![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 276, Issue 48, 45009-45014, November 30, 2001
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Departments of Molecular and Integrative Physiology and Cell and Structural Biology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois 61801
Received for publication, May 22, 2001, and in revised form, August 8, 2001
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The N-terminal signal anchor of cytochrome P-450
2C1 mediates retention in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane of
several reporter proteins. The same sequence fused to the C terminus of the extracellular domain of the epidermal growth factor receptor permits transport of the chimeric protein to the plasma membrane. In
the N-terminal position, the ER retention function of this signal
depends on the polarity of the hydrophobic domain and the sequence KQS
in the short hydrophilic linker immediately following the transmembrane
domain. To determine what properties are required for the ER retention
function of the signal anchor in a position other than the N terminus,
the effect of mutations in the linker and hydrophobic domains on
subcellular localization in COS1 cells of chimeric proteins with the
P-450 signal anchor in an internal or C-terminal position was analyzed.
For the C-terminal position, the signal anchor was fused to the end of
the luminal domain of epidermal growth factor receptor, and green
fluorescent protein was additionally fused at the C terminus of the
signal anchor for the internal position. In these chimeras, the ER
retention function of the signal anchor was rescued by deletion of
three leucines at the C-terminal side of its hydrophobic domain;
however, deletion of three valines from the N-terminal side did not
affect transport to the cell surface. ER retention of the C-terminal deletion mutants was eliminated by substitution of alanines for glutamine and serine in the linker sequence. These data are consistent with a model in which the position of the linker sequence at the membrane surface, which is critical for ER retention, is dependent on
the transmembrane domain.
Intracellular localization of secretory and membrane proteins
results from the sequential action of sorting factors functioning at
multiple steps, starting with insertion of the proteins into the
membranes of the endoplasmic reticulum
(ER).1 The transport from the
ER of proteins destined for other cellular compartments was initially
proposed to occur by bulk flow, that is, passive incorporation of ER
contents into transport vesicles (1). The concentration of some
proteins in the COPII transport vesicles that form at the ER is
the same as that in the lumen of the ER (2), which is consistent with
the bulk flow model (1). However, for other, perhaps most proteins,
concentrations of the proteins are increased in the COPII transport
vesicles, and the kinetics of transport are faster than expected for a
bulk flow model, which indicates that exit from the ER is a selective process mediated by positive sorting signals (1, 3, 4). The sorting
signals, by interaction with coat proteins or vesicle membrane
proteins, mediate concentration of secretory and membrane proteins in
selected regions of the ER, where they are packaged into the transport
vesicles (5, 6). In the absence of sorting signals, proteins would not
be concentrated in transport vesicles but could still be slowly
transported from the ER by bulk flow unless other sorting signals or
properties of the protein prevent their incorporation into the
transport vesicle.
Primary determinants mediating localization of membrane proteins to the
ER, Golgi, or plasma membrane have been mostly mapped to their TMDs
(7-10). There is no obvious difference in the lengths or sequences of
TMDs of ER and Golgi membrane proteins; however, it has been suggested
that the length of the TMD is the main discriminatory factor between
Golgi and plasma membrane proteins (9, 10). Consistent with the
increasing thickness of the lipid bilayer along the secretory pathway,
TMDs of the plasma membrane are longer than those of the Golgi.
Moreover, for some ER membrane proteins, simple extension of the TMD
was sufficient for targeting to the Golgi and plasma membrane (11, 12).
In addition to length, both the distribution of hydrophobicity and
polar residues in the TMD are also part of the sorting determinants
(13-15).
Extramembranous sequences have been also found to strongly affect
sorting of proteins to the ER, Golgi, or plasma membrane (16-20). In
addition to the already mentioned positive sorting signals, these
sequences may contain localization determinants that prevent transport
to the next compartment, thus functioning as negative or true retention
signals (20-22). This may be the mechanism used by some integral ER
membrane proteins lacking any known sorting signals, which are excluded
from export to the pre-Golgi compartment. Lack of transport from the ER
as a consequence of incorporation of membrane proteins into large
immobile networks has also been postulated (23, 24). However, this
mechanism fails to explain the ER retention of proteins that have been
shown to have high lateral mobility (25, 26). The sorting signals or properties of the proteins that prevent the incorporation of these
mobile proteins into transport vesicles are not well understood. Either
the proteins could be actively targeted to regions of the ER not
involved in transport vesicle formation or some property of the protein
could be incompatible with inclusion in the transport vesicle.
Cytochrome P-450 (P-450) 2C1/2 is inserted into the ER membrane via
its N-terminal signal anchor sequence, which functions as an ER
retention sequence, independently of the ER retention also mediated by
the catalytic, cytoplasmic domain (27). We have shown that the 28-amino
acid signal anchor sequence of cytochrome P-450 2C1 prevents
incorporation into the transport vesicles, resulting in static ER
retention of either P-450 2C1 or chimeric proteins (15). Deletion of
the 7-amino acid linker sequence following the TMD or mutation of the
sequence 21KQS23 in the linker resulted
in chimeras that were no longer statically retained in the ER but were
retained in the ER by retrieval from the intermediate compartment.
Mutagenesis of the P-450 2C1 TMD indicated that ER retention mediated
by the N-terminal 28 amino acids depended not only on its length but
also on the distribution of the hydrophobic residues. These results
suggest that the specific position or orientation of the TMD in the
membrane determines whether the protein is incorporated into transport
vesicles, possibly by properly positioning the linker sequence.
We have shown that the ER retention function of the signal anchor of
cytochrome P-450 2C1 is dependent on its position in the protein. If
the signal anchor was fused to the C terminus of the extracellular
domain of EGFR or substituted for the TMD of EGFR, the resulting
chimeric proteins were exported from the ER in transfected COS1 cells
(27). If the large luminal domain in these chimeric proteins alters the
position of the TMD in the membrane, then changing the length of the
hydrophobic core or altering the distribution of the hydrophobicity
might be able to restore the ER retention function. To test this
hypothesis, we examined the effects of deletions of hydrophobic
residues in the TMD and the effect of mutations in the linker sequence
on the ER retention function of the signal anchor in an internal or
C-terminal position. Our results demonstrate that in these positions,
the native P-450 2C1 signal anchor does not mediate ER retention unless
its TMD core is shortened in the C-terminal region, which may bring the
linker residues KQS that are critical for ER retention closer to the
lipid bilayer.
Materials--
Tran35S-label was from ICN
Radiochemicals, endoglycosidase H was from Roche Molecular
Biochemicals, N-glycosidase F was from New England Biolabs,
the antibody against the extracellular domain of EGFR was from Upstate
Biotechnology, rhodamine-conjugated goat anti-mouse antibody was from
TAGO, Inc. (Burlingame, CA), mouse anti-GM310 antibody was from BD
Biosciences, and anti-GFP antibody was from Roche Molecular
Biochemicals. Cell culture media and antibiotics were from Life
Technologies, Inc., and fetal bovine serum was from Gemini
Bio-Products.
Plasmid Constructions--
The construction of chimeras ECE
(EGFR with its transmembrane domain replaced by the P-450 2C1 signal
anchor) and ECO (ECE with the cytoplasmic domain of EGFR deleted) in
the pCMV vector has been described (27). To construct chimera EC/GFP,
in which the GFP coding sequence is attached to the C terminus of the
P-450 2C1 signal anchor, plasmid ECC (27) was digested with
BglII and HindIII, and the obtained fragment was
inserted into the BglII-HindIII-digested vector
pEGFP-N1. All mutations of the P-450 N-terminal signal anchor were
prepared by polymerase chain reaction using a set of designed primers
and ECO or EC/GFP DNA as a template. Construction of a plasmid encoding
a glycosylation tag at the C terminus of GFP and of chimera C1/GFP
(C1(1-28)/GFP) was described previously (15). To construct chimera
PTH/GFP, a DNA sequence encoding the 27-amino acid secretory
signal sequence of preproparathyroid hormone was amplified from the
vector pTP6 (28) using the T7 promoter primer as a 5' primer and a 3'
primer with a KpnI site. The polymerase chain reaction
product was digested with HindIII and KpnI and
inserted into HindIII/KpnI-digested pEGFP-N1 and with or without the glycosylation tag at the C terminus.
Expression in COS1 Cells--
COS1 cells were transfected with
LipofectAMINE 2000 reagent (Life Technologies, Inc.). Biosynthetic
labeling of the transfected cells, immunoprecipitation, and
endoglycosidase H and N-glycosidase F treatment were
performed as described (25, 29). For fluorescent microscopy,
transfected cells were fixed and processed for immunofluorescent staining as described (25, 27).
Subcellular Localization of Chimeric Proteins with the P-450 2C1
Signal Anchor in an Internal Position--
The ER retention function
of the P-450 2C1 signal anchor (amino acids 1-28) placed either
internally or at the C terminus of a transmembrane protein has been
tested in chimeras ECE and ECO (Fig. 1).
The luminal domain of EGFR is glycosylated so the resistance to
cleavage of the carbohydrate side chains by endo H can be used to
determine whether the protein is transported to at least the medial
Golgi from the ER. Previously we showed that both ECO and ECE were
exported from the ER in transfected COS1 cells (27). Thus, an internal
or C-terminal position of the P-450 signal anchor peptide eliminates
its ER retention property, which might be related to a change in its
position or orientation in the membrane.
Lengthening the TMD of some C-terminally anchored ER membrane proteins
can lead to their transport out of the ER (11, 12). To test whether the
length of the hydrophobic core of a C-terminally positioned P-450
signal anchor sequence affects its function, we deleted three Leu
residues from the C-terminal side of the TMD (Fig. 1, positions
15-17) in chimera ECO. Transfected COS1 cells were pulse-labeled,
and the immunoprecipitated proteins were digested with endo H. As
expected, ECO was resistant to cleavage of its side chains by endo H,
indicating that this chimera was transported from the ER. In contrast,
the chimera with the hydrophobic core shortened at its C terminus,
EC(
In the ECO context the P-450 signal anchor is at the C terminus of the
chimeric protein, whereas in ECE, which is also transported from the
ER, it is followed by a large cytoplasmic domain of EGFR that could
potentially contain positive transport signals. To examine whether the
characteristics of the signal anchor were similar in an internal
position when flanked by a reporter that normally is not localized to
the plasma membrane, ECO and its deletion mutants were fused to the N
terminus of GFP. The localization of these fluorescent proteins in the
cells was consistent with the studies with ECO. EC/GFP and EC( The Role of the Linker Sequence in ER Retention Mediated by an
Internally Located Signal Anchor--
Studies on the signal anchor in
its normal N-terminal position showed that both the TMD and the linker
region contribute to its ER retention function (15). Specific mutations
of the sequence KQS in the linker interfered with ER retention, whereas
changes in the distribution and number of hydrophobic residues
primarily in the C-terminal half of the TMD blocked retention (15). One interpretation of these results was that the orientation or position of
the linker sequence or the C-terminal half of the TMD relative to the
membrane was critical for ER retention. If the mechanism for ER
retention mediated by the signal anchor in an internal or C-terminal
position is the same as when it is in the N-terminal region, then the
KQS sequence in the linker should also be important for retention
mediated by the C-terminal or internal signal anchor.
Our previous studies with chimeras containing an N-terminally
positioned signal anchor showed that mutation of both Lys21
and Ser23 (K21N and S23V) in the linker largely
eliminated static ER retention. We therefore analyzed the effect of
mutating these residues in chimera EC(
To further examine the importance of the KQS linker sequence, we
analyzed the effect on subcellular localization of substituting three
alanines for 21KQS23 (Fig. 1). In contrast to
EC( Effects of Shortening the TMD on Targeting by the N-terminally
Located P-450 2C1 Signal Anchor--
In previous studies on the
requirements for the ER retention mediated by the P-450 2C1 signal
anchor in its normal N-terminal position, we demonstrated that
lengthening the TMD resulted in a loss of ER retention, but mutations
that shortened the TMD were not studied (15). Because deletion of three
leucines had dramatic effects on signal anchor retention function when
the signal anchor was C-terminal or internal, whereas deletion of three
valines did not, we examined the effects of these mutations on the
N-terminally located signal anchor. In agreement with previous studies
(15, 25), the fluorescent distribution of C1/GFP was consistent with an
ER localization (Fig. 4A). The
deletion of either three leucines or three valines, however, altered
the targeting function of the signal anchor, and the proteins were no
longer inserted as type 1 membrane proteins, so that the effect on ER
retention could not be determined. The diffuse pattern observed with
C1(
The C1( Mutations in either the TMD or the following linker sequence can
interfere with the static ER retention function of the P-450 2C1 signal
anchor sequence when in its normal N-terminal location (15). Such
mutations in the TMD were relatively nonspecific with regard to the
sequence but altered the length of the hydrophobic core or the
distribution of hydrophobic residues. In general, mutations in the
C-terminal half of the TMD had greater effects. In the linker sequence,
the specific sequence KQS was important for static ER retention. The
more specific sequence requirement in the linker suggested that this
sequence might interact with other proteins. These results led to a
proposal that the orientation and position of the C-terminal portion of
the TMD and the linker sequence relative to the membrane were important
for ER retention. When the P-450 2C1 signal anchor is placed in an
internal or C-terminal position, its ER retention function is lost. In
terms of the proposed model, a large luminal domain may alter the
position of the TMD in the membrane, which in turn affects the position
of the KQS sequence. The size of the luminal domain may be important
because fusion of a smaller 29-amino acid glycosylation tag sequence to the N terminus did not affect ER retention (15). This idea is supported
by the observation that reducing the length of the C-terminally or
internally positioned TMD by deletions in its C-terminal portion restored ER retention function. This dependence on length is similar to
the observation that ER retention of cytochrome
b5 was lost when its C-terminal TMD was
lengthened (11). The inability of the mutant with deletion of three
valines from the N-terminal portion of the signal anchor to restore ER
retention is more difficult to explain from this model but may indicate
that the length of the TMD is less important than its orientation,
i.e. the degree of slant in the membrane.
Because the TMD requirements for ER retention are different depending
on the position of the signal anchor, it is possible that the
mechanisms for ER retention are different. If different mechanisms are
involved, then the KQS sequence in the linker region might not be as
important for the ER retention function of the signal anchor in a
C-terminal or internal position as it is in the N-terminally located
signal anchor. However, substitution of Ala either for KQS or QS or
substitution of NQV for KQS resulted in transport from the ER of
chimeras containing the signal anchor in an internal or C-terminal
position. The requirement for the KQS sequence regardless of position
suggests that the mechanisms are the same and that both the TMD and the
juxtamembrane linker sequence are required for ER retention.
Sorting determinants for transmembrane proteins have been identified in
juxtamembrane sequences on both the cytosolic and luminal sides of the
membrane. Positive sorting signals in the cytoplasmic tails of membrane
proteins contribute to targeting in the secretory pathway and
endocytosis and to basolateral membranes in polarized cells (reviewed
in Ref. 6). Similarly, a short juxtamembrane domain mediates the
sorting of MAL to specific membrane microdomains (32). A negative
cytoplasmic retention signal is required for localization of Golgi
proteins (19, 20) and is present in the catalytic domain of P-450 2C2
(27). Luminal or extramembranous sequences functioning in ER retention
have also been found in hepatitis C virus glycoprotein E1 (33),
asialoglycoprotein (34), hepatitis B virus glycoprotein (35), aldehyde
dehydrogenase (36), and some reporter proteins in the protozoan
parasite Toxoplasma gondii (37). A conserved sequence motif
that mediates the targeting has not been identified in any of these cases.
The KQS motif identified in our studies as being required for the ER
retention function of the P-450 2C1 signal anchor has not been
described previously as a sorting signal. This sequence is not highly
conserved in P-450s. KQS and similar sequences (RQS and RQV) are
present in many P-450 2C subfamily members and in the most closely
related subfamily, P-450 2E (KQI and RQV) but not in most other P-450s.
In human P-450 2E1, which has an RQV sequence, the signal anchor does
not mediate static ER retention (22). ER retention, therefore, appears
to be mediated by different mechanisms for different P-450s. Whether
the use of the KQS motif as a retention signal in P-450 2C proteins is
related to a unique physiological function is not known.
Deletions within the hydrophobic core of the P-450 2C1 signal anchor,
when in its normal N-terminal position, had dramatically different
effects on its targeting function depending on whether the N- or
C-terminal portion of the TMD was shortened. These results agree with
earlier observations of Sato et al. (38), who showed that
for the signal anchor of rabbit P-450 IA1, N-terminal deletions caused
translocation and processing of the protein, whereas C-terminal deletions eliminated interaction with the membrane resulting in a
cytosolic protein. These data are consistent with the loop model of
signal sequence insertion, in which the C terminus of the signal enters
the membrane first, so that its hydrophobicity may be more critical for
membrane interaction (39). Different results were obtained with the
signal anchor of cytochrome P-450 M1. This signal anchor mediated ER
translocation with either N-terminal or C-terminal deletions, which
probably reflects different sequences of these signal anchors or the
systems used: cell-free translation-translocation versus
transfected cells (38).
The loss of ER retention function of the P-450 2C1 signal anchor in a
C-terminal position differs from the continued ER retention function
mediated by the 21-amino acid TMD of the closely related P-450 M1
signal anchor fused to the C terminus of carboxyesterase (40). The
differences in the two experiments may be related to the nature of the
luminal domain, which could have different effects on the signal anchor
sequence. For instance, in terms of the model described above,
carboxyesterase may perturb the membrane position of the P-450 TMD less
than the luminal domain of EGFR. Surprisingly, deletion of 15 of the 21 amino acids of the M1 TMD, leaving only four core hydrophobic residues,
did not affect its ER retention function (40). An alternative
explanation for the different results might be that the mechanism for
ER retention in this fusion protein is unrelated to the normal
mechanism mediated by the signal anchor in the N-terminal position.
TMDs play a critical role as sorting signals for multiple organelles.
The targeting may result from preference of a TMD for membranes with
specific lipid compositions or thickness or by more specific
interactions with lipids or helices of other membrane proteins. The
distribution of polar residues in TMDs has been shown to be important
for sorting, which suggests that interactions with other proteins may
be involved. In addition to these direct interactions of the TMD with
membrane components, the TMD may also determine the position relative
to the membrane of juxtamembrane sequences, such as the KQS motif
described in this paper, which is critical for proper sorting. In this
case, the TMD would be a relatively passive anchor, whereas the
juxtamembrane sequence would be the primary signal for sorting.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Schematic structures of chimeric proteins and
the amino acid sequence of the P-450 2C1 signal anchor.
Open, filled, and hatched boxes
represent the sequences of EGFR, P-450, and GFP, respectively. The
numbering of amino acid residues of the P-450 region is shown as in the
original N-terminal position. Residues mutated or deleted in this study
are in bold type.
3L)O was localized to the ER, as shown by the complete sensitivity
of its carbohydrate side chains to cleavage by endo H (Fig.
2A). This could be the result either of the overall shortening of the TMD or of a change in hydrophobicity of its C-terminal region. To distinguish between these
possibilities, the three Val at positions 4-6 at the N-terminal side
of the TMD (Fig. 1) were deleted. In contrast to the C-terminal deletion, the carbohydrate side chains of the N-terminal mutant were
resistant to endo H digestion (Fig. 2A), as in ECO, so that the signal anchor with three valines deleted did not regain an ER
retention function. These results suggest that the specific distribution of the hydrophobic residues in the TMD is an important determinant for ER retention.

View larger version (45K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Subcellular localization of chimeric proteins
assayed by sensitivity to endo H digestion (A) and
fluorescence microscopy (B). A, COS1
cells transfected with the plasmids encoding chimeric proteins ECO,
EC(
3L)O, and EC(
3V)O, were labeled with Trans35S-label
for 30 min and chased in complete medium for 4 h. The cellular
lysates were immunoprecipitated with antisera against the extracellular
domain of EGFR, which also cross-reacts with endogenous EGFR (indicated
with a dot) in COS1 cells. Following digestion with endo H
for 18 h the samples were analyzed by SDS-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis. The positions of proteins resistant (R) or
sensitive (S) to endo H (EH) cleavage are
indicated. B, COS1 cells were transfected with chimeras
EC/GFP, EC(
3L)/GFP, and EC(
3V)/GFP and fixed after 48 h, and
unpermeabilized cells were immunostained with an antibody against
extracellular domain of EGFR, followed by rhodamine-conjugated
secondary antibody. Fluorescence from GFP is shown in the
left panels, and that from rhodamine in the right
panels.
3V)/GFP
were transported out of the ER as indicated by an intracellular
fluorescence pattern different from ER localization (compare with Fig.
4A, C1/GFP) and by the presence of fluorescence at the
surface of the cells (Fig. 2B, left panels). The
location of the proteins at the surface of the cell was supported by
the detection of the chimera (as well as endogenous EGFR) on the
surface of unpermeabilized cells by an antibody against the
extracellular domain of EGFR and rhodamine-conjugated secondary
antibody (Fig. 2B, right panels). In contrast,
cells expressing EC(
3L)/GFP had a reticular cytoplasmic pattern
characteristic of ER localization (Fig. 2B, left
panel) that was clearly different from the surface localization of
EGFR (Fig. 2B, right panel). The presence of GFP
did not affect the distribution of the proteins in the cell because the
endoglycosidase H sensitivity of the GFP chimeras was the same as that
of the corresponding proteins without GFP (data not shown). In both the
C-terminal and internal positions, therefore, deletions on the
C-terminal side but not the N-terminal side, of the TMD resulted in a
gain of ER retention function. These results are consistent with
previous studies of the signal anchor in its normal N-terminal
position, in which mutations in the C-terminal side of the TMD had the
greatest effect on ER retention function (15).
3L)/GFP. Surprisingly, the
carbohydrate side chains of this mutant, EC(
3L)/NQV/GFP, remained
sensitive to endo H digestion (Fig.
3A). Consistent with this
observation, the fluorescence of this mutant was not localized to the
plasma membrane; however, the distribution was not typical of ER
localization either (Fig. 3B, left panel).
Instead, the fluorescence was localized in a perinuclear region, which
indicates that the protein was not retained efficiently in the ER. The
pattern of GFP fluorescence suggests that the protein is transported to
the Golgi. The distribution of fluorescence is similar to that of the
cis-Golgi marker protein GM130 (30), which was detected by
its antibody and visualized with rhodamine-conjugated secondary
antibody (Fig. 3B, right panel). The sensitivity
of the carbohydrate side chains to cleavage with endo H suggested that
the mutant was transported no further than the cis-Golgi
(31).

View larger version (45K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Subcellular localization of chimeric proteins
carrying mutations in the linker sequence. A, COS1
cells were transfected with chimeras EC(
3L)/AAA/GFP (AAA),
EC(
3L)/KAA/GFP (KAA), and EC(
3L)/NQV/GFP (NQV), and 48 h later
cells were processed for endo H (EH) sensitivity as
described in the legend to Fig. 2A. B, COS1 cells
transfected with the same chimeras as in A were fixed, and
unpermeabilized cells were immunostained with an antibody against the
extracellular domain of EGFR (AAA and KAA), or permeabilized cells were
immunostained with mouse antibody to the cis-Golgi marker
protein GM130 (NQV), followed in each case by rhodamine-conjugated
secondary antibody. Fluorescence from GFP is shown in the left
panels, and that from rhodamine in the right
panels.
3L)/GFP, significant resistance to endo H digestion of the
carbohydrate side chains was observed for this mutant, which indicates
that it is not efficiently retained in the ER (Fig. 3A).
Furthermore, the distribution of the fluorescence in cells expressing
the EC(
3L)/AAA/GFP chimera, which includes fluorescence at the
surface of the cells, indicates that the protein is not retained in the
ER but is transported to the cell surface (Fig. 3B,
left panel). To address the possibility that this effect is
caused by the elimination of the positively charged Lys21,
which effectively extends the TMD by three amino acids, we also tested
a mutant with only residues 22 and 23 (QS) substituted by alanines.
This mutant, EC(
3L)/KAA/GFP, is also transported from the ER, as
shown by its resistance to endo H digestion (Fig. 3A) and
the presence of the fluorescent protein in the plasma membrane (Fig.
3B, left panel). For both EC(
3L)/AAA/GFP and
EC(
3L)/KAA/GFP, detection of the extracellular domain of EFGR on the
surface of the cells provides further evidence that the chimeras are
transported from the ER to the plasma membrane (Fig. 3B,
right panels). The requirement for the linker sequence KQS
for ER retention when the (
3L) signal anchor is present at the C
terminus or internally indicates that the mechanism for retention is
the same when the signal anchor is present in these positions as when
it is present at the N terminus.
3L)/GFP is consistent with a cytoplasmic distribution (Fig.
4A), which indicates that this deletion inhibited the
targeting of the protein to the ER.

View larger version (56K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Effect of the deletions in the TMD on
targeting by an N-terminally positioned P-450 signal anchor.
A, COS1 cells were transfected with chimeras C1/GFP,
C1(
3L)/GFP, and C1(
3V)/GFP and, after 48 h, analyzed for
distribution of fluorescence, as described in legend to Fig. 2.
B and C, COS1 cells were transfected with
chimeras PTH/GFP and C1(
3L)/GFP without (B) or with
(C) a 29-amino acid glycosylation tag (GT)
attached to the C terminus of GFP. Radiolabeled proteins were
immunoprecipitated from the media (lanes M) and lysed cells
(lanes C) with the antibody against GFP, as described in the
legend to Fig. 2. As indicated, after immunoprecipitation some samples
were digested with N-glycosidase F (PF). The
position of the glycosylated protein (G) is indicated.
3V)/GFP mutant exhibited a punctate pattern of fluorescence,
suggesting that it had been translocated across the ER membrane and
transported through the secretory pathway to transport vesicles.
Several observations supported this conclusion. First, treatment of the
cells with brefeldin A, which prevents forward transport from the ER
and leads to retrograde transport of Golgi proteins to the ER, resulted
in a reticular pattern of fluorescence consistent with ER retention
(not shown). Second, after radiolabeling and a prolonged chase, small
amounts of protein immunoreactive to GFP antisera are present in the
medium of transfected cells (Fig. 4B). Similar amounts of
the protein are present in the medium of cells transfected with a
chimera containing the secretory signal sequence of parathyroid hormone
fused to GFP, PTH/GFP (Fig. 4B). Finally, a 29-amino acid
glycosylation tag (15) was placed at the C terminus of C1(
3V)/GFP and
PTH/GFP. Glycosylation of the tag would indicate that the protein was
translocated across the ER membrane. In both cases, a fraction of the
radiolabeled protein had a slower electrophoretic mobility on
SDS-polyacrylamide gels, suggesting that it had been glycosylated (Fig.
4C). This was confirmed by the elimination of the slower
mobility protein by treatment with N-glycosidase F, which
removes carbohydrate side chains. Thus, whereas deletion of three
leucines or three valines in the TMD of the P-450 signal anchor does
not affect its stop transfer and membrane anchor properties when the
TMD is internal or C-terminally located, the same mutations in the
N-terminally located signal anchor either inhibit ER targeting (
3L)
or convert it to a translocation signal that is presumably cleaved
(
3V).
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by United States Public Health Service Grant GM35897.The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Molecular and
Integrative Physiology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 524 Burrill Hall, 407 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61801. Tel.: 217-333-1146; Fax: 217-333-1133; E-mail: byronkem@uiuc.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, September 13, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M104676200
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: ER, endoplasmic reticulum; P-450, cytochrome P-450; TMD, transmembrane domain; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; endo H, endoglycosidase H; GFP, green fluorescent protein; PTH, parathyroid hormone.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Rothman, J. E., and Orci, L. (1992) Nature 355, 409-415 |
| 2. | Martínez-Menárguez, J. A., Geuze, H. J., Slot, J. W., and Klumperman, J. (1999) Cell 98, 81-90 |
| 3. | Nishimura, N., and Balch, W. E. (1997) Science 277, 556-558 |
| 4. | Kuehn, M. J., Herrmann, J. M., and Schekman, R. (1998) Nature 391, 187-191 |
| 5. | Mellman, I., and Warren, G. (2000) Cell 100, 99-112 |
| 6. | Rothman, J. E., and Wieland, F. T. (1996) Science 272, 227-234 |
| 7. | Letourneur, F., and Cosson, P. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 33273-33278 |
| 8. | Rayner, J. C., and Pelham, H. R. (1997) EMBO J. 16, 1832-1841 |
| 9. | Bretscher, M. S., and Munro, S. (1993) Science 261, 1280-1281 |
| 10. | Munro, S. (1995) EMBO J. 14, 4695-4704 |
| 11. | Pedrazzini, E., Villa, A., and Borgese, N. (1996) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 93, 4207-4212 |
| 12. | Yang, M., Ellenberg, J., Bonifacino, J., and Weissman, A. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 1970-1975 |
| 13. | Reggiori, F., Black, M. W., and Pelham, H. R. (2000) Mol. Biol. Cell 11, 3737-3749 |
| 14. | Sato, M., Sato, K., and Nakano, A. (1996) J. Cell Biol. 134, 279-293 |
| 15. | Szczesna-Skorupa, E., and Kemper, B. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 19409-19415 |
| 16. | Cosson, P., and Letourneur, F. (1994) Science 263, 1629-1631 |
| 17. | Ohno, H., Stewart, J., Fournier, M. C., Bosshart, H., Rhee, I., Miyatake, S., Saito, T., Gallusser, A., Kirchhausen, T., and Bonifacino, J. S. (1995) Science 269, 1872-1875 |
| 18. | Honing, S., Sandoval, I. V., and von Figura, K. (1998) EMBO J. 17, 1304-1314 |
| 19. | Milland, J., Taylor, S. G., Dodson, H. C., McKenzie, I. F., and Sandrin, M. S. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 12012-12018 |
| 20. | Misumi, Y., Sohda, M., Tashiro, A., Sato, H., and Ikehara, Y. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 6867-6873 |
| 21. | Shenkman, M., Ayalon, M., and Lederkremer, G. Z. (1997) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 94, 11363-11368 |
| 22. | Szczesna-Skorupa, E., Chen, C., and Kemper, B. (2000) Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 374, 128-136 |
| 23. | Gaynor, E. C., te Heesen, S., Graham, T. R., Aebi, M., and Emr, S. D. (1994) J. Cell Biol. 127, 653-665 |
| 24. | Ivessa, N. E., De Lemos-Chiarandini, C., Tsao, Y. S., Takatsuki, A., Adesnik, M., Sabatini, D. D., and Kreibich, G. (1992) J. Cell Biol. 117, 949-958 |
| 25. | Szczesna-Skorupa, E., Chen, C., Rogers, S., and Kemper, B. (1998) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 95, 14793-14798 |
| 26. | Li, Y., Smith, T., Grabski, S., and DeWitt, D. L. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 29830-29837 |
| 27. | Szczesna-Skorupa, E., Ahn, K., Chen, C.-D., Doray, B., and Kemper, B. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 24327-24333 |
| 28. | Mead, D. A., Szczesna-Skorupa, E., and Kemper, B. (1986) Protein Eng. 1, 67-74 |
| 29. | Szczesna-Skorupa, E., and Kemper, B. (1993) J. Biol. Chem. 268, 1757-1762 |
| 30. | Nakamura, N., Lowe, M., Levine, T. P., Rabouille, C., and Warren, G. (1997) Cell 89, 445-455 |
| 31. | Kornfeld, R., and Kornfeld, S. (1985) Annu. Rev. Biochem. 54, 631-664 |
| 32. | Puertollano, R., and Alonso, M. A. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 12740-12745 |
| 33. | Mottola, G., Jourdan, N., Castaldo, G., Malagolini, N., Lahm, A., Serafini-Cessi, F., Migliaccio, G., and Bonatti, S. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 24070-24079 |
| 34. | Tolchinsky, S., Yuk, M. H., Ayalon, M., Lodish, H. F., and Lederkremer, G. Z. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 14496-14503 |
| 35. | Kuroki, K., Russnak, R., and Ganem, D. (1989) Mol. Cell. Biol. 9, 4459-4466 |
| 36. | Masaki, R., Yamamoto, A., and Tashiro, Y. (1994) J. Cell Biol. 126, 1407-1420 |
| 37. | Hoppe, H. C., and Joiner, K. A. (2000) Cell Microbiol. 2, 569-578 |
| 38. | Sato, T., Sakaguchi, M., Mihara, K., and Omura, T. (1990) EMBO J. 9, 2391-2397 |
| 39. | Shaw, A. S., Rottier, P. J., and Rose, J. K. (1988) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 85, 7592-7596 |
| 40. | Murakami, K., Mihara, K., and Omura, T. (1994) J. Biochem. (Tokyo) 116, 164-175 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. M. Cairns, L. S. Friedman, H. Lou, J. C. Whitbeck, M. S. Shaner, G. H. Cohen, and R. J. Eisenberg N-Terminal Mutants of Herpes Simplex Virus Type 2 gH Are Transported without gL but Require gL for Function J. Virol., May 15, 2007; 81(10): 5102 - 5111. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Ozalp, E. Szczesna-Skorupa, and B. Kemper BIMOLECULAR FLUORESCENCE COMPLEMENTATION ANALYSIS OF CYTOCHROME P450 2C2, 2E1, AND NADPH-CYTOCHROME P450 REDUCTASE MOLECULAR INTERACTIONS IN LIVING CELLS Drug Metab. Dispos., September 1, 2005; 33(9): 1382 - 1390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. V. Schepetilnikov, U. Manske, A. G. Solovyev, A. A. Zamyatnin Jr, J. Schiemann, and S. Yu. Morozov The hydrophobic segment of Potato virus X TGBp3 is a major determinant of the protein intracellular trafficking J. Gen. Virol., August 1, 2005; 86(8): 2379 - 2391. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Pottekat and A. K. Menon Subcellular Localization and Targeting of N-Acetylglucosaminyl Phosphatidylinositol De-N-acetylase, the Second Enzyme in the Glycosylphosphatidylinositol Biosynthetic Pathway J. Biol. Chem., April 16, 2004; 279(16): 15743 - 15751. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Szczesna-Skorupa, C.-D. Chen, H. Liu, and B. Kemper Gene Expression Changes Associated with the Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress Response Induced by Microsomal Cytochrome P450 Overproduction J. Biol. Chem., April 2, 2004; 279(14): 13953 - 13961. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Cotman, D. Jezek, K. F. Tacer, R. Frangez, and D. Rozman A Functional Cytochrome P450 Lanosterol 14{alpha}-Demethylase CYP51 Enzyme in the Acrosome: Transport through the Golgi and Synthesis of Meiosis-Activating Sterols Endocrinology, March 1, 2004; 145(3): 1419 - 1426. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Szczesna-Skorupa, B. Mallah, and B. Kemper Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer Analysis of Cytochromes P450 2C2 and 2E1 Molecular Interactions in Living Cells J. Biol. Chem., August 15, 2003; 278(33): 31269 - 31276. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| All ASBMB Journals | Molecular and Cellular Proteomics |
| Journal of Lipid Research | ASBMB Today |