Advertisement
JBC

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


     

Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M505968200 on October 28, 2005

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 281, Issue 3, 1477-1488, January 20, 2006
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
281/3/1477    most recent
M505968200v1
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 Church, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Fulton, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Church, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Fulton, D.
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?

Differences in eNOS Activity Because of Subcellular Localization Are Dictated by Phosphorylation State Rather than the Local Calcium Environment*

Jarrod E. Church and David Fulton1

From the Vascular Biology Center and the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, Georgia 30912

Received for publication, June 1, 2005 , and in revised form, October 28, 2005.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Nitric oxide (NO) produced in the endothelium via the enzyme endothelial nitric-oxide synthase (eNOS) is an important vasoactive compound. Wild-type (WT) eNOS is localized to the plasma membrane and perinuclear/Golgi region by virtue of N-terminal myristoylation and palmitoylation. Acylation-deficient mutants (G2AeNOS) remain cytosolic and release less NO in response to Ca2+-elevating agonists; a disparity that we hypothesized was attributed to the greater distance between G2AeNOS and plasma membrane Ca2+ influx channels. The reduced activity of G2AeNOS versus WT was reversed upon disruption of cellular integrity with detergents or sonication. NO production from both constructs relied almost exclusively on the influx of extracellular Ca2+, and elevating intracellular Ca2+ to saturating levels with 10 µM ionomycin in the presence of 10 mM extracellular Ca2+ equalized NO production. To identify the contribution of calcium to the differences in activity between these enzymes, we created Ca2+/CaM-independent eNOS mutants by deleting the two putative autoinhibitory domains of eNOS. There was no difference in NO production between WT and G2A-targeted Ca2+-independent eNOS, suggesting that Ca2+ was the factor responsible. When eNOS constructs were fused in-frame to the bioluminescent probe aequorin, membrane-bound probes were exposed to higher [Ca2+] in unstimulated cells but upon ionomycin stimulation, the probes experienced equal amounts of Ca2+. The WT and G2A enzymes displayed significant differences in the phosphorylation state of Ser617, Ser635, and Ser1179, and mutating all three sites to alanine or restoring phosphorylation with the phosphatase inhibitor calyculin abolished the differences in activity. We therefore conclude that the disparity in NO production between WTeNOS and G2AeNOS is not caused by different localized [Ca2+] upon stimulation with ionomycin, but rather differences in phosphorylation state between the two constructs.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Nitric oxide (NO)2 produced in the endothelium via the enzyme endothelial nitric-oxide synthase (eNOS) is an important vasoactive compound (1). Loss of endothelial function, and particularly disturbance of eNOS-derived NO production, has been implicated in a number of cardiovascular diseases, and represents a promising therapeutic target (2, 3). The production of NO is a tightly regulated event and is influenced in the short term by a series of post-translational modifications (4). These include modulation of phosphorylation state by kinases and phosphatases (5–9), protein-protein interactions (4), and availability of requisite substrates and cofactors for eNOS function, including L-arginine, tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4), iron (Fe), FMN, FAD, NADPH, and calcium/calmodulin (1). Finally, eNOS activity can also be affected by the intracellular localization of the enzyme (10).

The subcellular localization of wild-type eNOS (WTeNOS) is dictated by post-translational fatty acylation, specifically myristylation of the glycine at position 2, which then leads to palmitoylation of the cysteines at positions 15 and 26 (11). This fatty acylation has been reported to target eNOS to both the plasma membrane and the perinuclear/Golgi region (12, 13). Mutant eNOS constructs, in which the glycine at position 2 is mutated to alanine (G2AeNOS), fail to undergo fatty acylation, and as a consequence remain cytosolic (14). This mistargeting has profound consequences for NO production, as both basal and stimulated NO production by G2AeNOS is markedly reduced compared with WTeNOS (14, 15). However, when the WTeNOS and G2AeNOS constructs are purified and examined in vitro with maximal substrate and cofactors, no differences in catalytic activity are observed (14). The mechanisms underlying the difference in catalytic activity in distinct intracellular environments remain unclear.

When inducible NOS (iNOS) is expressed with the targeting sequences for both WTeNOS and G2AeNOS, the production of NO is completely unaffected by intracellular location (16). As iNOS and eNOS require similar amounts of L-arginine, BH4, and NADPH for activity, it seems unlikely that local variations in these cofactors are responsible for the altered activity of targeted eNOS constructs. In contrast, iNOS and eNOS are diametrically opposed in their dependence on Ca2+/CaM-eNOS is highly dependent on increases in intracellular Ca2+ for activity, whereas iNOS is already maximally activated by Ca2+/CaM even at basal levels of intracellular Ca2+, and is thus to all practical purposes Ca2+-independent (17). Therefore, intracellular [Ca2+] represents a plausible candidate that mediates the differences in NO production observed between WTeNOS and G2AeNOS.

One of the major sources of Ca2+ entry into non-excitable cells is the opening of non-selective cation channels in the plasma membrane in response to the depletion of intracellular Ca2+ stores, a phenomenon known as capacitative calcium entry (CCE) (18). CCE is the predominate source of agonist-regulated Ca2+ entry into endothelial cells and is also believed to play a major role in shear stress-stimulated Ca2+ entry (19–21). It is now widely accepted that the influx of external Ca2+, specifically that provided by CCE, is also the predominate source of the Ca2+ required by eNOS for sustained activation and NO production (22). Elevations in intracellular Ca2+, particularly in response to Ca2+ influx, are rarely homogeneous throughout the cell. For instance, invoking CCE in A7r5 cells produces a rather modest increase in cytosolic Ca2+, while producing localized [Ca2+] up to 300 times greater at the plasma membrane (23). Indeed, it has previously been demonstrated that the peak Ca2+ transient response reported upon invoking of CCE is higher for WTeNOS than a myristylation-deficient eNOS expressed in COS cells (22). However, whether this disparity in local [Ca2+] is sufficient to explain the large differences in NO production between WTe-NOS and G2AeNOS over sustained periods of time remains to be elucidated. Indeed, NO production and calcium elevation are elevated above baseline several minutes beyond the initial influx of CCE-driven calcium (24, 25). Therefore, the aim of the present study was to determine whether proximity to plasma membrane Ca2+ entry channels and the subsequent differences in localized [Ca2+] experienced by the plasma membrane and the cytosol, were the sole determinant of the disparity between the NO production by membrane-bound or cytosolic eNOS constructs.


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Cell Culture and Transfection—Both COS-7 cells and bovine aortic endothelial cells (BAECs) were cultured in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (DMEM, Invitrogen) containing L-glutamine, penicillin, streptomycin, and 10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum. COS-7 cells were transfected by using LipofectamineTM 2000 according to the manufacturer's instructions (Invitrogen). BAECs were transduced with constructs (WTeNOS, G2AeNOS, or aequorin constructs) that had been inserted into the pDEST adenoviral vector (Invitrogen).

Generation of eNOS Constructs—A cytosolic bovine eNOS construct (G2AeNOS) was constructed by mutating the alanine at position 2 of wild-type bovine eNOS (WTeNOS) to a glycine, preventing fatty acylation of the enzyme, as previously described (14). The eNOS constructs with reduced Ca2+/CaM dependence were based on a Ca2+/CaM-independent construct ({Delta}45/{Delta}14eNOS) of human eNOS first characterized by Chen and Wu (26). Two significant portions of the sequence of human eNOS that were not shared by the Ca2+-insensitive NOS isoform iNOS, specifically the residues of the two putative autoinhibitory control elements: 594–606/614–645 ({Delta}45) and 1165–1178 ({Delta}14) were deleted. The constructs for the present study were created by deleting the corresponding residues in bovine eNOS, specifically 596–608/616–647 ({Delta}45) and 1167–1180 ({Delta}14). cDNA fragments containing the mutated regions were generated by PCR using WTeNOS cDNA as a template, and a pair of primers were used for each region: 5'-GAAGCGGATCTTGTAACTCTTCATCTCCATCAG-GGCAG-3' and 5'-GAGTTACAAGATCCGCTTCAGGTTCTGTGTGTTCGGACTGGGC-3' for the {Delta}45 mutation, 5'-GATGCCGCTCCTGCAGGGAAAACGTGAGGCCGAAAATGTC-3' and 5'-CCTCACGTTTTCCCTGCAGGAGCGGCATCTG-3' for the {Delta}14 mutation. Each fragment was then sequentially subcloned into WTeNOS or G2AeNOS cDNA.

Phospho-null eNOS mutants were generated by mutating serines 617, 635, and 1179 to alanine on bovine eNOS using sequential PCR mutagenesis with the primers previously described (5, 27), and then subcloning the various fragments into the WT and G2A targeting sequence construct. The sequences of the phospho-null eNOS and the Ca2+-independent eNOS constructs were confirmed by DNA sequencing at the Genomics Core Facility of the Medical College of Georgia.

NO Release from Intact Cells—Cells were transfected with the constructs of interest, and 48 h later were stimulated with the Ca2+ ionophore ionomycin (1 µM) for 30 min. Medium containing NO (primarily NO–2) was ethanol-precipitated to remove proteins and was refluxed in sodium iodide/glacial acetic acid to convert NO–2 to NO. NO was then quantified via specific chemiluminescence following reaction with ozone (Sievers). All NO measurements were corrected by subtracting the signal detected from cells transfected with empty vector (pCDNA3).

NO Production in Disrupted Cell Preparations—COS-7 cells transfected with either WTeNOS or G2AeNOS were scraped into 1.5-ml Eppendorf tubes, pelleted, and resuspended at a density of ~1 x 107 cells/ml in fresh serum-free DMEM supplemented with NADPH (100 µM). Cells undergoing sonication were then subjected to 3 x 1-s bursts with a sonic dismembrator (Fisher Model 100, setting: 3), after which the lysates were aliquoted and incubated for 30 min at 37 °C. Detergent-treated samples were treated with 1% Triton X-100 and then incubated for 30 min at 37 °C. The reaction was terminated by mixing samples with 2x volume of cold absolute ethanol before analysis for NO content (see above).

Generation of Aequorin (AEQ) Constructs—Four AEQ constructs were created; an HA-tagged aequorin for measurement of cytosolic Ca2+ (CYT-AEQ), an AEQ fused in-frame to the transmembrane domain of the T-cell surface glycoprotein CD8 (accession NM_001768 [GenBank] ) for measurement of Ca2+ at the plasma membrane (PM-AEQ), and AEQ fused in-frame to either WTeNOS (WTeNOS-AEQ) or G2AeNOS (G2AeNOS-AEQ) for measurement of the Ca2+ experienced by each construct (28).

Calibration of Aequorin Constructs to [Ca2+]—COS-7 cells were transfected with the AEQ fusion proteins, and 48 h later, the cells were homogenized by sonication in medium of the following composition: 50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 0.1 mM EGTA, 0.1 mM EDTA, 10 mM NaF, 1 mM orthovanadate, and 1x protease inhibitor mixture (Sigma). The lysates were then exposed to EGTA-buffered solutions of known Ca2+ concentrations, followed by total discharge of the AEQ with 10 mM CaCl2. The ratio of luminescence in the one second immediately after exposure to the Ca2+ solution was calculated as a proportion of the total luminescence emitted over the duration of the experiment (L/Lmax) and plotted against each known concentration of Ca2+ to obtain a calibration curve.

Ca2+ Measurements Using Aequorin in COS Cells—COS-7 cells were transfected with one of the four aequorin constructs, and 48 h later, the aequorin was activated by incubating the cells in Ca2+-free DMEM (BIOSOURCE) containing 5 µM coelenterazine (Sigma) for 1 h. Following this, loading medium was replaced with Ca2+-free DMEM without coelenterazine. The cells were then exposed to Ca2+-free DMEM, Ca2+-DMEM (DMEM containing 1.5 mM free Ca2+), or Ca2+-DMEM with 1 µM ionomycin. Cells were placed in a luminescence plate reader (Lumistar Galaxy) and after the appropriate treatment time the remaining luminescence (Lmax) was discharged by exposing the cells to a lysis buffer consisting of 10 mM Ca2+ and 0.3% Triton X-100 in dH2O, and then expressed as a ratio of the total luminescence obtained from untreated cells (t = 0).

AEQ and its cofactor coelenterazine react in the presence of Ca2+ to emit a photon. This reaction results in the permanent oxidation of coelenterazine to coelenteramide, and therefore the emission of light in response to Ca2+ is a once-only reaction. The size of the available pool of luminescence therefore decreases constantly over time in direct proportion to the amount of Ca2+ present. We, therefore, interpreted the decrease in Lmax as being indicative of exposure to Ca2+ over time, with a greater degree of burnout indicating that the AEQ probe had been exposed to more Ca2+.

Immunoprecipitation and Western Blotting—Cells were washed twice with phosphate-buffered saline and lysed in homogenization buffer of the following composition: 50 mM Tris-HCl, 0.1 mM EGTA, 0.1 mM EDTA, 0.1% SDS, 1% Nonidet P-40, 0.1% deoxycholic acid. Lysates were homogenized and cleared by centrifugation. After determining protein concentration (DC protein assay kit, Pierce), equal amounts of protein were incubated with an excess of eNOS monoclonal antibody for 2 h at 4°C. Protein A-Sepharose was then added, and the mixture incubated for another 1 h at 4 °C. The immune complexes were washed three times with lysis buffer and boiled in SDS-PAGE sample buffer (5 min), and then size-fractionated by SDS-PAGE. Blots were transferred to nitrocellulose membrane in standard transfer buffer for 18 h at 4 °C and 40 V, and then blocked in nonfat milk for 1 h. After blocking, membranes were incubated with phosphospecific antibodies raised to the individual phosphorylation sites (phospho-116 and phospho-Ser617, Upstate; phospho-Thr497, Cell Signaling Technologies; phospho-Ser635 and phospho-Ser1179, BD Transduction Laboratories) or with anti-eNOS monoclonal antibody (9D10, Zymed Laboratories) for 2 h, washed, incubated with secondary antibody conjugated to horseradish peroxidase (anti-mouse, Amersham Biosciences), washed again, and then developed using chemiluminescence (Amersham Biosciences).

2',5'-ADP-Sepharose Isolation of eNOS Constructs—Cells were washed twice with phosphate-buffered saline and homogenized as for the AEQ calibration experiments (see above). When required, membrane and cytosolic fractions were separated by centrifugation (100,000 x g, 90 min; Beckman ultracentrifuge), and the membrane fraction was resuspended in homogenization buffer supplemented with 1% Nonidet P-40. 2',5'-ADP-Sepharose beads (Amersham Biosciences) were then added to the fractions and rotated at 4 °C for 3 h. Beads were then washed three times in homogenization buffer before being prepared for Western blotting (see above).

Concentration-Response Curves to Ca2+/CaM with Isolated eNOS Constructs—COS-7 cells expressing WT and G2A eNOS constructs were homogenized and eNOS affinity-purified with 2',5'-ADP-Sepharose beads (as above). Following the 3-h rotation at 4 °C, beads were washed twice in HEPES-buffered saline (HBS; 135 mM NaCl, 5.9 mM KCl, 1.2 mM MgCl2, 11.6 mM HEPES, 11.5 mM glucose, pH 7.3) then twice in HBS supplemented with EGTA (2 mM) to remove all Ca2+/CaM from the sample, then washed twice again in HBS. Beads were then resuspended in treatment solutions consisting of HBS supplemented with NADPH (3 mM), BH4 (30 µM), L-arginine (100 µM), CaCl2 (1 mM), and varying concentrations of calmodulin (bovine heart calmodulin, Sigma). Reactions were terminated after 30 min by addition of 2x volume of ice-cold EtOH. The relative production of NO was determined by chemiluminescence as described above.

Confocal Imaging—To visualize the subcellular location of WT and G2A eNOS and eNOS-aequorin fusion protein within cells, we constructed additional fusion proteins encoding WT and G2A eNOS-GFP and WT and G2A-RFP-AEQ. COS-7 cells were then transfected with cDNAs encoding the eNOS fusion proteins of EGFP and monomeric RFP. 24–48 h later, cells were replated onto glass-bottomed culture dishes (MatTek). All imaging was performed using the LSM 510 Meta 3.2 Confocal Microscope (Zeiss). Magnification power was set at x40 with oil.

Statistical Analysis—NO release data were expressed as mean ± S.E. AEQ burnout data were individually normalized to the Lmax obtained for each AEQ fusion construct in Ca2+-free DMEM, then expressed as mean ± S.E. Overall differences between groups were analyzed using a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Student-Newman-Keuls posthoc analysis for determining differences between the means when more than two groups were compared. An independent Student's t test was used when only two groups were compared. Comparisons between the Ca2+ calibration curves of each AEQ fusion construct were made using 2-way ANOVA. Differences were considered significant if p < 0.05.


Figure 1
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 1.
WTeNOS produces more NO than G2AeNOS in intact cells but not in disrupted cells. a, COS-7 cells were transfected with WT and G2A eNOS and immunoblotted for total eNOS. b, NO release was measured from WT and G2A eNOS-transfected COS-7 cells that were stimulated for 30 min with ionomycin (IM, 1 µM), thapsigargin (TG, 100 nM), or extracellular ATP (100 µM) by NO-specific chemiluminescence. c, NO release from Triton X-100 (1%) or sonication (3 x 1-s bursts) disrupted COS-7 expressing WT and G2A eNOS. Cell lysates were incubated for 30 min in serum-free DMEM supplemented with 100 µM NADPH. Data are presented as means ± S.E. (n = 4–5). *, p < 0.05 versus WTeNOS.

 

   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
The Disparity in NO Production between WTeNOS and G2AeNOS Is Abolished by Cellular Disruption—When COS-7 cells were transfected with equal amounts of WTeNOS or G2AeNOS (Fig. 1a) and stimulated for 30 min with three Ca2+-mobilizing compounds: the Ca2+ ionophore ionomycin (1 µM), the SERCA inhibitor thapsigargin (100 nM), or extracellular ATP (100 µM), G2AeNOS produced significantly less NO than the WTeNOS (Fig. 1b). However, when cells expressing both constructs were disrupted either by sonication (3 x 1-s bursts, setting 3) or detergent (Triton X-100, 1%) in medium supplemented with NADPH (100 µM), G2AeNOS actually produced more NO than the WTeNOS construct (Fig. 1c), suggesting that the disparity in NO production between the constructs was reliant on intracellular localization.

NO Production by Both WTeNOS and G2AeNOS Is Ca2+-dependent, and Raising Intracellular Ca2+ to Saturating Levels Equalizes NO Production—Previous studies have suggested that a contributing factor to the disparity in NO production between membrane-bound WTeNOS and the myristylation-deficient, cytosolic G2AeNOS may be the proximity of each construct to store-operated Ca2+-entry channels (22); a hypothesis supported by our finding that disruption of cellular integrity abolished the differences in NO production. To further investigate this hypothesis, it was first necessary to confirm that the entry of extracellular Ca2+ was the dominant stimulus for NO production by both constructs. Cells transfected with either WTeNOS or G2AeNOS were stimulated with 1 µM ionomycin (a concentration that is reported to increase intracellular Ca2+ via activation of CCE and not direct opening of plasma membrane channels, Ref. 29) in serum-free DMEM (1.5 mM free Ca2+), in serum-free DMEM after preincubation with the intracellular Ca2+ chelator BAPTA-AM (10 µM, 20 min), or in serum-free and Ca2+-free DMEM supplemented with 1 mM EGTA. In the presence of extracellular Ca2+, G2AeNOS produced approximately half the amount of NO produced by WTeNOS (Fig. 2a). Preincubation with BAPTA-AM significantly decreased NO production by both constructs, but decreased NO production by G2AeNOS to a greater extent than that of WTeNOS (54% reduction in G2AeNOS activity versus only 20% reduction in WTeNOS activity). In contrast, the removal of extracellular Ca2+ reduced the ionomycin-induced NO production by both constructs by greater than 90% (Fig. 2a), demonstrating that both constructs rely almost entirely on the influx of external Ca2+ for sustained NO production.


Figure 2
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 2.
WT and G2A eNOS are dependent on extracellular Ca2+ and saturating intracellular Ca2+ normalizes activity. a, COS-7 cells transfected with WT and G2A eNOS were stimulated with ionomycin (1 µM; 30 min) in DMEM containing 1.5 mM free [Ca2+], after chelation of intracellular Ca2+ by preincubation with BAPTA-AM (10 µM, 20 min), or in the absence of extracellular Ca2+ (EGTA; 1 mM). NO release was quantified using a chemiluminescence NO analyzer (b). NO release over 30 min from transfected COS-7 cells that were stimulated with either 1 µM ionomycin or (c)10 µM ionomycin in DMEM containing increasing concentrations of extracellular Ca2+. Data are presented as means ± S.E. (n = 4). *, p < 0.05 versus WTeNOS; #, p < 0.05 versus NO production in the presence of Ca2+.

 


Figure 3
View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 3.
The activity of Ca2+-independent eNOS mutants is unaffected by intracellular targeting. COS-7 cells were transfected with WTeNOS, G2AeNOS, WT({Delta}45/{Delta}14)eNOS, and G2A({Delta}45/{Delta}14)eNOS. a, basal NO release was determined over 30 min from transfected COS-7 cells in DMEM containing either 1.5 mM free Ca2+ or zero free Ca2+ (1 mM EGTA) using chemiluminescence. b, stimulated NO release from transfected COS-7 cells that were exposed to ionomycin (1 µM) for 30 min in DMEM containing either 1.5 mM free Ca2+ or zero free Ca2+ (1 mM EGTA). Data are presented as means ± S.E. (n = 4). *, p < 0.05 versus construct with WT targeting; #, p < 0.05 versus NO production in the presence of Ca2+.

 
If the differences in NO production were due solely to differences in Ca2+ interaction with the two constructs and not caused by inferior catalytic activity of the G2AeNOS construct, then elevating cytosolic [Ca2+] to saturating levels would be expected to fully activate both constructs and equalize NO production. When cells expressing WTe-NOS or G2AeNOS were stimulated with 1 µM ionomycin in the presence of increasing concentrations of external Ca2+, the NO production by G2AeNOS increased as a proportion of the NO production by WTe-NOS (38% at 1.5 mM Ca2+ and 56% at 10 mM, Fig. 2b) but did not equalize. When the higher concentration of 10 µM ionomycin was used to stimulate cells, NO production by G2AeNOS again increased in proportion to that of WTeNOS, and elevating extracellular [Ca2+] to 10 mM equalized NO production (58% at 1.5 mM Ca2+ and 97% at 10 mM; Fig. 2c). The ability of saturating concentrations of Ca2+ to equalize the NO production by the two constructs again suggested that differences in [Ca2+] handling, and not an inability of the G2A construct to produce NO per se, might be the key regulatory factor mediating the differences in activity. Additionally, treatment of cells with the superoxide scavenger Tiron (10 mM, 30 min) had absolutely no effect on the NO production by either construct, suggesting that the disparity in NO production was not caused by aberrant production of superoxide (data not shown).


Figure 4
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 4.
Construction of AEQ fusion probes. a, schematic representation of the four AEQ probes used in this study: HA-tagged AEQ (CYT-AEQ), AEQ fused to the transmembrane domain of CD8 (PM-AEQ), AEQ fused to the C terminus of WTeNOS (WTeNOS-AEQ) and AEQ fused to the C terminus of G2AeNOS (G2AeNOS-AEQ). b, COS-7 cells were transfected with CYT-AEQ, PM-AEQ, WTeNOS-AEQ, G2AeNOS-AEQ, and cell lysates were exposed to EGTA-buffered [Ca2+] solutions. The luminescence in the one second after exposure was calculated as a ratio of the total luminescence emitted from the sample over the entire experiment (L/Lmax) and plotted for each [Ca2+].

 
The Activity of Ca2+/CaM-insensitive Constructs Is Unaffected by Subcellular Localization—Once we had confirmed the dependence of both constructs on extracellular Ca2+ entry, and that NO production could be equalized simply by increasing intracellular Ca2+ to saturating levels, we attempted to demonstrate a direct link between intracellular Ca2+ and the altered NO production by the two constructs. To achieve this we created Ca2+/CaM-independent deletion mutants of the WTe-NOS and G2AeNOS constructs based on the constructs of Chen and Wu (26). Both deletion mutants were found to be almost entirely Ca2+/ CaM-independent as, in contrast to the native constructs, they displayed extremely high basal NO production. This was unaffected by chelation of extracellular Ca2+ (Fig. 3a) and only a slight (although significant) increase in NO production in response to ionomycin stimulation, which was sensitive to removal of extracellular Ca2+ (Fig. 3b). The WTeNOS and G2AeNOS deletion mutants retained the same membrane/cytosol distribution as the parent enzymes (data not shown). However, in contrast to the original constructs, the WTeNOS and G2AeNOS Ca2+/CaM-independent mutants produced equivalent amounts of NO both basally and in response to ionomycin stimulation (Fig. 3, a and b). The ability of the Ca2+/CaM-independent constructs to produce equal amounts of NO regardless of their subcellular localization strongly suggested that the disparity between the NO production of the original WTeNOS and G2AeNOS constructs involved the interaction of the constructs with Ca2+/CaM.

WTeNOS Experiences Higher [Ca2+] in Unstimulated but Not Stimulated Cells—As our observations so far had concurred with the hypothesis that the disparity between NO production by WTeNOS and G2AeNOS was caused by differences in localized [Ca2+], we attempted to test the hypothesis by measuring the localized Ca2+ experienced by each construct in response to CCE. Aequorin fusion constructs were constructed as discussed under "Materials and Methods" (Fig. 4a) and were evaluated to ensure that none of the modifications altered the sensitivity of the AEQ to Ca2+ (Fig. 4b). To ensure that the targeting of the eNOS constructs was unaffected by the fusion to AEQ, we examined the subcellular distribution of the WTeNOS and WTeNOS-AEQ constructs expressed in COS-7 cells. When cell lysates were separated into cytosolic and membrane fractions by centrifugation, both WTeNOS and WTeNOS-AEQ were found in equal proportion, primarily in the membrane fraction. However, the bulk of the G2AeNOS and G2AeNOS-AEQ protein was found in equal proportion in the cytosolic fraction (Fig. 5a). To further confirm that AEQ did not disrupt eNOS targeting we generated eNOS-GFP and eNOS-AEQ-RFP fusion proteins. In COS-7 cells transfected with WT and G2A variants of eNOS-GFP and eNOS-AEQ-RFP, we performed confocal microscopy to visualize the subcellular distribution of eNOS fusion proteins. As shown in Fig. 5b, G2AeNOS is found distributed throughout the cytosol, colocalizing completely with G2A-eNOS-AEQ. In contrast, the WTeNOS is found at discrete intracellular locations, primarily at the perinuclear Golgi (arrows) with less expression at the plasma membrane (arrowheads) and importantly it also colocalizes with the WTeNOS-AEQ. These results further suggest that the addition of AEQ does not disrupt the subcellular targeting of WT or G2A eNOS. Finally, the functional effect of AEQ fusion on the eNOS constructs was determined. Although a slight reduction in NO production by both constructs was observed when fused to AEQ, as has been reported for eNOS-GFP fusion proteins (30), the relative differences between WTeNOS and G2AeNOS were unaffected by the addition of AEQ (Fig. 5c). Taken together, these results strongly suggest that the targeting of the two eNOS-AEQ constructs accurately reflects that of the native enzymes. When aequorin was expressed in unstimulated COS-7 cells either as a free cytosolic probe (CYT-AEQ) or fused to the transmembrane domain of CD8 as a plasma membrane probe (PM-AEQ), the localized [Ca2+] experienced, as interpreted by the burnout of the coelenterazine pool, was much greater for the plasma membrane probe than the cytosolic probe (Fig. 6a). These findings are consistent with our hypothesis that proximity to plasma membrane Ca2+ entry channels results in substantially higher localized [Ca2+]. Likewise, when aequorin was fused to the C terminus of the eNOS constructs in unstimulated cells, the membrane-bound WTeNOS-AEQ construct experienced greater coelenterazine burnout than the cytosolic G2AeNOS-AEQ construct (Fig. 6b).


Figure 5
View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 5.
The fusion of AEQ to the C terminus of eNOS does not modify its subcellular targeting. a, subcellular fractionation of cell lysates from COS-7 cells transfected with WTeNOS, WTeNOS-AEQ, G2AeNOS, or G2AeNOS-AEQ. Cytosolic (c) and membrane (m) fractions were separated by high speed centrifugation and blotted for eNOS (upper panels), the membrane-bound protein tyrosine phosphatase 1B (PTP1B, middle panels), or the cytosolic protein, beta-tubulin (lower panels). b, live cell imaging of WT and G2A eNOS and eNOS-AEQ fusion proteins. COS-7 cells co-transfected with eNOS-GFP (left panels, green) or eNOS-AEQ-RFP (middle panel, red) containing either the WT or G2A targeting sequences, and examined using confocal microscopy to determine the extent of colocalization of the eNOS and eNOS-AEQ constructs (right panels, yellow). c, COS-7 cells were transfected with WTeNOS, G2AeNOS, WTeNOS-AEQ, and G2AeNOS-AEQ and NO release was quantified by chemiluminescence in the presence or absence of ionomycin (1 µM, 30 min). Data are presented as means ± S.E. (n = 3). *, p < 0.05 versus construct with WT targeting sequence.

 


Figure 6
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 6.
Membrane-associated constructs are exposed to greater [Ca2+] in unstimulated cells. a, COS-7 cells were transfected with CYT-AEQ and PM-AEQ or b WTeNOS-AEQ and G2AeNOS-AEQ. AEQ was reconstituted by incubation with coelenterazine (5 mM, 1 h), and cells were exposed to DMEM containing 1.5 µM free Ca2+. Measurements of the cumulative exposure of each construct to intracellular calcium were obtained by depletion of the coelenterazine pool as determined by Lmax at 0, 8 or 20 h normalized to t = 0. Data are presented as means ± S.E. (n = 10). *, p < 0.05 membrane versus cytosolic construct.

 
When COS-7 cells expressing the AEQ constructs were stimulated with ionomycin (1 µM) the coelenterazine burnout between the CYT-AEQ and PM-AEQ was not significantly different, suggesting that this stimulation results in both the plasma membrane and cytosolic probes being exposed to equivalent amounts of Ca2+ over time (Fig. 7a). Interestingly, the G2AeNOS-AEQ displayed significantly more coelenterazine burnout than the WTeNOS-AEQ probe (Fig. 7b), suggesting that over the 30 min of ionomycin stimulation the cytosolic G2AeNOS is actually exposed to more Ca2+ than the membrane-bound WTeNOS.


Figure 7
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 7.
Membrane-associated constructs are not exposed to greater [Ca2+] in ionomycin-stimulated cells. a, CYT-AEQ and PM-AEQ or b, WTeNOS-AEQ and G2AeNOS-AEQ were expressed in COS-7 cells. AEQ was reconstituted by incubation with coelenterazine (5 µM, 1 h), and cells were stimulated with ionomycin (1 µM) in DMEM-containing 1.5 mM free Ca2+. Measurements of the cumulative exposure of each construct to intracellular calcium were obtained by depletion of the coelenterazine pool as determined by Lmax at 0, 5 or 30 min normalized to t = 0. Data are presented as means ± S.E. (n = 5). *, p < 0.05 membrane versus cytosolic construct.

 
Phosphorylation State Contributes to Differences in NO Production between the Two Constructs—Both WT and G2A eNOS constructs experience similar exposure to intracellular Ca2+ upon ionomycin stimulation. However our earlier observations demonstrated that intracellular Ca2+ was undoubtedly implicated in the phenomenon. If Ca2+ was involved in the phenomenon, but the constructs did not experience different exposure to Ca2+, then the logical explanation was that the constructs were not equally responsive to Ca2+. A number of phosphorylation sites on eNOS are believed to increase enzyme sensitivity to intracellular Ca2+ (31–33). Indeed, when creating our own Ca2+-independent eNOS mutants we deleted three such sites; specifically Ser617, Ser635, and Ser1179 (Fig. 8a). We therefore examined the differences in the phosphorylation state of the two constructs. When the eNOS constructs were immunoprecipitated and probed with phosphospecific antibodies (Fig. 8b), we observed a slight decrease in Ser635 phosphorylation, a marked decrease in Ser1179 phosphorylation, and virtually no Ser617 phosphorylation on the G2AeNOS compared with the WT enzyme, confirming earlier observations (10). As stimulation of eNOS has been reported to alter phosphorylation state (31, 34–36), we also examined the phosphorylation state of immunoprecipitates after stimulation with ionomycin (1 µM, 30 min). We observed an increase in the phosphorylation of Ser617, Ser635, and Ser1179 in the stimulated cells versus the unstimulated cells; however, there was little change in the relative differences between WTeNOS and G2AeNOS after ionomycin stimulation (Fig. 8b). Although it had not been removed in our Ca2+-insensitive mutants, we also examined the phosphorylation state of Thr497, a residue whose phosphorylation state has been intimately linked with CaM binding by the enzyme (8, 37). The Thr497 site was phosphorylated in WTeNOS but not G2AeNOS, an observation that was once more unchanged after stimulation with ionomycin. Moreover, the phosphorylation of Thr497 in the Ca2+-insenstitive deletion mutants was no different to that of the original constructs (data not shown), suggesting that the equalization of NO production in the deletion mutants was not a result of altered phosphorylation of the Thr497 site.


Figure 8
View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 8.
Reduced phosphorylation of G2AeNOS and equalization of activity by mutation of key phosphorylation sites. a, schematic representation of the eNOS enzyme (solid black) showing the regions removed in the {Delta}45/{Delta}14 Ca2+-independent constructs (white), and the corresponding phosphorylation sites. b, cell lysates from COS-7 cells transfected with empty vector (Blank), WTeNOS, or G2AeNOS were immunoprecipitated with or without prior stimulation by ionomycin (1 µM, 30 min) using an anti-eNOS antibody and immunoblotted for changes in phosphorylation state of Ser617, Ser635, Ser1179, and Thr497 relative to total eNOS. c, NO release from COS-7 cells expressing WT and G2A eNOS mutants with the Ser617, Ser635, and Ser1179 phosphorylation sites mutated from serine to alanine (3SA). Cells were stimulated with ionomycin (1 µM; 30 min). Data are presented as means ± S.E. (n = 4). *, p < 0.05 versus construct with the wild-type targeting sequence.

 
To examine whether differences in phosphorylation contributed to the altered NO production between the constructs, we mutated three phosphorylation sites (Ser617, Ser635, and Ser1179) to alanine to create an eNOS construct that was phospho-null at these sites. Phospho-null constructs expressing either the WT or G2A targeting sequences produced equivalent amounts of NO when expressed in COS-7 cells (Fig. 8c).

To further confirm that phosphorylation state was responsible for the different catalytic activity between the two constructs, we examined the effect of calyculin A, an inhibitor of the protein phosphatases PP1 and PP2A. After incubation with calyculin A, phosphorylation of Ser617, Ser635, and Ser1179 was markedly increased (Fig. 9a), and NO production by both constructs was significantly increased (Fig. 9b). Importantly, treatment with calyculin A increased the stimulated NO production by G2AeNOS much more than that of WTeNOS (7-fold versus 2-fold), and in fact after calyculin A treatment stimulated NO production by G2AeNSO was equivalent with that of WTeNOS (Fig. 9b). Calyculin significantly increased basal NO production from both constructs; however, NO production from WT was elevated to a much greater degree than the G2A enzyme (4-fold versus 2-fold). This difference most likely results from the higher Ca2+ experienced by the WT enzyme versus the G2AeNOS under basal conditions (Fig. 6b).

When taken together, the above results strongly suggested that differences in ionomycin-stimulated NO production by WT and G2A eNOS was in fact because of differences in Ca2+/CaM sensitivity as a result of differences in phosphorylation. We therefore sought to directly examine the Ca2+/CaM-sensitivity of each WT and G2A eNOS. When both constructs were isolated on ADP-Sepharose beads and exposed to saturating levels of all other cofactors (NADPH, BH4, L-arginine, and Ca2+), WTeNOS displayed a higher sensitivity to calmodulin than G2AeNOS (Fig. 9c), directly confirming that the two constructs have different sensitivity to Ca2+/CaM.

Observations in COS Cells Are Mirrored in the More Physiologically Relevant Bovine Aortic Endothelial Cells (BAECs)—To confirm the physiological relevance of our findings in COS-7 cells, we extended some key experiments to primary cultures of BAECs. When either WTeNOS or G2AeNOS were overexpressed in BAECs, the NO production both basally and in response to stimulation was significantly less for cells overexpressing G2AeNOS compared with those overexpressing WTeNOS (Fig. 10b). Likewise when BAECs were transduced with WTeNOS-AEQ or G2AeNOS-AEQ, the WT construct reported higher Ca2+ exposure (based on coelenterazine burnout) than the G2A construct in unstimulated cells (Fig. 10c). When cells expressing the AEQ constructs were stimulated with ionomycin, the constructs did not report significantly different calcium concentrations (unlike the findings in COS cells). However the most significant finding was that WTe-NOS is not exposed to more Ca2+ than the G2AeNOS, results that are consistent with the findings in COS cells (Fig. 10d).

Finally, we sought to examine the phosphorylation state of the eNOS constructs in BAECs. After transducing either WTeNOS or G2AeNOS in BAECs, we then separated the membrane and cytosolic fractions of the cells. Using ADP-Sepharose beads to isolate WTeNOS from membrane fractions and G2AeNOS from cytosolic fractions, we immunoblotted for the relevant phosphorylation sites (Fig. 10e). The phosphorylation state of each site was similar in BAECs as had been the case in COS-7 cells, once more suggesting that our findings in COS-7 cells are physiologically relevant.


   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
The reduced activity of myristylation-deficient and thus incorrectly targeted eNOS constructs (G2AeNOS) has been known for some time (14); however, the mechanism behind this phenomenon remains poorly understood. It has long been known that intracellular Ca2+ is an absolute requirement for eNOS activation (38). Furthermore, it is now widely accepted that when sustained NO production is triggered by a number of Ca2+-elevating agents such as the IP3 generating agonist histamine, the SERCA inhibitor thapsigargin, or the Ca2+ ionophore A-23187, the major source of this Ca2+ is the influx of extracellular Ca2+ via CCE (22, 39, 40). The localization of WTeNOS in plasma membrane caveolae, sites where CCE channels have also been proposed to reside (41), raised the tempting hypothesis that the decreased NO production by G2AeNOS upon stimulation of CCE was simply a result of the construct experiencing lower localized [Ca2+] than the WTeNOS because of greater spatial separation from Ca2+ influx channels. Indeed, the study of Lin et al. (22) conclusively demonstrated that upon activation of CCE, a WTeNOS construct did experience higher peak [Ca2+] transient than a myristylation-deficient construct. Our previous observations that expression of WTeNOS and G2AeNOS targeting sequences fused to the Ca2+-independent iNOS fail to demonstrate differences in NO production (16) also seemed to support this hypothesis. However, despite the peak differences in calcium inflow, no direct link between has been made between local NO production and the more functionally relevant measurement of compartmentalized increases in intracellular calcium over time. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to directly demonstrate if the disparity in catalytic activity between the two constructs was caused by differences in localized [Ca2+] upon stimulation with Ca2+-elevating agonists, or if other regulatory factors were involved.


Figure 9
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 9.
Increased eNOS phosphorylation equalizes NO production between WTeNOS and G2AeNOS and increases enzyme sensitivity to calcium/calmodulin. a, COS-7 cells were transfected with WT and G2A eNOS and treated with or without calyculin A (100 nM, 1 h). Whole cell lysates were immunoblotted for changes in phosphorylation state of Ser617, Ser635, and Ser1179 relative to total eNOS. b, NO release from COS-7 transfected as above with or without pretreatment with calyculin A (100 nM, 1 h) and stimulation with ionomycin (1 µM, 30 min). c, WTeNOS (open circles) and G2AeNOS (solid circles) were affinity-purified from transfected COS-7 cells using 2',5'-ADP-Sepharose beads. Purified enzymes were then exposed to differing concentrations of CaM for 30 min in the presence of saturating cofactors (NADPH, 3 mM;BH4, 30 µM; L-arginine, 100 µM; CaCl2, 1 mM). Data are presented as means ± S.E. (n = 4–9). *, p < 0.05 versus construct with wild-type targeting sequence, #, p < 0.05 versus same construct without calyculin pretreatment.

 
We first examined the importance of cellular integrity to the phenomenon. Three different Ca2+-elevating agonists (ionomycin, thapsigargin, and ATP) all produced greater activation of WTeNOS than G2AeNOS in intact COS-7 cells. However when the cells were disrupted either by mechanical (sonication) or chemical (Triton X-100) means, G2AeNOS was significantly more active than WTeNOS. These findings confirmed that the relative activity of eNOS depends on factors present within the intracellular environment that each construct resides in, rather than a permanent change in enzyme activity.

Our hypothesis relied on the influx of extracellular Ca2+as the major source of eNOS activation. As eNOS has been suggested to undergo Ca2+-independent activation in response to certain stimuli (6, 33), we needed to ensure that all NO production by our constructs was dependent on Ca2+ influx. Removal of extracellular Ca2+ almost abolished NO production by both constructs, confirming that both relied on the influx of external Ca2+. Interestingly, intracellular chelation of Ca2+ using BAPTA-AM failed to completely inhibit the activity of either construct, even though all such activity was dependent on Ca2+ influx. The inability of BAPTA-AM to affect near membrane Ca2+ responses has been previously reported (42), and possibly reflects the inability of BAPTA to immediately access and chelate all of the Ca2+ entering the cytosol through Ca2+ influx channels. Thus, the membrane-localized eNOS is likely to be relatively unaffected by BAPTA-AM even though cytosolic Ca2+ is significantly reduced. Further supporting this hypothesis is the observation that G2AeNOS, the construct furthest from the plasma membrane, was much more effectively inhibited by BAPTA-AM than WTeNOS. Another central tenet of our hypothesis was that if the two constructs were producing disparate amounts of NO because of their exposure to different levels of Ca2+, then raising intracellular Ca2+ to saturating levels should equalize the NO production by both constructs. Cells with 1 µM ionomycin failed to display equalized NO production even in the presence of 10 mM extracellular Ca2+ (probably because of the fact that at this concentration ionomycin is thought to act almost exclusively by activating CCE (29), a Ca2+ entry pathway that can only produce Ca2+ influx as rapidly as plasma membrane Ca2+ channels will allow). However when the cells were stimulated with a 10-fold higher concentration of ionomycin (a concentration that facilitates Ca2+ entry independently of plasma membrane Ca2+ channels), NO production was equalized when extracellular Ca2+ was raised to sufficiently high concentration.


Figure 10
View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 10.
WTeNOS and G2AeNOS expressed in BAECs behave similarly to those expressed in COS-7 cells. a, confluent BAECs were transduced with adenovirus encoding a control vector (lacZ), WTeNOS or G2AeNOS. Cells were lysed and immunoblotted for total eNOS. b, ionomycin-stimulated (1 µM; 30 min) NO release was measured from BAECs transduced with either WTeNOS or G2AeNOS by NO-specific chemiluminescence. c and d, consumption of coelenterazine was measured in BAECs transduced with WTeNOS-AEQ and G2AeNOS-AEQ fusion constructs either (c) basally or (d) in response to stimulation with 1 µM ionomycin. Measurements of the cumulative exposure of each construct to intracellular calcium were obtained by depletion of the coelenterazine pool as determined by Lmax at 0, 5, or 30 min normalized to t = 0. e, BAECs were transduced with WTeNOS and G2AeNOS. The cells lysed in hypotonic buffer and the membrane fraction and cytosolic fractions were separated by high speed centrifugation. WTeNOS was affinity-purified from the membrane fraction, and G2AeNOS from the cytosolic fraction, by 2',5'-ADP-Sepharose beads. The relative phosphorylation of WTeNOS and G2AeNOS in BAECs was determined by immunoblotting with phosphospecific eNOS antibodies. Data are presented as means ± S.E. (n = 3–7). *, p < 0.05 versus constructs with wild-type targeting sequence.

 
As our hypothesis was still supported by all observations so far, we then attempted to more directly determine the contribution of intracellular Ca2+ to the disparity in NO production between the constructs. To achieve this, we created Ca2+/CaM-independent mutants based on those described by Chen and Wu (26). Interestingly, the WTeNOS and G2AeNOS Ca2+/CaM-independent mutants showed absolutely no differences in NO production under any stimulation conditions observed, confirming our previous findings with targeted iNOS constructs (16). This constitutes the first direct evidence that Ca2+ or CaM alone is responsible for the difference in activity.

After confirming that interaction of the constructs with Ca2+ was involved in the phenomenon, we next determined the localized [Ca2+] experienced by each construct both basally and upon stimulation by fusing in-frame the bioluminescent Ca2+ probe aequorin (AEQ). Although Lin et al. (22) had demonstrated that the peak [Ca2+] experienced after CCE stimulation was higher for WTeNOS than the G2A construct, this response was a transient (<30s) peak response to a protocol designed to maximally activate CCE. As we stimulated our cells with ionomycin for 30 min to measure NO production, we felt it would be more informative to measure the Ca2+ exposure during the 30-min stimulation with ionomycin rather than an immediate peak response to deliberate CCE activation. We therefore attempted to devise a method to observe Ca2+ exposure over more sustained time periods.

The reaction between AEQ and its cofactor coelenterazine in the presence of Ca2+ and molecular oxygen results in the emission of one photon and the irreversible oxidation of coelenterazine to coelenteramide. The emission of light in response to Ca2+ is thus a once-only reaction (43), and the size of the available pool of luminescence decreases constantly over time in direct proportion to the amount of Ca2+ present. The relative amounts of localized [Ca2+] that each construct is exposed to over time can therefore be estimated by measuring the decrease in the size of the releasable pool of luminescence (Lmax), as determined by discharging the remaining luminescence with lysis buffer. Using this technique, we observed that in unstimulated cells the PM-AEQ probe displayed a faster rate of burnout than CYT-AEQ. Likewise, WTeNOS-AEQ clearly displayed a faster rate of burnout than G2AeNOS-AEQ, indicating that the WTeNOS construct is exposed to higher levels of Ca2+ than the G2AeNOS construct in unstimulated cells. This probably reflects the constant transmembrane flux of Ca2+, which enters the cell because of the spontaneous opening of Ca2+ influx channels. It is rapidly pumped back out of the cytosol by plasma membrane Ca2+-ATPases before having an opportunity to significantly elevate [Ca2+] in the cytosol (23).

Upon 30 min of stimulation with ionomycin, the burnout between PM-AEQ and CYT-AEQ was not significantly different, suggesting that ionomycin stimulation elevates cytosolic [Ca2+] to the point where both plasma membrane and cytosolic probes are equally exposed to Ca2+. When cells expressing the eNOS-AEQ fusion constructs were stimulated with ionomycin for 30 min, not only did the WTeNOS no longer display greater burnout than G2AeNOS, but in fact the membrane-bound WT probe displayed significantly less burnout than cytosolic G2A probe, suggesting that the G2A probe had been exposed to more Ca2+ over the stimulation period than the WT probe. This suggests that, even though the [Ca2+] increase because of maximally activated CCE is transiently greater at the plasma membrane (as reported by Lin et al., Ref. 22), upon sustained (30 min) elevation of cytosolic Ca2+ (such as during ionomycin stimulation) the Ca2+ gradient between plasma membrane influx channels and the cytosol may be markedly reduced (or even non-existent) when observed as a Ca2+ exposure over time phenomenon (such as in these coelenterazine burnout experiments). This also supports the recent findings of Jobin et al. (44) using a FRET-based Ca2+ sensor fused to eNOS constructs.

Based on the AEQ burnout data, our hypothesis that the disparity in NO production was simply because of proximity to plasma membrane Ca2+ influx channels seemed insufficient to explain the phenomenon. The preceding data, however, strongly suggested that Ca2+ plays an important role in the phenomenon, and we therefore considered the possibility that the two constructs were differentially sensitive to Ca2+. As our Ca2+-independent deletion mutants (the only modification of the constructs, which had successfully equalized NO production) also deleted three key phosphorylation sites involved in sensitizing eNOS to calcium/calmodulin we next addressed whether this could explain the functional differences between the enzymes. Compared with the WT enzyme, G2A eNOS exhibited slightly reduced Ser635 phosphorylation, marked reduction of Ser1179 phosphorylation, and virtually no Ser617 phosphorylation. The phosphorylation of these residues is associated with reduced dependence on intracellular calcium (33), increased calcium sensitivity (31) and reduced dissociation of calcium-bound calmodulin (32). To directly test whether phosphorylation of these residues mediates the functional differences between these enzymes, we mutated all three residues to the nonphosphorylatable analogue, alanine. The marked difference in activity between the native WT and G2A enzymes was abolished in the equivalent constructs with triple (S617A, S635A, S1179A) mutations, suggesting that indeed a difference in phosphorylation mediates the functional differences in calcium sensitivity between these enzymes.

We then attempted the converse experiment, by equalizing the phosphorylation of WT and G2A eNOS using the phosphatase inhibitor, calyculin A. Treatment of cells with calyculin produced a marked increase in phosphorylation and an increase in both basal and stimulated NO production, for both constructs. Calyculin treatment equalized eNOS phosphorylation and stimulated production of NO between the WT and G2A eNOS. These results are consistent with the data obtained with phospho-null mutants and strongly support the contention that phosphorylation mediates the difference between these enzymes. Interestingly, phosphatase inhibition failed to equalize basal NO production between the constructs even though stimulated NO production was equalized. We believe that this reflects the differences in basal Ca2+ exposure between the two constructs that were observed using eNOS-aequorin fusion proteins.

As the two constructs differed in phosphorylation state, and either increasing or abolishing phosphorylation of the two constructs equalized NO production, it seemed likely that our previous results could be explained by these phosphorylation differences endowing the two constructs with different Ca2+/CaM sensitivity. We therefore sought direct evidence that the two constructs were differentially sensitive to Ca2+/ CaM. Performing a concentration-response curve to CaM on isolated eNOS constructs in the presence of saturating Ca2+ conclusively demonstrated that the WT construct is more sensitive to Ca2+/CaM than the G2A construct, supporting our conclusions.

Finally, we sought to confirm that our observations in COS-7 cells were mirrored in BAECs, a cell type which expresses endogenous eNOS and is thus a more physiologically relevant model. When BAECs overexpressing WTeNOS or G2AeNOS were stimulated, G2AeNOS-expressing cells produced significantly less NO than those expressing WTeNOS. When the WTeNOS-AEQ and G2AeNOS AEQ fusion constructs were expressed in BAECs, the basal burnout of WTeNOS-AEQ was once again greater than that of G2AeNOS-AEQ, confirming our results in COS-7 cells. Upon stimulation of BAECs expressing the AEQ fusion constructs, the WTeNOS and G2AeNOS constructs reported no significant difference in coelenterazine burnout. This differs slightly from the results obtained in COS-7 cells (where G2AeNOS displayed significantly higher burnout than WTeNOS) and may reflect either dimerization issues (G2AeNOS-AEQ being taken to the membrane after dimerizing with endogenous eNOS) or possibly some subtle differences in Ca2+ signaling between endothelial cells and COS-7 cells. Nonetheless, the pertinent finding; that stimulation with ionomycin does not produce greater burnout of the membrane-bound probe than the cytosolic probe, was confirmed in BAECs as well as COS-7 cells. In addition, immunoblotting demonstrated that the differences we observed in Ser617, Ser635, and Ser1179 phosphorylation of WTeNOS and G2AeNOS in COS-7 cells are preserved in BAECS, further supporting the physiological relevance of our findings in COS-7 cells.

In conclusion, we have presented direct evidence that the functional differences between the WT and myristylation-deficient, cytosolic eNOS constructs are due exclusively to one variable, calcium/calmodulin. We have measured local calcium levels using targeted aequorin fusion proteins and have shown that while basal calcium levels are clearly different between the two enzymes, stimulation of cells provides equivalent levels of calcium to both enzymes. Phosphorylation of eNOS at serines 617, 635, and 1179 provides a mechanism for enhancing the interaction between eNOS and calcium/calmodulin and deletion or mutation of these phosphorylation sites, as well as stimulation of phosphorylation by phosphatase inhibitors, is sufficient to normalize activity between the WT and G2A enzymes. These data are sufficient to explain the paradox between NO release and calcium that underlies the functional differences in membrane-anchored and cytosolic eNOS.


   FOOTNOTES
 
* This work was supported by Grant HL74279 from the National Institutes of Health (to D. F.). 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

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed: Vascular Biology Center and Dept. of Pharmacology, Medical College of Georgia, 1459 Laney Walker Blvd, Augusta, GA 30912-2500. E-mail: dfulton{at}mcg.edu.

2 The abbreviations used are: NO, nitric oxide; eNOS, endothelial nitric-oxide synthase; WT, wild type; DMEM, Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium; HA, hemagglutinin; AEQ, aequorin; CCE, capacitative calcium entry; CaM, calmodulin; iNOS, inducible nitricoxide synthase; BAEC, bovine aortic endothelial cells; BH4, tetrahydrobiopterin. Back



   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Fleming, I., and Busse, R. (2003) Am. J. Physiol. Regul. Integr. Comp. Physiol. 284, R1–R12[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Panza, J. A., Garcia, C. E., Kilcoyne, C. M., Quyyumi, A. A., and Cannon, R. O., 3rd. (1995) Circulation 91, 1732–1738[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Tai, S. C., Robb, G. B., and Marsden, P. A. (2004) Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol. 24, 405–412[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Fulton, D., Gratton, J. P., and Sessa, W. C. (2001) J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 299, 818–824[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Fulton, D., Gratton, J. P., McCabe, T. J., Fontana, J., Fujio, Y., Walsh, K., Franke, T. F., Papapetropoulos, A., and Sessa, W. C. (1999) Nature 399, 597–601[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Butt, E., Bernhardt, M., Smolenski, A., Kotsonis, P., Frohlich, L. G., Sickmann, A., Meyer, H. E., Lohmann, S. M., and Schmidt, H. H. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 5179–5187[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Chen, Z. P., Mitchelhill, K. I., Michell, B. J., Stapleton, D., Rodriguez-Crespo, I., Witters, L. A., Power, D. A., Ortiz de Montellano, P. R., and Kemp, B. E. (1999) FEBS Lett. 443, 285–289[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  8. Fleming, I., Fisslthaler, B., Dimmeler, S., Kemp, B. E., and Busse, R. (2001) Circ. Res. 88, E68–75[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Michell, B. J., Griffiths, J. E., Mitchelhill, K. I., Rodriguez-Crespo, I., Tiganis, T., Bozinovski, S., de Montellano, P. R., Kemp, B. E., and Pearson, R. B. (1999) Curr. Biol. 9, 845–848[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  10. Fulton, D., Babbitt, R., Zoellner, S., Fontana, J., Acevedo, L., McCabe, T. J., Iwakiri, Y., and Sessa, W. C. (2004) J. Biol. Chem. 279, 30349–30357[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Sessa, W. C., Harrison, J. K., Barber, C. M., Zeng, D., Durieux, M. E., D'Angelo, D. D., Lynch, K. R., and Peach, M. J. (1992) J. Biol. Chem. 267, 15274–15276[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Liu, J., Hughes, T. E., and Sessa, W. C. (1997) J. Cell Biol. 137, 1525–1535[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Garcia-Cardena, G., Oh, P., Liu, J., Schnitzer, J. E., and Sessa, W. C. (1996) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 93, 6448–6453[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Sessa, W. C., Barber, C. M., and Lynch, K. R. (1993) Circ. Res. 72, 921–924[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Sakoda, T., Hirata, K., Kuroda, R., Miki, N., Suematsu, M., Kawashima, S., and Yokoyama, M. (1995) Mol. Cell Biochem. 152, 143–148[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  16. Jagnandan, D., Sessa, W. C., and Fulton, D. (2005) Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 25, 25
  17. Cho, H. J., Xie, Q. W., Calaycay, J., Mumford, R. A., Swiderek, K. M., Lee, T. D., and Nathan, C. (1992) J. Exp. Med. 176, 599–604[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Putney, J. W., Jr. (1986) Cell Calcium 7, 1–12[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  19. Tran, Q. K., Ohashi, K., and Watanabe, H. (2000) Cardiovasc. Res. 48, 13–22[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Dolor, R. J., Hurwitz, L. M., Mirza, Z., Strauss, H. C., and Whorton, A. R. (1992) Am. J. Physiol. 262, C171–181[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  21. Schilling, W. P., Cabello, O. A., and Rajan, L. (1992) Biochem. J. 284, 521–530[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  22. Lin, S., Fagan, K. A., Li, K. X., Shaul, P. W., Cooper, D. M., and Rodman, D. M. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 17979–17985[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Marsault, R., Murgia, M., Pozzan, T., and Rizzuto, R. (1997) EMBO J. 16, 1575–1581[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  24. Harris, M. B., Blackstone, M. A., Sood, S. G., Li, C., Goolsby, J. M., Venema, V. J., Kemp, B. E., and Venema, R. C. (2004) Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol. 287, H560–H566[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Yi, F. X., Zhang, A. Y., Campbell, W. B., Zou, A. P., Van Breemen, C., and Li, P. L. (2002) Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol. 283, H2725–H2732[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Chen, P. F., and Wu, K. K. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 52392–52400[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Bauer, P. M., Fulton, D., Boo, Y. C., Sorescu, G. P., Kemp, B. E., Jo, H., and Sessa, W. C. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 14841–14849[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Padua, R. A., Baron, K. T., Thyagarajan, B., Campbell, C., and Thayer, S. A. (1998) Am. J. Physiol. 274, C615–C622[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  29. Morgan, A. J., and Jacob, R. (1994) Biochem. J. 300, 665–672[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  30. Sowa, G., Liu, J., Papapetropoulos, A., Rex-Haffner, M., Hughes, T. E., and Sessa, W. C. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 22524–22531[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Michell, B. J., Harris, M. B., Chen, Z. P., Ju, H., Venema, V. J., Blackstone, M. A., Huang, W., Venema, R. C., and Kemp, B. E. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 42344–42351[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. McCabe, T. J., Fulton, D., Roman, L. J., and Sessa, W. C. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 6123–6128[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Boo, Y. C., Sorescu, G. P., Bauer, P. M., Fulton, D., Kemp, B. E., Harrison, D. G., Sessa, W. C., and Jo, H. (2003) Free Radic. Biol. Med. 35, 729–741[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Gonzalez, E., Kou, R., Lin, A. J., Golan, D. E., and Michel, T. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 39554–39560[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Fulton, D., Fontana, J., Sowa, G., Gratton, J. P., Lin, M., Li, K. X., Michell, B., Kemp, B. E., Rodman, D., and Sessa, W. C. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 4277–4284[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Fontana, J., Fulton, D., Chen, Y., Fairchild, T. A., McCabe, T. J., Fujita, N., Tsuruo, T., and Sessa, W. C. (2002) Circ. Res. 90, 866–873[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Harris, M. B., Ju, H., Venema, V. J., Liang, H., Zou, R., Michell, B. J., Chen, Z. P., Kemp, B. E., and Venema, R. C. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 16587–16591[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Forstermann, U., Pollock, J. S., Schmidt, H. H., Heller, M., and Murad, F. (1991) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 88, 1788–1792[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Taniguchi, H., Tanaka, Y., Hirano, H., Tanaka, H., and Shigenobu, K. (1999) Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch. Pharmacol. 360, 69–79[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  40. Taniguchi, H., Hirano, H., Tanaka, Y., Tanaka, H., and Shigenobu, K. (1999) J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 51, 831–840[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  41. Isshiki, M., Ying, Y. S., Fujita, T., and Anderson, R. G. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 43389–43398[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Basset, O., Boittin, F. X., Dorchies, O. M., Chatton, J. Y., van Breemen, C., and Ruegg, U. T. (2004) J. Biol. Chem. 279, 47092–47100[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Blinks, J. R., Prendergast, F. G., and Allen, D. G. (1976) Pharmacol. Rev. 28, 1–93[Free Full Text]
  44. Jobin, C. M., Chen, H., Lin, A. J., Yacono, P. W., Igarashi, J., Michel, T., and Golan, D. E. (2003) Biochemistry 42, 11716–11725[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
 Circ. Res.Home page
D. J.R. Fulton
Mechanisms of Vascular Insulin Resistance: A Substitute Akt?
Circ. Res., May 8, 2009; 104(9): 1035 - 1037.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol.Home page
F. A. Sanchez, D. D. Kim, R. G. Duran, C. J. Meininger, and W. N. Duran
Internalization of eNOS via caveolae regulates PAF-induced inflammatory hyperpermeability to macromolecules
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, October 1, 2008; 295(4): H1642 - H1648.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Bio.Home page
S. Jin, Y. Zhang, F. Yi, and P.-L. Li
Critical Role of Lipid Raft Redox Signaling Platforms in Endostatin-Induced Coronary Endothelial Dysfunction
Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., March 1, 2008; 28(3): 485 - 490.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol.Home page
D. Hong, D. Jaron, D. G. Buerk, and K. A. Barbee
Transport-dependent calcium signaling in spatially segregated cellular caveolar domains
Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, March 1, 2008; 294(3): C856 - C866.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
C. J. Glueck, R. A. Freiberg, J. Oghene, R. N. Fontaine, and P. Wang
Association Between the T-786C eNOS Polymorphism and Idiopathic Osteonecrosis of the Head of the Femur
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., November 1, 2007; 89(11): 2460 - 2468.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cardiovasc ResHome page
D. M. Dudzinski and T. Michel
Life history of eNOS: Partners and pathways
Cardiovasc Res, July 15, 2007; 75(2): 247 - 260.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
D. Jagnandan, J. E. Church, B. Banfi, D. J. Stuehr, M. B. Marrero, and D. J. R. Fulton
Novel Mechanism of Activation of NADPH Oxidase 5: CALCIUM SENSITIZATION VIA PHOSPHORYLATION
J. Biol. Chem., March 2, 2007; 282(9): 6494 - 6507.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol.Home page
S. Mukhopadhyay, F. Xu, and P. B. Sehgal
Aberrant cytoplasmic sequestration of eNOS in endothelial cells after monocrotaline, hypoxia, and senescence: live-cell caveolar and cytoplasmic NO imaging
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, March 1, 2007; 292(3): H1373 - H1389.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Bio.Home page
Z.-G. Jin
Where is endothelial nitric oxide synthase more critical: plasma membrane or Golgi?
Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., May 1, 2006; 26(5): 959 - 961.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Bio.Home page
Q. Zhang, J. E. Church, D. Jagnandan, J. D. Catravas, W. C. Sessa, and D. Fulton
Functional Relevance of Golgi- and Plasma Membrane-Localized Endothelial NO Synthase in Reconstituted Endothelial Cells
Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., May 1, 2006; 26(5): 1015 - 1021.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
281/3/1477    most recent
M505968200v1
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 Church, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Fulton, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Church, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Fulton, D.
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 © 2006 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
Advertisement
spacer
Advertisement
Advertisement