![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 278, Issue 10, 8219-8223, March 7, 2003
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the
Received for publication, December 13, 2002, and in revised form, January 3, 2003
Tail-anchored proteins have an
NH2-terminal cytosolic domain anchored to
intracellular membranes by a single, COOH-terminal, transmembrane
segment. Sequence analysis identified 55 tail-anchored proteins in
Saccharomyces cerevisiae, with several novel proteins, including Prm3, which we find is required for karyogamy and is tail-anchored in the nuclear envelope. A total of six tail-anchored proteins are present in the mitochondrial outer membrane and have relatively hydrophilic transmembrane segments that serve as targeting signals. The rest, by far the majority, localize via a bipartite system
of signals: uniformly hydrophobic tail anchors are first inserted into
the endoplasmic reticulum, and additional segments within the cytosolic
domain of each protein can dictate subsequent sorting to a precise
destination within the cell.
Tail-anchored proteins have a single transmembrane segment at
their carboxyl terminus, and many of the proteins that mediate subcellular traffic and programmed cell death are tail-anchored into
select membranes of eukaryotic cells (1). In the Bcl-2 family of
proteins, key regulators of the programmed cell death pathway in animal
cells, 12 of the 16 known family members are tail-anchored to either
the mitochondrial outer membrane or endoplasmic reticulum, and their
membrane location is critical for function (2). The
SNAP-receptors
(SNAREs)1 are a family of
proteins essential for intracellular membrane fusion, and 19 of the 23 SNAREs in yeast are tail-anchored proteins. Membrane fusion absolutely
requires the participation of SNAREs in both the donor and acceptor
membrane, and each of the known SNAREs has a restricted location at a
defined membrane compartment of the endomembrane system (3, 4).
Tail-anchored proteins fold co-translationally and the single
hydrophobic segment at their carboxyl terminus allows for
post-translational insertion into membranes (5, 6). Once membrane is
inserted, the amino-terminal domain of the protein is displayed in the
cytosol. An elegant study on the tail-anchored SNARE
synaptobrevin-1/VAMP-1a found that the protein is inserted into the
endoplasmic reticulum and subsequently sorted to presynaptic vesicles
(5). Cytochrome b5, another tail-anchored
protein, is inserted into the membrane of the endoplasmic reticulum and
maintained there despite some escape to, and retrieval from, the
cis-Golgi cisternae (7).
But tail-anchored proteins are also located in the mitochondrial outer
membrane, and the precise signal that distinguishes these from those
targeted to the endoplasmic reticulum is still not clear. Deletion
mutagenesis has shown the signal is contained within the tail segment,
and in the few different model proteins examined to date critical
determinants have been either the presence of charged residues or in
some cases the number of hydrophobic residues (8-14). An understanding
of the precise targeting signals that direct the majority of
tail-anchored proteins to the endoplasmic reticulum, but allow some to
go exclusively to mitochondria, has been hampered by the relatively
small number of model tail-anchored proteins that have been available
for study.
We applied several bioinformatic approaches to identify
tail-anchored proteins encoded in the genome of
Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Fifteen novel
tail-anchored proteins were discovered; we report here on the
localization of the previously unrecognized tail-anchored proteins.
Analysis of the targeting segments from the 55 tail-anchored proteins
in yeast suggests a bipartite system of signals: hydrophobic character
in the tail segment determines targeting to the endoplasmic reticulum
instead of mitochondria and discrete sorting signals that then direct
tail-anchored proteins to their correct subcellular destination.
Plasmids and Yeast Strains--
DNA fragments corresponding to
each open reading frame were amplified by PCR using primers that
generated one in-frame restriction site immediately preceding the start
codon and another following the stop codon (oligonucleotide sequences
available on request). PCR products were cloned behind GFP-S65T
under the control of the MET25 promoter and expressed from a
centromeric plasmid (13). In semisynthetic (SD) media, expression from
the plasmid is partially repressed.
PCR-based mutagenesis was used to convert hydrophilic residues in the
transmembrane segments of Tom22 and Fis1 to leucine residues. For the
mutant described here, Fis1(4L), Gly136,
Gly137, Gly141, and Ala142 were
converted to leucine residues. Initial trials to visualize expression
of the fusion proteins were made in the diploid strain JK9-3da/ Fluorescence Microscopy--
For fluorescence microscopy, cells
were visualized directly or after staining with Mitotracker
(MitoTracker Red CM-H2X Ros) according to the standard protocol from
Molecular Probes. All fluorescence images were captured using a Bio-Rad
MRC1024 confocal scanning laser microscope mounted on a Zeiss Axioscop.
For the mating studies, a Nikon fluorescence microscope with GFP and
DAPI filter sets and a ×100 DIC (Nomarski) objective was used. In this case images were captured by a Micromax digital camera with Metamorph imaging software. In preparation for fluorescence microscopy cells were
grown to mid-log phase at 25 °C in semisynthetic medium. In
assays for nuclear transport, wild-type, rna1-1, or
prp20-1 cells were transferred from 25 °C liquid culture
to a 37 °C water bath for 30 min immediately prior to preparation
for microscopy.
Membrane Isolation and Analysis--
Microsomal membrane
fractions were prepared by differential centrifugation. Cells (50-100
OD600 units) were suspended in buffer 88 (250 mM sorbitol, 150 mM potassium acetate, 5 mM magnesium acetate, 0.5 mM
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 1.2 µg/ml leupeptin, 0.75 µg/ml antipain, 0.25 µg/ml chymostatin, 1 µg/ml pepstatin, 50 mM HEPES, pH 6.8) and disrupted by two bursts (each of
2-min duration) in a mini-beadbeater-8 (Biospec products) using
silica/zirconia beads. Cell debris was removed by centrifugation at
500 × g for 5 min. A crude membrane fraction was
collected by centrifugation at 16,000 × g for 10 min.
Membranes were extracted by resuspension in either 1% Triton X-100 or
100 mM Na2CO3 and incubated
for 30 min on ice with intermittent vortexing. Soluble and insoluble proteins were separated by centrifugation at 100,000 × g in a Beckman Airfuge.
Miscellaneous--
Published procedures were used for isolation
of mitochondria and trypsin shaving, SDS-PAGE, and immunoblot analysis
(16). Detailed comparative hydrophobicity analyses of the targeting sequences in each tail-anchored protein made use of the ProtParam site
at (expasy.proteome.org.au/cgi-bin/protparam) using a window of
5 amino acids to scan through the predicted transmembrane segment according to the Kyte-Doolittle algorithm.
In addition to the tail-anchored proteins known in yeast, sequence
analysis revealed 15 open reading frames that could be expressed as GFP
fusions that localize to discrete subcellular membranes. Fig.
1 shows that Fis1 and YFL046w are
mitochondrial proteins (Fig. 1A), seven proteins localized
generally to the endoplasmic reticulum membrane (Fig. 1B),
and four are localized to specific subdomains of the endoplasmic
reticulum (Fig. 1C). YLR238w and YOR324c are found in
clusters within the bounds of the endoplasmic reticulum, and Prm3 is
confined to the perinuclear (nuclear envelope) membrane. YPL206c, a
protein showing sequence similarity to bacterial glycerophosphodiester
phosphodiesterases, was found concentrated in lipid bodies, regions of
endoplasmic reticulum specialized for lipid metabolism (Fig.
1C; Ref. 17). Two proteins closely related in primary
structure, YDL012c and YBR016w, are located in the plasma membrane
(Fig. 1D). Both YDL012c and YBR016w are localized more
intensely in regions of new membrane synthesis, toward the emergent
buds of dividing cells and also in the schmoo structure (Fig.
1E, arrowheads) of haploid cells in the presence
of mating pheromone.
The Tail Segment Is Necessary for Targeting to the Endoplasmic
Reticulum--
Comparative sequence analysis of the carboxyl-terminal
segments of the 41 tail-anchored proteins targeted to the endoplasmic reticulum (including the 17 proteins sorted to other membranes of the
secretory pathway) revealed no obvious motifs in the primary structure
that might serve as a common targeting signal. However, hydropathy
analysis through the transmembrane segments suggests regions of high
(>3.3 units) hydropathy score in each protein (Fig.
2A). Conversely, hydropathy
analysis of the predicted transmembrane domain from Fis1 (Fig.
2B) and for YFL046w, Tom5, Tom6, Tom7, and Tom22 (data not
shown) suggests this segment of each polypeptide is more amphipathic
than for proteins targeted to the endoplasmic reticulum. Previous work
has shown that the transmembrane segments of the translocase subunits
Tom5, Tom6, Tom7, Tom22, and Fis1 are necessary and sufficient for
targeting mitochondria (13, 14,
18).2
To test whether the character in the transmembrane segment of Fis1
distinguished it as a protein destined for mitochondria, site-directed
mutagenesis was used to replace hydrophilic residues with leucines,
such that the hydrophobicity approached that of proteins targeted to
the endoplasmic reticulum (Fig. 2B). When yeast cells
expressing these mutant proteins as GFP fusions were analyzed by
fluorescence microscopy, the Fis1 mutant, Fis1(L4), is targeted to the
endoplasmic reticulum (Fig. 2C). Similar results were found
with mutations made in the transmembrane segment of Tom22 (data not
shown). Fluorescence is sometimes also observed in the lumen of the
vacuole, perhaps reflecting turnover of the inappropriately targeted
proteins (Fig. 2C, "V").
Bipartite Signals for Targeting and Sorting Proteins in
Intracellular Membranes--
Tail-anchored proteins in the endoplasmic
reticulum can display distinct patterns of localization. For example
YOR324c is found in discrete clusters throughout the endoplasmic
reticulum (Fig. 3A), whereas
Bos1 is a SNARE found sparingly in the endoplasmic reticulum but
enriched in the Golgi (Fig. 3B, arrows). The
hydrophobic tail segments from each of these proteins are sufficient to
target GFP to the endoplasmic reticulum, where it remains generally
distributed (Fig. 3, C and D). The proteins are
integrated into the membrane as judged by their resistance to
extraction by sodium carbonate treatment of isolated membranes (Fig.
3E; data not shown).
We identified a single protein, Prm3, whose distribution was restricted
to the nuclear envelope and sought to understand whether its targeting
and sorting were also mediated by bipartite signals. A series of
deletion mutants were constructed (Fig.
4A) and tested for subcellular
localization. Deletion of 91 amino acids, leaving only the
carboxyl-terminal segment of Prm3 (GFP-Prm3
Point mutations in the putative NLS caused degradation of the
full-length Prm3 fusion protein, and so to test whether the putative
NLS is functional, we analyzed a soluble version,
GFP-Prm3(
If Prm3 has a bipartite targeting sequence, with the
P68GRVRKHK75 truly acting as an NLS, the
general nuclear import machinery of the cell should be required to
maintain the full-length, membrane-embedded Prm3 within the nucleus.
Ran is a small GTP-binding protein that plays a critical role in
transport of proteins into the nucleus (20, 21). A gradient of
Ran-GTP across the nuclear membrane is established by the
differential localization of two enzymes: the Ran-GTP
exchange factor (Ran-GEF) in the nucleus and
the Ran-GTP-activating protein
(Ran-GAP) in the cytosol, and mutations in either of these two enzymes
leads to collapse of nuclear traffic.
Temperature-sensitive mutants for Ran-GEF (prp20-1) and
Ran-GAP (ran1-1) were transformed and the
distribution of Prm3 measured by fluorescence microscopy. At the
permissive temperature of 25 °C, the localization of Prm3 in the
Ran-GEF mutants (Fig. 4F) and the Ran-GAP mutants (Fig.
4G) is nuclear. However, after shift to the non-permissive
temperature of 37 °C, Prm3 is found throughout the membranes of the
endoplasmic reticulum, suggesting that without a functioning Ran cycle
the protein cannot be sorted from the outer to inner membrane of the
nuclear envelope.
Since Prm3 is the first protein described in yeast that might be
localized to the inner membrane of the nuclear envelope, we sought to
determine its function by analysis of
If, as suggested by this microscopy, Prm3 is required for
the fusion of nuclear envelopes, then
Transcript profiling has shown that the PRM3 gene is induced
in response to both pheromone stimulation (22) and during sporulation (23), and both processes culminate in karyogamy (see review by Rose
(24)). Because Prm3 localization is dependent on a NLS and the
Ran-GTPase cycle, we propose Prm3 as the first component of the
cellular karyogamy machinery to function in membrane fusion at the
level of the inner membrane of the nuclear envelope.
In addition to the discovery and localization of a large set of
novel tail-anchored proteins, analysis of the sequence data provided by
these proteins suggests a general model for the targeting of
tail-anchored proteins to each intracellular membrane.
From analysis of the 41 tail-anchored proteins now known to localize to
membranes of the secretory pathway, the only common property we could
identify was the uniformly hydrophobic nature of the residues within
the transmembrane segment. Previous studies on individual tail-anchored
proteins have each suggested that the tail-segment contains targeting
information (8-14). The hydrophobic tail segments of Bos1, Prm3, and
YOR324c are sufficient to target each of these proteins to the
endoplasmic reticulum, and these truncated fusions remain uniformly
distributed through the perinuclear endoplasmic reticulum
(i.e. the outer membrane of the nuclear envelope) and
peripheral endoplasmic reticulum.
A segment of lower hydrophobic moment, containing glycine, serine, and
threonine residues, is found in the six tail-anchored proteins targeted
to the mitochondrial outer membrane. Replacement of these residues with
leucines, to alter the hydrophobicity and perhaps other structural
features such as the rigidity of the helix it can form, prevents
targeting to mitochondria. The TOM translocation machinery mediates
protein insertion into the outer membrane (25-27), as well as the
import of soluble proteins into mitochondria (28-31). The recent
three-dimensional structure of the TOM complex receptor subunit, Tom20,
suggests that it has only a very shallow binding groove on its surface,
into which binds the hydrophobic face of the targeting sequences found
attached to soluble proteins targeted to mitochondria (32, 33). Tom20 has been implicated as the import receptor for tail-anchored proteins, and it will be of interest to determine the structural details of how
the receptor binds the targeting segments of tail-anchored proteins.
In contrast to insertion of tail-anchored proteins into mitochondria,
the nature of the machinery that mediates tail-anchored protein
insertion into the endoplasmic reticulum is still unclear. Kutay
et al. (5) suggested that the general post-translational Sec
machinery might mediate insertion of tail-anchored proteins like
VAMP-1a. Whatever the machinery, it is able to insert tail-anchored proteins with hydrophobic tail-segments; even a simple, artificial tail-segment consisting entirely of leucine residues was a suitable substrate for in vitro insertion into membrane vesicles
derived from the endoplasmic reticulum (34), and the same tail segment directs GFP to the endoplasmic reticulum when expressed in yeast cells.3
Distinct regions in the cytosolic domain of VAMP-1a assist its
subsequent transport from the endoplasmic reticulum to the presynaptic
vesicles. Interactions mediated by distinct regions in the cytosolic
domains are also required for Bos1 trafficking to the Golgi, Prm3
targeting to the nuclear envelope, and YOR324c clustering in punctate
zones of the endoplasmic reticulum. Thus two independent processes,
targeting to the endoplasmic reticulum and subsequent sorting to the
correct membrane, are mediated by bipartite targeting and sorting
signals. For the Golgi and post-Golgi membranes, sorting would be
mediated through vesicular traffic. In the case of Prm3 and any other
proteins that might exist in the inner membrane of the nuclear
envelope, we suggest that this occurs via the lipid rivulets of pore
membrane present in the nuclear pore complex (35, 36) that would link
the outer and inner membrane bilayers and is catalyzed by Ran and the
karyopherins that also drive the import of soluble nuclear proteins.
We thank Ben Glick, Tina Junne-Bieri, and
Jeff Schatz for plasmids and antisera; Peter Walsh,
Diana Macasev, and Ross Waller for critical suggestions on
the manuscript; and Binks Wattenberg and David Huang for
comments on the manuscript and critical discussions throughout the
course of the project.
*
This work was supported by a grant from the Australian
Research Council (to T. L.).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.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, January 3, 2003, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M212725200
2
T. Beilharz and T. Lithgow, unpublished observations.
3
T. Beilharz, unpublished observations.
The abbreviations used are:
SNARE, soluble N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor attachment protein
(SNAP) receptors;
DAPI, 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole;
NLS, nuclear
localization sequence;
GEF, GTP exchange factor;
GAP, GTP-activating
protein.
Bipartite Signals Mediate Subcellular Targeting of Tail-anchored
Membrane Proteins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae*
,
,
Russell Grimwade School of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Australia,
the § Department of Biological Chemistry and Molecular
Pharmacology, Harvard Medical School, and Department of Cancer Biology,
The Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, and
the ¶ Bioinformatics Group, MEMOREC Stoffel GmbH, Stoeckheimer Weg
1, D-50829 Köln, Germany
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
(leu2-3,122/leu2-3,122,
ura3-52/ura3-52, rme1/rme1
trp1/trp1, his4/his4 GAL+/GAL+, HMLa/HMLa).
In three cases, this failed to give discernible fluorescence but
expression of fusion proteins constructed from YBL100c, YFL046w, and
YPL200c was possible using a strain defective in proteasome function
(Mat
, trp1, ura3, his, leu2, cim5-1; Ghislain
et al. (38)). To generate yeast mutants lacking the
FIS1 gene or the PRM3 gene, PCR-mediated gene
disruption (15) was employed with the plasmid p3xHA-His5 as template.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (78K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Localization of tail-anchored proteins
in vivo. A, yeast cells expressing the
Fis1 and YFL046w fusions were co-stained with the fluorescent dye
Mitotracker and viewed by fluorescence microscopy. Filters selective
for the green fluorescence of GFP (left section of each
panel) or the red fluorescence of Mitotracker (right section
of each panel) were used. B, each of the indicated open
reading frames targets GFP to the endoplasmic reticulum
(arrows, peripheral membrane; N denotes nucleus
and perinuclear membrane). C, YLR238w and YOR324c show a
punctate staining pattern, Prm3 displays restricted perinuclear
localization, and YDR200c is enriched in lipid bodies. D,
YDL012c and YBR016w target GFP to the plasma membrane where the
proteins are enriched in new buds. E, in haploid
(Mata) cells incubated for 2 h in the
presence of untransformed cells of the opposite mating type (Mat
)
and visualized by fluorescence microscopy, YBR016w is enriched
in mating projections of "schmoo" cells
(arrowheads).

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Hydrophobic character determines targeting of
proteins to the endoplasmic reticulum. A, hydropathy
profiles for the predicted transmembrane segments from Bos1
(solid line), Hlj1 (dotted line), and Cyb5
(dashed line). The relative hydropathy score is plotted
against the amino acid residues of the segment. The region of the graph
with a Kyte-Doolittle score >3.3 is indicated by gray
shading. B, hydropathy profiles for the predicted
transmembrane segments from Fis1 (targeted to mitochondria) and
Fis1(L4) (targeted to the endoplasmic reticulum). Hydrophilic residues
(those having a Kyte-Doolittle score <0) within each transmembrane
segment are circled. C, yeast cells expressing
GFP-Fis1 are shown as a stack of five sections (left) and a
single medial section (right). A single medial section of
cells expressing GFP-Fis1(L4) shows the protein in the peripheral
(arrows) and perinuclear (N denotes the nucleus)
membranes of the endoplasmic reticulum and vacuole
(V).

View larger version (27K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
The carboxyl-terminal tail segment targets
proteins to the endoplasmic reticulum. Yeast cells expressing GFP
fused to the entire open reading frame from GFP-YOR324w (A)
or Bos1 (B) were visualized by fluorescence microscopy.
Intense staining for Bos1 representing Golgi localization (37) is
indicated (arrows), as is the perinuclear endoplasmic
reticulum (N denotes the nucleus). C, yeast cells
transformed with a plasmid encoding GFP fused to the carboxyl-terminal
35 amino acids of YOR324c ("YOR324tail") or transformed
with a plasmid encoding GFP-fused to the carboxyl-terminal 35 amino
acids of Bos1 were viewed by fluorescence microscopy (D).
E, a crude membrane fraction was isolated from yeast cells
expressing GFP-YORtail, solubilized, and centrifuged to separate
solubilized proteins ("S") from insoluble material
("P"). Proteins were then analyzed by immunoblotting
after SDS-PAGE.
1-91), targets the GFP
reporter to the endoplasmic reticulum (Fig. 4B), which is
continuous with the outer membrane of the nuclear envelope (19). A
second signal is present in Prm3(
1-68), causing the fusion to be
localized specifically to the nuclear envelope (Fig. 4C).
Sequence analysis suggested a nuclear
localization sequence (NLS) between
Pro68 and Lys75.

View larger version (39K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Sorting of Prm3 to the nuclear envelope.
A, truncations of Prm3 fused to GFP are represented. The
putative NLS is denoted +++. The transmembrane segment is
shaded black. B-E, fluorescent micrographs
depicting localization of the mutated proteins in yeast cells
transformed with each of the plasmids. "V" denotes the
vacuole of the cells. F, yeast prp20-1 cells,
with a temperature-sensitive allele of Ran-GEF, were transformed with a
plasmid encoding GFP-Prm3 and incubated at either 25 or 37 °C for 30 min before fluorescence microscopy. G, an equivalent
temperature shift experiment with rna1-1 cells, carrying a
temperature-sensitive allele of Ran-GAP.
109-133). GFP-Prm3(
109-133) is localized exclusively
within the nucleus, and confocal sectioning revealed it distributed
throughout the nucleoplasm (Fig. 4D). To be certain the
information for nuclear localization is contained within the amino acid
sequence P68GRVRKHK75, site-directed
mutagenesis was used to convert Lys73 to Ala73,
and the mutant protein GFP-Prm3(
109-133)* is compromised in import,
with much of the protein located in the cytosol (Fig. 4E).
prm3 mutant cells.
Haploid yeast cells of opposite mating types, either wild type
(Mata) with wild type (Mat
) or
prm3
(Mata) with
prm3 (Mat
), were mixed and
incubated on rich medium for 3-4 h, then fixed and stained with
DAPI to visualize DNA. In wild-type crosses, nuclear DNA is usually
mixed by the time the first diploid bud appears near the junction of
the two parent cells of the mating pair (Figs.
5A). However, the cytoductants
that arise from
prm3 ×
prm3 crosses
are unable to undergo normal karyogamy, and nuclear material remains
distinct but tightly juxtaposed at the point where the nuclei
simultaneously squeeze through the bud neck, whether staining for
nucleic acid (Fig. 5B) or nucleoplasmic protein (Fig.
5C).

View larger version (27K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Prm3 is essential for karyogamy.
A, wild-type haploid cells of opposite mating types were
mixed and incubated for 3-4 h on YPAD agar, fixed in 70% ethanol for
10-20 min, washed, and resuspended in 1 mg/ml DAPI and viewed by
fluorescence microscopy. Arrows denote the bud emerging from
the parent cells of the mating pair. B,
prm3
haploid cells of each mating type were mixed and analyzed as described
above. C,
prm3 haploid cells of each mating
type, transformed with a plasmid encoding GFP-Prm3(
109-133) were
mixed and analyzed by fluorescence microscopy. The periphery of the
budding zygotes was highlighted with the cell wall-specific stain
concanavalin A-rhodamine B isothiocyanate. D, cells
recovered from mating mixtures described above were allowed to grow to
mid-log phase and then stained with Calcofluor. Bud scars are
seen at either end of the diploid cells from the wild-type matings, but
a characteristic whorl of scars is found on one end only of the cells
derived from the
prm3 x
prm3
cytoductants.
prm3 cells should
remain haploid through subsequent generations. To test this
possibility, ten zygotes from mating mixtures like those described in
Fig. 5 were isolated by micromanipulation. The progeny from wild-type crosses are diploid: in the course of mitosis they develop bud scars at
each end of the ovoid cells (Fig. 5D), they cannot mate with
haploid cells of either mating type, and they will undergo meiosis if
placed on sporulation media (data not shown). By contrast, the progeny
from
prm3 ×
prm3 matings were
exclusively haploid: the cells that arise mitotically from these
cytoductants have a single, spiralled pattern of bud scars (Fig.
5D), cannot be sporulated, but can mate with (wild-type)
cells of the opposite mating type (data not shown). The colonies that
initially arise from these cytoductants show a distinct furrow, with
cells isolated from one side of the furrow exhibiting mating type
a and cells from the other side being of mating type
.3
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
![]()
FOOTNOTES
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Russell Grimwade
School of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Australia. Tel.: 61-3-8344-4131; Fax: 61-3-9348-2251; E-mail: t.lithgow@unimelb.edu.au.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Wattenberg, B.,
and Lithgow, T.
(2001)
Traffic
2,
66-71[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
2.
Antonsson, B.
(2001)
Cell Tissue Res.
306,
347-361[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
3.
Pelham, H. R.
(1999)
Exp. Cell Res.
247,
1-8[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
4.
Chen, Y. A.,
and Scheller, R. H.
(2001)
Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell. Biol.
2,
98-106[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
5.
Kutay, U.,
Ahnert-Hilger, G.,
Hartmann, E.,
Wiedenmann, B.,
and Rapport, T. A.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
217-223[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
6.
Federov, A. N.,
and Baldwin, T. O.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
32715-32718 7.
Pedrazzini, E.,
Villa, A.,
Longhi, R.,
Bulbarelli, A.,
and Borgese, N.
(2000)
J. Cell Biol.
148,
899-914 8.
Mitoma, J.,
and Ito, A.
(1991)
J. Biochem. (Tokyo)
111,
20-24
9.
Vergeres, G.,
and Waskell, L.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
12583-12591 10.
Borgese, N.,
Gazzoni, I.,
Barberi, M.,
Colombo, S.,
and Pedrazzini, E.
(2001)
Mol. Biol. Cell
12,
2482-2496 11.
Kuroda, R.,
Ikenoue, T.,
Honsho, M.,
Tsujimoto, S.,
Mitoma, J. Y.,
and Ito, A.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
31097-31102 12.
Isenmann, S.,
Khew-Goodall, Y.,
Gamble, J.,
Vadas, M.,
and Wattenberg, B. W.
(1999)
Mol. Biol. Cell
9,
1649-1660
13.
Egan, B.,
Beilharz, T.,
George, R.,
Isenmann, S.,
Gratzer, S.,
Wattenberg, B.,
and Lithgow, T.
(1999)
FEBS Lett.
451,
243-248[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
14.
Allen, R.,
Egan, B.,
Gabriel, K.,
Beilharz, T.,
and Lithgow, T.
(2002)
FEBS Lett.
514,
347-350[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
15.
Wach, A.,
Brachat, A.,
Alberti-Segui, C.,
Rebischung, C.,
and Philippsen, P.
(1997)
Yeast
13,
1065-1075[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
16.
Beilharz, T.,
Suzuki, C.,
and Lithgow, T.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
35268-35272 17.
Zweytick, D.,
Athenstaedt, K.,
and Daum, G.
(2000)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1469,
101-120[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
18.
Cao, W.,
and Douglas, M. G.
(1996)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
224,
457-461[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
19.
Prinz, W. A.,
Grzyb, L.,
Veenhuis, M.,
Kahana, J. A.,
Silver, P. A.,
and Rapoport, T. A.
(2000)
J. Cell Biol.
150,
461-474 20.
Chook, Y. M.,
and Blobel, G.
(2001)
Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol.
11,
703-715[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
21.
Kuersten, S.,
Ohno, M.,
and Mattaj, I. W.
(2001)
Trends Cell Biol.
11,
497-503[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
22.
Heiman, M. G.,
and Walter, P.
(2000)
J. Cell Biol.
151,
719-730 23.
Yale, J.,
and Bohnert, H. J.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
15996-16007 24.
Rose, M. D.
(1996)
Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol.
12,
663-695[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
25.
Keil, P.,
and Pfanner, N.
(1993)
FEBS Lett.
321,
197-200[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
26.
Millar, D. G.,
and Shore, G. C.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
25823-25829 27.
Lan, L.,
Isenmann, S.,
and Wattenberg, B. W.
(2000)
Biochem. J.
349,
611-621[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
28.
Schatz, G.
(1997)
Nature
388,
121-122[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
29.
Neupert, W.
(1997)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
66,
863-917[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
30.
Voos, W.,
Martin, H.,
Krimmer, T.,
and Pfanner, N.
(1999)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1422,
235-254[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
31.
Gabriel, K.,
Buchanan, S. K.,
and Lithgow, T.
(2001)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
26,
36-40[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
32.
Abe, Y.,
Shodai, T.,
Muto, T.,
Mihara, K.,
Torii, H.,
Nishikawa, S.,
Endo, T.,
and Kohda, D.
(2000)
Cell
100,
551-560[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
33.
Muto, T.,
Obita, T.,
Abe, Y.,
Shodai, T.,
Endo, T.,
and Kohda, D.
(2001)
J. Mol. Biol.
306,
137-143[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
34.
Whitley, P.,
Grahn, E.,
Kutay, U.,
Rapoport, T. A.,
and von Heijne, G.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
7583-7586 35.
Allen, T. D.,
Cronshaw, J. M.,
Bagley, S.,
Kiseleva, E.,
and Goldberg, M. W.
(2000)
J. Cell Sci.
113,
1651-1659[Abstract]
36.
Georgatos, S. D.
(2001)
EMBO J.
20,
2989-2994[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
37.
Rossanese, O. W.,
Soderholm, J.,
Bevis, B. J.,
Sears, I. B.,
O'Connor, J.,
Williamson, E. K.,
and Glick, B. S.
(1999)
J. Cell Biol.
145,
69-81 38.
Ghislain, M.,
Udvardy, A.,
and Mann, C.
(1993)
Nature
366,
358-362[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
Copyright © 2003 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. Simockova, R. Holic, D. Tahotna, J. Patton-Vogt, and P. Griac Yeast Pgc1p (YPL206c) Controls the Amount of Phosphatidylglycerol via a Phospholipase C-type Degradation Mechanism J. Biol. Chem., June 20, 2008; 283(25): 17107 - 17115. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Kemper, S. J. Habib, G. Engl, P. Heckmeyer, K. S. Dimmer, and D. Rapaport Integration of tail-anchored proteins into the mitochondrial outer membrane does not require any known import components J. Cell Sci., June 15, 2008; 121(12): 1990 - 1998. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. V. Schepetilnikov, A. G. Solovyev, E. N. Gorshkova, J. Schiemann, A. I. Prokhnevsky, V. V. Dolja, and S. Y. Morozov Intracellular Targeting of a Hordeiviral Membrane-Spanning Movement Protein: Sequence Requirements and Involvement of an Unconventional Mechanism J. Virol., February 1, 2008; 82(3): 1284 - 1293. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Becker, S. Pfannschmidt, B. Guiard, D. Stojanovski, D. Milenkovic, S. Kutik, N. Pfanner, C. Meisinger, and N. Wiedemann Biogenesis of the Mitochondrial TOM Complex: Mim1 PROMOTES INSERTION AND ASSEMBLY OF SIGNAL-ANCHORED RECEPTORS J. Biol. Chem., January 4, 2008; 283(1): 120 - 127. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Melloy, S. Shen, E. White, J. R. McIntosh, and M. D. Rose Nuclear fusion during yeast mating occurs by a three-step pathway J. Cell Biol., November 19, 2007; 179(4): 659 - 670. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. J.R. Loewen, B. P. Young, S. Tavassoli, and T. P. Levine Inheritance of cortical ER in yeast is required for normal septin organization J. Cell Biol., November 5, 2007; 179(3): 467 - 483. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. M. Abell, C. Rabu, P. Leznicki, J. C. Young, and S. High Post-translational integration of tail-anchored proteins is facilitated by defined molecular chaperones J. Cell Sci., May 15, 2007; 120(10): 1743 - 1751. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Kvam and D. S. Goldfarb Structure and function of nucleus-vacuole junctions: outer-nuclear-membrane targeting of Nvj1p and a role in tryptophan uptake J. Cell Sci., September 1, 2006; 119(17): 3622 - 3633. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Halbach, C. Landgraf, S. Lorenzen, K. Rosenkranz, R. Volkmer-Engert, R. Erdmann, and H. Rottensteiner Targeting of the tail-anchored peroxisomal membrane proteins PEX26 and PEX15 occurs through C-terminal PEX19-binding sites J. Cell Sci., June 15, 2006; 119(12): 2508 - 2517. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. P. Fernandez-Murray and C. R. McMaster Glycerophosphocholine Catabolism as a New Route for Choline Formation for Phosphatidylcholine Synthesis by the Kennedy Pathway J. Biol. Chem., November 18, 2005; 280(46): 38290 - 38296. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. T. Hwang, S. M. Pelitire, M. P.A. Henderson, D. W. Andrews, J. M. Dyer, and R. T. Mullen Novel Targeting Signals Mediate the Sorting of Different Isoforms of the Tail-Anchored Membrane Protein Cytochrome b5 to Either Endoplasmic Reticulum or Mitochondria PLANT CELL, November 1, 2004; 16(11): 3002 - 3019. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. T. Youker, P. Walsh, T. Beilharz, T. Lithgow, and J. L. Brodsky Distinct Roles for the Hsp40 and Hsp90 Molecular Chaperones during Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator Degradation in Yeast Mol. Biol. Cell, November 1, 2004; 15(11): 4787 - 4797. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Huyer, W. F. Piluek, Z. Fansler, S. G. Kreft, M. Hochstrasser, J. L. Brodsky, and S. Michaelis Distinct Machinery Is Required in Saccharomyces cerevisiae for the Endoplasmic Reticulum-associated Degradation of a Multispanning Membrane Protein and a Soluble Luminal Protein J. Biol. Chem., September 10, 2004; 279(37): 38369 - 38378. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Macasev, J. Whelan, E. Newbigin, M. C. Silva-Filho, T. D. Mulhern, and T. Lithgow Tom22', an 8-kDa trans-Site Receptor in Plants and Protozoans, Is a Conserved Feature of the TOM Complex That Appeared Early in the Evolution of Eukaryotes Mol. Biol. Evol., August 1, 2004; 21(8): 1557 - 1564. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. L Heath, S. L. Shaw, S. Roy, and M. S. Cyert Hph1p and Hph2p, Novel Components of Calcineurin-Mediated Stress Responses in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Eukaryot. Cell, June 1, 2004; 3(3): 695 - 704. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Stojanovski, O. S. Koutsopoulos, K. Okamoto, and M. T. Ryan Levels of human Fis1 at the mitochondrial outer membrane regulate mitochondrial morphology J. Cell Sci., March 1, 2004; 117(7): 1201 - 1210. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Kondo-Okamoto, J. M. Shaw, and K. Okamoto Mmm1p Spans Both the Outer and Inner Mitochondrial Membranes and Contains Distinct Domains for Targeting and Foci Formation J. Biol. Chem., December 5, 2003; 278(49): 48997 - 49005. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||