat domain (PZA) fragment of ASAP1 (24).
Full-length GAP1 with a His6 extension at the amino
terminus was expressed in insect cells using a baculovirus expression
vector and purified as described previously (37).
-D-thiogalactopyranoside. Bacterial pellets were extracted with 6 M guanidine hydrochloride, and
proteins were purified by Ni2+-nitrilotriacetic acid
chromatography according to the manufacturer's instructions using 6 M guanidine hydrochloride in 0.1 M sodium phosphate, 10 mM Tris, pH 8.0, throughout the purification.
The Ni2+-nitrilotriacetic acid eluate was diluted with 6 M guanidine hydrochloride to a protein concentration of
3-5 mg/ml and was supplemented with 5 mM dithiothreitol.
The eluate was dialyzed overnight against 50 mM NaCl, 25 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 1 mM dithiothreitol with one
buffer change. The dialysate was cleared by centrifugation, and
proteins were purified by Resource-Q anion exchange chromatography
using a linear NaCl gradient in 25 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 1 mM dithiothreitol.
-32P]GTP in the presence of phospholipid
vesicles (0.4 µm) containing 40% phosphatidylcholine, 30%
phosphatidylethanolamine, and 30% phosphatidylserine prepared as
described in Ref. 34. The loading mixture contained 4 µM
myristoylated ARF1, 25 mM MOPS, pH 7.4, 100 mM
KCl, 1 mM MgCl2, 2 mM EDTA, 0.5 µM [
-32P]GTP, and 1 mg/ml liposomes. In
some experiments, liposomes were replaced with a mixture containing 30 mM dimyristoylphosphatidylcholine (DMPC) and 1% sodium
cholate (17). Loading proceeded for 15 min at 30 °C and was
terminated by the addition of 2 mM MgCl2. Loading efficiency with respect to [
-32P]GTP was
typically 60-75%. GAP assays contained 40 nM
[
-32P]GTP-loaded ARF1 (approximately 1:10 dilution of
the loading reaction), 5 mM MgCl2, 25 mM MOPS, pH 7.4, 1 mM dithiothreitol, and 1 mM ATP with an ATP-regenerating system (5 mM
phosphocreatine and 50 µg/ml creatine phosphokinase) in a final
volume of 10 µl. Reactions were preincubated for 5 min at room
temperature with or without coatomer and were initiated by the addition
of different concentrations of GAP. Reactions proceeded for 15 min and
were terminated by boiling for 30 s. GTP hydrolysis was determined by thin layer chromatography on polyethyleneimine cellulose
(17), and data are presented as the percentage of ARF-bound GTP that was converted to GDP.
17-ARF1 was assayed by a modification of the
assay described by Goldberg (27).
17-ARF1 was loaded with
[
-32P]GTP in the presence of the guanine nucleotide
exchange protein ARNO as described previously (27). GAP assays
contained 400 nM GTP-bound
17-ARF1, 5 mM
MgCl2, 25 mM MOPS, pH 7.4, and 0.5 mM 5'-adenylyl-
,
-imidodiphosphate (AMP-PNP) in a
final volume of 20 µl. Preincubation with coatomer and subsequent
incubation with GAP were carried out as described above, and reactions
were terminated by the addition of 0.5 ml of cold charcoal suspension (5% charcoal in 50 mM NaH2PO4).
Following centrifugation, the amount of 32Pi in
the supernatant was determined by scintillation counting. In both
assays described above, the addition of coatomer without GAP had little
effect (less than 5% of GTP hydrolyzed). Coatomer background values
were subtracted from GAP activity in the presence of coatomer in all
experiments except for those shown in Fig. 4. Experiments were repeated
at least 3 times, and a representative experiment is presented.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
17-ARF
Mediated by Different ARF GAPs--
Goldberg (27) recently reported
that coatomer stimulates GTP hydrolysis by up to 1000-fold on a
lipid-independent ARF1 mutant (
17-ARF1) in the presence of a
fragment of GAP1 containing amino acids 6-136. We investigated whether
coatomer stimulation is restricted to GAP1 or can take place with
additional members of the ARF GAP family. We employed the full-length
GAP1 protein that was generated using a baculovirus expression system,
S. cerevisiae Gcs1, and a catalytically active fragment of
mammalian ASAP1. As shown in Fig. 1,
coatomer stimulated GTP hydrolysis mediated by both GAP1 and
Gcs1 on
17-ARF1. Under the conditions employed (0.2 µM coatomer, 0.5 µM
17-ARF1), the
stimulation of GTP hydrolysis by coatomer (about 10-fold) was
considerably lower than that reported by Goldberg (27). This difference
was attributed to a large extent to the higher rate of GTP hydrolysis
in the presence of GAPs alone in our experiments. The higher rate may
have been caused by the fact that GAP1 and Gcs1 were employed as
full-length proteins in contrast to the truncated GAP1 used by
Goldberg, which may have only partial activity in the absence of
coatomer (18).

View larger version (21K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Coatomer stimulates GTP hydrolysis on
17-ARF1 in the presence of full-length GAP1 and S. cerevisiae Gcs1. Coatomer (0.2 µM) and
17-ARF1, preloaded with [
-32P]GTP (0.5 µM), were preincubated for 5 min at 25 °C. This was
followed by the addition of the indicated concentrations of GAP1 or
Gcs1 and incubation for 15 min as described under "Experimental
Procedures."
17-ARF1 as
substrate, ASAP1 GAP activity was strongly stimulated by
phosphoinositides. This is in agreement with recent findings by Kam
et al. (39) who employed
13-ARF1 as substrate. By
contrast, coatomer had little effect on ASAP1 activity either in the
absence or presence of phosphoinositides. A reciprocal pattern was
observed with GAP1-(1-257) where coatomer but not phosphoinositides
stimulated GTP hydrolysis on
17-ARF1. Similar results were obtained
with full-length GAP1/Gcs1 or in the presence of
phosphatidylinositol 4',5'-bisphosphate instead of the phosphoinositide mixture (data not shown).

View larger version (18K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Effect of coatomer and phosphoinositides on
GTP hydrolysis on
17-ARF1 in the presence of ASAP1 and GAP1.
Time course of GTP hydrolysis in the presence of 0.6 µM
ASAP1 (PZA fragment) (A) or 0.3 µM GAP1
catalytic fragment (residues 1-257) (B) with or without 0.2 µM coatomer and/or 1 mg/ml phosphoinositide
(PIs) mixture.
17-ARF1, an ARF1 mutant that does not depend on
lipids for GTP binding (40) and has therefore been employed to study
the interaction of ARF1 with proteins and drugs in solution (27, 32,
40, 41). However, the amino terminus of wild-type ARF1 with its attached myristate residue serves to anchor GTP-bound ARF1 to phospholipid bilayers, and it is this form of ARF1 that is likely to
encounter GAP in the biological membrane. It was therefore of interest
to test the effect of coatomer on GAP1-dependent hydrolysis of GTP on myristoylated ARF1. In the experiments presented in Figs.
3 and 4,
myristoylated ARF1 was loaded with GTP in the presence of unilamellar
liposomes containing a phospholipid mixture that is typical of
biological membranes (40% phosphatidylcholine, 30% phosphatidylethanolamine, and 30% phosphatidylserine). In the absence
of coatomer, GAP1 stimulated GTP hydrolysis on myristoylated ARF1 at
concentrations that were lower by 2 orders of magnitude than those
required to stimulate hydrolysis on
17-ARF1 (compare Figs. 1 and 3).
When GAP activity was assayed on myristoylated ARF1 over a broad range
of GAP1 concentrations, there was no significant difference between the
activities in the presence or absence of coatomer (Fig. 3). Moreover,
coatomer had no effect on GTP hydrolysis on myristoylated ARF1 even at
coatomer concentrations that were supra-optimal in the
17-ARF1 assay
(Fig. 4).

View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Coatomer does not stimulate
GAP1-dependent GTP hydrolysis on myristoylated ARF1.
GAP activity was assayed in the presence or absence of 0.2 µM coatomer using as substrate myristoylated ARF1 that
was preloaded with [
-32P]GTP in the presence of
phospholipid vesicles (40% phosphatidylcholine, 30%
phosphatidylethanolamine, and 30% phosphatidylserine).

View larger version (25K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Effect of different coatomer concentrations
on GAP1-dependent hydrolysis of GTP on
17-ARF1 and
myristoylated ARF1. Activity was assayed using GAP1 concentrations
of 2 and 100 nM for myristoylated ARF1
(Myr-ARF1) and
17-ARF1, respectively. Myristoylated ARF1
was preloaded with GTP as described in the legend to Fig. 3.
17-ARF1 and
myristoylated ARF1 may be attributed to differences in conformation between the native and truncated proteins or to the presence of phospholipids in assays employing myristoylated ARF1. These
phospholipids, which are required for GTP binding to myristoylated
ARF1, may obscure the coatomer effect by promoting an efficient
interaction between ARF1 and GAP. To distinguish between the above
possibilities, we tested the effect of coatomer on myristoylated ARF1
in the presence of mixed detergent/phospholipid micelles. In the
experiment presented in Fig. 5, ARF1 was
loaded with GTP in the presence of DMPC and cholate, which were
added at approximately equimolar concentrations. Under these
conditions, coatomer caused a small but reproducible stimulation of
GAP1-dependent GTP hydrolysis on myristoylated ARF1 (Fig.
5). When the ratio of detergent to phospholipid was increased
with the addition of a 4-fold excess of detergent to the assay (0.4%
CHAPS), there was a dramatic decrease in GAP1 activity whereas the
addition of coatomer caused an approximately 2-fold stimulation. Thus,
under conditions where membrane structure is perturbed, GTP hydrolysis
on myristoylated ARF1 can become responsive to coatomer.

View larger version (27K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Effect of coatomer on GTP hydrolysis on
myristoylated ARF1 in the presence of mixed detergent/phospholipid
micelles. Myristoylated ARF1 was preloaded with GTP in the
presence of DMPC and cholate. GTP hydrolysis was assayed in the
presence or absence of 0.4% CHAPS and 0.2 µM
coatomer.
and ASAP1 ARF GAPs (30, 38). When
activity was assayed using
17-ARF1, the Arg-50 mutants were
completely inactive in the absence or presence of coatomer (data not
shown). These findings highlight the importance of the conserved Arg
residue of ARF GAPs.

View larger version (18K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
A, an invariant arginine residue is
required for GAP1 activity. GTP hydrolysis was assayed with the
GAP1-(1-257) wild-type protein (WT) and its Arg-50 mutants
using myristoylated ARF1 preloaded with GTP in the presence of DMPC and
cholate. B, the Arg-50 mutant (R50K) does not inhibit
coatomer-dependent GTP hydrolysis on
17-ARF1. Activity
was assayed in the presence of 0.2 µM GAP1-(1-257) and
different concentrations of the R50K mutant with or without 0.2 µM coatomer.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
17-ARF1 even when coatomer was used to
stimulate GAP activity on
17-ARF1 (compare Figs. 1 and 3). It is
also noteworthy that the stimulation of GAP activity on
17-ARF1 by
coatomer in our experiments (~10-fold) was much lower than that
reported by Goldberg (up to 1000-fold) under similar conditions. This
is probably because of differences in the GAP preparations. The
full-length GAP1 and Gcs1 proteins we employed showed low but
significant coatomer-independent activity whereas Goldberg employed a
catalytic fragment of GAP1 (amino acids 6-136), which showed
negligible activity under comparable conditions. We have previously
observed that truncated GAP1 mutants containing fewer than the first
146 amino acids displayed reduced activity on myristoylated ARF1 (18).
It therefore appears that very short forms of GAP1 are incapable of
effectively activating either
17-ARF1 or myristoylated ARF1 whereas,
for reasons that are not understood, coatomer appears to confer high
activity on the short GAP1 mutants.
17-ARF1 assay system. It is noteworthy that we did not
observe an inhibition of coatomer-dependent GAP activity by
the GAP1 mutant R50K (Fig. 6B) and two other inactive
mutants (D65A and W32A).2
This absence of competition suggests that any interaction of GAP with
coatomer must be of low affinity. Such low affinity interaction could
nonetheless suffice for generating the stimulation of GAP activity by
the proximity effect.
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
![]()
FOOTNOTES
These authors contributed equally to this work.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
,
-imidodiphosphate;
DMPC, dimyristoylphosphatidylcholine;
MOPS, 4-morpholinepropanesulfonic acid;
coatomer, coat protein complex;
CHAPS, 3-[(3-cholamidopropyl)dimethylammonio]-1-propanesulfonic acid.
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Schekman, R.,
and Orci, L.
(1996)
Science
271,
1526-1533
2.
Chavrier, P.,
and Goud, B.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
11,
466-475
3.
Donaldson, J. G.,
Finazzi, D.,
and Klausner, R. D.
(1992)
Nature
360,
350-352
4.
Palmer, D. J.,
Helms, J. B.,
Beckers, C. J.,
Orci, L.,
and Rothman, J. E.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
12083-12089
5.
Donaldson, J. G.,
and Klausner, R. D.
(1994)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
6,
527-532
6.
Zhao, L.,
Helms, J. B.,
Brunner, J.,
and Wieland, F. T.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
14198-14203
7.
Tanigawa, G.,
Orci, L.,
Amherdt, M.,
Ravazzola, M.,
Helms, J. B.,
and Rothman, J. E.
(1993)
J. Cell Biol.
123,
1365-1371
8.
Teal, S. B.,
Hsu, V. W.,
Peters, P. J.,
Klausner, R. D.,
and Donaldson, J. G.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
3135-3138
9.
Peyroche, A.,
Paris, S.,
and Jackson, C. L.
(1996)
Nature
384,
479-481
10.
Chardin, P.,
Paris, S.,
Antonny, B.,
Robineau, S.,
Beraud-Dufour, S.,
Jackson, C. L.,
and Chabre, M.
(1996)
Nature
384,
481-484
11.
Meacci, E.,
Tsai, S. C.,
Adamik, R.,
Moss, J.,
and Vaughan, M.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
1745-1748
12.
Morinaga, N.,
Moss, J.,
and Vaughan, M.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
12926-12931
13.
Pacheco-Rodriguez, G.,
Meacci, E.,
Vitale, N.,
Moss, J.,
and Vaughan, M.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
26543-26548
14.
Franco, M.,
Boretto, J.,
Robineau, S.,
Monier, S.,
Goud, B.,
Chardin, P.,
and Chavrier, P.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
9926-9931
15.
Claude, A.,
Zhao, B. P.,
Kuziemsky, C. E.,
Dahan, S.,
Berger, S. J.,
Yan, J. P.,
Armold, A. D.,
Sullivan, E. M.,
and Melancon, P.
(1999)
J. Cell Biol.
146,
71-84
16.
Jackson, C. L.,
and Casanova, J. E.
(2000)
Trends Cell Biol.
10,
60-67
17.
Makler, V.,
Cukierman, E.,
Rotman, M.,
Admon, A.,
and Cassel, D.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
5232-5237
18.
Cukierman, E.,
Huber, I.,
Rotman, M.,
and Cassel, D.
(1995)
Science
270,
1999-2002
19.
Huber, I.,
Cukierman, E.,
Rotman, M.,
Aoe, T.,
Hsu, V. W.,
and Cassel, D.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
24786-24791
20.
Poon, P. P.,
Wang, X.,
Rotman, M.,
Huber, I.,
Cukierman, E.,
Cassel, D.,
Singer, R. A.,
and Johnston, G. C.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
10074-10077
21.
Poon, P. P.,
Cassel, D.,
Spang, A.,
Rotman, M.,
Pick, E.,
Singer, R. A.,
and Johnston, G. C.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
555-564
22.
Premont, R. T.,
Claing, A.,
Vitale, N.,
Freeman, J. L.,
Pitcher, J. A.,
Patton, W. A.,
Moss, J.,
Vaughan, M.,
and Lefkowitz, R. J.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
14082-14087
23.
Bagrodia, S.,
Bailey, D.,
Lenard, Z.,
Hart, M.,
Guan, J. L.,
Premont, R. T.,
Taylor, S. J.,
and Cerione, R. A.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
22393-22400
24.
Brown, M. T.,
Andrade, J.,
Radhakrishna, H.,
Donaldson, J. G.,
Cooper, J. A.,
and Randazzo, P. A.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
7038-7051
25.
Andreev, J.,
Simon, J. P.,
Sabatini, D. D.,
Kam, J.,
Plowman, G.,
Randazzo, P. A.,
and Schlessinger, J.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
2338-2350
26.
Kondo, A.,
Hashimoto, S.,
Yano, H.,
Nagayama, K.,
Mazaki, Y.,
and Sabe, H.
(2000)
Mol. Biol. Cell
11,
1315-1327
27.
Goldberg, J.
(1999)
Cell
96,
893-902
28.
Zhao, L.,
Helms, J. B.,
Brugger, B.,
Harter, C.,
Martoglio, B.,
Graf, R.,
Brunner, J.,
and Wieland, F. T.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
4418-4423
29.
Goldberg, J.
(2000)
Cell
100,
671-679
30.
Mandiyan, V.,
Andreev, J.,
Schlessinger, J.,
and Hubbard, S. R.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
6890-6898
31.
Antonny, B.,
Beraud-Dufour, S.,
Chardin, P.,
and Chabre, M.
(1997)
Biochemistry
36,
4675-4684
32.
Goldberg, J.
(1998)
Cell
95,
237-248
33.
Beraud-Dufour, S.,
Paris, S.,
Chabre, M.,
and Antonny, B.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
37629-37636
34.
Antonny, B.,
Huber, I.,
Paris, S.,
Chabre, M.,
and Cassel, D.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
30848-30851
35.
Pavel, J.,
Harter, C.,
and Wieland, F. T.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
2140-2145
36.
Franco, M.,
Chardin, P.,
Chabre, M.,
and Paris, S.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
24531-24534
37.
Huber, I., Rotman, M., Pick, E., Makler, V., Rothem, L., Cukierman, E.,
and Cassel, D. (2000) Methods Enzymol., in press
38.
Randazzo, P. A.,
Andrade, J.,
Miura, K.,
Brown, M. T.,
Long, Y. Q.,
Stauffer, S.,
Roller, P.,
and Cooper, J. A.
(2000)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
97,
4011-4016
39.
Kam, J. L.,
Miura, K.,
Jackson, T. R.,
Gruschus, J.,
Roller, P.,
Stauffer, S.,
Clark, J.,
Aneja, R.,
and Randazzo, P. A.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
9653-9663
40.
Paris, S.,
Beraud-Dufour, S.,
Robineau, S.,
Bigay, J.,
Antonny, B.,
Chabre, M.,
and Chardin, P.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
22221-22226
41.
Peyroche, A.,
Antonny, B.,
Robineau, S.,
Acker, J.,
Cherfils, J.,
and Jackson, C. L.
(1999)
Mol Cell
3,
275-285
42.
Scheffzek, K.,
Ahmadian, M. R.,
and Wittinghofer, A.
(1998)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
23,
257-262
43.
Aoe, T.,
Cukierman, E.,
Lee, A.,
Cassel, D.,
Peters, P. J.,
and Hsu, V. W.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
7305-7316
44.
Aoe, T.,
Lee, A. J.,
van Donselaar, E.,
Peters, P. J.,
and Hsu, V. W.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
1624-1629
45.
Aoe, T.,
Huber, I.,
Vasudevan, C.,
Watkins, S. C.,
Romero, G.,
Cassel, D.,
and Hsu, V. W.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
20545-20549
Copyright © 2000 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:
![]() |
C. Weimer, R. Beck, P. Eckert, I. Reckmann, J. Moelleken, B. Brugger, and F. Wieland Differential roles of ArfGAP1, ArfGAP2, and ArfGAP3 in COPI trafficking J. Cell Biol., November 18, 2008; 183(4): 725 - 735. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Luo and P. A. Randazzo Kinetic Analysis of Arf GAP1 Indicates a Regulatory Role for Coatomer J. Biol. Chem., August 8, 2008; 283(32): 21965 - 21977. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Levi, M. Rawet, L. Kliouchnikov, A. Parnis, and D. Cassel Topology of Amphipathic Motifs Mediating Golgi Localization in ArfGAP1 and Its Splice Isoforms J. Biol. Chem., March 28, 2008; 283(13): 8564 - 8572. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Totaro, S. Paris, C. Asperti, and I. de Curtis Identification of an Intramolecular Interaction Important for the Regulation of GIT1 Functions Mol. Biol. Cell, December 1, 2007; 18(12): 5124 - 5138. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. K. Min, S. J. Kim, Y. Miao, J. Shin, L. Jiang, and I. Hwang Overexpression of Arabidopsis AGD7 Causes Relocation of Golgi-Localized Proteins to the Endoplasmic Reticulum and Inhibits Protein Trafficking in Plant Cells Plant Physiology, April 1, 2007; 143(4): 1601 - 1614. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Moreau, F. Brandizzi, S. Hanton, L. Chatre, S. Melser, C. Hawes, and B. Satiat-Jeunemaitre The plant ER-Golgi interface: a highly structured and dynamic membrane complex J. Exp. Bot., January 1, 2007; 58(1): 49 - 64. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Natsume, K. Tanabe, S. Kon, N. Yoshida, T. Watanabe, T. Torii, and M. Satake SMAP2, a Novel ARF GTPase-activating Protein, Interacts with Clathrin and Clathrin Assembly Protein and Functions on the AP-1-positive Early Endosome/Trans-Golgi Network Mol. Biol. Cell, June 1, 2006; 17(6): 2592 - 2603. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Parnis, M. Rawet, L. Regev, B. Barkan, M. Rotman, M. Gaitner, and D. Cassel Golgi Localization Determinants in ArfGAP1 and in New Tissue-specific ArfGAP1 Isoforms J. Biol. Chem., February 17, 2006; 281(7): 3785 - 3792. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. E. Connolly and J. Engebrecht The Arf-GTPase-Activating Protein Gcs1p Is Essential for Sporulation and Regulates the Phospholipase D Spo14p Eukaryot. Cell, January 1, 2006; 5(1): 112 - 124. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. M. Meyer, P. Crottet, B. Maco, E. Degtyar, D. Cassel, and M. Spiess Oligomerization and Dissociation of AP-1 Adaptors Are Regulated by Cargo Signals and by ArfGAP1-induced GTP Hydrolysis Mol. Biol. Cell, October 1, 2005; 16(10): 4745 - 4754. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y.-W. Liu, C.-F. Huang, K.-B. Huang, and F.-J. S. Lee Role for Gcs1p in Regulation of Arl1p at Trans-Golgi Compartments Mol. Biol. Cell, September 1, 2005; 16(9): 4024 - 4033. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Tanabe, T. Torii, W. Natsume, S. Braesch-Andersen, T. Watanabe, and M. Satake A Novel GTPase-activating Protein for ARF6 Directly Interacts with Clathrin and Regulates Clathrin-dependent Endocytosis Mol. Biol. Cell, April 1, 2005; 16(4): 1617 - 1628. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Liu, R. Duden, R. D. Phair, and J. Lippincott-Schwartz ArfGAP1 dynamics and its role in COPI coat assembly on Golgi membranes of living cells J. Cell Biol., March 28, 2005; 168(7): 1053 - 1063. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Y. Lee, J.-S. Yang, W. Hong, R. T. Premont, and V. W. Hsu ARFGAP1 plays a central role in coupling COPI cargo sorting with vesicle formation J. Cell Biol., January 17, 2005; 168(2): 281 - 290. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. D. Chamberlain, T. R. Berry, M. C. Pastor, and D. H. Anderson The p85{alpha} Subunit of Phosphatidylinositol 3'-Kinase Binds to and Stimulates the GTPase Activity of Rab Proteins J. Biol. Chem., November 19, 2004; 279(47): 48607 - 48614. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Hashimoto, A. Hashimoto, A. Yamada, C. Kojima, H. Yamamoto, T. Tsutsumi, M. Higashi, A. Mizoguchi, R. Yagi, and H. Sabe A Novel Mode of Action of an ArfGAP, AMAP2/PAG3/Pap{alpha}, in Arf6 Function J. Biol. Chem., September 3, 2004; 279(36): 37677 - 37684. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. A. Diebold, B. Fowler, J. Lu, M. C. Dinauer, and G. M. Bokoch Antagonistic Cross-talk between Rac and Cdc42 GTPases Regulates Generation of Reactive Oxygen Species J. Biol. Chem., July 2, 2004; 279(27): 28136 - 28142. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Albertinazzi, L. Za, S. Paris, and I. de Curtis ADP-Ribosylation Factor 6 and a Functional PIX/p95-APP1 Complex Are Required for Rac1B-mediated Neurite Outgrowth Mol. Biol. Cell, April 1, 2003; 14(4): 1295 - 1307. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Janvier, H. Craig, D. Hitchin, R. Madrid, N. Sol-Foulon, L. Renault, J. Cherfils, D. Cassel, S. Benichou, and J. Guatelli HIV-1 Nef Stabilizes the Association of Adaptor Protein Complexes with Membranes J. Biol. Chem., February 28, 2003; 278(10): 8725 - 8732. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.-S. Yang, S. Y. Lee, M. Gao, S. Bourgoin, P. A. Randazzo, R. T. Premont, and V. W. Hsu ARFGAP1 promotes the formation of COPI vesicles, suggesting function as a component of the coat< |