Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M910400199 on April 26, 2000
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 31, 24070-24079, August 4, 2000
A New Determinant of Endoplasmic Reticulum Localization Is
Contained in the Juxtamembrane Region of the Ectodomain of Hepatitis C
Virus Glycoprotein E1*
Giovanna
Mottola,
Nathalie
Jourdan,
Giovanna
Castaldo,
Nadia
Malagolini
,
Armin
Lahm§,
Franca
Serafini-Cessi
,
Giovanni
Migliaccio§¶, and
Stefano
Bonatti¶
From the Dipartimento di Biochimica e Biotecnologie Mediche,
Università di Napoli Federico II, 80131 Napoli,
Dipartimento di Patologia Sperimentale, Università
di Bologna, 40126 Bologna, and § Istituto di Ricerche di
Biologia Molecolare P. Angeletti, 00040 Pomezia, Roma, Italia
Received for publication, December 28, 1999, and in revised form, April 11, 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
Hepatitis C virus glycoproteins E1 and E2 do not
reach the plasma membrane of the cell but accumulate intracellularly,
mostly in the endoplasmic reticulum. Previous studies based on
transient expression assays have shown that the transmembrane domains
of both glycoproteins are sufficient to localize reporter proteins in
the endoplasmic reticulum and that other localization signals may be
contained in the ectodomain of E1 protein. To identify such signals we
generated chimeric proteins between E1 and two reporter proteins, the
human CD8 glycoprotein and the human alkaline phosphatase, and analyzed
their subcellular localization in stable as well as transient
transfectants. Our results showed that (i) an independent localization
determinant for the endoplasmic reticulum is present in the
juxtamembrane region of the ectodomain of E1 protein and (ii) the
localization dictated by this determinant is either due to direct
retention or to a recycling mechanism from the intermediate
compartment/cis-Golgi complex region, which is clearly different from
those previously described for other retrieval signals. These results
show for the first time in mammalian cells that the localization in the
endoplasmic reticulum of transmembrane protein can be determined by
specific targeting signals acting in the lumen of the compartment.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
HCV1 is a major agent of
chronic hepatitis and liver diseases in humans throughout the world. It
is classified in the Flaviviridae family because of its similarity in
genomic organization to flavivirus and pestivirus. The genome, a single
positive-strand RNA, is translated into a polyprotein of about 3,000 amino acid residues, which is processed by host and viral proteases to
generate at least 10 polypeptides (reviewed in Ref. 1). Little is known
on HCV replication and assembly because the virus does not infect
laboratory animals and tissue-cultured cells. Only recently Lohmann
et al. (2) succeeded in designing a self-replicating
subgenomic viral RNA, and to date biogenesis of HCV proteins has been
studied only by cell-free transcription/translation and transfection
assays. These experiments show that co-translational cleavages in the
N-terminal region of HCV nascent chain release the two putative
envelope viral glycoproteins, E1 and E2 (3). E1 and E2 are intrinsic membrane proteins with an N-terminal ectodomain that is heavily N-glycosylated and a C-terminal hydrophobic TMD, whose
precise length has not been established. When expressed in tissue
culture cells, E1 and E2 interact with each other and with resident
chaperones forming two types of complexes: heterogeneous aggregates
containing E1 and E2, possibly associated by intermolecular disulfide
bonds, as well as calreticulin and calnexin and a non-covalent
heterodimer presumably representing the correct folding state that
precedes the formation of the viral envelope (4-6). Independently of
their oligomeric status, E1 and E2 localize predominantly in the ER and
are not transported to the cell surface (4, 6-8). This localization
suggests that HCV budding occurs entirely on intracellular membranes,
thus helping HCV to minimize the host immune surveillance and determine
persistent infection.
Mutational analysis in transfected cells allowed the identification of
two independent ER retention signals in the TMDs of E1 and E2
glycoproteins; replacement of the TMD of human CD4 protein with the
C-terminal hydrophobic region of E1 or E2 resulted in the ER
localization of the chimeric protein (9-11). However, removal of the
E1 TMD or its substitution with the TMD and the cytosolic domain of CD8
still resulted in localization in the ER (9, 12). Conversely, E2
deleted of the TMD or with a different TMD was secreted or located on
the plasma membrane, respectively (10, 12). Thus, it is likely that
other determinant(s) for ER localization is contained in the lumenal
portion of E1 protein. On this line, E1 deleted of the TMD and of the
juxtamembrane portion of the ectodomain was secreted (12). However, the
native, correctly folded configuration of E1 and E2 glycoproteins is
still unknown; thus, evaluating whether ER localization of recombinant
forms of these proteins is determined by a specific signal or by
misfolding is a constant problem.
To overcome this problem, we decided to search for localization signals
in E1 glycoprotein by fusing part of it to the human glycoprotein CD8
or to the human alkaline phosphatase (AP) (13). CD8 is a class I
transmembrane protein that is quickly transported to the cell surface
and has been extensively used as a reporter protein to study
localization signals (14-17). Maturation of its O-linked
oligosaccharides has been thoroughly characterized (18, 19), and it has
been established that sugar modifications mark transport in different
compartments of the secretory pathway. Finally, in contrast to HCV E1,
folding of CD8 can be monitored by using conformation-sensitive
antibodies and by the formation of disulfide-linked homodimers. Human
placental AP is a glycoprotein anchored to the cell surface via a
phosphatidylinositol-glycan moiety (20, 21). Several laboratories have
shown that the catalytic domain of this enzyme retains its activity
when fused to different types of TMDs (22, 23). Thus, the use of this protein as reporter offers the possibility of very easily testing the
folding state of the chimeric proteins by measuring its enzymatic activity. We have constructed several chimeric proteins between these
two reporter proteins and the C-terminal region of E1 protein and
expressed them either stably in rat thyroid cells (FRT) or transiently
in human hepatoma cells (HuH-7). Analysis of the intracellular localization of these chimeras indicated the presence of a new localization determinant in the viral glycoprotein.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Materials--
All culture reagents were supplied by
Sigma-Aldrich. Solid chemicals and liquid reagents were obtained from
Merck, Farmitalia Carlo Erba (Milano, Italy), Serva Feinbiochemica
(Heidelberg, Germany), BDH. All radiochemicals were obtained from NEN
Life Science Products. Protein A-Sepharose CL-4B and the ECL kit were from Amersham Pharmacia Biotech. Endoglicosidase H and neuraminidase enzymes and all enzymes used in molecular cloning were obtained from
Roche Molecular Biochemicals, New England BioLabs (distributed by
Microglass, Napoli, Italy), or Promega Italia Srl (Milano, Italy).
Oligonucleotides were synthesized by Primm Srl (Milano, Italy). The
following antibodies were used: mouse mAb OKT8 (anti-CD8 protein),
mouse mAb N1 (anti-CD8 protein), rabbit polyclonal anti-CD8 and rabbit
polyclonal anti-SSr
(16); mouse mAb G10-1 (anti-CD8 protein)
(24)2; rabbit polyclonal
anti-calnexin (17); rabbit polyclonal anti-calreticulin (Stress-Gene,
Canada); rabbit polyclonal anti-alkaline phosphatase (Rockland,
Gilbertsville, PA); mouse mAb anti-placental alkaline phosphatase
(Chemicon International, Inc., Temecula, CA); peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse and anti-rabbit IgG (Sigma-Aldrich); Texas Red-conjugated anti-mouse IgG and fluorescein-conjugated anti-rabbit IgG (Jackson Immunoresearch Lab, West Grove, PA).
Construction of Recombinant Plasmids--
cDNA fragments
were cloned in the desired expression vector by standard DNA protocols
or by PCR amplification of the area of interest using synthetic
oligonucleotides with the appropriate restriction sites. PCR
amplification was performed according to the procedure of Barnes (25)
to minimize the possibility of unwanted second-site mutations.
Site-directed mutagenesis was carried out by inserting the mutations in
the PCR primers. The expression vector (plasmid CD8) was a plasmid
containing the human CD8a cDNA downstream of the promoter and the
enhancer from the Friend murine leukemia virus (26). This plasmid was
mutagenized in order to contain a SphI site and a
ClaI site between amino acids 160 and 161 of CD8 protein,
where all HCV or SV fragments were cloned. Plasmid
CD8-E199-192 contains HCV sequence from nucleotide 1200 to
nucleotide 1568 of the HCV BK strain (27) corresponding to residues
99-192 of E1 protein. All the other HCV sequences were amplified from
plasmid CD8-E199-192. Plasmid CD8-E199-155
contains HCV fragment encoding residues 155-192 of E1 protein,
followed by a stop codon. HCV cDNA fragments contained in the
plasmids CD8-E199-154, CD8-E199-148, and
CD8-E199-142 encode, respectively, residues 99-154, 99-148, and 99-142 of the E1 protein. Plasmid CD8-SV differs from CD8-E199-142 in that the HCV fragment was
substituted with a Sindbis virus sequence derived from plasmid pSP1900
(28) and coding for residues 360-403 of the SV E1 protein. Plasmid
CD8-E199-142M is identical to plasmid
CD8-E199-142 but contains mutations of HCV nucleotides
ATGATGATG, coding for methionines 131-133, into AGCAGCAGC, coding for
three serines.
Plasmids expressing the AP chimeric proteins were prepared from the
plasmids expressing correspondent CD8 chimeras by substituting the CD8
ectodomain sequence with AP sequence in two steps. First, plasmids CD8,
CD8-SV, CD8-E199-142, and CD8-E199-142M were
digested with BglII (unique site in the promoter region) and
SpHI to remove only the CD8 ectodomain. Then they were
ligated with a fragment BglII/SpHI amplified by
PCR from promoter region in plasmid CD8 and contained a mutagenized
unique site for HindIII. These intermediate plasmids were
again digested with HindIII and SphI and ligated
to the soluble AP cDNA fragment HindIII/SphI derived by PCR from the plasmid pBC12/RSV/SEAP in which the stop codon
in position 1529-31 of cDNA sequence was removed (13). All
plasmids were verified by DNA sequencing.
Cell Culture and Transfection--
Parental FRT cells were
cultured as described previously (19) and stably transfected with
Lipofectin reagent (Life Technologies, Inc.) according to
manufacturer's instructions. Stable transformants were obtained by
co-transfecting cells with recombinant plasmids and the plasmid
PSV2neo, selected in the presence of G418 (Life Technologies, Inc.) and
screened by indirect immunofluorescence. HuH-7 cells were cultured in
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing 10% fetal calf serum
and transfected by using FuGENETM6 transfection reagent
(Roche Molecular Biochemicals) according to the manufacturer's
instructions. 36 h after transfection, cells were analyzed by
indirect immunofluorescence and Western blotting.
Indirect Immunofluorescence--
Cells grown on glass coverslips
were fixed with 4% formaldehyde for 20 min at room temperature and
made permeable with 0.1% Triton X-100 in phosphate-buffered saline.
Cells were labeled with the appropriate antibodies and with fluorescein
and Texas Red-conjugated secondary antibodies. To separately stain the
cell surface and the intracellular membranes, after fixation cells were
incubated with a specific polyclonal antibody, then permeabilized and
incubated with a specific monoclonal antibody. Coverslips were mounted
in Moviol and viewed by epifluorescence on a Zeiss axiomat
photomicroscope with a 100× planar objective.
Metabolic Labeling, Preparation of Cells Extracts,
Immunoprecipitation, SDS-PAGE, and Western Blotting--
Stably
transfected cells were allowed to grow to subconfluency and then were
manipulated for [35S]cysteine, [3H]GlcN, or
[3H]Man labeling, as performed previously (19). Cells
were lysed with 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 1% SDS, 20 mM N-ethylmaleimide; total extracts were passed
several times through a syringe needle, and aliquots were then used for
immunoprecipitation, SDS-PAGE, and Western blotting as detailed
previously (28, 29). For immunoprecipitation with the
conformation-sensitive antibodies, OKT8 and G10-1, cells were lysed
with 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 1% Triton X-100, 20 mM N-ethylmaleimide. To calculate the half-life
times, the amounts of protein were determined by scanning densitometry
of the film developed after autoradiography. Mean values of four
experiments were considered.
Endoglycosidase H (Endo H) and Neuraminidase
Digestions--
Treatment with Endo H and neuraminidase were performed
as indicated in the manufacturer's instructions.
Analysis of [3H]GlcN- and
[3H]Man-labeled Glycans--
All analysis were performed
on CD8-derived proteins immunoprecipitated after 16 h of labeling
with [3H]GlcN or [3H]Man and subjected to
SDS-PAGE. Areas of polyacrylamide gels corresponding to bands
visualized by fluorography were excised and digested overnight with
Pronase at 60 °C. The glycopeptides isolated by Bio-Gel P-4
filtration (400 mesh) column (1 × 75 cm) were analyzed for the
radioactive amino-sugar composition as described previously (19).
N-Glycans generated by Endo H treatment were isolated by
Bio-Gel P-4 filtration and analyzed by HPLC as described (30).
Assay for Alkaline Phosphatase Activity--
Transfected cells
were lysed with 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 9.8, 100 mM
NaCl, 1 mM MgCl2, Triton X-100 0.5%. Aliquots
of cell lysates were assayed for alkaline phosphatase activity as
described previously (31). The increase in light absorption at 405 nm
was measured after 20 min of incubation with the specific substrate
p-nitrophenyl phosphate. The amounts of alkaline phosphatase
chimeras were determined as arbitrary units by scanning densitometry of
the Western blot film using the NIH Image program. The specific
activities were calculated dividing the absorbance units for the
protein amount measured.
 |
RESULTS |
The C-terminal Region of Glycoprotein E1 Determines Localization of
the Reporter Protein CD8 in the Endoplasmic Reticulum--
It was
previously reported that E1 with the C-terminal 72 residues deleted was
efficiently secreted (12); thus we focused on this portion of the
protein and fused it to the C terminus of the CD8 ectodomain (Fig.
1A). For cloning convenience,
our initial construct (CD8-E199-192) contained the 94 C-terminal residues of E1, encompassing the juxtamembrane portion of
the ectodomain and the entire transmembrane domain.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Schematic illustration of the different
chimeric forms of CD8 used in this work. A, HCV E1
glycoprotein (192 amino acids) has presumably 154 amino acids in the
ectodomain and 38 in the TMD. Human CD8 (214 amino acids) has 160 amino
acids in the ectodomain, 26 in the TMD, and 28 in the cytosolic tail.
The subscript numbers in each chimeric construct indicate the HCV E1
region present. In CD8-E199-142M, the three methionines
(131-133) of HCV E1 region were substituted with three serines. SV E1
glycoprotein (439 amino acids) has 403 amino acids in the ectodomain
and 35 in the TMD (not shown). The region of SV E1 glycoprotein in the
construct CD8-SV is 44 amino acids long, corresponding to residues
360-403 of the ectodomain. Details on the constructions are described
under "Experimental Procedures." B, sequence by
single-letter code of HCV E1 ectodomain and TMD used in the chimeric
constructs. The potential N-glycosylation sites are
underlined.
|
|
We examined the intracellular distribution of CD8-E199-192
by indirect immunofluorescence analysis of stably transfected FRT cells
(Fig. 2). To unequivocally assess the
subcellular localization of wild type and chimeric CD8 protein, we
regularly decorated transfected cells before and after permeabilization
with a polyclonal and a monoclonal anti-CD8 antibody, respectively. In
this way the polyclonal antibody recognized only the protein present on the cell surface, whereas the monoclonal antibody labeled the protein
present on all cellular membranes. Unlike wild type CD8 (Fig. 2,
a-b) that was localized primarily on the cell surface, CD8-E199-192 could not be detected on the plasma membrane and was only found on intracellular membranes (Fig. 2,
c-d). Double labeling experiments of permeabilized cells
with antibodies reacting with antigens localized in specific
subcellular compartments showed that the chimeric protein co-localized
with the SSR
protein, an ER resident protein (Fig. 2,
e-f) but not with mannosidase II, a medial-Golgi marker
(data not shown). Therefore, the C-terminal region 99-192 of E1
protein prevents the progress of the reporter in the secretory pathway
and determines localization in the ER.

View larger version (79K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
The C-terminal region 99-192 of HCV E1
protein determines localization in the ER of the reporter CD8. FRT
cells stably expressing CD8 (a-b) or
CD8-E199-192 (c-f) were analyzed by double
indirect immunofluorescence microscopy as detailed under
"Experimental Procedures" and "Results." a,
c, e, and f, permeabilized cells;
b and d, not permeabilized cells. a,
c, and e, anti-CD8 mAb OKT8; b and
d, polyclonal antibody anti-CD8; f, polyclonal
antibody anti-SSR ; a, c, and e,
Texas Red-conjugated anti-mouse secondary antibody; b,
d, and f, fluorescein-conjugated anti-rabbit
secondary antibody.
|
|
To gain independent evidence of the intracellular distribution of
CD8-E199-192, we analyzed its glycosylation.
CD8-E199-192 could be modified by the addition of both
N- and O-linked sugars; two sites for
N-glycosylation are contained in the 56 lumenal amino acids
of E1 (positions 114 and 134 of the protein; see Fig. 1B),
but a recent study revealed that only the one in position 114 is
utilized (32). The CD8 ectodomain is usually modified by the addition
of 7-8 O-linked glycans, whereas the
N-glycosylation site present in the N-terminal region is
usually not modified. We first evaluated in pulse-chase experiments the
Endo H and neuraminidase sensitivity of CD8-E199-192. Endo
H digests N-glycans of high mannose type, and resistance to
Endo H digestion indicates that a glycoprotein has moved from the ER to
the medial- and trans-Golgi, where high mannose chains are converted to
complex type chains. Neuraminidase removes sialic acid residues from
both N- and O-glycans. These residues are added
in the trans-/trans-Golgi network; thus, sensitivity to neuraminidase
indicates passage of a glycoprotein through these compartments. In
agreement with previous studies (19), wild type CD8 was almost
completely or completely converted into a mature,
neuraminidase-sensitive form after 1 or 4 h of chase (Fig.
3). As expected, CD8 was always resistant
to Endo H digestion. CD8-E199-192 was mostly present as a
33-kDa band that did not show any modification in its electrophoretic mobility over time. At all time points analyzed, this protein was
completely sensitive to Endo H and resistant to neuraminidase digestion, indicating the absence of complex type N-glycans
and sialic acid residues, respectively. These modifications suggested an incomplete maturation and a premedial-Golgi location of
CD8-E199-192 at steady state.

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Endo H and Neuraminidase digestions indicate
that CD8-E199-192 protein is only initially
glycosylated. FRT cells stably expressing CD8 or
CD8-E199-192 proteins were pulse-labeled with
[35S]cysteine and chased for the indicated times.
Proteins were immunoprecipitated from cell lysates and mock-treated
( ) or treated with Endo H (H) or neuraminidase
(N). Samples were analyzed by SDS-PAGE, followed by
fluorography. Numbers on the right and on the left indicate
the positions on the same gel of a marker protein. Only the relevant
portion of the gel is shown. Note that the stability of CD8 protein
over time was not observed in other pulse-chase experiments.
|
|
To define more precisely the intracellular distribution of
CD8-E199-192, we characterized its carbohydrate chains by gel filtration and HPLC. Fig. 4 shows
that the [3H]GlcN-labeled Pronase glycopeptides from
CD8-E199-192 contained GlcNAc but not GalNAc, indicating
the presence of N-glycans and the absence of
O-glycans (Fig. 4, panel a). In addition, the gel filtration of [3H]Man-labeled glycopeptides revealed that
they were entirely Endo H-sensitive (Fig. 4, panel b), and
HPLC analysis of oligosaccharides generated by Endo H showed the
presence of two major species Man8GlcNAc and
Man9GlcNAc (Fig. 4, panel c). These results
suggested that the N-glycans were modified only by the ER
glucosidases I and II and partially by the ER mannosidase (33). Taken
together, these data indicate that CD8-E199-192 does not
receive Golgi complex modifications because it is modified at the
N-glycans only by ER resident enzymes and does not carry
O-glycans.

View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
CD8-E199-192
protein has only high mannose
N-linked oligosaccharides.
CD8-E199-192 protein was immunoprecipitated from stably
expressing FRT cells labeled for 16 h with [3H]GlcN
or [3H]Man and visualized by SDS-PAGE, followed by
fluorography. The radioactive band was excised from the gel, digested
with Pronase, and subjected to Bio-Gel P-4 filtration as indicated
under "Experimental Procedures." a, elution pattern of
the glycopeptides labeled with [3H]GlcN. Arrow
1 indicates the void volume, where O-linked
oligosaccharides of wild type CD8 and N-glycans of complex
type are eluted. Arrow 2 indicates the elution volume of
high mannose glycopeptides from Tamm-Horsfall glycoprotein. The
histogram on top of the panel shows the percent
radioactivity recovered as GlcN and GalN in the pooled fractions
19-26 according to the procedure previously described (19).
b, analysis of [3H]Man-labeled oligomannosides
from CD8-E199-192. Bio-Gel P-4 filtration of
19-26 pooled fractions of panel a before (solid
line) and after (dashed line) Endo H treatment.
Arrows 1 and 2 are as in the panel a,
and arrow 3 shows the elution volume of high mannose
oligosaccharides from Tamm-Horsfall glycoprotein (released by Endo H).
c, HPLC analysis of the oligomannosides of the peak fraction
marked by arrow 3 in panel b. Arrows
on the top indicate the retention times of marker oligosaccharides.
Arrow 9, Man9GlcNAc; arrow 8,
Man8GlcNAc; arrow 7, Man7GlcNAc;
arrow 6, Man6GlcNAc; arrow 5,
Man5GlcNAc.
|
|
Two ER Localization Determinants Are Contained in the C-terminal
Region of E1 Glycoprotein--
Next we analyzed the subcellular
localization of a chimeric protein containing the CD8 ectodomain fused
to the hydrophobic tail of E1 (Fig. 1A,
CD8-E1155-192). Immunofluorescence analysis of stable
transfectants expressing CD8-E1155-192 showed also that
this chimeric protein was not expressed on the cell surface but was
localized intracellularly (Fig. 5,
a-b), in close association with the ER membrane as
indicated by co-localization with the ER marker protein calnexin (Fig.
5, c-d). The level of expression of
CD8-E1155-192 in the stably transfected FRT cells was low,
as reported for the chimeric form of CD4 containing the TMD of E2 (10).
For this reason, we could not perform a biochemical analysis to study
the glycan processing and the maturation of the protein. A possible
explanation for this finding is that the TMD of E1 protein has a toxic
effect on the cells. Interestingly, rapid cell lysis, probably due to
permeability changes of the inner membrane, has been recently
documented in prokaryotic cells expressing this region (34). These
results were entirely consistent with the previously described
identification of an ER retention signal in the TMD domain of E1
(9).

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
The TMD region of HCV E1 protein determines
localization in the ER of the reporter CD8. FRT cells stably
expressing CD8-E1155-192 were analyzed by double indirect
immunofluorescence microscopy as detailed under "Experimental
Procedures" and in the Results. a, c, and
d, permeabilized cells; b, non-permeabilized
cells. a and c, anti-CD8 mAb OKT8; b,
polyclonal antibody anti-CD8; d, polyclonal antibody
anti-calnexin; a and c, Texas red-conjugated
anti-mouse secondary antibody; b and d,
fluorescein-conjugated anti-rabbit secondary antibody.
|
|
To assess the presence of additional ER localization signal(s) in the
lumenal portion of E1 protein, we prepared three additional constructs
containing amino acids 99-154, 99-148, and 99-142 of E1 inserted
between the ectodomain and the TMD of CD8 (see Fig. 1A). By
immunofluorescence analysis of transiently transfected cells, we
observed that chimeric proteins encoded by these three constructs were
also localized intracellularly and could not be detected on the cell
surface (data not shown). Thus, we focused on the construct containing
the shortest fragment (Fig. 1A, CD8-E199-142) and analyzed its intracellular localization in stably transfected cells
in comparison to an ER marker protein (Fig.
6). The immunofluorescence results showed
that CD8-E199-142 displayed the same subcellular localization observed for CD8-E199-192 and
CD8-E1155-192, thus indicating that the 44 lumenal amino
acids of E1, independently of the transmembrane domain, determine
localization of CD8 protein in the ER.

View larger version (80K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
The juxtamembrane region 99-142 of the
ectodomain of HCV E1 protein contains another determinant for ER
localization. FRT cells stably expressing
CD8-E199-142 (a-d) and CD8-SV
(e-f) were analyzed by double indirect immunofluorescence
microscopy as detailed under "Experimental Procedures" and
"Results." a, c-e, permeabilized cells;
b and f, non-permeabilized cells. a,
c, and e, anti-CD8 OKT8 mAb; b and
f, polyclonal antibody anti-CD8; d, polyclonal
antibody anti-calnexin; a, c, and e,
Texas Red-conjugated anti-mouse secondary antibody; b,
d, and f, fluorescein-conjugated anti-rabbit
secondary antibody.
|
|
Then we analyzed glycosylation of CD8-E199-142.
Pulse-chase experiments revealed that CD8-E199-142 was
present mostly as a 34-kDa band, completely sensitive to Endo H and
resistant to neuraminidase, which did not change electrophoretic
mobility during the chase (Fig.
7A); a faster migrating band,
which displayed a similar sensitivity to glycosidases, appeared in
variable amounts in different experiments. This molecular form was not
recognized by an antibody against the CD8 tail (data not shown) and
could be due to an endoproteolytic cleavage(s) of unknown nature,
resulting in the removal of the C-terminal tail. The analysis by gel
filtration of the [3H]GlcN-labeled glycan moiety
confirmed the data obtained with CD8-E199-192 (Fig.
7B). Also CD8-E199-142 did not contain GalNAc
but only N-glycans of complex type, indicating the absence
of Golgi-enzyme modifications.

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
CD8-E199-142
protein is not O-glycosylated and
carries only high mannose N-glycans.
A, CD8-E199-142 protein was immunoprecipitated
from cell lysates of stably expressing cells pulse-chase-labeled with
[35S]cysteine for the indicated times. The
immunoprecipitated products were mock-treated ( ) or treated with Endo
H (H) or neuraminidase (N) and analyzed by
SDS-PAGE, followed by fluorography. The number on the right
indicates the migration on the gel of a marker protein. Only the
relevant part of the gel is shown. B, analysis by Bio-Gel
P-4 filtration of [3H]GlcN-labeled glycopeptides obtained
from CD8-E199-142, as described in the legend of Fig. 4.
Arrow 2 indicates the elution volume of high mannose
glycopeptides. Even the percent of radioactive GlcN and GalN showed in
the histogram was calculated as described in the legend of Fig.
4.
|
|
ER Localization of CD8-E199-142 Protein Is Not Due to
Misfolding--
Protein misfolding in the lumen of the ER prevents
export toward the Golgi complex (35). To rule out the possibility that CD8-E199-142 was retained in the ER by quality control
mechanisms recognizing misfolded proteins, we performed different
experiments. First, we analyzed the folding status of this chimeric
protein by using two different conformation-sensitive antibodies, OKT8 and G10-1, and by assessing the formation of disulfide-linked homodimers (18). Since both antibodies recognized human CD8 in
immunofluorescence assays (16, 24), we tested whether they were also
able to immunoprecipitate CD8-E199-142. Indeed, CD8-E199-142 was immunoprecipitated by the two
conformation-sensitive antibodies as efficiently as the wild type CD8
(Fig. 8A). In addition, comparison of the electrophoretic mobility of the chimeric protein in
reducing and non-reducing conditions revealed that, similarly to wild
type CD8, CD8-E199-142 molecules were mostly associated in
disulfide-linked homodimers (Fig. 8B) and did not form
disulfide-linked aggregates (data not shown). Next we tested if
CD8-E199-142 was bound to ER chaperones. The ER chaperones
calnexin and calreticulin are involved in the quality control of
several N-glycoproteins, including HCV E1 and E2 (36, 37).
Both chaperones associate with glucosylated N-glycans
bearing proteins transiently (if productive folding intermediates) or
stably (if misfolded or incompletely folded), causing their ER
retention. Thus we performed co-immunoprecipitation experiments of
pulse-chase-labeled proteins. As already observed by Tatu and Helenius
(38), several high molecular weight proteins were co-immunoprecipitated
by both antibodies after the pulse but not after the chase, indicating
that these proteins were transiently associated with the chaperones
(Fig. 8C). A similar transitory association was observed for
wild type CD8 protein, despite the absence of N-linked
glycans (Fig. 8C). Albeit unusual, association of a not
N-glycosylated protein with these chaperones has already been reported (39). Conversely, CD8-E199-142, which is N-glycosylated, was not co-immunoprecipitated by the
anti-calnexin and anti-calreticulin antibodies, thus ruling out the
hypothesis that the ER localization of CD8-E199-142
depended on the association with these chaperones. Radiolabeled
calnexin and calreticulin were not detected under these conditions,
most likely because of the short labeling time (38). However, Western
blot analysis revealed that both proteins were effectively
immunoprecipitated by their cognate antibody (data not shown).

View larger version (44K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
CD8-E199-142 protein is
immunoprecipitated by conformation-sensitive antibodies, dimerizes
efficiently, and is not associated to ER chaperones. A,
parental ( ) and stably transfected FRT cells were labeled with
[35S]cysteine for 1 h and lysed in a buffer
containing 1% Triton X-100. CD8 and CD8-E199-142 proteins
were immunoprecipitated with the anti-CD8 conformation-sensitive mAbs
OKT8 or G10-1 and analyzed by SDS-PAGE, followed by fluorography.
B, proteins precipitated from a lysate of
CD8-E199-142-expressing cells were analyzed in reducing
(+) and not reducing ( ) conditions by SDS-PAGE followed by Western
blotting decorated with the mAb N1 and developed with the ECL
kit. Only the relevant part of the gel is shown. C, stably
transfected FRT cells expressing CD8 and
CD8-E199-142 were labeled with
[35S]cysteine for 15 min, chased for 2 h, and lysed
in a buffer containing 0.5% Triton X-100. Cell lysates were divided in
three aliquots that were used for immunoprecipitation with
anti-calnexin ( CLNX), anti-calreticulin ( CLRT), or OKT8. The
immunoprecipitates were analyzed by SDS-PAGE, followed by fluorography.
Numbers on the left indicate the position in the same gel of
marker proteins.
|
|
To further prove that ER retention was not due to misfolding, we
created a construct matching CD8-E199-142 but containing, in place of the HCV E1 insert, 44 amino acids derived from the juxtamembrane portion of the SV E1 glycoprotein (Fig. 1A,
CD8-SV). SV E1 glycoprotein has the same membrane topology of HCV E1
and CD8 proteins and is quickly transported to the plasma membrane (28). Therefore, we expected CD8-SV to be transported to the cell
surface unless misfolded because of the SV E1 insertion. As shown in
Fig. 6, unlike CD8-E199-142, CD8-SV was clearly expressed on the cell surface, although less efficiently than wild type
CD8. This result was confirmed by the finding that newly synthesised
CD8-SV was converted to a mature, terminally glycosylated form (see below).
Taken together, these results strongly support that ER localization of
CD8-E199-142 was not due to misfolding and quality control
problems. However, although very unlikely, ER localization could be the
result of an extremely fast degradation rate of a properly folded
protein, so as to prevent its export. Thus we performed
pulse/chase-labeling and immunoprecipitation experiments to determine
the half-lives of CD8, CD8-E199-142, and CD8-SV. By
quantitative analysis of the autoradiogram (data not shown) we
calculated a half-life of 8 h for CD8 and CD8-SV and 5 h for CD8-E199-142. Albeit slightly shorter than that of CD8, the half-life of CD8-E199-142 was more than 10-fold longer than the half-time of surface expression of wild type CD8 (18), indicating that ER localization was not the consequence of a faster degradation. Conversely, it is conceivable that the accelerated turnover of CD8-E199-142 is the result of its localization in the ER.
Terminal Glycosylation and Transport to the Plasma Membrane of
Mutagenized CD8-E199-142--
To further verify the
specificity of the localization determinant present within residues
99-142 of HCV E1, we substituted different residues by site-directed
mutagenesis and analyzed the intracellular localization of each mutant
in transiently transfected HuH-7 cells. The intracellular distribution
of CD8-E199-142 and CD8-SV did not vary, but a much higher
transfection efficiency was obtained in HuH-7 with respect to FRT
cells. Replacement with serine at three consecutive methionine
residues, positions 131-133, affected subcellular localization (Fig.
1, A and B, CD8-E199-142M). As shown
in Fig. 9, CD8-E199-142M
protein was clearly expressed on the surface of HuH-7 cells as the
control CD8-SV protein, whereas CD8-E199-142 protein was
completely intracellular. Next, we performed a biochemical analysis of
the chimeric proteins expressed in HuH-7 cells. To obtain results more
directly comparable with the immunofluorescence data, we looked at the
total population of the chimeric proteins by Western blotting. This
approach showed that also in HuH-7 cells, CD8-E199-142
protein migrated as a single band of about 34 kDa, sensitive to Endo H
and resistant to neuraminidase. Conversely, CD8-E199-142M
protein was present in two forms of 34 and 37 kDa (Fig.
10, see also Fig. 7). The 34-kDa form
responded to the glycosidases digestions as the 34-kDa form of
CD8-E199-142, whereas the 37-kDa form was sensitive to
neuraminidase and largely resistant to Endo H (Fig. 10). As expected,
CD8-SV also showed two bands of 30 and 33 kDa. The 33-kDa form was
sensitive to neuraminidase, whereas none was sensitive to Endo H since
no N-glycosylation sites are present in the SV E1 fragment
(Fig. 10). The most likely interpretation of these results is that the
newly synthesised forms of CD8-E199-142M (34 kDa) and
CD8-SV (30 kDa) proteins are exported to the Golgi complex, where they
are converted to the slower migrating, terminally glycosylated forms
and eventually transported to the plasma membrane. These findings were
confirmed by pulse-chase labeling experiments (data not shown). In
conclusion, since it is extremely unlikely that the mutagenesis of
three residues could cause refolding of an otherwise unfolded protein,
these results provide further evidence that the ER localization was not
due to misfolding of the 44 residues sequence and demonstrate that at
least one of three methionines residues in positions 131-133 of HCV E1
is essential for the function of the localization determinant.

View larger version (92K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9.
CD8-E199-142M protein is
expressed on the plasma membrane. HuH-7 cells were transfected
with plasmids expressing CD8-SV (a and b),
CD8-E199-142 (c and d), and
CD8-E199-142M (e and f) proteins.
36 h post-transfection, the cells were analyzed by single
(a and b) and double (c and
f) indirect immunofluorescence microscopy as detailed under
"Experimental Procedures." a, c, and
e, permeabilized cells; b, d, and
f, not permeabilized cells; a-c and
e, anti-CD8 mAb OKT8, Texas Red-conjugated anti-mouse
secondary antibody; d and f, anti-CD8 polyclonal
antibody, fluorescein-conjugated anti-rabbit secondary antibody.
|
|

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 10.
CD8-E199-142M protein is
terminally glycosylated. HuH-7 cells were transfected with
plasmids expressing CD8-SV, CD8-E199-142, and
CD8-E199-142M proteins. 36 h post-transfections,
proteins were immunoprecipitated from cell lysates, mock-treated ( )
or treated with Endo H (H) or neuraminidase (N),
and analyzed by SDS-PAGE followed by Western blotting. The
number on the left indicates the position in the same gel of
a marker protein. Only the relevant part of the gel is shown.
|
|
The 44 Lumenal Amino Acids of E1 Determine Intracellular
Localization of Another Reporter Protein--
To investigate whether
the E1 determinant functioned as a localization signal in another
context, we constructed additional chimeric proteins containing the
catalytic domain of AP (13) instead of the ectodomain of CD8 (Fig.
11). The chimeric protein comprising
the extracellular domain of AP fused to the TMD and cytosolic tail of
CD8 (AP8, Fig. 12, a-b) was
expressed on the plasma membrane of transiently transfected HuH-7
cells. The chimeric protein containing the SV E1 44 amino acids
fragment between the AP and CD8 domains was also localized on the cell
surface (AP8-SV, Fig. 12, c-d). On the contrary, the
chimeric protein AP8-E199-142 containing the HCV E1 insert
was localized exclusively in intracellular membranes (Fig. 12,
e-f). However, also in this case, mutagenesis of the three
methionines resulted in transport to the cell surface (AP8-E199-142M, Fig. 12, g-h). All chimeric
forms of AP were detected by Western blot analysis (data not shown),
and most importantly, all were enzymatically active; the specific
activity ranged from 14.7 for AP8 to 8 for AP8-SV and
AP8-E199-142M and 6.3 for AP8-E199-142 (see
"Experimental Procedures" for details). Thus, the insertion of 44 residues (independently from their sequence) between the AP catalytic
domain and CD8 moiety resulted only in a partial decrease of enzymatic
activity, with no obvious correlation with the intracellular
localization of the chimeric constructs. In conclusion, all together
these data represent further evidence in favor of the role of the E1
lumenal region as a specific determinant for ER localization.

View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 11.
Schematic illustration of the different
chimeric forms of AP used in this work. In the AP8 chimeric
protein the secreted form of the human AP (489 amino acids) is fused to
the transmembrane (26 amino acids) and the cytosolic tail (28 amino
acids) of CD8. AP8-SV contains the region of SV E1 glycoprotein
corresponding to residues 360-403 of the ectodomain between AP and the
transmembrane domain of CD8. In the same region
AP-E199-142 contains the HCV E1 44 residues region. In
AP-E199-142M, the three methionines of HCV E1 region were
substituted with three serines. Details on the constructions are
described under "Experimental Procedures."
|
|

View larger version (86K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 12.
The juxtamembrane region 99-142 of the
ectodomain of HCV E1 determines intracellular localization of the AP
protein. HuH-7 cells were transfected with plasmids expressing AP8
(a and b), AP8-SV (c and
d), AP8-E199-142 (e and
f), and AP8-E199-142M (g and
h) proteins. 36 h post-transfection, the cells were
analyzed by double indirect immunofluorescence microscopy as detailed
under "Experimental Procedures." a, c,
e, and g, permeabilized cells, anti-AP mAb, Texas
red-conjugated anti-mouse secondary antibody; b,
d, f, and h, not permeabilized cells,
anti-AP polyclonal antibody, fluorescein-conjugated anti-rabbit
secondary antibody.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
To understand the molecular mechanism that prevents the export to
the cell surface of the HCV E1 glycoprotein, we have investigated the
intracellular localization of chimeric proteins containing different
domains of E1 and demonstrated that, in addition to the already
described determinant present in the TMD region, a different
localization determinant is present in the juxtamembrane region of the
ectodomain of E1 protein. Both determinants independently are able to
localize the reporter protein mostly in the ER. The ER localization
dictated by the lumenal determinant is either due to direct retention
or to a recycling mechanism that is clearly different from the ones
previously described for proteins bearing KDEL, KKXX, or TMD
retrieval signals.
Several lines of evidence support the conclusion that the HCV E1
sequence contained in CD8-E199-142 represents a novel type
of ER localization determinant. The immunofluorescence results, which
show a clear ER pattern of labeling, and the characterization of the
oligosaccharide chains, which indicates complete absence of Golgi
processing, unequivocally demonstrate that CD8-E199-142 is
localized almost exclusively in the ER. The proper folding of the
chimeric proteins, suggested by the reactivity to conformation-specific mAbs, by the correct dimerization and by the absence of association with ER chaperones, indicates that localization in the ER is not due to
the quality control mechanisms operating in this compartment. The
finding that the same HCV E1 region determines ER localization of
another reporter, AP, without affecting its enzymatic activity strongly
supports the result obtained with CD8. Finally, the different subcellular localization of the control constructs CD8-SV and AP8-SV,
together with the loss of ER localization after a limited mutagenesis
of the HCV E1 determinant, reinforces the notion of a specific signal.
The new localization determinant of HCV E1 protein has two important
features. (i) It is present in the ectodomain of an intrinsic membrane
protein, and thus, it has to perform its function in the lumen of the
secretory apparatus, and ii) it apparently operates independently of
the quality control mechanisms that prevent export from the ER of
misfolded proteins. Both findings were unexpected, given the evidence
available in the literature. The KKXX and RRXX motifs are currently the best characterized examples of localization signals of transmembrane proteins. Both are exposed on the cytosolic side of the membrane (15, 40), and it has been documented that the
KKXX motif operates by directly binding to COP-I cytosolic proteins (41). In addition, there are several documented examples of ER
localization mediated by TMDs. In some cases TMDs are both necessary
and sufficient to induce ER localization and function by a recycling
mechanism involving the Golgi complex receptor Rer1p (42-43). In other
cases, TMDs cooperate with cytosolic or lumenal domains to specify ER
localization. For example, the TMD and the lumenal pentapeptide EGHRG
of the asialoglycoprotein receptor H2a form a complex determinant for
ER localization by virtue of the quality control mechanism (44, 45). To
our knowledge, the only transmembrane protein with an ER localization
motif in the lumenal domain is the yeast Sec20 protein (46, 47). This protein is a class II transmembrane proteins and contains the HDEL
sequence at its C terminus. This motif (KDEL in higher eukaryotes) is
the prototype for ER localization signals of "soluble" proteins present in the ER lumen, like BiP, protein disulfide isomerase (PDI),
and many others (48) and determines a retrieval process mediated by a
receptor located in the Golgi complex (49, 50). The function of the
HDEL motif in the case of the Sec20 protein remains to be established.
Anyhow, the general rule is that ER localization determinants of
transmembrane proteins are located either in the cytosolic or in the
TMD regions but not in the lumenal ectodomain. Therefore, a challenging
task will be to understand the mechanism of action of the localization
determinant present in the lumenal domain of HCV E1 protein.
According to our data, HCV E1 protein has two localization
determinants, which apparently operate in an independent fashion. Other
membrane proteins have been shown to contain multiple signals for
localization. The targeting of ERGIC-53 protein to the early secretory
pathway is a result of retention and retrieval mechanisms modulated by
several co-operating signals (51); rabbit cytochrome P450 C1 and 2C2
contain signals for ER localization in the transmembrane and the
C-terminal cytosolic domains (52); rubella virus E1 glycoprotein has a
complex ER localization signal that requires both the transmembrane and
the cytosolic regions of the protein (53). Interestingly, it has been
proposed that rubella E1 protein would control virus assembly by its
slow folding and transport rate to the Golgi complex, the site of virus
budding (53). HCV E1 protein might play a similar role in virus
assembly because it folds slowly, representing the rate-limiting step
in the formation of E1-E2 complexes (8), and most likely has a major
role in controlling the intracellular localization of the envelope proteins.
Current opinion is that ER residency of proteins that have successfully
undergone the quality control process is achieved by two, different but
potentially overlapping, mechanisms (reviewed in Ref. 54): dynamic
recycling, in which proteins are continuously retrieved from post-ER
compartments, and direct retention, in which proteins are excluded from
transport vesicles because they are probably bound to large
heteroligomeric complexes with other resident proteins. The last
mechanism has been frequently hypothesized, but little direct evidence
is available in the literature (55, 56); indirectly, it relies mostly
on the large mass of data showing retention in the ER of newly
synthesized proteins during the quality control process (35).
Conversely, dynamic recycling from the Golgi complex has been
demonstrated in many instances; the KDEL receptor, which is normally
located in the Golgi complex, moves to the ER when a vast excess of
KDEL-bearing proteins is transiently expressed by the cell.
Modifications of the oligosaccharides chains due to enzymes localized
in the Golgi complex have been shown in recombinant reporter proteins
localized in the ER (48). Extending the rationale of this approach, the
absence or the presence of Golgi-type modifications in the
oligosaccharides chains of ER resident proteins has been used as a
direct criteria to discriminate between retention and retrieval
mechanisms. For example, direct retention has been claimed for the
TMD-dependent ER localization of HCV glycoproteins and of
chimeric CD4 proteins because of the absence of mannose
residue-trimming of the N-linked glycans (9, 10, 57).
However, the Golgi mannosidase responsible for the trimming from
Man9-8GlcNAc2 to Man5GlcNAc2 has
not been precisely located among cis- and medial-Golgi complex; thus, a recycling from a very early Golgi location can not be excluded. In the
present work, we could examine not only the trimming of high mannose
glycans but also the presence of O-linked sugars thanks to
the abundant O-glycosylation of CD8 protein. It is widely accepted that the addition of GalNAc residues, i.e.
the start of 0-glycosylation, is the most cis-Golgi complex
enzymatic marker available (58, 59). We found no GalNAc in the chimeric
reporter CD8-E199-142; nonetheless, we believe that
these results may only suggest, not demonstrate, a mechanism of direct
retention in the ER. Several considerations must be taken into account. First, a quick retrieval from the Golgi complex back to the ER and/or
inaccessibility of the protein to the cis-Golgi enzymes could yield the
observed results; second, a recycling from the intermediate compartment
could not be detected by any assays given the absence of specific
enzymatic modifications localized in this compartment;
third, we have recently observed by confocal and immunoelectron
microscopy that a portion of HCV E1 and E2 glycoproteins is present in
the intermediate compartment/cis-Golgi region of stably expressing CV1
cells.3 Therefore, we think
that the available results allow only to (i) exclude a dynamic
recycling such as the one operating by both KDEL and KKXX
motifs, which certainly results in a passage of the protein through the
Golgi complex, or (ii) hypothesize either a direct retention or a
dynamic recycling from the intermediate compartment. Overall, the last
possibility goes along better with all the new data that underline the
role of the cross-talk between ER, intermediate compartment, and Golgi
complex in the function of the early segment of the secretory pathway
(60).
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Dr. J. A. Ledbetter for the
generous gift of antibody and Bruno Mugnoz for excellent technical assistance.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported in part by grants from Ministero
dell'Università e della Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica (PRIN 1998), Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (Target Project on
Biotechnology), and the Training and Mobility of Researcher Program of
the European Community (to S. B.).The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
¶
To whom correspondence should be addressed: (to S. Bonatti)
Dipartimento di Biochimica e Biotecnologie Mediche, via S. Pansini 5, 80131 Napoli, Italy. Tel.: 390817463200; Fax: 390817463150; E-mail:
bonatti@unina.it; (to G. Migliaccio) IRBM Pietro Angeletti, via
Pontina Km 30.6, 00040 Pomezia (Roma), Italy. Tel.: 390691093239; Fax:
390691093225; E-mail: migliaccio@irbm.it.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, April 26, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M910400199
2
S. Bonatti, unpublished results.
3
G. Martire, A. Viola, L. Iodice, and S. Bonatti,
personal communication,
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
HCV, hepatitis C
virus;
ER, endoplasmic reticulum;
mAb, monoclonal antibody;
HuH-7, human hepatoma cells;
PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis;
SV, Sindbis virus;
TMD, transmembrane domain;
AP, human alkaline
phosphatase;
PCR, polymerase chain reaction;
Endo H, endoglycosidase H;
HPLC, high performance liquid chromatography.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Clarke, B.
(1997)
J. Gen. Virol.
78,
2397-2410
|
| 2.
|
Lohmann, V.,
Körner, F.,
Koch, J.-O.,
Herian, U.,
Theilmann, L.,
and Bartenschlager, R.
(1999)
Science
285,
110-113
|
| 3.
|
Rice, C. M.
(1996)
in
Fields' Virology
(Fields, B. N.
, and Knipe, D. M., eds), Vol. 1
, pp. 931-959, Raven Press, Ltd., New York
|
| 4.
|
Dubuisson, J.,
Hsu, H. H.,
Cheung, R. C.,
Greenberg, H. B.,
Russell, D. S.,
and Rice, C. M.
(1994)
J. Virol.
68,
6147-6160
|
| 5.
|
Lanford, R. E.,
Notvall, L.,
Chavez, D.,
White, R.,
Frenzel, G.,
Simonsen, C.,
and Kim, J.
(1993)
Virology
197,
225-235
|
| 6.
|
Ralston, R.,
Thudium, K.,
Berger, K.,
Kuo, C.,
Gervase, B.,
Hall, J.,
Selby, M.,
Kuo, G.,
Houghton, M.,
and Choo, Q.-L.
(1993)
J. Virol.
67,
6753-6771
|
| 7.
|
Selby, M. J.,
Choo, Q. L.,
Berger, K.,
Kuo, G.,
Glazer, E.,
Eckart, M.,
Lee, C.,
Chien, D.,
Kuo, C.,
and Houghton, M.
(1993)
J. Gen. Virol.
74,
1103-1113
|
| 8.
|
Deleersnyder, V.,
Pillez, A.,
Wychowski, C.,
Blight, K.,
Xu, J.,
Hahn, Y. S.,
Rice, C. M.,
and Dubuisson, J.
(1997)
J. Virol.
71,
697-704
|
| 9.
|
Cocquerel, L.,
Duvet, S.,
Meunier, J. C.,
Pillez, A.,
Cacan, R.,
Wychowski, C.,
and Dubuisson, J.
(1999)
J. Virol.
73,
2641-2649
|
| 10.
|
Cocquerel, L.,
Meunier, J. C.,
Pillez, A.,
Wychowski, C.,
and Dubuisson, J.
(1998)
J. Virol.
72,
2183-2191
|
| 11.
|
Flint, M.,
and McKeating, J. A.
(1999)
J. Gen. Virol.
80,
1943-1947
|
| 12.
|
Michalak, J. P.,
Wychowski, C.,
Choukhi, A.,
Meunier, J. C.,
Ung, S.,
Rice, C. M.,
and Dubuisson, J.
(1997)
J. Gen. Virol.
78,
2299-2306
|
| 13.
|
Berger, J.,
Hauber, J.,
Hauber, R.,
Geiger, R.,
and Cullen, B. R.
(1988)
Gene
66,
1-10
|
| 14.
|
Littman, D. R.,
Thomas, Y.,
Maddon, P. J.,
Chess, L.,
and Axel, R.
(1985)
Cell
40,
237-246
|
| 15.
|
Jackson, M. R.,
Nilsson, T.,
and Peterson, P. A.
(1990)
EMBO J.
9,
3153-3162
|
| 16.
|
Martire, G.,
Mottola, G.,
Pascale, M. C.,
Malagolini, N.,
Turrini, I.,
Serafini-Cessi, F.,
Jackson, M. R.,
and Bonatti, S.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
3541-3547
|
| 17.
|
Lotti, L. V.,
Mottola, G.,
Torrisi, M. R.,
and Bonatti, S.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
10413-10420
|
| 18.
|
Pascale, M. C.,
Erra, M. C.,
Malagolini, N.,
Serafini-Cessi, F.,
Leone, A.,
and Bonatti, S.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
25196-25201
|
| 19.
|
Pascale, M. C.,
Malagolini, N.,
Serafini-Cessi, F.,
Migliaccio, G.,
Leone, A.,
and Bonatti, S.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
9940-9947
|
| 20.
|
Cross, G. A. M.
(1987)
Cell
48,
179-181
|
| 21.
|
Low, M. G.
(1987)
Biochem. J.
244,
1-13
|
| 22.
|
Feehan, C.,
Darlak, K.,
Kahn, J.,
Walcheck, B.,
Spatola, A. F.,
and Kishimoto, T. K.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
7019-7024
|
| 23.
|
Berger, J.,
Micanovic, R.,
Greenspan, R. J.,
and Undenfriend, S.
(1989)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
86,
1457-1460
|
| 24.
|
Ledbetter, J. A.,
Rose, L. M.,
Spooner, C. E.,
Beatty, P. G.,
Martin, P. J.,
and Clark, E. A.
(1985)
J. Immunol.
135,
1819-1825
|
| 25.
|
Barnes, W. M.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
2216-2220
|
| 26.
|
Migliaccio, G.,
Zurzolo, C.,
Nitsch, L.,
Obici, S.,
Lotti, L. V.,
Torrisi, M. R.,
Pascale, M. C.,
Leone, A.,
and Bonatti, S.
(1990)
Eur. J. Cell Biol.
52,
291-296
|
| 27.
|
Takamizawa, A.,
Mori, C.,
Fuki, I.,
Manabe, S.,
Murakami, S.,
Fujita, J.,
Onishi, E.,
Andoh, T.,
Yoshida, I.,
and Okayama, H.
(1991)
J. Virol.
65,
1105-1113
|
| 28.
|
Migliaccio, G.,
Pascale, M. C.,
Leone, A.,
and Bonatti, S.
(1989)
Exp. Cell Res.
185,
203-216
|
| 29.
|
Bonatti, S.,
Migliaccio, G.,
and Simons, K.
(1989)
J. Biol. Chem.
264,
12590-12595
|
| 30.
|
Serafini-Cessi, F.,
Malagolini, N.,
Hoops, T. C.,
and Rindler, M. J.
(1993)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
194,
784-790
|
| 31.
|
Cullen, B. R.,
and Malim, M. H.
(1992)
Methods Enzymol.
216,
362-368
|
| 32.
|
Meunier, J.-C.,
Fournillier, A.,
Choukhi, A.,
Cahour, A.,
Cocquerel, L.,
Dubuisson, J.,
and Wychowski, C.
(1999)
J. Gen. Virol.
80,
887-896
|
| 33.
|
Kornfeld, R.,
and Kornfeld, S.
(1985)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
54,
631-664
|
| 34.
|
Ciccaglione, A. R.,
Marcantonio, C.,
Costantino, A.,
Equestre, M.,
Geraci, A.,
and Rapicetta, M.
(1998)
Virology
250,
1-8
|
| 35.
|
Helenius, A.
(1997)
Trends Cell Biol.
7,
193-200
|
| 36.
|
Helenius, A.
(1994)
Mol. Biol. Cell
5,
253-265
|
| 37.
|
Choukhi, A.,
Ung, S.,
Wychowski, C.,
and Dubuisson, J.
(1998)
J. Virol.
72,
3851-3858
|
| 38.
|
Tatu, U.,
and Helenius, A.
(1997)
J. Cell Biol.
136,
555-565
|
| 39.
|
Kim, P. S.,
and Arvan, P.
(1995)
J. Cell Biol.
128,
29-38
|
| 40.
|
Schutze, M.-P.,
Peterson, P. A.,
and Jackson, M. R.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
1696-1705
|
| 41.
|
Letourneur, F.,
Gaynor, E. C.,
Hennecke, S.,
Démollière, C.,
Duden, R.,
Emr, S. D.,
Riezman, H.,
and Cosson, P.
(1994)
Cell
79,
1199-1207
|
| 42.
|
Letourneur, F.,
and Cosson, P.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
33273-33278
|
| 43.
|
Sato, K.,
Sato, M.,
and Nakano, A.
(1996)
J. Cell Biol.
134,
279-293
|
| 44.
|
Letourneur, F.,
Hennecke, S.,
Demolliere, C.,
and Cosson, P.
(1995)
J. Cell Biol.
129,
971-978
|
| 45.
|
Shenkman, M.,
Ayalon, M.,
and Lederkremer, G. Z.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
11363-11368
|
| 46.
|
Sweet, D. J.,
and Pelham, H. R. B.
(1992)
EMBO J.
11,
423-432
|
| 47.
|
Cosson, P.,
Schroder-Kohne, S.,
Sweet, D. S.,
Demolliere, C.,
Hennecke, S.,
Frigerio, G.,
and Letourneur, F.
(1997)
Eur. J. Cell Biol.
73,
93-97
|
| 48.
|
Pelham, H. R.
(1989)
Annu. Rev. Cell Biol.
5,
1-23
|
| 49.
|
Semenza, J. C.,
Hardwick, K. G.,
Dean, N.,
and Pelham, H. R. B.
(1990)
Cell
61,
1349-1357
|
| 50.
|
Griffiths, G.,
Ericsson, M.,
Krijnse-Locker, J.,
Nilson, T.,
Goud, B.,
Söling, H.-D.,
Tang, B. L.,
Wong, S. H.,
and Hong, W.
(1994)
J. Cell Biol.
127,
1557-1574
|
| 51.
|
Kappeler, F.,
Klopfenstein, D. R. Ch.,
Foghet, M.,
Paccaud, J. P.,
and Hauri, H. P.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
31801-31808
|
| 52.
|
Szczesna-Skorupa, E.,
Ahn, K.,
Chen, C. D.,
Doray, B.,
and Kemper, B.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
24327-24333
|
| 53.
|
Hobman, T. C.,
Lemon, H. F.,
and Jewell, K.
(1997)
J. Virol.
71,
7670-7680
|
| 54.
|
Teasdale, R.,
and Jackson, M.
(1996)
Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol.
12,
27-54
|
| 55.
|
Yu, Y.,
Zhang, Y.,
Sabatini, D. D.,
and Kreibich, G.
(1989)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
86,
9931-9935
|
| 56.
|
Schweizer, A.,
Clausen, H.,
van Meer, G.,
and Hauri, H. P.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
4035-4041
|
| 57.
|
Duvet, S.,
Cocquerel, L.,
Pillez, A.,
Cacan, R.,
Verbert, A.,
Moradpour, D.,
Wychowski, C.,
and Dubuisson, J.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
32088-32095
|
| 58.
|
Roth, J.,
Wang, Y.,
Eckhardt, A. E.,
and Hill, R. L.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
8935-8939
|
| 59.
|
Verde, C.,
Pascale, M. C.,
Martire, G.,
Lotti, L. V.,
Torrisi, M. R.,
Helenius, A.,
and Bonatti, S.
(1995)
Eur. J. Cell Biol.
67,
267-274
|
| 60.
|
Presley, J. F.,
Smith, C.,
Hirschberg, K.,
Miller, C.,
Cole, N. B.,
Zaal, K. J. M.,
and Lippincott-Schwartz, J.
(1998)
Mol. Biol. Cell
9,
1617-1626
|
Copyright © 2000 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg