Advertisement
JBC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M403830200 on June 1, 2004

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 279, Issue 33, 34589-34594, August 13, 2004
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
279/33/34589    most recent
M403830200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Weber, A. N. R.
Right arrow Articles by Gay, N. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Weber, A. N. R.
Right arrow Articles by Gay, N. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Four N-linked Glycosylation Sites in Human Toll-like Receptor 2 Cooperate to Direct Efficient Biosynthesis and Secretion*

Alexander N. R. Weber{ddagger}§, Mary A. Morse{ddagger}, and Nicholas J. Gay§||

From the {ddagger}RA Pharmacology, RI CEDD, GlaxoSmithKline Medicines Research Centre, Stevenage SG1 2NY, United Kingdom and the §Department of Biochemistry, Cambridge University, 80 Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1GA, United Kingdom

Received for publication, April 6, 2004 , and in revised form, May 25, 2004.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Most higher organisms have a system of innate immune defense that is mediated by a group of evolutionarily related, germ line-encoded receptors, so-called Toll-like receptors. In mammals Toll-like receptors signal in response to pathogen-associated microbial structures. For example, Toll-like receptor 2 appears to mediate responses to bacterial peptidoglycan and acylated lipoproteins and Toll-like receptor 4 to bacterial lipopolysaccharide. However, the structural principles that underlie recognition of these structures are poorly understood. Toll-like receptors have leucine-rich repeats in their extracellular domains and are thus believed to adopt solenoid structures, similar to that found in platelet glycoprotein Ib. Additionally, all Toll-like receptors contain N-linked glycosylation consensus sites, and Toll-like receptor 4 requires glycosylation for function. Toll-like receptor glycosylation is also likely to influence receptor surface representation, trafficking, and pattern recognition. Using circular dichroism spectroscopy, we show here that purified human Toll-like receptor 2 and 4 proteins have secondary structure contents similar to glycoprotein Ib. We have also analyzed where consensus glycosylation sites are located in the extracellular domains of other human Toll-like receptors. We found that there are significant differences in the location and degree of conservation between sites in different Toll-like receptors. Using site-directed mutagenesis, we have found that in Toll-like receptor 2 extracellular domain all four predicted glycosylation sites are substituted, although one site is inefficiently core-glycosylated and its removal drastically affects secretion. The remaining Toll-like receptor 2 glycosylation sites also contribute to efficient protein secretion, albeit to a lesser degree.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
In humans, innate immune responses provide the first line of defense against invading bacterial pathogens. Pathogen-associated molecular patterns such as lipopolysaccharide from Gram-negative bacteria, peptidoglycan, and foreign nucleic acids are sensed by several different immune cell types such as macrophages and dendritic cells. These cells then mediate complex inflammatory and antiviral responses. Stimulation of dendritic cells by pathogen patterns is also required for T-cell maturation and the development of an adaptive immune response (see Ref. 1 for a review).

In recent years it has become clear that the human Toll-like receptors (TLRs)1 are required to mediate these responses. These molecules are single pass transmembrane receptors and are related to Drosophila Toll, a protein involved in dorsoventral patterning and antifungal innate immunity in the fly (2–4). Drosophila Toll and TLRs all have ectodomains with characteristic blocks of leucine-rich repeats and a cytoplasmic signaling domain of about 200 residues called the Toll/interleukin 1 receptor domain. The family of Toll receptors appears to use common components in the postreceptor signaling pathway, resulting in the activation of the transcription factor NF{kappa}B (5, 6).

An important area in TLR research is to understand the way in which pathogen patterns are able to activate these receptors at the biochemical and structural level. In the case of Drosophila Toll, pathogen patterns indirectly activate an endogenous cytokine-like ligand, Spätzle, and this dimeric protein activates signal transduction by dimerizing the Toll receptor (7). However, the human TLRs appear to have a different mechanism of activation that involves co-receptor proteins and direct sensing of the pattern. For example, signaling by TLR4 probably requires direct binding of lipopolysaccharide to the accessory co-receptor protein MD2 and consequent dimerization of the receptors (8).

To study these molecular recognition events biochemically requires the production of the receptor domains in a pure and functional form. This has proved difficult to achieve, and there are few reports of expression and purification of receptor ectodomains in the literature. The ectodomains consist primarily of leucine-rich repeat sequences (LRRs), 24-amino acid motifs that fold together into a solenoidal structure (see Fig. 1). LRRs are found in a large superfamily of proteins (5) and seem adapted for the rapid evolution of diverse protein binding specificities. Although no structures of TLRs are presently known, the crystal structures of two related LRR extracellular proteins, platelet glycoprotein Ib (9) and the Nogo receptor (10), have recently been solved in complex with specific protein binding partners. These structures show that unlike some other LRR proteins (for example, ribonuclease/angiogenin inhibitor (11)) the convex surface of the LRRs is not {alpha}-helical but of variable, extended secondary structure (see Fig. 1).



View larger version (79K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 1.
Localization and conservation of glycosylation sites in the TLR2 ectodomain. A, structural representation of the TLR2 ectodomain LRRs and flanking regions with N-linked glycosylation consensus sites. Sites located in LRR turn regions projecting laterally are colored in green; site 4, which is located in the LRR {beta}-sheet region, is blue. B, sequence alignment of consecutive TLR2 LRRs. N-linked glycosylation sites are highlighted by black boxes. C, sequence alignments of TLR2 sequences from different species showing N-linked glycosylation sites 1–4 and surrounding sequences. Color coding of amino acids according to Ref. 28. Similar analysis for TLR4 is shown in Fig. S1 and a summary for the other TLRs in Table S1.

 
In this study we have described the expression and purification of TLR 2 and 4 ectodomains and have shown that they lack {alpha}-helical secondary structure. We have also probed the glycosylation status of TLR2. Using site-directed mutagenesis, we found that all four predicted sites are used and that one of these, the conserved site 4, is heterogeneously glycosylated. Mutation of all the sites severely affects the biosynthesis and secretion of the TLR2 ectodomain.


   EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Sequence Alignments and Bioinformatic Analysis—TLR protein sequences were retrieved from the EMBL data base using SRS (sequence retrieval system). Retrieved protein sequence accession numbers are as follows: human TLR1 Q9UG90, murine TLR1 Q9EPW5; bovine TLR2 Q9GL66, chicken TLR2 variant 1 Q9DD78, chicken TLR2 variant 2 Q9DGB6, equine TLR2 AAR08196_P, hamster Q9R1F8, human TLR2 O15454 [UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot] , macaca TLR2 Q95M53, murine TLR2 Q9DBC4, pig TLR2 AAQ84520 [GenBank] rat TLR2 variant 1 AAN86524_P, rat TLR2 variant 2 AAN86525_P, human TLR3 O15455 [GenBank] , murine TLR3 Q91ZM4, rat TLR3 Q7TNI8; baboon TLR4 Q9TSP2, bovine TLR4 Q9GL65, feline TLR4 P58727 [GenBank] , chimpanzee TLR4 Q9TTN0, equine TLR4 Q9MYW3, hamster TLR4 Q9WV82, human TLR4 Q9UM57, murine TLR4 Q9Z203, rat TLR4 Q9QX05; human TLR5 O15456 [UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot] , murine TLR5 Q9JLF7; human TLR6 Q9Y2C9, murine TLR6 Q9WTQ4, pig TLR6 BAC99317_p; human TLR7 Q9NR98, murine TLR7 Q923I1; human TLR8 Q9NYG9, murine TLR8 Q91XI7; dog TLR9 Q865B9_p, human TLR9 Q9NYC3, murine Q99MQ8, pig TLR9 Q865R8_p, rat TLR9 AAO91938 [GenBank] human TLR10 Q9BXR5. For analysis of site conservation, sequences from different species were aligned using ClustalW and color-coded using Joy (12). To analyze where sites were located within the LRR solenoid structure, individual LRRs were manually aligned based on the LRR definitions of Bell et al.(13). Alignments were then colored using Joy as before. Structural representations were created using PyMol (www.pymol.org), based on the crystal structure of the Nogo receptor (10).

Cell Culture—Sf9 and T.ni cells for baculovirus generation and protein expression were grown in suspension culture in serum-free SF900 II medium (Invitrogen) containing 0.1% pluronic acid (Sigma). For the expression of glycosylation mutants HEK293 (human embryonic kidney) cells were used and cultured in HEPES-modified Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium cell (Sigma), supplemented with L-Gln, 10% fetal bovine serum, and antibiotics (penicillin/streptomycin).

Expression of Recombinant Toll-like Receptors 2 and 4 —Expression constructs for residues 1–587 and 1–631 of the TLR2 and TLR4 extracellular domains, respectively, were generated by PCR on a vector containing the TLR2 open reading frame using a 5' primer encoding a BamHI site and Kozac sequence and a 3' primer encoding an rTEV protease cleavage site, His6 tag, STOP codon, and NotI restriction site, respectively. The PCR product was purified and cloned into the plasmid pFastBac (Invitrogen). A recombinant baculovirus was generated using the Bac-to-Bac system (Invitrogen) with Sf9 cells. Large scale protein expression was carried out in T.ni cells by infection of 10-liter cultures at a multiplicity of infection of 0.1 and a cell density of 1.0 x 106 ml. The cell culture supernatant was harvested 3 days postinfection, concentrated to 500 ml using a tangential flow filtration unit (Pall Filtron), and the buffer exchanged to 150 mM NaCl, 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 5 mM imidazole. The concentrate was purified using Superflow Ni-NTA acid-agarose (Qiagen) on an ÄKTA FPLC system (Amersham Biosciences) at 4 °C. Protein-containing fractions were pooled and further purified by gel filtration on Superdex 200 gel filtration columns (Amersham Biosciences).

CD Spectroscopy and Data Analysis—TLR2 and TLR4 proteins were dialyzed into 20 mM NaCl 20 mM sodium phosphate buffer, pH 7.2, and spectra recorded between 190 and 250 nm on a Aviv Model 215 circular dichroism spectrometer with a protein concentration of ~10 µM. Raw data were averaged from duplicate runs and a buffer control subtracted. Data were analyzed using Excel software. Circular dichroism data were analyzed using the program Selcon3 (14). Raw CD data were converted to molar ellipticity and transferred into input files as outlined in the CDPro documentation. Secondary structure information for platelet glycoprotein Ib and Ng-R was retrieved from Protein Data Bank structure files (1GWB [PDB] and 1OZN [PDB] , respectively) using Procheck (15).

Glycosidase Treatment—TLR2 samples were dialyzed into 100 mM phosphate buffer, pH 7.2. For denatured samples, 1% (v/v) Nonidet P-40, 1% (v/v) {beta}-mercaptoethanol, and 0.1% (w/v) SDS were added and the samples boiled for 10 min. Subsequently, 20 units of PNGase F, 100 milliunits of endoglycosidase H, 20 milliunits of neuraminidase, and/or 20 milliunits of O-glycosidase were added to 200 µl of protein sample as required; the final volume was adjusted to 260 µl. Mixtures were then incubated overnight at 37 °C and the samples analyzed by SDS-PAGE.

TLR2 Mutagenesis and Expression of Mutants in HEK293 Cells— Site-directed mutagenesis was carried out according to the instructions in the Stratagene QuikChange kit. The following primers (and their reverse complements) were used for mutagenesis (mutated codons in bold, changed bases in italics): N114S, atcc tat aat tac tta tct TCT tta tcg tct tcc tgg ttc aag ccc; S114N, atcc tat aat tac tta tct AAT tta tcg tct tcc tgg ttc aag ccc; N199D, aagt ttg aag tca att cag GAC gta agt cat ctg atc cttc; D199N, aagt ttg aag tca att cag AAC gta agt cat ctg atc cttc; T416A, tg ctc act ctg aaa aac ttg GCT cta aca ttg ata tca gta ag; A416T, tg ctc act ctg aaa aac ttg ACT cta aca ttg ata tca gta ag; N442D, ca gaa aag atg aaa tat ttg GAC tta tcc agc aca cga ata cac; D442N, ca gaa aag atg aaa tat ttg AAC tta tcc agc aca cga ata cac. The mutagenized inserts were sequenced and then backcloned into original pcDNA3.1 vector backbone to avoid mutations outside the sequenced insert region. For expression of the mutant constructs, plasmids were transfected into HEK293 cells using LipofectAMINE 2000 according to the manufacturer's instructions. Samples were collected 72 h posttransfection. Supernatant samples (usually ~1.5 ml) were collected and dialyzed against 2 x 5 liters of buffer A + 5 mM imidazole. Subsequently, the samples were loaded onto Ni-NTA acid spin columns in several centrifugation runs at 1500 rpm. Columns were then washed twice with buffer A containing 30 mM imidazole and His-tagged proteins eluted with 200 µl of 250 mM imidazole-containing buffer. Cells were collected by scraping and then washed twice in ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline. The cell pellet was subsequently lysed in 150 µl of radioimmune precipitation assay buffer by incubation on ice for 30 min with pulse vortexing every 10 min. The sample was then centrifuged for 15 min in a chilled centrifuge and the cleared lysates transferred to a fresh tube. Both supernatant samples and cell lysates were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and subsequent immunoblot using TLR2 antibodies (gift from G. Squires) (16). Bands were analyzed with Image J software (rsb.info.nih.gov/ij).


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
A Single Conserved Glycosylation Site Is Present in TLR2 and Is Located on the Conserved Face of the Leucine-rich Repeat Solenoid—Analysis of the primary sequence of TLR2 ectodomains reveals the presence of four potential glycosylation sites. All of these lie within consensus leucine-rich repeats, and three are predicted to lie in the constant regions of the LRR (Fig. 1, A and B). Site 1 is predicted to be solvent-exposed on the convex surface of the LRR solenoid. By contrast, sites 2 and 3 are located on the concave surface but in a position predicted to be solvent-exposed and to make the asparagine residues available for modification. On the other hand, site 4 is located on the terminal residue of the parallel {beta}-sheet of LRR16, a structure that forms part of the inner surface of the solenoid; access to this site in the folded state might be sterically restricted. We examined whether any of these four sites is conserved in the 11 TLR2 sequences currently known. As shown in Fig. 1C, only site 4 is conserved in all species; the other three are present in about 6 of 11 species.

The Ectodomains of Toll-like Receptors 2 and 4 Are Secreted in a Monomeric and N-glycosylated Form when Expressed in Insect Cell Culture—The extracellular domains of TLR2 and TLR4 were secreted from Sf9 insect culture cells infected with baculovirus expression constructs. The proteins were purified from culture supernatants using metal affinity chromatography and gel filtration chromatography (Fig. 2A). Both TLR2 and TLR4 ectodomains eluted as single peaks at positions that indicate the proteins are monomeric (Fig. 2B). To study the glycosylation status of TLR2, we treated samples with several glycosidases: PNGase F, an amidase that cleaves between the innermost GlcNAc and asparagine residues of high mannose, hybrid, and complex oligosaccharides from N-linked glycoproteins; endoglycosidase H, which cleaves the chitobiose core of high mannose and some hybrid oligosaccharides from N-linked glycoproteins; neuraminidase (also called sialidase), which releases terminal N-acetyl-neuraminic (sialic) acid structures from complex sugars; and O-glycosidase, which releases the disaccharide {beta}-galactosidase (1–3)-GalNAc from O-glycans bound to serine or threonine (17). Protein samples were denatured beforehand or left untreated and then incubated overnight in the presence of glycosidases at 37 °C under mildly denaturing or native conditions as indicated. Samples were analyzed by SDS-PAGE (see Fig. 2C). Both protein preparations are insensitive to treatment with neuraminidase and O-glycosidase, which suggests that there is no or very little O-glycosylation. By contrast, both endoglycosidase H and PN-Gase F deglycosylate TLR2, demonstrating the presence of N-linked sugars.



View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 2.
The TLR2 and TLR4 extracellular domains can be expressed and purified from insect cell culture, and the TLR2 extracellular domain is glycosylated. A, expression and purification of TLR2 and TLR4 extracellular domains. Culture supernatants of insect cells infected with TLR2 and TLR4 recombinant baculoviruses were concentrated and purified by Ni-NTA purification (lanes 1 and 3, respectively) and gel filtration (lanes 2 and 4, respectively). Samples were analyzed on 4–20% SDS-PAGE and stained with Coomassie Blue. B, gel filtration profiles of purified TLR2 and TLR4 ectodomans. Left, purified TLR2 extracellular domain analyzed on a calibrated analytical Superdex 75 gel filtration column. Right, purified TLR4 extracellular domain analyzed on a calibrated Superdex 200 gel filtration column. C, treatment of TLR2 extracellular domain protein with glycosidases. Purified TLR2 protein was treated with PNGase F (F), endoglycosidase H (H), neuraminidase (N), or O-glycosidase (O), as indicated, under native or denatured conditions overnight at 37 °C. Samples were then analyzed on 8% SDS-PAGE and Coomassie-stained.

 
Circular Dichroism Spectra of TLR2 and TLR4 Indicate a Lack of {alpha}-Helical Structure—To analyze the secondary structure adopted by TLR2 and TLR4 ectodomains, we measured circular dichroism spectra of the purified proteins. As shown in Fig. 3, both samples display a negative band at ~217 nm. This indicates the presence of {beta} structure, but the lack of bands at 208 and 222 nm suggests a low content of {alpha}-helix in the proteins. The secondary structure content of the spectra was estimated using the program Selcon3 (14) and compared with known LRR protein structures (Table I). This result strongly suggests that the LRRs of TLR2 and 4 adopt an overall architecture similar to that of platelet glycoprotein Ib and the Nogo receptor (see Fig. 1) (9, 10) and unlike that of ribonuclease inhibitor, which has a high {alpha}-helical content (18).



View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 3.
Circular dichroism spectroscopy of TLR2 and TLR4 extracellular domains. Spectra were recorded in phosphate buffer from 250 to 190 nm, duplicate runs were averaged, and a buffer control subtracted. Data were analyzed using CDPro as shown in Table I.

 


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE I
Selcon3 analysis of TLR2 and TLR4 CD spectra and comparison with LRR proteins of known three-dimensional structure

Ribonuclease inhibitor PDB code 2BNH [PDB] (18), GpIb PDB code 1GWB [PDB] (29), Internalin B PDB code 1DOB [PDB] (30), Ng-R PDB code 1OZN [PDB] (10). Secondary structure content was retrieved using Procheck (15).

 
All Four Predicted Glycosylation Sites in TLR2 Are Modified and Are Required for Efficient Secretion—To study the role of TLR2 glycosylation further, the four predicted N-linked sites were sequentially removed by site-directed mutagenesis. To conserve function and folding, sites 1 to 3 were changed to residues found at those positions in TLR2 from other species (Fig. 1C), and the fully conserved site 4 was mutated to aspartate, a residue frequently found at position 6 in other extracellular LRRs. The four mutant proteins were then expressed in HEK293 cells, followed by immunoblot assay of both supernatant and cell lysate samples (Fig. 4). Each successive mutation reduced the apparent molecular mass of the recombinant protein, demonstrating that the mutations prevented the addition of N-glycans. The wild-type TLR2 protein expressed in the presence of tunicamycin, an inhibitor of N-linked glycosylation, co-migrates with mutant 4, suggesting that mutant 4 is fully unglycosylated (Fig. 4). Taken together, these results demonstrate that each of the four sites is occupied in the wild-type TLR2 ectodomain. It is noticeable that not all protein bands are single species. In the supernatant samples where bands are generally broad and fuzzy, this is hard to distinguish, but in the cell lysate blot doublet bands are discernible. Analysis of these bands using ImageJ software confirms this observation (Fig. 4B). Differences in electrophoretic mobility manifesting themselves as multiplet bands are most likely caused by inefficient core glycosylation. That there are only doublet bands and no triplet or higher order multiplets is an indication that only one of the sites is partially glycosylated. The lower doublet band in lane 11 probably corresponds to unglycosylated protein because it co-migrates with mutant 4. In other samples, upper and lower bands correspond to mono- and diglycosylated (mutant 2), di- or triglycosylated (mutant 1) and so forth. The doublet is present in wild-type and all the mutants up to mutant 3 (lanes 8–11) but disappears in mutant 4 (lane 12). This suggests that site 4, the last remaining site in mutant 3, is the partially occupied site, removal of which generates a universally unglycosylated and unsecreted product.



View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 4.
Properties of glycosylation mutants expressed in mammalian culture cells. Immunoblot of culture supernatants (A) or cell lysates (B) from HEK293 cells transfected with TLR2 glycosylation mutants 1–4 as indicated in the absence or presence of tunicamycin (*) or transfected with empty vector (x). Samples were collected and processed 3 days posttransfection as described, separated on 8% SDS-PAGE, and probed with anti-TLR2 antibody. C, bands labeled 1, 2, and 3 were analyzed using ImageJ software.

 
No Permutation of Double or Triple Glycosylation Mutants Restores Efficient Secretion of TLR2 Ectodomain—To determine whether any TLR2 ectodomain that retains a single, homogeneous glycosylation site can be efficiently secreted, the three remaining triple mutants were made. As shown in Fig. 5, none of these proteins is secreted by HEK293. However, a substantial amount of protein can be detected intracellularly, and it appears that the single glycosylation sites are used as the bands migrate more slowly than the mutant lacking all the sites. In addition, three further permutations not involving site 4 cannot be secreted (Fig. 6). Interestingly, although the single mutant lacking site 1 is secreted at only a slightly reduced level compared with wild-type, the site 4 single mutant is severely impaired. This points to the heterogeneous site 4 as being particularly critical for secretion of TLR2.



View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 5.
Monoglycosylated and glycosylated mutants of TLR2 fail to secrete. Immunoblot of culture supernatants (A) or cell lysates (B) from HEK293 cells transfected with TLR2 glycosylation mutants 4–7 as indicated or transfected with empty vector (x). Samples were collected and processed as before. The asterisk denotes a nonspecific protein also detected in the empty vector control (x).

 



View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 6.
Diglycoyslated mutants of TLR2 cannot support secretion. Immunoblot of culture supernatants (A) or cell lysates (B) from HEK293 cells transfected with TLR2 glycosylation mutants 1 and 8–11 as indicated or transfected with empty vector (x). Samples were collected and processed as before.

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
The expression studies and purification of TLR2 and TLR4 presented here show that folded and monodisperse proteins can be produced by baculovirus-infected insect culture cells in amounts sufficient for biochemical and structural analysis. The ability of the TLR2 ectodomain to be secreted in a heterologous expression system is consistent with the behavior of endogenous human TLR2. TLR2 is detected on the surface of monocytes, and TLR2 ectodomains are shed from these cells (19). It is proposed that shed TLR2 may have a physiological role in regulating responses to pathogens.

The circular dichroism spectroscopy studies presented here indicate that the LRRs of TLR2 and TLR4 are likely to fold into an overall structure comparable with that of platelet glycoprotein Ib and the Nogo receptor. This finding has allowed us to predict the likely arrangement of the polysaccharide chains in TLR2 and TLR4 (see Fig. 1 and Supplemental Fig. S1).

We have shown that human TLR2 is glycosylated when expressed in a human cell line and thus confirmed the character of TLR2 as a glycoprotein. Although glycosylation of the cell surface TLR2 receptor protein may be different (20), our data suggest that all four glycosylation sites are modified in the mature TLR2 protein. Other studies suggest that this is also the case for TLR4. TLR4 requires glycosylation for receptor function (21); its functional importance may be reflected in the high degree of conservation of TLR4 glycosylation sites, all of which are conserved (see Fig. S1). In TLR1 two of six and in TLR6 five of nine glycosylation sites are conserved across species. In TLR2, which features the least number of glycosylation sites in all TLRs, only site 4 is conserved. An analysis of predicted glycosylation sites in all the TLRs is presented in supplementary data (Table S1). The degree of conservation observed may reflect the requirements of glycosylation in receptor function. Interestingly, the conserved site in TLR2 shows inefficient core glycosylation, whereas all other sites are efficiently substituted. Thus, this site may be of importance for protein structure or secretion rather than for signaling function. In this regard, protein binding to both platelet glycoprotein Ib and the Nogo receptor does not require glycosylation but does involve interaction with LRR residues on the concave surface of the LRR solenoid.

Comparing the TLR2 mutants generated here, the level of protein biosynthesis appears to be similar between the different mutants despite the differences in the nature and number of mutated residues. Our observations illustrate that glycosylation is an important determinant of TLR2 secretion in mammalian cells. All mutants are impaired in their level of secretion in comparison to wild-type protein, and not only entirely unglycosylated but also monoglycosylated mutants secrete poorly. The decrease in secretion between mutants 1 and 4 (Fig. 4) shows that the overall number of glycosylation sites has a strong influence on the ability of the protein to secrete, potentially by decreasing interactions of the nascent protein chain with the cellular folding machinery. Based on this data, TLR2 appears to belong to the group of glycoproteins that require most, if not all, glycosylation sites for secretion (22, 23).

Our data suggest that the conserved site 4 is one of the major determinants for proper TLR2 biosynthesis. All mutants in Figs. 5 and 6 lack site 4 and do not secrete efficiently, although they still carry some glycosylation. On the other hand, mutants 1–3, which still have site 4, are secreted even though at decreasing levels (Fig. 4). Significantly, the single mutant lacking only site 1 retains a reasonable level of secretion, whereas the single mutant of site 4 cannot be detected in supernatants, again suggesting a particular importance for this glycosylation event. The role played by particular glycosylation sites in determining the ability of a protein to secrete has been studied before (20, 24–26). Our data also suggest that this site is partially occupied, and this is consistent with enzymatic deglycosylation experiments (Fig. 2). It is conceivable that this is because of low accessibility on the inner LRR solenoid surface. Because this region has been implicated as the primary ligand binding region in LRR proteins, it is possible that site 4 is functionally important (27).


   FOOTNOTES
 
* The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact. Back

The on-line version of this article (available at http://www.jbc.org) contains a supplemental figure and a supplemental table. Back

Supported by a studentship from GlaxoSmithKline and St. John's College, Cambridge. Back

|| To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 44-1223-333626; Fax: 44-1223-766002; E-mail: njg11{at}mole.bio.cam.ac.uk.

1 The abbreviations used are: TLR, toll-like receptor; LRR, leucine-rich repeat; Ni-NTA, nickel-nitrilotriacetic acid; HEK, human embryonic kidney. Back


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank Alan Lewis for help with LRR alignments and mutagenesis.



   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Janeway, C. A., and Medzhitov, R. (2002) Annu. Rev. Immunol. 20, 197–216[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Gay, N. J., and Keith, F. J. (1991) Nature 351, 355–356
  3. Belvin, M. P., and Anderson, K. V. (1996) Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 12, 393–416[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  4. Imler, J. L., and Hoffmann, J. A. (2001) Trends Cell Biol. 11, 304–311[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  5. Buchanan, S. G. S., and Gay, N. J. (1996) Prog. Biophys. Mol. Bio. 65, 1–44[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Rock, F. L., Hardiman, G., Timans, J. C., Kastelein, R. A., and Bazan, J. F. (1998) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 95, 588–593[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Weber, A., Tauszig-Delamasure, S., Hoffmann, J., Lelièvre, E., Gascan, H., Ray, K., Morse, M., Imler, J., and Gay, N. (2003) Nat. Immunol. 4, 794–800[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  8. Gangloff, M., and Gay, N. J. (2004) Trends Biochem. Sci. 29, 294–300[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Huizinga, E. G., Tsuji, S., Romijn, R. A. P., Schiphorst, M. E., de Groot, P. G., Sixma, J. J., and Gros, P. (2002) Science 297, 1176–1179[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. He, X. L. L., Bazan, J. F., McDermott, G., Park, J. B., Wang, K., Tessier-Lavigne, M., He, Z. G., and Garcia, K. C. (2003) Neuron 38, 177–185[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  11. Kobe, B., and Deisenhofer, J. (1995) Nature 374, 183–186[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  12. Mizuguchi, K., Deane, C. M., Blundell, T. L., Johnson, M. S., and Overingon, J. P. (1998) Bioinformatics 14, 617–623[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Bell, J. K., Mullen, G. E., Leifer, C. A., Mazzoni, A., Davies, D. R., and Segal, D. M. (2003) Trends Immunol. 24, 528–533[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  14. Sreerama, N., and Woody, R. W. (2000) Anal. Biochem. 287, 252–260[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  15. Laskowski, R. A. (2001) Nucleic Acids Res. 29, 221–222[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Hausmann, M., Kiessling, S., Mestermann, S., Webb, G., Spottl, T., Andus, T., Scholmerich, J., Herfarth, H., Ray, K., Falk, W., and Rogler, G. (2002) Gastroenterology 122, 1987–2000[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  17. Maley, F., Trimble, R. B., Tarentino, A. L., and Plummer, T. H., Jr. (1989) Anal. Biochem. 180, 195–204[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  18. Kobe, B., and Deisenhofer, J. (1993) Nature 366, 751–756[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  19. LeBouder, E., Rey-Nores, J. E., Rushmere, N. K., Grigorov, M., Lawn, S. D., Affolter, M., Griffin, G. E., Ferrara, P., Schiffrin, E. J., Morgan, B. P., and Labeta, M. O. (2003) J. Immunol. 171, 6680–6689[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Wojczyk, B. S., Stwora-Wojczyk, M., Shakin-Eshleman, S., Wunner, W. H., and Spitalnik, S. L. (1998) Glycobiology 8, 121–130[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Correia, J. D., and Ulevitch, R. J. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 1845–1854[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Hickman, S., and Kornfeld, S. (1978) J. Immunol. 121, 990–996[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Taylor, A. K., and Wall, R. (1988) Mol. Cell. Biol. 8, 4197–4203[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Assil, I. Q., and Abou-Samra, A. B. (2001) Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab. 281, E1015-E1021[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Dube, S., Fisher, J. W., and Powell, J. S. (1988) J. Biol. Chem. 263, 17516–17521[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Semenkovich, C. F., Luo, C. C., Nakanishi, M. K., Chen, S. H., Smith, L. C., and Chan, L. (1990) J. Biol. Chem. 265, 5429–5433[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Recny, M. A., Luther, M. A., Knoppers, M. H., Neidhardt, E. A., Khandekar, S. S., Concino, M. F., Schimke, P. A., Francis, M. A., Moebius, U., and Reinhold, B. B. (1992) J. Biol. Chem. 267, 22428–22434[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Taylor, W. R. (1997) J. Mol. Biol. 269, 902–943[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  29. Uff, S., Clemetson, J. M., Harrison, T., Clemetson, K. J., and Emsley, J. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 35657–35663[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Marino, M., Braun, L., Cossart, P., and Ghosh, P. (1999) Mol. Cell 4, 1063–1072[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Immunol.Home page
A.-C. Raby, E. Le Bouder, C. Colmont, J. Davies, P. Richards, B. Coles, C. H. George, S. A. Jones, P. Brennan, N. Topley, et al.
Soluble TLR2 Reduces Inflammation without Compromising Bacterial Clearance by Disrupting TLR2 Triggering
J. Immunol., July 1, 2009; 183(1): 506 - 517.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Pathol.Home page
K. C. Coltri, L. L. Oliveira, C. F. Pinzan, P. E. Vendruscolo, R. Martinez, M. H. Goldman, A. Panunto-Castelo, and M.-C. Roque-Barreira
Therapeutic Administration of KM+ Lectin Protects Mice Against Paracoccidioides brasiliensis Infection via Interleukin-12 Production in a Toll-Like Receptor 2-Dependent Mechanism
Am. J. Pathol., August 1, 2008; 173(2): 423 - 432.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JEMHome page
E. Andersen-Nissen, K. D. Smith, R. Bonneau, R. K. Strong, and A. Aderem
A conserved surface on Toll-like receptor 5 recognizes bacterial flagellin
J. Exp. Med., February 19, 2007; 204(2): 393 - 403.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J BiochemHome page
K. Ito, A. Seri, F. Kimura, and N. Matsudomi
Site-specific Glycosylation at Asn-292 in Ovalbumin is Essential to Efficient Secretion in Yeast
J. Biochem., February 1, 2007; 141(2): 193 - 199.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
J. K. Bell, J. Askins, P. R. Hall, D. R. Davies, and D. M. Segal
The dsRNA binding site of human Toll-like receptor 3
PNAS, June 6, 2006; 103(23): 8792 - 8797.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
J. Sun, K. E. Duffy, C. T. Ranjith-Kumar, J. Xiong, R. J. Lamb, J. Santos, H. Masarapu, M. Cunningham, A. Holzenburg, R. T. Sarisky, et al.
Structural and Functional Analyses of the Human Toll-like Receptor 3: ROLE OF GLYCOSYLATION
J. Biol. Chem., April 21, 2006; 281(16): 11144 - 11151.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
K. O. Omueti, J. M. Beyer, C. M. Johnson, E. A. Lyle, and R. I. Tapping
Domain Exchange between Human Toll-like Receptors 1 and 6 Reveals a Region Required for Lipopeptide Discrimination
J. Biol. Chem., November 4, 2005; 280(44): 36616 - 36625.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
A. N. R. Weber, M. C. Moncrieffe, M. Gangloff, J.-L. Imler, and N. J. Gay
Ligand-Receptor and Receptor-Receptor Interactions Act in Concert to Activate Signaling in the Drosophila Toll Pathway
J. Biol. Chem., June 17, 2005; 280(24): 22793 - 22799.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
A. Grabiec, G. Meng, S. Fichte, W. Bessler, H. Wagner, and C. J. Kirschning
Human but Not Murine Toll-like Receptor 2 Discriminates between Tri-palmitoylated and Tri-lauroylated Peptides
J. Biol. Chem., November 12, 2004; 279(46): 48004 - 48012.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
279/33/34589    most recent
M403830200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Weber, A. N. R.
Right arrow Articles by Gay, N. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Weber, A. N. R.
Right arrow Articles by Gay, N. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 All ASBMB Journals   Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 
 Journal of Lipid Research   ASBMB Today 
Copyright © 2004 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
Advertisement
spacer
Advertisement
Advertisement