![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 27, 24361-24367, July 5, 2002
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
,
¶
From the
Department of Microbiology, Boston
University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts 02118 and the
§ Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Queen's
University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada
Received for publication, March 6, 2002, and in revised form, April 18, 2002
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The cellular chaperone Hsp90 has been shown to
associate with the reverse transcriptase (RT) of the duck hepatitis B
virus and is required for RT functions. However, the molecular basis for the specific interaction between the RT and Hsp90 remains unknown.
Comparison of protein compositional properties suggests that the RT is
highly related to the protein kinase c-Raf, which interacts with Hsp90
via the cochaperone p50 (CDC37). We tested whether the RT, like c-Raf,
is specifically recognized by p50. Immunoprecipitation and pull-down
assays showed that p50 or p50 Reverse transcription in hepadnaviruses (hepatitis B viruses) is
carried out by a novel virally encoded reverse transcriptase (RT)1 (1, 2). The RT is able
to initiate DNA synthesis de novo using a specific tyrosine
residue located within its N-terminal domain (the terminal protein
(TP)) as a protein primer (Refs. 3-6; for a recent review, see Ref.
7). This protein priming reaction requires the interaction between the
RT and a specific RNA signal (termed Using the duck hepatitis B virus (DHBV) as a model system, we have
recently found that the RT requires the assistance of host cell factors
to carry out specific Hsp90 target proteins range from steroid receptors and protein kinases
to reverse transcriptase (19, 20, 22). These proteins do not share any
obvious structural or functional similarities. Hence, one of the most
enigmatic, unresolved questions about Hsp90 is how the chaperone can
recognize specifically such a diverse group of substrates. In our
efforts to understand the molecular basis for the interaction between
the Hsp90 complex and the viral RT, we searched the data base for Hsp90
target proteins that might share sequence and/or structural properties
with the RT. For this purpose, we used a recently described sequence
analysis program called protein property search or PropSearch (23),
which was designed to detect weak structural and/or functional protein
homologs that cannot be detected using conventional sequence
alignment tools. PropSearch defines protein similarities not through
sequence alignment, but as a weighted sum of compositional properties
such as singlet and doublet amino acid compositions. By these criteria, we found that the RT is highly related to the serine/threonine protein
kinase c-Raf.
The protein kinase c-Raf and a selected group of several other
serine/threonine and tyrosine-protein kinases (e.g. CDK4 and v-Src) are known to be Hsp90 target proteins, requiring the chaperone for their intracellular trafficking, assembly, and maturation (24, 25).
An Hsp90 cofactor called p50 (or CDC37) binds specifically to these
kinases and to Hsp90 and is thought to be a "kinase-specific subunit" of a particular subset of Hsp90 complexes that targets Hsp90
to the kinase substrates by acting as a bridge between the kinases and
Hsp90 (26-28). In light of these results, we decided to examine
whether p50/CDC37 plays a role in the functions of the hepadnavirus RT,
as suggested by the similarity between the RT and the protein kinases.
Herein, we report that p50/CDC37 could indeed specifically interact
with the RT in vitro and in vivo. The functional
significance of this interaction was underscored by the fact that
p50/CDC37 was able to modulate RT functions, as determined by measuring
its protein priming activity in vitro and RNA packaging and
DNA synthesis activities in transfected cells. These results thus
indicate that p50/CDC37 is a host cell cofactor for hepadnavirus
replication and may play a more general role in Hsp90 chaperone
function than originally proposed.
Plasmids--
Plasmid pHTP was used for in vitro
expression of the full-length DHBV RT (6). Plasmids expressing the DHBV
mini-RT proteins, pcDNA-MiniRT1 and pcDNA-MiniRT2 (for in
vitro and mammalian cell expression) and pGST-MiniRT1 and
pGST-MiniRT2 (for bacterial expression of glutathione
S-transferase (GST) fusion proteins) have been described
before (29). pSP-c-Raf directs the in vitro expression of
the human c-raf gene under the control of
the SP6 promoter in the pSP64polyA vector (Promega) and was kindly
provided by Zhijun Luo (Boston Medical Center). pGST-p50 and
pGST-p50 Antibodies--
The monoclonal antibody (mAb) against p23 (clone
JJ3) was generously provided by David Toft (Mayo Clinic) (34), and the anti-p50 mAb (clone C1) by Gary Perdew (30). The anti-Hsp90 mAb (clone
16F1) was purchased from Stressgen Biotech Corp., and the anti-FLAG mAb
(clone M2) from Sigma. Anti-HA mAb HA.11 (clone 16B12) was purchased
from BAbCO (Berkeley Antibody). The polyclonal rabbit antibody
against the DHBV core antigen was kindly provided by William Mason (Fox
Chase Cancer Center) (35). The anti-DHBV RT TP domain antibodies were
kindly provided by John Tavis (St. Louis University) (36).
In Vitro Transcription and Translation--
RNAs used for
in vitro translation were transcribed from linearized
plasmids using an in vitro transcription kit (MEGAscript, Ambion) and were purified as described previously (16, 29). Purified
RNAs were then translated using the rabbit reticulocyte lysate in
vitro translation system (Promega). Protein expression in the
coupled transcription and translation reaction using the TnT rabbit
reticulocyte lysate system (Promega) was carried out according to the
manufacturer's instructions.
In Vitro Protein Priming--
Approximately 10 ng of purified
GST-MiniRT proteins were used in an in vitro protein priming
reaction in a total volume of 10 µl as described previously (29).
Rabbit reticulocyte lysate (nuclease-treated; Promega) supplemented
with an ATP regenerating system (5 mM ATP, 10 mM creatine phosphate, and 50 µg/ml creatine phosphokinase) was used to reconstitute the RT protein priming activity
as described (29). In all reactions, [ Protein Expression and Purification--
Two truncated minimal
DHBV RT fusion proteins (GST-MiniRT1 and GST-MiniRT2) were expressed in
Escherichia coli and purified as described (29). FLAG
epitope-tagged p50 and p50 Protein-Protein Interactions--
Full-length DHBV RT and
truncation mutants (labeled by in vitro translation using
the reticulocyte lysate in the presence of
[35S]methionine) were diluted with lysis buffer (50 mM Tris (pH 8.0), 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM
EDTA, and 0.5% Nonidet P-40) and incubated with p50 or p50
To assess p50-RT interaction in cultured cells, pcDNA-MiniRT1 and
pcDNA-MiniRT2 were cotransfected with pGST-p50 or pGST-p50 Analysis of Viral DNA, RNA, and Proteins--
The human
embryonic kidney cell line 293T and the monkey kidney cell line COS-1
were transfected with pCMV-DHBV, pCMV-
Encapsidated pgRNA in cytoplasmic core particles obtained by
polyethylene glycol precipitation (38) was detected by resolving the
capsid particles on agarose gels followed by Southern blot analysis
using a 32P-labeled antisense riboprobe (spanning
nucleotides 143-391 on the DHBV genome) (16) as described (39). The
amount of assembled capsid particles was determined by subsequent
reprobing of the same membrane using the anti-DHBV core antibody. To
measure the steady-state levels of total DHBV core protein in the
transfected cells, a portion of the cytoplasmic extract used for core
DNA isolation was analyzed by SDS-PAGE and Western blotting using the
anti-DHBV core antibody.
Similarity between the DHBV RT and c-Raf in Compositional
Properties as Detected by PropSearch--
Because conventional
sequence alignment methods have not revealed any similarity between the
hepadnavirus RT and other Hsp90 target proteins, we attempted to
determine whether the RT is related to any other known Hsp90 target
proteins using an alternative sequence comparison method called
PropSearch (23). PropSearch defines protein similarities not through
sequence alignment, but as a weighted sum of compositional properties
(a total of 144 parameters), including singlet and doublet amino acid
composition and isoelectric point, and has been shown to detect weak
structural and/or functional protein homologs that escaped detection by
conventional sequence alignment tools.
A strong similarity in amino acid composition between the RT and c-Raf
(kraf), a protein kinase target of Hsp90, was detected by
PropSearch (Table I and additional
search results not shown). In fact, the similarity between the RT and
c-Raf proteins (Table I, ranks 7, 8, and 11) was judged to be stronger
than that between the RT and other reverse transcriptases from other
retroelements (rank 14) and just below that between the DHBV RT and
other hepadnavirus RTs (ranks 1-5). It is not yet known whether the
other proteins listed in Table I are Hsp90 targets or not. However, the
strong similarity between the RT and c-Raf raised the intriguing
possibility that the RT, like c-Raf, may be targeted to the Hsp90
chaperone via p50/CDC37, an Hsp90 cofactor known to be responsible for
targeting the kinase substrates to the chaperone.
Association between the RT and p50 in Vitro--
To determine
whether the RT could associate with p50 specifically, we expressed the
35S-labeled DHBV RT by in vitro translation in
the rabbit reticulocyte lysate, in which an active DHBV RT can be
expressed (4) and is associated with Hsp90 and one of the cochaperones,
p23 (16, 17). The labeled RT proteins were then co-immunoprecipitated with purified FLAG-tagged p50 pre-bound to antibody affinity beads. Bound proteins were detected by SDS-PAGE and autoradiography. As shown
in Fig. 1A, the RT could be
co-immunoprecipitated by the p50 beads (lane 1), similar to
c-Raf (lane 4), which was used as a positive control. The
negative control (in vitro translated luciferase) was not
precipitated by the p50 beads (Fig. 1A, lane 7).
As p50 is known to bind to Hsp90 (Fig. 1B, lanes
1, 4, and 7) (27, 40), as does the RT (16),
it was possible that the RT was associated with p50 via Hsp90.
To test whether p50 could associate with the RT independently of Hsp90,
a p50 mutant (p50
To determine whether the RT could bind directly to p50, as c-Raf does
(27, 41), purified GST-MiniRT proteins expressed in bacteria were
incubated with purified p50 proteins pre-bound to mAb M2 beads. We
found that both GST-MiniRT1 and GST-MiniRT2 (but not GST alone) could
bind directly to purified p50 and p50 Association between the RT and p50 in Vivo--
To determine
whether the RT could associate with p50 in the cell, we coexpressed
functional mini-RT proteins (29) together with GST-tagged p50 in 293T
cells, which can be transfected efficiently. As shown in Fig.
3 (lanes 13-18), GST-tagged
p50
To further assess the association of the RT with p50 (and other
cellular proteins) in the cell, we expressed the GST-MiniRT proteins in
293T cells. The tagged mini-RT proteins were purified by GSH beads, and
RT-associated proteins in the GSH eluate were detected by Western blot
analysis using specific antibodies against various cellular proteins.
As GST-MiniRT1 was rapidly degraded in the transfected cells, it
was difficult to purify significant amounts of MiniRT1 for this
purpose. However, we found that GST-MiniRT2 was significantly more
stable, and substantial amounts of GST-MiniRT2 could be purified (Fig.
4, fourth panel). When a
FLAG-tagged p50 protein was coexpressed with GST-MiniRT2 in 293T cells,
the overexpressed exogenous p50-FLAG protein was associated with the
MiniRT2 protein (Fig. 4, second panel). The association
between the mini-RT protein and endogenous p50 was also detectable in
some experiments (data not shown). In addition, we could consistently
detect the association between GST-MiniRT1 and endogenous Hsp90 and
another cochaperone, p23 (Fig. 4, first and third
panels). We noticed that in some experiments, the amount of p23 in
association with the RT seemed to be decreased when p50-FLAG was
overexpressed (Fig. 4, third panel, lane 1).
In summary, we demonstrated that the RT could associate with several
components of the Hsp90 complex, including Hsp90, p50, and p23 in
vivo. Furthermore, we found that the association between the RT
and p50 in vivo, as in vitro, was independent of Hsp90.
Inhibition of in Vitro RT Activation by p50 Increase in Viral Replication by p50 and Decrease by p50
To understand the mechanism of p50 effect on viral DNA synthesis in the
cell, we determined the levels of viral pgRNA packaged into the
nucleocapsids. Because pgRNA packaging in hepadnaviruses depends on RT
function, we predicted that p50, through its effect on the RT, may be
required for efficient pgRNA packaging. The preferential effect of p50
and p50 In our attempt to understand the molecular basis for the
interaction between the hepadnavirus RT and the host cell Hsp90
chaperone complex, we have now obtained in vitro and
in vivo evidence for a specific interaction between the RT
and one of the known Hsp90 cofactors, p50/CDC37. This study was
initially inspired by the intriguing data base search result suggesting
a close relationship between the RT and the protein kinase c-Raf, as
judged by their amino acid compositional properties (PropSearch) (23).
As p50 is thought to bind specifically to both Hsp90 and c-Raf (and
several other Hsp90 kinase substrates) and thus target the chaperone to the kinase substrates, this result prompted us to test whether p50
might also help to target the RT to Hsp90. We have shown here that p50
could bind to the RT in vitro and in vivo
independently of Hsp90. Indeed, the RT and p50 could interact directly,
at least in vitro. In addition, the in vitro
protein priming activity of the RT was inhibited by a dominant-negative
inhibitor of p50, p50 It is not yet known how p50 recognizes the different protein kinases or
the viral RT. As the PropSearch program indicated that the RT and c-Raf
are highly related in their amino acid composition (but apparently not
by sequence alignment), it is possible that this similarity in
composition may in turn dictate certain common folding characteristics
(pathways) or folding intermediates that are recognized by p50.
Interestingly, the same program also identified other classes of Hsp90
substrates, including certain steroid hormone receptors, as related to
the RT and c-Raf. Although p50 was originally thought to be a
kinase-specific subunit of the Hsp90 complex (26), more recent
results suggest that this may not be entirely the case, as other
classes of Hsp90 target proteins, including some steroid receptors, may
also interact with p50 (42-44). Furthermore, p50 has been found to be
present in Hsp90 complexes together with other cochaperones which had
been previously thought to be irrelevant for kinase functions (45, 46)
but have since been found to associate with at least some kinase
substrates and to be required for their functions (47, 48). Our results
are therefore consistent with the emerging notion that p50 may not be a
dedicated Hsp90 cofactor specific for the kinase substrates, as
originally envisioned, but rather functions as a more general
cochaperone interacting with a variety of different Hsp90 target
proteins. This concept is also supported by the failure, so far, to
identify any "dedicated" cochaperones that would target the Hsp90
complex to its increasingly wide array of substrates (19, 20), except
for the kinases. Furthermore, genetic experiments in yeast have
suggested that Hsp90 folds structurally very different target proteins
(e.g. glucocorticoid receptor and v-Src) by a similar
mechanism and uses a comparable set of cochaperones (49, 50). If,
indeed, no specific targeting factors are responsible for the
interaction between the Hsp90 chaperone and its diverse substrates, the
challenge now will be to identify the common properties that have to be shared among these different substrates and that are recognized by the
chaperone. Whatever these properties turn out to be, it appears that
both the TP and RT domains of the hepadnavirus RT may share some of
these properties, as each of them could independently associate with
p50 (Fig. 3) (data not shown) and Hsp90 (29).
The functional importance of p50-RT association in RT activity and
viral replication was supported by both in vitro and
in vivo experiments. In vitro, a
dominant-negative inhibitor of p50 (p50 Because p50
C, a p50 mutant defective in Hsp90
binding, could interact specifically with the RT both in
vitro and in vivo, indicating that p50 can bind the
RT independently of Hsp90. Furthermore, purified p50 and p50
C
interacted directly with purified RT. The importance of p50-RT
interaction for RT functions was underscored by 1) inhibition of
protein-primed initiation of reverse transcription by p50
C in
vitro and 2) stimulation of viral DNA replication and RNA
packaging by p50 and their inhibition by p50
C in transfected cells.
These results suggest that p50 can function as a cellular cofactor for the hepadnavirus RT by mediating the interaction between the RT and Hsp90.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
) located on the viral
pregenomic RNA (pgRNA; the template for reverse transcription) (8, 9).
The
RNA is used as a specific template for protein priming (and
thus, the origin of reverse transcription) (Refs. 9-11; for a recent review, see Ref. 12). In addition,
serves as the RNA packaging signal (13, 14) and directs, through its interaction with the RT, the
selective encapsidation of both the pgRNA and the RT into viral
nucleocapsids (8, 15). Therefore, the specific interaction between the
RT and
triggers two essential early steps in hepadnavirus assembly
and replication, i.e. the protein-primed initiation of
reverse transcription and the assembly of replication-competent nucleocapsids.
binding and protein priming functions (16,
17). One such cellular factor is the 90-kDa heat shock protein (Hsp90).
Hsp90 associates with the DHBV RT and is required for RT-
interaction and protein priming in vitro and for pgRNA
packaging and DNA synthesis in vivo. Hsp90 is thought to
facilitate the functions of a specific subset of cellular proteins (the
target or substrate proteins) by helping to establish and maintain
certain poised but labile conformations of these target proteins
through a dynamic multistage process (18-22). In so doing, Hsp90
invariably collaborates with other factors (the so-called cochaperones
or cofactors) and forms various multicomponent chaperone complexes. The
precise composition of the Hsp90 chaperone complexes seems to vary
depending upon the nature of the target proteins and the stage of the
chaperoning process.
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
C were constructed in a modified pEBG vector and direct the
expression of p50/CDC37 and C-terminally truncated p50,
respectively, in mammalian cells (27). pEBG-MiniRT1 and
pEBG-MiniRT2 were constructed by substituting the GST-MiniRT1 and
GST-MiniRT2 cassettes from pGST-MiniRT1 and pGST-MiniRT2, respectively,
for the GST-p50 sequences in pGST-p50 and were used to express the
GST-MiniRT fusion proteins in mammalian cells. All RT and mini-RT
proteins were tagged with a synthetic hemagglutinin (HA) epitope
inserted into the spacer domain. p50-FLAG, which directs the expression
of FLAG epitope-tagged p50 under the control of the cytomegalovirus
immediate-early promoter/enhancer, was kindly provided by Gary Perdew
(Pennsylvania State University) (30). pCMV-DHBV, which directs the
expression of the DHBV pgRNA under the control of the cytomegalovirus
promoter, and its derivative pCMV-YMHA, which harbors two amino acid
substitutions in the RT active site abolishing polymerase activity,
have been described (31-33). pCMV-
XM(core) was derived from
pCMV-DHBV by removing the DHBV sequences from the unique
XhoI site (nucleotide 1217) to the MscI site
(nucleotide 2375), abolishing the expression of the RT and viral
envelope proteins, but retaining core protein expression.
-32P]dATP was
used as the labeled nucleotide.
C were purified from recombinant
baculovirus-infected insect cells by immunoaffinity chromatography
using agarose-cross-linked mAb M2 (Eastman Kodak Co.) as described
(27).
C
pre-bound to the mAb M2-agarose beads. The unbound material was removed
by extensive washing with lysis buffer, and the immunoprecipitates were
then resolved by SDS-PAGE. Total proteins were detected by Coomassie
Blue staining, and the labeled proteins by autoradiography. To detect
direct binding between the RT and p50, purified GST-MiniRT proteins
from bacteria were incubated with the FLAG-tagged p50- or
p50
C-bound mAb M2 immunoaffinity beads in lysis buffer, and
unbound proteins were removed after extensive washing with lysis
buffer. The RT proteins bound to the beads were detected by Western
blot analysis using the anti-HA mAb following resolution of the
immunoprecipitates by SDS-PAGE.
C into
293T or COS-1 cells. The transfected cells were lysed in lysis buffer 3 days after transfection, and the p50 proteins were purified by
GSH-agarose beads. The mini-RT proteins bound to the p50 proteins were
eluted by GSH and detected by resolving the purified proteins by
SDS-PAGE and Western blot analysis using either the anti-HA mAb or mAbs
against the TP domains. In addition, the GST-MiniRT proteins were
coexpressed using pEBG-MiniRT1 and pEBG-MiniRT2 in 293T or COS-1 cells
together with FLAG-tagged p50. The GST-MiniRT fusion proteins were then
purified by GSH beads and eluted by GSH. Proteins associated with the
RT were detected by SDS-PAGE and Western blot analysis.
XM(core), or pCMV-YMHA
together with a p50 expression construct (pGST-p50 or pGST-p50
C) or
the vector alone (pEBG or GST) using the calcium phosphate (5 Prime
3 Prime, Inc.) procedure (16). Transfected cells were harvested 3 days
after transfection. Replicative viral DNA intermediates were purified
from cytoplasmic core particles and analyzed by Southern blot analysis
as described (16, 37).
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
Top 20 candidate proteins related to the DHBV RT as identified by
PropSearch
C) with its C-terminal Hsp90-binding domain
deleted, and thus unable to bind Hsp90 (Fig. 1B, lanes
2, 5, and 8) (27), was used to precipitate
the RT. We found that p50
C could also associate with the RT (Fig.
1A, lane 2) as well as c-Raf (lane 5),
indicating that the interaction between p50 and the RT (like c-Raf)
(27) is independent of its association with Hsp90. Interestingly,
p50
C seemed to bind even more in vitro translated RT
proteins than wild-type p50, which was also the case when they were
coexpressed in cultured cells (see Fig. 3 below).

View larger version (36K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Association of in vitro
translated DHBV RT with p50 and
p50
C. The DHBV RT (RT) was
translated in the rabbit reticulocyte lysate supplemented with
[35S]methionine. The 35S-labeled RT protein
was then incubated with purified FLAG-tagged p50 (p50FLAG)
or p50
C (p50
CFLAG) pre-bound to mAb M2-agarose beads.
Control beads were protein G-agarose beads with pre-bound nonimmune
mouse IgG. 35S-Labeled c-Raf (Raf) and
luciferase (Lucif) were also translated and used as positive
and negative controls, respectively, for the binding reaction. Bound
proteins were eluted by boiling in SDS sample buffer and resolved by
SDS-PAGE. 35S-Labeled proteins were then detected by
autoradiography (A, lanes 1-9), and total
proteins by Coomassie blue staining (B). Note the presence
of Hsp90 in the p50 (but not p50
C) immunoprecipitates
(IP) in the Coomassie blue-stained gel (B).
Lanes 10-12 in A show the translation reactions
used for the binding reaction (Input). IgH and
IgL, immunoglobulin heavy and light chains, respectively.
Note that the control antibody Ig heavy chain migrated faster than the
mAb M2 Ig heavy chain and comigrated with p50-FLAG.
C (Fig.
2) (data not shown). Therefore, these
results showed that the DHBV RT could directly associate with p50
in vitro, independently of Hsp90 or any other cellular
factors.

View larger version (29K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Association of purified mini-RT proteins with
purified p50 and p50
C. GST-MiniRT1 and
GST-MiniRT2 purified from bacteria were incubated with p50-FLAG-bound
(A) or p50
C-FLAG-bound (B) mAb M2-agarose
beads or control beads. Bound proteins were eluted in SDS sample buffer
and resolved by SDS-PAGE. Total proteins were then detected by
Coomassie blue staining (upper panels), and the mini-RT
proteins by Western blot analysis (lower panels) using the
anti-HA mAb against the HA epitope inserted into the mini-RT proteins.
IP, immunoprecipitates; IgH and IgL,
immunoglobulin heavy and light chains, respectively. Note that the
control antibody Ig heavy chain migrated faster than the mAb M2 Ig
heavy chain and comigrated with p50-FLAG.
C proteins specifically pulled down the mini-RT proteins
expressed in 293T cells. (Similar results were also obtained using COS
cells (data not shown).) In addition to the intact mini-RT proteins, we
noticed that a major degradation product derived from both mini-RT
proteins was also pulled down by p50
C. This degradation product
reacted with both the anti-HA mAb (Fig. 3A) and several
antibodies (both monoclonal and polyclonal) against the TP domain (data
not shown), indicating that it represented the TP fragment with some
residual sequences from the spacer region where the HA epitope was
inserted. On the other hand, the binding of the RT to wild-type p50
seemed to be weaker and more variable (Fig. 3) (data not shown). In
addition, we noticed that p50
C (but not p50) was predominantly
localized to the detergent-insoluble fraction and shifted a significant amount of the mini-RT proteins and the TP fragment into this fraction (Fig. 3, lanes 7-12). As p50
C (unlike p50) could not
associate with Hsp90 (Fig. 3B, lanes 13-18),
these results indicated that the mini-RT proteins and the TP domain
could associate with p50 in vivo independently of Hsp90.

View larger version (44K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Association of mini-RT proteins with p50 and
p50
C in cells. pcDNA-MiniRT1 and
pcDNA-MiniRT2 were transfected into 293T cells together with
pGST-p50, pGST-p50
C, or pGST (as a vector control). Transfected
cells were then lysed in lysis buffer. Insoluble materials were removed
by pelleting in a microcentrifuge. The supernatant (soluble fraction)
was incubated with GSH beads to pull down GST-p50, GST-p50
C, or GST
alone. Bound proteins were eluted with GSH (eluate). The soluble
(lanes 1-6), insoluble (lanes 7-12), and eluate
(lanes 13-18) materials were resolved by SDS-PAGE and
detected by Western blot analysis using the anti-HA mAb against the HA
epitope inserted into the mini-RT proteins (A) or by
Coomassie blue staining (B). The intact MiniRT1 and MiniRT2
proteins and the degradation product containing the TP domain are
indicated in A. In B, the arrowheads
denote GST-p50 (lanes 3, 6, 9,
12, 15, and 18), GST-p50
C
(lanes 2, 5, 8, 11,
14, and 17), and GST (lanes 1,
4, 13, and 16). p50-associated Hsp90
evident in lanes 15 and 18 is also
indicated.

View larger version (35K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Association of Hsp90, p23, and p50 with the
mini-RT protein. Plasmid DNA expressing GST-MiniRT2 or GST alone
was transfected into 293T cells together with p50-FLAG or a vector
control (pcDNA3). Transfected cells were lysed in lysis buffer, and
soluble materials were incubated with GSH beads. Bound materials were
eluted with GSH, resolved by SDS-PAGE, and detected by Western blot
analysis using anti-Hsp90 (first panel), anti-p50
(second panel), and p23 (third panel) mAbs or by
Coomassie blue staining (fourth panel). Hsp90, p50-FLAG,
p23, GST-MiniRT2, and GST are indicated. The asterisk
denotes a nonspecific band associated with the GSH beads.
C--
To determine
whether p50 plays a role in the functions of the RT, we measured the
protein priming activity of purified GST-MiniRT1 from bacteria using
our recently established in vitro reconstitution assay (29).
When the purified mini-RT protein was incubated with the reticulocyte
lysate, it was activated for in vitro priming (Fig.
5, lanes 1 and 2)
(29). The addition of increasing amounts of p50
C led to a
progressive inhibition of protein priming (Fig. 5, lanes 3 and 4). On the other hand, the addition of wild-type p50 to
the priming reaction had little or no effect (Fig. 5, lanes 5 and 6) (data not shown). As p50
C is known to be a
dominant-negative inhibitor of p50 function (27), these results
suggested that p50 function was important for protein priming, but was
not limiting under these in vitro conditions. On the other
hand, they could not exclude the possibility that the inhibitory effect
of p50
C on RT activation was simply due to the sequestration of the
RT away from the Hsp90 chaperone by p50
C.

View larger version (92K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Inhibition of the protein priming activity of
the RT by p50
C. GST-MiniRT1 purified from
bacteria was tested for in vitro protein priming activity in
presence of purified p50 (200 and 400 ng) (lanes 5 and
6), p50
C (200 and 400 ng) (lanes 3 and
4), or buffer alone (lanes 1 and 2).
All reactions were supplemented with reticulocyte lysate (1 µl),
which is required to activate the RT. The 32P-labeled
mini-RT protein was then resolved by SDS-PAGE and detected by
autoradiography.
C in
Vivo--
To obtain evidence for a role of p50 in RT function and in
viral replication in vivo, we transfected
replication-competent DHBV DNA into 293T cells together with p50
expression plasmids. As shown in Fig. 6,
the overexpression of p50 led to a significant increase in viral DNA
synthesis, whereas the dominant-negative mutant (p50
C) showed just
the opposite effect and decreased viral replication. The stimulatory
and inhibitory effects of p50 and p50
C, respectively, were
particularly evident on the replicative viral single-stranded DNA
intermediates (Fig. 6A). Although the effects of p50 and
p50
C on viral DNA synthesis were modest (~3-fold increase by p50
and 3-fold decrease by p50
C), the opposing effects of p50 and its
dominant-negative inhibitor (p50
C) clearly demonstrated that p50
plays a role in viral DNA replication.

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Activation of DHBV replication by p50 and
inhibition by p50
C. Replication-competent
DHBV DNA was transfected into 293T cells together with pGST-p50
(lane 3), pGST-p50
C (lane 2), or pGST
(lane 1). Transfected cells were lysed, and viral DNA was
extracted from cytoplasmic core particles and analyzed by Southern blot
analysis (A, upper panel). Viral core protein
levels were determined by Western blot analysis using a rabbit
antiserum against the DHBV core protein (A, lower
panel). The replicative viral DNA intermediates, including the
relaxed circular (RC) and single-stranded (SS)
DNAs, and viral core protein are indicated. IC, an internal
control DHBV plasmid added during viral DNA extraction for
normalization of extraction efficiency. Viral DNA levels were
quantified by phosphorimaging and normalized to viral core protein
levels. The normalized viral DNA replication levels are shown in
B.
C on the single-stranded DNA intermediate (rather than the
mature relaxed circular DNA) (Fig. 6A) also suggested that
they might have affected pgRNA packaging. Using a native agarose gel
assay of nucleocapsid assembly and RNA packaging (39), we could indeed
show that the overexpression of p50 led to a stimulation of pgRNA
packaging, whereas the expression of the dominant-negative mutant
(p50
C) had just the opposite effect and inhibited pgRNA packaging
(Fig. 7).

View larger version (20K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Stimulation of viral RNA packaging by p50 and
inhibition by p50
C. The
replication-incompetent DHBV construct YMHA, which harbors two amino
acid substitutions in the RT active site abolishing viral DNA
synthesis, but still allowing pgRNA packaging, was transfected into
293T cells together with pGST-p50 (lane 1), pGST-p50
C
(lane 2), or pGST (lane 3). A negative control
plasmid expressing only the DHBV core protein (thus, no pgRNA packing
was possible) was also transfected into 293T cells together with
pGST-p50 (lane 4). Viral nucleocapsids harvested from
transfected cells were resolved on a native agarose gel and transferred
to nylon membrane. pgRNA packaged in the nucleocapsids was then
detected by Southern blot analysis using an antisense DHBV riboprobe
(see "Experimental Procedures" for details) (A,
upper panel), and the viral capsid was detected by
subsequent reprobing of the same membrane by Western blot analysis
using a rabbit antiserum against the DHBV core protein (lower
panel). pgRNA packaged in nucleocapsids was quantified by
phosphorimaging and normalized to viral core protein levels. The
normalized viral RNA packaging efficiencies are shown in
B.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
C. Furthermore, both viral DNA synthesis and
RNA packaging in vivo were stimulated by p50 and inhibited
by p50
C.
C) decreased reconstitution
of protein priming activity by the reticulocyte lysate, suggesting that
endogenous p50 present in the reticulocyte lysate played a positive
role in RT reconstitution. Furthermore, the overexpression of p50
stimulated viral RNA packaging and DNA synthesis in transfected cells,
whereas p50
C, a dominant-negative inhibitor of p50 function,
inhibited viral RNA packaging and DNA replication. These results thus
strongly support a role for p50 in viral replication in
vivo. Recently, we have developed a defined reconstitution system
whereby five purified components of the Hsp90 complex, i.e.
Hsp90, Hsp70, Hsp40, p60/Hop, and p23, are sufficient to partially
reconstitute a functional mini-RT protein (51). Preliminary results so
far suggest that p50 does not appear to further enhance the activity of
the RT in this defined in vitro reconstitution
system.2 These results may
suggest that p50 is required only for RT functions under the more
physiological conditions either in the complex mixture of the cell
lysate or in the living cell, e.g. by helping to target the
RT to the Hsp90 complex. In the defined reconstitution system using
purified factors, the requirement for p50 may be bypassed when the RT
and the Hsp90 chaperone system are brought together under the selected
in vitro conditions. However, other interpretations are
possible, and we are currently investigating conditions under which p50
may play a role in RT functions also in this defined system.
C could still bind the RT, but not Hsp90, it probably
inhibited RT activation by sequestering the RT away from the Hsp90
complex. In fact, we found that p50
C could bind to the RT more
strongly compared with p50 and shifted most of the RT into a
detergent-insoluble fraction in the cell. Although the nature of the
detergent-insoluble compartment in the cell to which the RT was shifted
remains to be characterized, other Hsp90 target proteins have also been
shown to partition to detergent-insoluble fractions when the chaperone
function is impaired (52). The finding that p50
C associated with the
RT more strongly compared with p50 also suggests that p50 may only
transiently associate with the RT: it helps to bring the RT to Hsp90
and then dissociates from the RT. In this scenario, p50
C would
remain bound to the RT because it cannot "transfer" the RT to
Hsp90. The dynamics of chaperone-RT association in the cell are still
unknown. Steroid receptors have been shown to associate with several
different Hsp90 subcomplexes (each with a different cochaperone
complement) along the maturation pathway (53, 54). It is possible that the RT may also undergo a similar pathway of conformational
maturation/activation. Preliminary results presented here showing that
the overexpression of p50 appears to decrease the association of
another cochaperone (p23) with the RT are consistent with this
suggestion. Additional work will be necessary to elucidate the
intricate and dynamic pathway of RT activation by the Hsp90 chaperone complex.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We thank Minhua Luo and Dana Anselmo for technical assistance during the initial stage of this work. We thank C. Seeger, G. Viglianti, and R. Corley for comments on and suggestions for the manuscript. We are grateful to the following people for providing reagents: Gary Perdew for the anti-p50 mAb, David Toft for the anti-p23 mAb, William Mason for the anti-DHBV core antibody, and John Tavis for the anti-DHBV RT TP domain antibody.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported in part by United States Public Health Service Grant R01 AI43453, a New Investigator Award of the Medical Foundation from the Harcourt General Charitable Foundation, and the American Liver Foundation (all to J. H.).The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
¶ Harcourt General Researcher and recipient of an American Liver Foundation Liver Scholar Award. To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Microbiology, Boston University School of Medicine, Rm. R516, 80 E. Concord St., Boston, MA 02118. Tel.: 617-638-4982; Fax: 617-638-4286; E-mail: jmhu@bu.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, May 1, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M202198200
2 X. Wang and J. Hu, unpublished data.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: RT, reverse transcriptase; TP, terminal protein; pgRNA, pregenomic RNA; DHBV, duck hepatitis B virus; Hsp, heat shock protein; GST, glutathione S-transferase; HA, hemagglutinin; mAb, monoclonal antibody.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Seeger, C.,
and Mason, W. S.
(2000)
Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.
64,
51-68 |
| 2. | Summers, J., and Mason, W. S. (1982) Cell 29, 403-415[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 3. | Lanford, R. E., Notvall, L., and Beames, B. (1995) J. Virol. 69, 4431-4439[Abstract] |
| 4. | Wang, G. H., and Seeger, C. (1992) Cell 71, 663-670[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 5. |
Weber, M.,
Bronsema, V.,
Bartos, H.,
Bosserhoff, A.,
Bartenschlager, R.,
and Schaller, H.
(1994)
J. Virol.
68,
2994-2999 |
| 6. |
Zoulim, F.,
and Seeger, C.
(1994)
J. Virol.
68,
6-13 |
| 7. | Hu, J., and Seeger, C. (1996) Methods Enzymol. 275, 195-208[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 8. |
Pollack, J. R.,
and Ganem, D.
(1994)
J. Virol.
68,
5579-5587 |
| 9. |
Wang, G. H.,
Zoulim, F.,
Leber, E. H.,
Kitson, J.,
and Seeger, C.
(1994)
J. Virol.
68,
8437-8442 |
| 10. |
Wang, G. H.,
and Seeger, C.
(1993)
J. Virol.
67,
6507-6512 |
| 11. | Nassal, M., and Rieger, A. (1996) J. Virol. 70, 2764-2773[Abstract] |
| 12. | Hu, J., and Seeger, C. (1997) Semin. Virol. 8, 205-211[CrossRef] |
| 13. |
Hirsch, R. C.,
Loeb, D. D.,
Pollack, J. R.,
and Ganem, D.
(1991)
J. Virol.
65,
3309-3316 |
| 14. | Junker-Niepmann, M., Bartenschlager, R., and Schaller, H. (1990) EMBO J. 9, 3389-3396[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 15. | Bartenschlager, R., and Schaller, H. (1992) EMBO J. 11, 3413-3420[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 16. |
Hu, J.,
and Seeger, C.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
1060-1064 |
| 17. | Hu, J., Toft, D. O., and Seeger, C. (1997) EMBO J. 16, 59-68[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 18. |
Bohen, S.,
Kralli, A.,
and Yamamoto, K.
(1995)
Science
268,
1303-1304 |
| 19. | Buchner, J. (1999) Trends Biochem. Sci. 24, 136-141[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 20. | Pearl, L. H., and Prodromou, C. (2000) Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 10, 46-51[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 21. | Toft, D. (1998) Trends Endocrinol. Metab. 9, 238-243[CrossRef] |
| 22. |
Young, J. C.,
Moarefi, I.,
and Hartl, F. U.
(2001)
J. Cell Biol.
154,
267-274 |
| 23. | Hobohm, U., and Sander, C. (1995) J. Mol. Biol. 251, 390-399[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 24. |
Wartmann, M.,
and Davis, R.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
6695-6701 |
| 25. | van der Straten, A., Rommel, C., Dickson, B., and Hafen, E. (1997) EMBO J. 16, 1961-1969[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 26. |
Stepanova, L.,
Leng, X.,
Parker, S.,
and Harper, J.
(1996)
Genes Dev.
10,
1491-1502 |
| 27. |
Grammatikakis, N.,
Lin, J. H.,
Grammatikakis, A.,
Tsichlis, P. N.,
and Cochran, B. H.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
1661-1672 |
| 28. | Hunter, T., and Poon, R. (1997) Trends Cell Biol. 7, 157-161[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 29. |
Hu, J.,
and Anselmo, D.
(2000)
J. Virol.
74,
11447-11455 |
| 30. | Perdew, G. H., Wiegand, H., Vanden Heuvel, J. P., Mitchell, C., and Singh, S. S. (1997) Biochemistry 36, 3600-3607[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 31. |
Seeger, C.,
and Maragos, J.
(1989)
J. Virol.
63,
1907-1915 |
| 32. |
Wu, T. T.,
Condreay, L. D.,
Coates, L.,
Aldrich, C.,
and Mason, W.
(1991)
J. Virol.
65,
2155-2163 |
| 33. |
Chang, L. J.,
Hirsch, R. C.,
Ganem, D.,
and Varmus, H. E.
(1990)
J. Virol.
64,
5553-5558 |
| 34. |
Johnson, J. L.,
Beito, T. G.,
Krco, C. J.,
and Toft, D. O.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
1956-1963 |
| 35. |
Jilbert, A. R., Wu, T. T.,
England, J. M.,
Hall, P. M.,
Carp, N. Z.,
O'Connell, A. P.,
and Mason, W. S.
(1992)
J. Virol.
66,
1377-1388 |
| 36. |
Yao, E.,
Gong, Y.,
Chen, N.,
and Tavis, J. E.
(2000)
J. Virol.
74,
8648-8657 |
| 37. |
Seeger, C.,
and Maragos, J.
(1990)
J. Virol.
64,
16-23 |
| 38. |
Pugh, J. C.,
Yaginuma, K.,
Koike, K.,
and Summers, J.
(1988)
J. Virol.
62,
3513-3616 |
| 39. |
Yu, M.,
and Summers, J.
(1994)
J. Virol.
68,
4341-4348 |
| 40. | Stepanova, L., Leng, X., and Harper, J. W. (1997) Methods Enzymol. 283, 220-229[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 41. |
Silverstein, A. M.,
Grammatikakis, N.,
Cochran, B. H.,
Chinkers, M.,
and Pratt, W. B.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
20090-20095 |
| 42. |
Fliss, A. E.,
Fang, Y.,
Boschelli, F.,
and Caplan, A. J.
(1997)
Mol. Biol. Cell
8,
2501-2509 |
| 43. |
Rao, J.,
Lee, P.,
Benzeno, S.,
Cardozo, C.,
Albertus, J.,
Robins, D. M.,
and Caplan, A. J.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
5814-5820 |
| 44. |
Kumar, R.,
Grammatikakis, N.,
and Chinkers, M.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
11371-11375 |
| 45. | Hartson, S. D., Irwin, A. D., Shao, J., Scroggins, B. T., Volk, L., Huang, W., and Matts, R. L. (2000) Biochemistry 39, 7631-7644[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 46. |
Scholz, G. M.,
Cartledge, K.,
and Hall, N. E.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
30971-30979 |
| 47. | Goes, F. S., and Martin, J. (2001) Eur. J. Biochem. 268, 2281-2289[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 48. | Donze, O., Abbas-Terki, T., and Picard, D. (2001) EMBO J. 20, 3771-3780[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 49. | Chang, H.-C. J., Nathan, D., and Lindquist, S. (1997) Mol. Cell. Biol. 17, 318-325[Abstract] |
| 50. |
Duina, A.,
Chang, H.-C. J.,
Marsh, J.,
Lindquist, S.,
and Gaber, R.
(1996)
Science
274,
1713-1715 |
| 51. |
Hu, J.,
Toft, D.,
Anselmo, D.,
and Wang, X.
(2002)
J. Virol.
76,
269-279 |
| 52. |
Lewis, J.,
Devin, A.,
Miller, A.,
Lin, Y.,
Rodriguez, Y.,
Neckers, L.,
and Liu, Z.-g.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
10519-10526 |
| 53. | Smith, D. (1993) Mol. Endocrinol. 7, 1418-1429[Abstract] |
| 54. |
Pratt, W.,
and Toft, D.
(1997)
Endocr. Rev.
18,
306-360 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
W. Gao and J. Hu Formation of Hepatitis B Virus Covalently Closed Circular DNA: Removal of Genome-Linked Protein J. Virol., June 15, 2007; 81(12): 6164 - 6174. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. H. Nguyen, S. Gummuluru, and J. Hu Deamination-Independent Inhibition of Hepatitis B Virus Reverse Transcription by APOBEC3G J. Virol., May 1, 2007; 81(9): 4465 - 4472. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. H. Basagoudanavar, D. H. Perlman, and J. Hu Regulation of Hepadnavirus Reverse Transcription by Dynamic Nucleocapsid Phosphorylation J. Virol., February 15, 2007; 81(4): 1641 - 1649. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S.-Y. Sohn, S.-B. Kim, J. Kim, and B.-Y. Ahn Negative regulation of hepatitis B virus replication by cellular Hsp40/DnaJ proteins through destabilization of viral core and X proteins J. Gen. Virol., July 1, 2006; 87(7): 1883 - 1891. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Hu and M. Boyer Hepatitis B Virus Reverse Transcriptase and {varepsilon} RNA Sequences Required for Specific Interaction In Vitro J. Virol., March 1, 2006; 80(5): 2141 - 2150. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. H. Perlman, E. A. Berg, P. B. O'Connor, C. E. Costello, and J. Hu Reverse transcription-associated dephosphorylation of hepadnavirus nucleocapsids PNAS, June 21, 2005; 102(25): 9020 - 9025. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Hu, D. Flores, D. Toft, X. Wang, and D. Nguyen Requirement of Heat Shock Protein 90 for Human Hepatitis B Virus Reverse Transcriptase Function J. Virol., December 1, 2004; 78(23): 13122 - 13131. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Miyata and E. Nishida CK2 Controls Multiple Protein Kinases by Phosphorylating a Kinase-Targeting Molecular Chaperone, Cdc37 Mol. Cell. Biol., May 1, 2004; 24(9): 4065 - 4074. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Lee, A. Shabbir, C. Cardozo, and A. J. Caplan Sti1 and Cdc37 Can Stabilize Hsp90 in Chaperone Complexes with a Protein Kinase Mol. Biol. Cell, April 1, 2004; 15(4): 1785 - 1792. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Q. Zhao, F. Boschelli, A. J. Caplan, and K. T. Arndt Identification of a Conserved Sequence Motif That Promotes Cdc37 and Cyclin D1 Binding to Cdk4 J. Biol. Chem., March 26, 2004; 279(13): 12560 - 12564. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||