![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2007, American Society of Plant Biologists Dual Lipid Modification of Arabidopsis Gγ-Subunits Is Required for Efficient Plasma Membrane Targeting1[C][W][OA] Donald Danforth Plant Science Center, St. Louis, Missouri 63132 *Corresponding author; e-mail mrunning/at/danforthcenter.org; fax 314–587–1741. Received November 22, 2006; Accepted December 31, 2006. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.Abstract Posttranslational lipid modifications are important for proper localization of many proteins in eukaryotic cells. However, the functional interrelationships between lipid modification processes in plants remain unclear. Here we demonstrate that the two heterotrimeric G-protein γ-subunits from Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), AGG1 and AGG2, are prenylated, and AGG2 is S-acylated. In wild type, enhanced yellow fluorescent protein-fused AGG1 and AGG2 are associated with plasma membranes, with AGG1 associated with internal membranes as well. Both can be prenylated by either protein geranylgeranyltransferase I (PGGT-I) or protein farnesyltransferase (PFT). Their membrane localization is intact in mutants lacking PFT activity and largely intact in mutants lacking PGGT-I activity but is disrupted in mutants lacking both PFT and PGGT-I activity. Unlike in mammals, Arabidopsis Gγs do not rely on functional Gα for membrane targeting. Mutation of the sixth to last cysteine, the putative S-acylation acceptor site, causes a dramatic change in AGG2 but not AGG1 localization pattern, suggesting S-acylation serves as an important additional signal for AGG2 to be targeted to the plasma membrane. Domain-swapping experiments suggest that a short charged sequence at the AGG2 C terminus contributes to AGG2's efficient membrane targeting compared to AGG1. Our data show the large degree to which PFT and PGGT-I can compensate for each other in plants and suggest that differential lipid modification plays an important regulatory role in plant protein localization. Heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide-binding proteins (G proteins) are important components of signal transduction pathways and are conserved in all eukaryotic organisms examined (Jones, 2002; Jones and Assmann, 2004; Perfus-Barbeoch et al., 2004). Heterotrimeric G proteins consist of three different subunits, Gα, Gβ, and Gγ. Gβ and Gγ are tightly associated as a functional unit under physiological conditions, while Gα can signal independently or through Gβγ. In the human genome, there are a total of 17 Gα genes that encode 23 Gα-subunits, five Gβ genes, and at least 12 Gγ genes (Cabrera-Vera et al., 2003), while in the Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) genome, only one canonical Gα (GPA1, At2G26300), one Gβ (AGB1, At4G34460), and two Gγ genes (AGG1, At3g63420 and AGG2, At3g22942) have been identified (Ma et al., 1990; Mason and Botella, 2000; Lease et al., 2001; Mason and Botella, 2001). The same number of G-protein components exists in the rice (Oryza sativa) genome (Kato et al., 2004). Studies of plant Gα and Gβ mutants have implicated G proteins in a wide range of developmental and phytohormone-mediated cellular processes (Jones, 2002; Jones and Assmann, 2004; Perfus-Barbeoch et al., 2004), including cell division (Ullah et al., 2001, 2003; Warpeha et al., 2006), leaf shape, internode elongation (Ueguchi-Tanaka et al., 2000), seed germination (Ullah et al., 2002), stomata function (Wang et al., 2001; Coursol et al., 2003; Fan et al., 2004; Mishra et al., 2006), and pathogen susceptibility (Suharsono et al., 2002; Trusov et al., 2006). Arabidopsis gpa1 and agb1 mutants share some common features, such as rounder rosette leaves, but, consistent with independent roles in particular signaling events have many distinct phenotypes. agb1 mutants produces excessive lateral roots and are more sensitive to auxin promotion of lateral roots, while gpa1 forms fewer lateral roots and is less sensitive to auxin (Ullah et al., 2003). agb1 mutants are more hypersensitive to abscisic acid (ABA) than gpa1 (Pandey et al., 2006), and GPA1 and AGB1 play opposite roles in regulating cell proliferation in roots (Chen et al., 2006). Critical to their signaling function is the localization of G proteins to the cytoplasmic face of plasma membrane in animal cells (Casey, 1995). This subcellular localization is often facilitated by lipid modifications of the Gα- and Gγ-subunits. In mammalian and yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) cells, Gα is usually modified by attachment of a 14-carbon myristate to an N-terminal Gly via an amide bond and/or by linking a 16-carbon palmitate to a nearby Cys through a thioester bond (Milligan et al., 1995). Gγ is usually modified by prenylation, attachment of a 15-carbon farnesyl or 20-carbon geranylgeranyl isoprenoid via a thioether bond to a Cys in the CaaX motif at the C terminus, where a is preferentially a small aliphatic amino acid and X significantly affects the substrate specificity (Wedegaertner et al., 1995; Lane and Beese, 2006). Extensive structural studies have been conducted to understand the molecular basis of substrate specificity and mechanisms of the mammalian protein prenyltransferase activities (Lane and Beese, 2006). Mammalian protein geranylgeranyltransferase I (PGGT-I) and protein farnesyltransferase (PFT) have distinct but overlapping substrate specificity. PGGT-I prefers a Leu and Phe residue in the X position, while PFT can recognize several other amino acids but prefers Met, Ser, Gln, or Ala (Zhang et al., 1994; Zhang and Casey, 1996; Lane and Beese, 2006). Up to 11 residues in the linker region proximal to the CaaX motif appear to affect the efficiency of prenylation (Maurer-Stroh and Eisenhaber, 2005). In general, PGGT-I substrates have a higher number of Lys residues in the proximal linker region (Maurer-Stroh and Eisenhaber, 2005). With a proximal polylysine domain, K-RasB, which has a CVIM motif, was shown to be a good substrate not only for PFT but for PGGT-I as well (James et al., 1995). Following prenylation, proteolysis of the last three amino acids and methylesterification of the prenyl Cys are closely coupled in vivo to promote the hydrophobicity of the modified protein (Hancock et al., 1991; Rodriguez-Concepcion et al., 2000; Crowell and Kennedy, 2001; Bracha et al., 2002; Narasimha Chary et al., 2002). Lipid modifications of Gγ in mammalian cells are not required for Gβγ dimerization but are essential for their plasma membrane association and interaction with Gα and effecter proteins (Wedegaertner et al., 1995; Dietrich et al., 2003), and Gβγ complex formation was shown to stabilize the Gγ-subunit (Pronin and Gautam, 1993). Palmitoylation of a Cys adjacent to the prenyl Cys (-CCTLM) in yeast Gγ (STE18) is required for its full function in pheromone response, and its palmitoylation seemed to depend on prenylation (Hirschman and Jenness, 1999; Manahan et al., 2000). In contrast, none of the human Gγ has an adjacent Cys, or the polybasic domain proximal to the CaaX box, as in K-RasB (Takida and Wedegaertner, 2003). Consequently, Gβ1γ2 requires the presence of Gα to be targeted to the plasma membrane rather than to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER; Takida and Wedegaertner, 2003). Interestingly, when a palmitoylation site is introduced into Gγ2, the dependence on Gα for correct plasma membrane localization is abolished. No defined motifs are known that predict palmitoylation (Roth et al., 2006). A number of proteins were shown to be palmitoylated in vitro simply by incubating with palmitoyl-CoA in the absence of an S-acyltransferase (Veit, 2000, 2004; Lavy et al., 2002). However, at physiological conditions, spontaneous acylation is thought not to be a significant process, considering the inhibitory effects of acyl-binding proteins and a low concentration of acyl-CoA (Dunphy et al., 2000). A dynamic process of protein acylation and deacylation in vivo is catalyzed by S-acyltransferase and palmitoyl-protein thioesterase, and a family of Asp-His-His-Cys; Cys-rich domain (DHHC-CRD) proteins show protein S-acyltransferase activities in yeast, but the enzymology is not clearly understood (Roth et al., 2002, 2006; Mitchell et al., 2006). TIP GROWTH DEFECTIVE1 of Arabidopsis was recently reported to be a DHHC-CRD S-acyltransferase (Hemsley et al., 2005). Arabidopsis tip1 mutants show pleiotropic growth defects, including short and deformed root hairs, pale leaves, and poorer growth. In Arabidopsis, the two Gγ genes, AGG1 and AGG2, were identified through their interaction with AGB1 in yeast two-hybrid experiments (Mason and Botella, 2000, 2001). AGG1 has a CRCLIL and AGG2 has a CGCSIL motif at the C terminus, making them potential targets for both protein prenylation and S-acylation (Fig. 1
There are approximately 700 proteins in Arabidopsis proteome that have a CaaX motif at the C terminus, with nearly 70 having a CaaL motif (Q. Zeng and M. Running, unpublished data). Only a few plant proteins have been shown to be prenylated, including a metal-binding protein ATFP3 (Dykema et al., 1999), petunia (Petunia hybrida) CaM53 (Rodriguez-Concepcion et al., 1999), Arabidopsis APETALA1 (Yalovsky et al., 2000b), the MUB family of ubiquitin-fold proteins (Downes et al., 2006), and the nucleosome assembly protein 1 homolog, AtNAP1;1 (Galichet and Gruissem, 2006). Some proteins that terminate with a CaaX motif have been shown not to be prenylated, including CAULIFLOWER (CYAA; Yalovsky et al., 2000b) and ROP10/RAC8 (CGKN; Lavy et al., 2002), highlighting the need for experimental verification of putative targets. Here, we present both biochemical and genetic evidence that the two Arabidopsis Gγ proteins AGG1 and AGG2 are indeed prenylated, not only by Arabidopsis PGGT-I but also by PFT. Enhanced yellow fluorescent protein (EYFP)-tagged AGG1 and AGG2 localization is disrupted in plp mutants, and their prenyl Cys is essential to their membrane localization. AGG1 and AGG2 localization patterns are largely normal in ggb, suggesting that PFT functionally compensates for PGGT in vivo. These results demonstrate the high degree of functional redundancy of prenylation enzymes in plants that may account for the lack of phenotype of PGGT-I mutants. We also provide evidence that AGG2 is subject to palmitoylation, which serves as an important second signal to target AGG2 to the plasma membrane. Although not a sufficient second membrane targeting signal, the short charged preceding sequences in AGG2 are important for its correct localization. RESULTS AGG1 and AGG2 Are Prenylated in Vitro AGG1 and AGG2 contain a CaaL motif for prenylation (Fig. 1
Prenylation Is Critical for the Proper Subcellular Localization of AGG1 and AGG2 To demonstrate that the lack of prenylation affects the localization of AGG1 and AGG2, AGG1, AGG1C95S, AGG2, and AGG2C97S were fused to EYFP at the N terminus under control of the 35S promoter of Cauliflower mosaic virus. Stable transgenic Arabidopsis plants for all the constructs as well as the EYFP vector alone were assessed by fluorescence confocal microscopy. Without other constraints, nonnuclear proteins within about 70 kD have been shown to freely enter into the nucleus through the nuclear pore complex (Galy et al., 2003). EYFP (27 kD) and its variant fluorophores are cytosolic proteins that can go into the nucleus but not vacuoles (Dixit et al., 2006). For the EYFP vector alone, a bright signal was detected in the nuclei, perinuclear cytoplasm, cytoplasmic strands, and the cortical cytoplasm that was pressed by the large vacuole against the cell wall (Fig. 3A
In EYFP-AGG1 plants, the fluorescence pattern is different from both AGG2 and EYFP vector alone. While most of the EYFP-AGG1 fluorescence is detected in the plasma membrane, there is considerable signal associated with more internal structures, especially some bright, small, and motile particles (Fig. 4B
Both EYFP-AGG2C97S (Fig. 3, E and F We crossed EYFP-AGG2 and EYFP-AGG1 plants to ggb-2, plp-1, and era1-4 mutants to see if the AGG1 and AGG2 distribution pattern is altered in prenylation mutants. Localization of AGG2 does not change in era1-4 (Fig. 3G To show the membrane versus cytosol partitioning of the Arabidopsis G-protein γ-subunits, we prepared total, membrane, and soluble fractions of protein from leaves of the above-mentioned overexpression plants, resolved on SDS-PAGE and visualized by immunoblotting with antibodies specific for green fluorescent protein (GFP; Fig. 5
AGG1 and AGG2 Do Not Depend on GPA1 or AGB1 for Their Membrane Localization The farnesylation of mammalian Gγ2 was shown to be critical but not sufficient to target Gβγ2 to the plasma membrane. Farnesylation is sufficient to target Gβγ2 to the ER, but it requires the presence of Gα to target to the plasma membrane (Takida and Wedegaertner, 2003). To see if Gα is necessary for Arabidopsis Gβγ to localize to the plasma membrane, we crossed Arabidopsis plants expressing EYFP-AGG1 and EYFP-AGG2 with both gpa1-1 and agb1-1. gpa1-1 is a T-DNA insertion that results in no detectable protein in western blots, and agb1-1 is a splice site mutation that introduces a stop codon early in the transcript, suggesting both are null alleles (Lease et al., 2001; Ullah et al., 2001). No alteration of localization pattern was observed for either EYFP-AGG2 or EYFP-AGG1 in gpa1-1 or agb1-1 mutants (Fig. 4, I–L AGG2 Localization Is Disrupted by Mutation of a Potential Acylation Acceptor Cys Two Residues Preceding the Prenyl Cys In yeast Gγ, an adjacent Cys to the prenyl Cys has been shown to be palmitoylated, and palmitoylation occurs after prenylation (Hirschman and Jenness, 1999; Manahan et al., 2000). In Arabidopsis, there are two additional Cys to the prenyl Cys in AGG1 and AGG2, and one of them is separated by one amino acid upstream of the prenyl Cys (Fig. 1
In contrast, AGG2C95S displayed a distinct pattern from that of wild-type AGG2. GFP-AGG2C95S is associated with internal membranes in both transient assays (Fig. 7, A–C
The fatty acid analog 2-bromo-palmitate (2-BP) is known as a palmitoylation inhibitor both in vivo and in vitro. 2-BP blocks the synthesis of acyl-CoA and also interferes with the transfer of fatty acids to the thiol group (Resh, 2006b). When EYFP-AGG2 were infiltrated into N. benthamiana along with 2-BP, a similarly disrupted pattern to that of GFP-AGG2C95S was displayed (Fig. 7H Charged Residues Preceding the CSIL Motif of AGG2 Are Indispensable for Its Correct Localization Many prenylation targets, including CaM53 (Caldelari et al., 2001) and K-RasB (Hancock et al., 1989), have a polybasic proximal domain that either promotes prenylation efficiency or serves as a second plasma membrane targeting signal. A polybasic region with a net positive charge of four or more is required to function as a plasma membrane targeting motif (Hancock et al., 1990; Michaelson et al., 2001). A polybasic sequence with six Lys was reported to be able to facilitate palmitoylation without requiring previous prenylation (Booden et al., 1999), suggesting the polybasic domain indeed serves as a membrane-targeting signal. A polybasic domain with 11 Arg and three Lys residues in CaM53 has been shown to increase PGGT-I prenylation efficiency by an order of magnitude in vitro (Caldelari et al., 2001). Neither AGG1 nor AGG2 has a long proximal polybasic domain as does CaM53 (Fig. 1
DISCUSSION The importance of G protein in signal transduction processes and some phenotypic similarities between the protein prenyltransferase mutant plp-1 and the Gα mutant gpa1 and Gβ mutant agb1 led us to choose the potential dual lipid modification targets AGG1 and AGG2 as models for the study of lipid modification mechanisms in Arabidopsis and to delineate PLP's physiological function. AGG1 and AGG2 share a CaaX box with Gγs from mammals and yeast but show unique proximal sequence domains. We showed that both AGG1 and AGG2 are prenylated, and prenylation is essential but not sufficient for their proper plasma membrane association. S-acylation functions as an important second signal to efficiently target AGG2 to the plasma membrane. Arabidopsis PFT can largely compensate for loss of function of PGGT-I, as shown both biochemically and genetically. This may help explain the lack of visible phenotypes of ggb mutants. The result that PFT can efficiently farnesylate the ideal PGGT-I targets AGG1 and AGG2 is largely consistent with earlier reports that the recombinant tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) farnesyltransferase can farnesylate mutated APETALA1 with a CaaL box, GST-ap1mL, with [3H]FPP (Yalovsky et al., 1997, 2000b). The change of localization patterns of wild-type AGG1 and AGG2 in the plp-1 background provides strong evidence that AGG1 and AGG2 are prenylated in vivo. Although prenylation is critical for the membrane association of many target proteins, there is always a question if prenylation is sufficient for plasma membrane association. The membrane affinity provided by prenylation alone, particularly farnesylation, is thought not enough to stably anchor the associated protein to the plasma membrane as a sticky finger, but rather provides a greasy handle to interact with the other membrane-bound proteins (Magee and Seabra, 2003). Prenyl groups are also thought to be too bulky and too rigid to associate with the lipid rafts, where sphingolipid and cholesterol is enriched and receptor-mediated signaling events are organized (Dunphy et al., 2001). In contrast, protein palmitoylation is well suited to this role, and mammalian Gαi palmitoyltransferase activity was determined to be enriched in the lipid rafts (Dunphy et al., 2001). Dual lipid modification was required for the yeast Gγ-subunit Ste18p (-CCTLM) for a fully functional pheromone response, and its palmitoylation seemed to depend on its farnesylation (Manahan et al., 2000). Unlike Ste18, which has two adjacent Cys, both AGG1 and AGG2 have two Cys interspersed by another amino acid residue at their C terminus (Fig. 1 The complete cytosolic distribution of the prenyl Cys mutants AGG2C97S and AGG1C95S suggests that initial prenylation is required for the S-acylation of their adjacent Cys. S-acyltransferase is found to be associated with ER (Lobo et al., 2002), Golgi (Resh, 2006a), plasma membrane (Dunphy et al., 2001), or vacuolar membranes (Veit et al., 2003). Thus for S-acylation to occur under physiological conditions, a mechanism is required to bring the target proteins close to the membranes where the S-acyltransferase resides. In contrast, protein prenyltransferases are cytosolic, and, thus, protein prenylation can occur simultaneously once the protein is translated. The reported dependence of palmitoylation of the second Cys on the farnesylation of the prenyl Cys in Ste18 and Ras2P from yeast cells agrees with this primary requirement of protein membrane association prior to S-acylation (Manahan et al., 2000; Lobo et al., 2002; Dong et al., 2003). Alternatively, the membrane attachment can be facilitated by a polybasic domain that interacts electrostatically with the head groups of negative-charged phospholipids in the cytoplasmic leaflet of the membrane (Magee and Marshall, 1999). It has been shown that requirement of farnesylation for palmitoylation of H-Ras can be replaced by a polybasic domain with six Lys (Booden et al., 1999). A nonprenylated but palmitoylated type II RAC, AtRAC10 (Lavy et al., 2002), also has a long stretch of charged residues with many Lys residues that is required for palmitoylation (Lavy and Yalovsky, 2006). Unsurprisingly, proteins with one or more intrinsic transmembrane domains have been identified to be palmitoylated through a global analysis approach (Roth et al., 2006). Proteins with none of the membrane association mechanisms mentioned above have also been identified to be palmitoylated in yeast, and possibly these types of targets were brought to the peripheral of membranes through interacting with membrane-associated proteins. Interestingly, no human Gγ has an adjacent Cys, as in the yeast Gγ, or the preceding polybasic domains to the -CaaX box, as in the K-RasB (Takida and Wedegaertner, 2003). Gβ1γ2 requires the presence of Gα to be targeted to the plasma membrane rather than to the ER (Takida and Wedegaertner, 2003). It was also shown that when an S-acylation site was introduced into the Gγ2, the dependence on Gα for correct plasma membrane localization is not required. Using gpa1, we showed that AGG1 and AGG2 do not rely on Gα for their correct targeting. On the other hand, the cytosolic distribution of the prenylation-depleted AGG1C95S and AGG2C97S indicates that, as in humans, Arabidopsis Gα is not sufficient to bring Gβγ to the membrane. In our EYFP tagging experiments, AGG2 appears to be more abundant and better targeted to the plasma membrane than AGG1. Although we found AGG2 has extra putative N-glycosylation motifs that AGG1 lacks using the Motif Scan program (http://myhits.isb-sib.ch/cgi-bin/motif_scan; Falquet et al., 2002; Fig. 1 In the plp-1 background, where both PFT and PGGT-I functions are lost, we still detected some AGG2 remaining in the membrane fraction, although the total signal in plp-1 is already much less than that in the wild type. We are not certain what accounts for the remaining membrane association, though there are several possibilities. One is that the third type of prenyltransferase, PGGT-II or Rab geranylgeranyltransferase, known to exclusively prenylate Rab GTPases in mammalian cells (Seabra et al., 1992), may compensate to some degree for loss of both PFT and PGGT-I in plants. However, prenylation studies using either PFT or PGGT-I targets and the crude extract from plp-1 or ggb mutant did not show extra prenylation activity (Running et al., 2004; Johnson et al., 2005), indicating either there is no cross specificity between PGGT-I and PGGT-II or the activity under physiological conditions is too low to detect using the crude extract under a condition not favored by PGGT-II. Further experiments using the purified PGGT-II enzyme are needed to see if AGG1 and AGG2 are possibly prenylated by PGGT-II at low efficiency. A second possibility is that dual acylation can compensate for the loss of prenylation. It is possible that the charged residues unstably but briefly allow AGG2 access to the internal membrane where the S-acyltransferase likely resides. MATERIALS AND METHODS Expression of GST-Fusion Proteins in Escherichia coli AGG1 (At3g63420) full-length cDNA was amplified with forward primer QZI1 (TTCGAATTCATGCGAGAGGAAACTGTGGTT) and reverse primer QZI2 (AGCTATGACCTCGAGTCAAAGTATTAAGCATCTGC), and AGG1C95S was amplified with QZI1 and QZI3 (AGCTATGACCTCGAGTCAAAGTATTAATGATCTGC). AGG2 (At3g22942) was amplified with QZJ1 (TTCGAATTCATGGAAGCGGGTAGCTCCAAT) and QZJ2 (AGCTATGACCTCGAGTCAAAGAATGGAGCAGCCA), and AGG2C97S was amplified with QZJ1 and QZJ3 (AGCTATGACCTCGAGTCAAAGAATGGAAGAGCCA). The PCR products were digested with EcoRI and XhoI and subcloned into pGEX-4T-1 (Pharmacia) in frame with GST and verified by sequencing. The corresponding fusion proteins (GST-AGG1, GST-AGG1C95S, GST-AGG2, and GST-AGG2C97S) were induced in E. coli XL-1 Blue and purified with glutathione-Sepharose 4B beads (Pharmacia) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Expression of Recombinant Arabidopsis PFT and PGGT-I in Yeast The full-length c-DNA of PLP (At3g59380) was amplified with QZT5 (CCGGAATTCTCGACTTTGGATCGGAGTC) and QZT6 (CCATCGATACAATTGCTGCCACTGTAATCTTG), linked as an EcoRI/ClaI fragment downstream to the GAL10 promoter of the yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) expression vector pESC-HIS (Stratagene), and verified by sequencing in frame with the FLAG epitope at the C terminus. The consequent plasmid was named pEHP. The full-length c-DNA of ERA1 (At5g40280), the β-subunit of PFT, was amplified with QZU4 (TTCCCCTCGAGTCATGCTGCTTTAAAGAA) and QZU5 (TACGGGATCCATGCCAGTAGTAACCCG), digested with BamHI/XhoI, and ligated with BamHI/SalI digested pEHP. The full-length c-DNA of GGB (At2g39550), the β-subunit of PGGT-I, was amplified with QZR1 (TTAGGATCCGAACGACGCTATGTCAGAGA) and QZR3 (TCGTAAGTCGACGACTTTGAGACAATCTAAACAT). The PCR product was directly subcloned into pCR-Blunt II-TOPO (Invitrogen/Life Technologies), digested with XbaI/EcoRV, filled in by Klenow fragment (New England Biolabs), and ligated to SmaI-digested pEHP. ERA1 and GGB were downstream of the GAL10 promoter. The resulting plasmids pFT and pGGT-I were introduced into yeast YPH499 cells by lithium acetate-mediated transformation (Gietz and Woods, 2002). Transformed cells were selected for their ability to grow on medium lacking His. Induction of protein expression was performed as described (Cahoon and Kinney, 2004) except for the following modifications. For medium scale protein induction, single colonies from the transformed cells were grown for 3 d with shaking (300 rpm) at 30°C in 5 mL medium consisting of 0.08% (w/v) complete supplement mixture without His (CSM-HIS, BIO101), 0.17% (w/v) yeast nitrogen base without amino acids (Difco), 0.5% (w/v) ammonium sulfate, and 2% (w/v) raffinose. Then the 5-mL culture was added into 50 mL of the same medium and continued growing for 2 d at 30°C. Cells were then collected, washed, and resuspended in 250 mL of the same medium except that the raffinose was replaced with 2% (w/v) Gal for induction of protein expression for 24 h. Spheroplast and crude protein were prepared using CelLytic Y Plus (product no. PCYP-1, Sigma). PFT and PGGT-I were purified using EZviewRed ANTI-FLAG M2 Affinity gel (product no. F2426, Sigma) and eluted with 3× FLAG peptide (product no. F4799, Sigma) according to the manufacturer's instructions. The eluted enzyme was stored at −80°C for further use. In Vitro Protein Prenylation Assays In vitro prenylation assays were performed as described (Randall et al., 1993; Zhang et al., 1994; Yalovsky et al., 2000b; Johnson et al., 2005). The reactions consisted of 2 μg of purified GST-AGG2, GST-AGG2C97S, GST-AGG1, or GST-AGG1C95S, 10 ng of purified recombinant Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) PFT or PGGT-I, 50 mm Tris, pH 8.0, 5 mm MgCl2, 50 μm ZnCl2, 0.2% (w/v) glucopyranoside, 5 mm dithiothreitol, and 1 μL of either [1-3H]FPP (1 mCi mL−1) or [1-3H]GGPP (1 mCi mL−1, both from American Radiological Company) in a total volume of 20 μL. The reactions were preequilibrated at 30°C for 5 min before adding prenyl substrates and incubated for 90 min afterward, resolved by 10% SDS-PAGE, and analyzed by fluorography using Autofluor fluorographic reagent (National Diagnostics) and Kodak XAR film (Eastman Kodak). Construction of Plant Expression Vectors and Transformation The AGG1 cDNA was amplified using primer sets QZI4 (ATACATAAGCTTTCATGCGAGAGGAAACTGT) and QZI5 (CGTTGCTCTAGATCAAAGTATTAAGCATCTGCA), and reverse primer QZI6 (CGTTGCTCTAGATCAAAGTATTAAAGATCTGCA) was used to change the fourth to last Cys in AGG1 to Ser. The AGG2 cDNA was amplified using QZJ4 (ATACATAAGCTTTCATGGAAGCGGGTAGCT) and QZJ5 (CGTTGCTCTAGATCAAAGAATGGAGCAGC), and reverse primer QZJ6 (CGTTGCTCTAGATCAAAGAATGGAAGAGC) was used to mutate the fourth to last Cys in AGG2 to Ser. The PCR products were subcloned into pCR-Blunt II-TOPO (Invitrogen/Life Technologies) and ligated as a HindIII/XbaI fragment into pCAM-EYFP-C1 (Preuss et al., 2004), a pCAMBIA-(CAMBIA) based plant expression vector. The cDNAs are in frame with EYFP at the N terminus under the control of the 35S promoter of Cauliflower mosaic virus. The corresponding constructs pEYFP-AGG1, pEYFP-AGG1C95S, pEYFP-AGG2, and pEYFP-AGG2C97S were transformed into Agrobacterium tumefaciens C58 by electroporation. AGG1C93S was amplified by QZY41 (CACCATGCGAGAGGAAACTGTGGTTTACGA) and QZY42 (TCAAAGTATTAAGCATCTAGAGCCTTCTCCTCCA). AGG1m2 was amplified by QZY41 and QZY47 (TCAAAGTATTAAGCAGCCACATCGTTTTGCTTCTTTTGGTCCTTCAAACCA). AGG2C95S was amplified by QZY43 (CACCATGGAAGCGGGTAGCTCCAATTCGTC) and QZY44 (CACCATGGAAGCGGGTAGCTCCAATTCGTC). AGG2m1 was amplified by QZY43 and QZY48 (TCAAAGAATGGAGCATCTGCAGCCTTCTCCTCCATTAGGGCCTTCGAACCA). The AGG1C93S, AGG1m2, AGG2C95S, and AGG2m1 were introduced into pENTR/d-TOPO (Invitrogen/Life Technologies) and then into destination vector pMDC43 (Curtis and Grossniklaus, 2003). The corresponding binary vector GFP-AGG1C93S, GFP-AGG1m2, GFP-AGG2C95S, and GFP-AGG2m1 was transformed into C58. Arabidopsis plants were transformed by the floral dip method (Clough and Bent, 1998). Transient assay in Nicotiana benthamiana is through leaf infiltration. Inhibition of S-Acylation This experiment essentially follows that of Lavy et al. (2002). Lower epidermal layers of N. benthamiana leaves were infiltrated with the induced Agrobacteria C58 harboring EYFP-AGG1, EYFP-AGG2, and EYFP-AUX1 (Yang et al., 2006) along with 1 mm of palmitoylation inhibitor 2-BP (Arcros) dissolved in 10% DMSO or 10% DMSO alone. Fluorescence signals were observed 24 h later. Plant Materials and Growth Condition plp-1 (Running et al., 2004), era1-4 (previously known as wig-1; Running et al., 1998), ggb-2 (Johnson et al., 2005), gpa1-1(Ullah et al., 2001), and agb1-1 (Lease et al., 2001) mutants were previously described. EYFP-AGG2 plp-1, EYFP-AGG2 ggb-2, EYFP-AGG2 era1-4, EYFP-AGG1 gpa1-1, EYFP-AGG1 agb1-1, EYFP-AGG2 gpa1-1, and EYFP-AGG2 agb1-1 were generated by crossing EYFP-AGG2 transgenic plants with their respective single mutant, allowing the hygromycin-resistant F1 plants to self fertilize and screening F2 plants on one-fourth strength Murashige and Skoog plates with 30 mg/L of hygromycin and further selected by confocal imaging. Then EYFP-containing mutants were screened either by their obvious phenotypes or PCR screening if there were no apparent phenotypes, as in EYFP-AGG2 ggb-2. Arabidopsis seeds expressing GmMan1-CFP (Nebenfuhr et al., 1999) were crossed with EYFP-AGG1, GFP-AGG1C93S, and GFP-AGG2C95S and F1 seeds were used for observation of colocalization. Arabidopsis plants were grown on the farfat soil in the greenhouse at 22°C under long-day conditions (15 h 150 μE light and 9 h dark) and 50% humidity. N. benthamiana was grown at 27°C under long-day conditions. Microscopy Imaging Cotyledons or leaf lower epidermal cells of transgenic plants or transiently infiltrated N. benthamiana with EYFP, GFP, or CFP signal were imaged using a Zeiss LSM 510 confocal/multiphoton microscope equipped with a 40× DIC lens that allows simultaneous acquisition of confocal, multiphoton, and transmitted light images. Colocalization of EYFP or GFP with CFP was taken under multitrack options with one channel set up for EYFP or GFP and another channel set up for CFP. To observe the signal distribution after plasmolysis, leaf sections were immersed in 30% Suc for 2 h. Images were finalized by Adobe Photoshop 7.0. Protein Preparation and Immunoblotting Proteins were prepared according to Preuss et al. (2004). A total of 0.2 g of leaf tissues was ground in 0.6 mL of cold buffer containing 20 mm HEPES, pH 7.5, 100 mm NaCl, 5 mm MgCl2, 1 mm dithiothreitol, and 1× complete protease inhibitors (Roche Applied Science). The homogenate was transferred to a 2-mL tube and spun at 6,000g for 5 min at 4°C, and 0.4 mL of postnuclear supernatant (PNS) was collected as total protein and 0.2 mL of PNS was fractionated at 100,000g at 4°C for 1 h. The supernatant (soluble fraction) was collected. The pellet was resuspended in 200 μL of 1× loading buffer. An equal volume of 2× loading buffer was added to both the saved PNS (total protein) and soluble fraction. Samples were boiled for 10 min and spun for 2 min. Five microliters of the above sample from YFP-vector control, 10 μL from YFP-AGG2, EYFP-AGG2C97S, and YFP-AGG2 era1-4, 15 μL from EYFP-AGG2 ggb-2, and 30 μL from EYFP-AGG2 plp-1 was loaded onto 4% to 15% SDS-PAGE gradient gel (Bio-Rad) and transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (Bio-Rad) for immunodetection with monoclonal anti-GFP (mouse IgG2a isotype, cat no. 8371, CLONTECH) and horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse secondary antibody (NA931-1ML, Amersham Biosciences). For AGG1, 1 μL of YFP-vector control, 10 μL from YFP-AGG1 and YFP-AGG1 era1-4, 30 μL from EYFP-AGG1C95S, EYFP-AGG1 ggb-2, and EYFP-AGG1 plp-1 was loaded onto 4% to 15% SDS-PAGE gradient gel. Signals were detected by exposing Kodak XAR film (Eastman Kodak) to the membrane after applying ECL western Blotting Substrate (Pierce). Supplemental Data The following materials are available in the online version of this article.
[Supplemental Data]
Acknowledgments We thank Dr. Mary Preuss for her help with membrane fractionation, Dr. Ed Cahoon for his technical advice in expressing recombinant PFT and PGGT-I in yeast, and Dr. Eric Nielsen for critical reading of the manuscript. We thank Dr. Dring Crowell for the ggb-2 mutant, Dr. Andreas Nebenfüer for the Golgi localization marker CFP-GmMan, Dr. Ming Chen for the ER localization marker CFP-HDEL, and Dr. Yaodong Yang for EYFP-AUX1. We thank Dr. Howard Berg for his help with confocal imaging and Drs. Tom Juehne and Keming Song for helpful materials. Notes 1This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (grant no. IOB–0344261 to M.P.R.). The author responsible for distribution of materials integral to the findings presented in this article in accordance with the policy described in the Instructions for Authors (www.plantphysiol.org) is: Mark P. Running (mrunning/at/danforthcenter.org). [C]Some figures in this article are displayed in color online but in black and white in the print edition. [W]The online version of this article contains Web-only data. [OA]Open Access articles can be viewed online without a subscription. References
|
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2002 Oct; 5(5):402-7.
[Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2002]EMBO Rep. 2004 Jun; 5(6):572-8.
[EMBO Rep. 2004]Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2004 Dec; 7(6):719-31.
[Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2004]Endocr Rev. 2003 Dec; 24(6):765-81.
[Endocr Rev. 2003]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990 May; 87(10):3821-5.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990]Science. 1995 Apr 14; 268(5208):221-5.
[Science. 1995]Trends Biochem Sci. 1995 May; 20(5):181-7.
[Trends Biochem Sci. 1995]J Biol Chem. 1995 Jan 13; 270(2):503-6.
[J Biol Chem. 1995]J Lipid Res. 2006 Apr; 47(4):681-99.
[J Lipid Res. 2006]J Biol Chem. 1994 Sep 23; 269(38):23465-70.
[J Biol Chem. 1994]Mol Cell Biol. 1999 Nov; 19(11):7705-11.
[Mol Cell Biol. 1999]Mol Biol Cell. 2000 Mar; 11(3):957-68.
[Mol Biol Cell. 2000]J Biol Chem. 2003 May 9; 278(19):17284-90.
[J Biol Chem. 2003]Cell. 2006 Jun 2; 125(5):1003-13.
[Cell. 2006]Biochem J. 2000 Jan 1; 345 Pt 1():145-51.
[Biochem J. 2000]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Dec 19; 97(26):14784-8.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000]Biochim Biophys Acta. 2001 Aug 30; 1520(2):147-53.
[Biochim Biophys Acta. 2001]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 May 18; 101(20):7815-20.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004]Science. 1996 Aug 30; 273(5279):1239-41.
[Science. 1996]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Jun 20; 97(13):7633-8.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000]Plant Mol Biol. 1999 Sep; 41(1):139-50.
[Plant Mol Biol. 1999]EMBO J. 1999 Apr 1; 18(7):1996-2007.
[EMBO J. 1999]Plant Cell. 2000 Aug; 12(8):1257-66.
[Plant Cell. 2000]J Biol Chem. 2006 Sep 15; 281(37):27145-57.
[J Biol Chem. 2006]Plant Physiol. 2006 Dec; 142(4):1412-26.
[Plant Physiol. 2006]Mol Biol Cell. 2003 Dec; 14(12):5104-15.
[Mol Biol Cell. 2003]Plant J. 2006 Feb; 45(4):599-615.
[Plant J. 2006]Plant Physiol. 1999 Dec; 121(4):1127-42.
[Plant Physiol. 1999]Mol Biol Cell. 2002 Sep; 13(9):3294-302.
[Mol Biol Cell. 2002]Plant Physiol. 1999 Dec; 121(4):1127-42.
[Plant Physiol. 1999]J Biol Chem. 2002 Aug 16; 277(33):29856-64.
[J Biol Chem. 2002]J Biol Chem. 2003 May 9; 278(19):17284-90.
[J Biol Chem. 2003]Plant Cell. 2001 Dec; 13(12):2631-41.
[Plant Cell. 2001]Science. 2001 Jun 15; 292(5524):2066-9.
[Science. 2001]Mol Cell Biol. 1999 Nov; 19(11):7705-11.
[Mol Cell Biol. 1999]Mol Biol Cell. 2000 Mar; 11(3):957-68.
[Mol Biol Cell. 2000]J Biol Chem. 2003 May 9; 278(19):17284-90.
[J Biol Chem. 2003]Methods. 2006 Oct; 40(2):191-7.
[Methods. 2006]Curr Biol. 2006 Jun 6; 16(11):1123-7.
[Curr Biol. 2006]Plant Physiol. 2001 Aug; 126(4):1416-29.
[Plant Physiol. 2001]Cell. 1989 Jun 30; 57(7):1167-77.
[Cell. 1989]Cell. 1990 Oct 5; 63(1):133-9.
[Cell. 1990]J Cell Biol. 2001 Jan 8; 152(1):111-26.
[J Cell Biol. 2001]J Biol Chem. 1999 Jan 15; 274(3):1423-31.
[J Biol Chem. 1999]Mol Cell Biol. 1997 Apr; 17(4):1986-94.
[Mol Cell Biol. 1997]Curr Biol. 2006 Jun 6; 16(11):1123-7.
[Curr Biol. 2006]Biochem J. 2003 Dec 1; 376(Pt 2):e3-4.
[Biochem J. 2003]J Biol Chem. 2001 Nov 16; 276(46):43300-4.
[J Biol Chem. 2001]Mol Biol Cell. 2000 Mar; 11(3):957-68.
[Mol Biol Cell. 2000]Cell. 1989 Jun 30; 57(7):1167-77.
[Cell. 1989]Cell. 2006 Jul 14; 126(1):191-203.
[Cell. 2006]J Biol Chem. 2002 Oct 25; 277(43):41268-73.
[J Biol Chem. 2002]J Biol Chem. 2001 Nov 16; 276(46):43300-4.
[J Biol Chem. 2001]FEBS Lett. 2003 Apr 10; 540(1-3):101-5.
[FEBS Lett. 2003]Mol Biol Cell. 2000 Mar; 11(3):957-68.
[Mol Biol Cell. 2000]Mol Cell Biol. 2003 Sep; 23(18):6574-84.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2003]J Biol Chem. 2003 May 9; 278(19):17284-90.
[J Biol Chem. 2003]Nucleic Acids Res. 2002 Jan 1; 30(1):235-8.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2002]Science. 2003 Aug 1; 301(5633):653-7.
[Science. 2003]J Biol Chem. 1992 Jul 15; 267(20):14497-503.
[J Biol Chem. 1992]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 May 18; 101(20):7815-20.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004]Plant Physiol. 2005 Oct; 139(2):722-33.
[Plant Physiol. 2005]Methods Enzymol. 2002; 350():87-96.
[Methods Enzymol. 2002]J Biol Chem. 2004 Mar 26; 279(13):12495-502.
[J Biol Chem. 2004]Plant Cell. 1993 Apr; 5(4):433-42.
[Plant Cell. 1993]J Biol Chem. 1994 Sep 23; 269(38):23465-70.
[J Biol Chem. 1994]Plant Cell. 2000 Aug; 12(8):1257-66.
[Plant Cell. 2000]Plant Physiol. 2005 Oct; 139(2):722-33.
[Plant Physiol. 2005]Plant Cell. 2004 Jun; 16(6):1589-603.
[Plant Cell. 2004]Plant Physiol. 2003 Oct; 133(2):462-9.
[Plant Physiol. 2003]Plant J. 1998 Dec; 16(6):735-43.
[Plant J. 1998]Plant Cell. 2002 Oct; 14(10):2431-50.
[Plant Cell. 2002]Curr Biol. 2006 Jun 6; 16(11):1123-7.
[Curr Biol. 2006]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 May 18; 101(20):7815-20.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004]Development. 1998 Jul; 125(14):2545-53.
[Development. 1998]Plant Physiol. 2005 Oct; 139(2):722-33.
[Plant Physiol. 2005]Science. 2001 Jun 15; 292(5524):2066-9.
[Science. 2001]Plant Cell. 2001 Dec; 13(12):2631-41.
[Plant Cell. 2001]Plant Cell. 2004 Jun; 16(6):1589-603.
[Plant Cell. 2004]