Autoinhibition of Arf GTPase-activating Protein Activity by the BAR Domain in ASAP1

ASAP1 is an Arf GTPase-activating protein (GAP) that functions on membrane surfaces to catalyze the hydrolysis of GTP bound to Arf. ASAP1 contains a tandem of BAR, pleckstrin homology (PH), and Arf GAP domains and contributes to the formation of invadopodia and podosomes. The PH domain interacts with the catalytic domain influencing both the catalytic and Michaelis constants. Tandem BAR-PH domains have been found to fold into a functional unit. The results of sedimentation velocity studies were consistent with predictions from homology models in which the BAR and PH domains of ASAP1 fold together. We set out to test the hypothesis that the BAR domain of ASAP1 affects GAP activity by interacting with the PH and/or Arf GAP domains. Recombinant proteins composed of the BAR, PH, Arf GAP, and Ankyrin repeat domains (called BAR-PZA) and the PH, Arf GAP, and Ankyrin repeat domains (PZA) were compared. Catalytic power for the two proteins was determined using large unilamellar vesicles as a reaction surface. The catalytic power of PZA was greater than that of BAR-PZA. The effect of the BAR domain was dependent on the N-terminal loop of the BAR domain and was not the consequence of differential membrane association or changes in large unilamellar vesicle curvature. The K_m for BAR-PZA was greater and the k_cat was smaller than for PZA determined by saturation kinetics. Analysis of single turnover kinetics revealed a transition state intermediate that was affected by the BAR domain. We conclude that BAR domains can affect enzymatic activity through intraprotein interactions.The Bin, amphiphysin, RSV161/167 (BAR)² domain is a recently identified structural element in proteins that regulate membrane trafficking (1–7). The BAR superfamily comprises three subfamilies: F-BAR, I-BAR, and BAR. The BAR group can be further subdivided into BAR, N-BAR, PX-BAR, and BAR-pleckstrin homology (PH). The BAR group domains consist of three bundled α-helices that homodimerize to form a banana-shaped structure. The inner curved face can bind preferentially to surfaces with similar curvatures. As a consequence, BAR domains can function as membrane curvature sensors or as inducers of membrane curvature. BAR domains also bind to proteins (8, 9). Several proteins contain a BAR domain immediately N-terminal to a PH domain, which also mediates regulated membrane association (10–13). In the protein APPL1 (9), the BAR-PH domains fold together forming a binding site for the small GTP-binding protein Rab5. Arf GTPase-activating proteins (GAPs) are regulators of Arf family GTP-binding proteins (14–18). Two subtypes of Arf GAPs have N-terminal BAR and PH domains similar to that found in APPL1.Thirty-one genes encode Arf GAPs in humans (16–18). Each member of the family has an Arf GAP domain that catalyzes the hydrolysis of GTP bound to Arf family GTP-binding proteins. The Arf GAPs are otherwise structurally diverse. ASAP1 is an Arf GAP that affects membrane traffic and actin remodeling involved in cell movement and has been implicated in oncogenesis (19–22). ASAP1 contains, from the N terminus, BAR, PH, Arf GAP, Ankyrin repeat, proline-rich, and SH3 domains.ASAP1 contains a BAR domain immediately N-terminal to a PH domain. The PH domain of ASAP1 is functionally integrated with the Arf GAP domain and may form part of the substrate binding pocket (23, 24). The PH domain binds specifically to phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate (PIP₂), a constituent of the membrane, leading to stimulation of GAP activity by a mechanism that is, in part, independent of recruitment to membranes (23, 25). The BAR domain of ASAP1 is critical for in vivo function of ASAP1, but the molecular functions of the BAR domain of ASAP1 have not been extensively characterized. Hypotheses related to membrane curvature have been examined. Recombinant ASAP1 can induce the formation of tubules from large unilamellar vesicles, which may be related to a function of ASAP1 in membrane traffic. The BAR domain might also regulate GAP activity of ASAP1. We have considered two mechanisms based on the known properties of BAR domains. First the BAR domain could regulate association of ASAP1 with membrane surfaces containing the substrate Arf1·GTP. The BAR domain could also affect GAP activity through an intramolecular association. In one BAR-PH protein that has been crystallized (APPL1), the two domains fold together to form a protein binding site (9). In ASAP1, the PH domain is functionally integrated with the GAP domain, raising the possibility that the BAR domain affects GAP activity by folding with the PH domain.Here we compared the kinetics of recombinant proteins composed of the PH, Arf GAP, and Ankyrin repeat (PZA)³ or BAR, PH, Arf GAP, and Ankyrin repeat (BAR-PZA) domains of ASAP1 to test the hypothesis that the BAR domain affects enzymatic activity. We found kinetic differences between the proteins that could not be explained by membrane association properties. The results were consistent with a model in which the BAR domain affects transition of ASAP1 through its catalytic cycle.     

ASAP1, a Phospholipid-Dependent Arf GTPase-Activating Protein That Associates with and Is Phosphorylated by Src

Membrane trafficking is regulated in part by small GTP-binding proteins of the ADP-ribosylation factor (Arf) family. Arf function depends on the controlled exchange and hydrolysis of GTP. We have purified and cloned two variants of a 130-kDa phosphatidylinositol 4,5-biphosphate (PIP₂)-dependent Arf1 GTPase-activating protein (GAP), which we call ASAP1a and ASAP1b. Both contain a pleckstrin homology (PH) domain, a zinc finger similar to that found in another Arf GAP, three ankyrin (ANK) repeats, a proline-rich region with alternative splicing and SH3 binding motifs, eight repeats of the sequence E/DLPPKP, and an SH3 domain. Together, the PH, zinc finger, and ANK repeat regions possess PIP₂-dependent GAP activity on Arf1 and Arf5, less activity on Arf6, and no detectable activity on Arl2 in vitro. The cDNA for ASAP1 was independently identified in a screen for proteins that interact with the SH3 domain of the tyrosine kinase Src. ASAP1 associates in vitro with the SH3 domains of Src family members and with the Crk adapter protein. ASAP1 coprecipitates with Src from cell lysates and is phosphorylated on tyrosine residues in cells expressing activated Src. Both coimmunoprecipitation and tyrosine phosphorylation depend on the same proline-rich class II Src SH3 binding site required for in vitro association. By directly interacting with both Arfs and tyrosine kinases involved in regulating cell growth and cytoskeletal organization, ASAP1 could coordinate membrane remodeling events with these processes.Membrane traffic, the transfer of material between membrane-bound compartments, is needed for such diverse cellular processes as secretion, endocytosis, and changes in cell shape that accompany cell growth, division, and migration (reviewed in references 84, 85, and 87). It is mediated by transport vesicles that are formed by budding from a donor membrane. The process of budding is driven by the assembly of a proteinaceous coat. Once the vesicle is formed, the coat must dissociate to permit fusion with an acceptor membrane and the consequent delivery of the vesicle’s contents. These steps are regulated in part by the Arf family of small GTP-binding proteins (reviewed in references 8, 23, 61, and 63). Arfs are highly conserved and are found in eukaryotes ranging from yeast to humans. The mammalian Arf family is divided into several classes based largely on sequence similarity: class I (Arfs 1 through 3), class II (Arfs 4 and 5), class III (Arf6), and the more distantly related Arf-like (Arl) class. By linking GTP binding and hydrolysis to coat assembly and disassembly, Arfs regulate membrane trafficking at a number of sites. Arf1 has been implicated in endoplasmic reticulum-to-Golgi and intra-Golgi transport, endosome-to-endosome fusion, and synaptic vesicle formation (8, 23, 28, 61, 63, 66). Arf6 has been implicated in regulation of membrane traffic between the plasma membrane and a specialized endocytic compartment, and its function has been linked to cytoskeletal reorganization (25, 26, 71, 73, 74). The specific sites of action of the other Arf family members are not known.The hydrolysis of GTP on Arf requires a GTPase-activating protein (GAP) (19, 61). With multiple Arfs and multiple sites of action, the existence of several unique Arf GAPs had been anticipated. A number of activities have been purified or partially purified from mammalian sources, including rat liver (19, 57, 77), rat spleen (21), and bovine brain (79), and two Arf GAP activities from rat liver have been resolved (77). They have similar Arf specificities but differ in their lipid dependencies. One of the Arf GAPs (ArfGAP/ArfGAP1, hereafter referred to as ArfGAP1) which functions in the Golgi is activated by dioleoglycerols (3, 4, 19, 40). ArfGAP1, in common with a yeast Arf GAP, GCS1 (72), contains a zinc finger domain which is required for activity (19). The second Arf GAP (ArfGAP2) is specifically activated by phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate (PIP₂) and phosphatidic acid (PA). Based on lipid requirements, ArfGAP2 was speculated to function at the plasma membrane and be regulated independently of ArfGAP1 (77). ArfGAP1 and ArfGAP2 were antigenically distinct and, therefore, likely to be distinct gene products; however, prior to this study, only ArfGAP1 had been cloned (19).Src, a cytoplasmic tyrosine kinase with N-terminal Src homology 3 (SH3) and SH2 domains, transduces signals important for cell growth and cytoskeletal organization (12, 68, 91). A number of studies suggest that Src is also involved in regulating membrane traffic. Src associates primarily with endosomal membranes and in several cell types has been localized to specialized secretory vesicles, including synaptic vesicles (5, 20, 34, 46, 54, 69, 81). Overexpression of Src accelerates endocytosis (95). In addition, Src associates with or phosphorylates several proteins involved in membrane trafficking (5, 31, 43, 65).Here, we report the purification and cloning of a PIP₂-dependent Arf GAP, ASAP1. ASAP1 contains a zinc finger domain similar to that required for GAP activity in ArfGAP1 and GCS1. ASAP1 also contains a number of domains that are likely to be involved in regulation and/or localization: a pleckstrin homology (PH) domain, three ankyrin (ANK) repeats, a proline-rich region with SH3 binding motifs, and an SH3 domain. In addition, ASAP1 was identified independently as a binding protein for Src and was found to be phosphorylated on tyrosine in cells that express activated Src. ASAP1 also associated with the adapter protein c-Crk in vitro. ASAP1 was localized to the cytoplasm and the cell edge likely associated with the plasma membrane. We propose that ASAP1, by binding both Src and PIP₂, could coordinate membrane trafficking with cell growth or actin cytoskeleton remodeling.     

A PH Domain in the Arf GTPase-activating Protein (GAP) ARAP1 Binds Phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-Trisphosphate and Regulates Arf GAP Activity Independently of Recruitment to the Plasma Membranes

ARAP1 is a phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate (PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃)-dependent Arf GTPase-activating protein (GAP) with five PH domains that regulates endocytic trafficking of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Two tandem PH domains are immediately N-terminal of the Arf GAP domain, and one of these fits the consensus sequence for PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃ binding. Here, we tested the hypothesis that PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃-dependent recruitment mediated by the first PH domain of ARAP1 regulates the in vivo and in vitro function of ARAP1. We found that PH1 of ARAP1 specifically bound to PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃, but with relatively low affinity (≈1.6 μm), and the PH domains did not mediate PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃-dependent recruitment to membranes in cells. However, PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃ binding to the PH domain stimulated GAP activity and was required for in vivo function of ARAP1 as a regulator of endocytic trafficking of the EGFR. Based on these results, we propose a variation on the model for the function of phosphoinositide-binding PH domains. In our model, ARAP1 is recruited to membranes independently of PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃, the subsequent production of which triggers enzymatic activity.Pleckstrin homology (PH)² domains are a common structural motif encoded by the human genome (1, 2). Approximately 10% of PH domains bind to phosphoinositides. These PH domains are thought to mediate phosphoinositide-dependent recruitment to membranes (1–3). Most PH domains likely have functions other than or in addition to phosphoinositide binding. For example, PH domains have been found to bind to protein and DNA (4–12). In addition, some PH domains have been found to be structurally and functionally integrated with adjacent domains (13, 14). A small fraction of PH domain-containing proteins (about 9% of the human proteins) have multiple PH domains arranged in tandem, which have been proposed to function as adaptors but have only been examined in one protein (15, 16). Arf GTPase-activating proteins (GAPs) of the ARAP family are phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate (PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃)-dependent Arf GAPs with tandem PH domains (17, 18). The function of specific PH domains in regulating Arf GAP activity and for biologic activity has not been described.Arf GAPs are proteins that induce the hydrolysis of GTP bound to Arfs (19–23). The Arf proteins are members of the Ras superfamily of GTP-binding proteins (24–27). The six Arf proteins in mammals (five in humans) are divided into three classes based on primary sequence: Arf1, -2, and -3 are class 1, Arf4 and -5 are class 2, and Arf6 is class 3 (23, 24, 27–29). Class 1 and class 3 Arf proteins have been studied more extensively than class 2. They have been found to regulate membrane traffic and the actin cytoskeleton.The Arf GAPs are a family of proteins with diverse domain structures (20, 21, 23, 30). ARAPs, the most structurally complex of the Arf GAPs, contain, in addition to an Arf GAP domain, the sterile α motif (SAM), five PH, Rho GAP, and Ras association domains (17, 18, 31, 32). The first and second and the third and fourth PH domains are tandem (Fig. 1). The first and third PH domains of the ARAPs fit the consensus for PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃ binding (33–35). ARAPs have been found to affect actin and membrane traffic (21, 23). ARAP3 regulates growth factor-induced ruffling of porcine aortic endothelial cells (31, 36, 37). The function is dependent on the Arf GAP and Rho GAP domains. ARAP2 regulates focal adhesions, an actin cytoskeletal structure (17). ARAP2 function requires Arf GAP activity and a Rho GAP domain capable of binding RhoA·GTP. ARAP1 has been found to have a role in membrane traffic (18). The protein associates with pre-early endosomes involved in the attenuation of EGFR signals. The function of the tandem PH domains in the ARAPs has not been examined.Open in a separate windowFIGURE 1.ARAP1 binding to phospholipids. A, schematic of the recombinant proteins used in this study. Domain abbreviations: Ank, ankyrin repeat; PLCδ-PH, PH domain of phospholipase C δ; RA, Ras association motif; RhoGAP, Rho GTPase-activating domain. B, ARAP1 phosphoinositide binding specificity. 500 nm PH1-Ank recombinant protein was incubated with sucrose-loaded LUVs formed by extrusion through a 1-μm pore filter. LUVs contained PtdIns alone or PtdIns with 2.5 μm PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃, 2.5 μm PtdIns(3)P, 2.5 μm PtdIns(4)P, 2.5 μm PtdIns(5)P, 2.5 μm PtdIns(3,4)P₂, 2.5 μm PtdIns(3,5)P₂, or 2.5 μm PtdIns(4,5)P₂ with a total phosphoinositide concentration of 50 μm and a total phospholipid concentration of 500 μm. Vesicles were precipitated by ultracentrifugation, and associated proteins were separated by SDS-PAGE. The amount of precipitated protein was determined by densitometry of the Coomassie Blue-stained gels with standards on each gel. C, PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃-dependent binding of ARAP1 to LUVs. 1 μm PH1-Ank or ArfGAP-Ank recombinant protein was incubated with 1 mm sucrose-loaded LUVs formed by extrusion through a 1-μm pore size filter containing varying concentration of PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃. Precipitation of LUVs and analysis of associated proteins were performed as described in B. The average ± S.E. of three independent experiments is presented.Here we investigated the role of the first two PH domains of ARAP1 for catalysis and in vivo function. The first PH domain fits the consensus sequence for PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃ binding (33–35). The second does not fit a phosphoinositide binding consensus but is immediately N-terminal to the GAP domain. We have previously reported that the PH domain that occurs immediately N-terminal of the Arf GAP domain of ASAP1 is critical for the catalytic function of the protein (38, 39). We tested the hypothesis that the two PH domains of ARAP1 function independently; one recruits ARAP1 to PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃-rich membranes, and the other functions with the catalytic domain. As predicted, PH1 interacted specifically with PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃, and PH2 did not. However, both PH domains contributed to catalysis independently of recruitment to membranes. None of the PH domains in ARAP1 mediated PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃-dependent targeting to plasma membranes (PM). PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃ stimulated GAP activity, and the ability to bind PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃ was required for ARAP1 to regulate membrane traffic. We propose that ARAP1 is recruited independently of PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃ to the PM where PtdIns(3,4,5)P₃ subsequently regulates its GAP activity to control endocytic events.     

Reactive oxygen species in aerobic methane formation from vegetation

The first report of aerobic methane emissions from vegetation by an unknown mechanism¹ suggested that this potential new source may make a significant contribution to global methane emissions. We recently investigated possible mechanisms and reported^2,3 experiments in which UV-irradiation caused methane emissions from pectin, a major plant cell wall polysaccharide. Our findings also suggest that UV-generated reactive oxygen species (ROS) release methane from pectin. This has implications for all other, UV-independent processes which may generate ROS in or close to the plant cell wall and suggests a need to evaluate additional systems for ROS-generated methane emissions in leaves.Key words: methane, hydroxyl radicals, reactive oxygen species, UV, methyl esters, pectinUntil recently, the global methane budget was thought to be well understood, the only natural process for methane generation being an anaerobic microbial mechanism.⁴ However, observations by Keppler et al.¹ of aerobic methane emissions from vegetation caused controversy and called for a re-assessment of the natural sources of methane. While no mechanism was originally suggested, a putative source, the methyl ester groups of pectin, was proposed based on carbon isotope analyses.¹ We tested this hypothesis directly and reported that UV light could drive methane emissions from pectin in vitro under aerobic conditions.² While UV light was necessary for generation of methane from pectin, it is not tenable that UV was directly attacking pectic methyl ester groups since these do not absorb UV of the wavelengths used (280–400 nm). Instead, we proposed that the energy from the UV light was being absorbed by compounds such as phenolics, and that a reactive intermediary would be formed in the process. Importantly, our process had to be non-enzymic since no enzymes were present in either experimental system.^1,2 Following this hypothesis, we tested the effect of reactive oxygen species (ROS) on pectin in vitro and discovered that certain ROS cause production of methane: hydroxyl radicals (^•OH) and singlet oxygen were effective, but hydrogen peroxide and superoxide were not.³ Also, the addition of ROS-specific scavengers to pectin sheets stopped or severely reduced UV-induced methane emissions from pectin, suggesting that ROS are the intermediary in the mechanism of aerobic methane formation from pectin (Fig. 1). De-esterified pectin was produced by saponification and emitted only trace amounts of methane upon UV-irradiation, clearly establishing ester groups as the source of methane^2,3 and confirming findings of other research groups.^5,6 However, we also found that acetyl ester groups may contribute to methane emissions from pectin and should therefore be considered in future experiments attempting to identify methane sources. Interestingly, we also observed, for the first time, ethylene, ethane and CO₂ emissions from pectin upon UV-irradiation,² which corroborates the ROS hypothesis since ROS attack of methyl esters is likely to form methyl radicals, which can then either form methane or dimerise to form ethylene or ethane.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Proposed pathway for ^•OH-driven methane generation from pectin upon UV irradiation. The compound illustrated here, l-tryptophan, is merely an example of a possible photosensitiser. Hydroxyl radicals (^•OH) are shown to attack a methyl galacturonate residue of the homogalacturonan component of the pectin molecule since this is likely to be the most abundant source of methane, but the methyl esters found in xylogalacturonan domains and the acetyl esters found in homogalacturonan and rhamnogalacturonan domains are also possible methane sources. Note that only ∼70% of all galacturonic acid residues of the pectin backbone are methyl-esterified. Inset photograph shows experimental set-up during UV-irradiation of pectin.ROS are produced and destroyed constantly throughout the lifetime of plants. The generation of ROS in vivo can generally be linked to two sources: (i) a response to an external stimulus which may be perceived as a threat or (ii) a signaling process in the cell which may happen during growth, hormone action or programmed cell death.⁷ Our experiments showed that ROS could lead to methane formation from methyl ester groups; however, the origin of the ROS may not be important, only their nature. Indeed, hydrogen peroxide and superoxide, widely reported to be formed during an oxidative burst following a biotic stress,⁸ did not generate methane from pectin in vitro, and are therefore unlikely to do so in vivo. Only the hydroxyl radical (^•OH) and singlet oxygen generation led to methane formation, and therefore any process which generates them could also trigger UV-independent methane production. Abiotic stresses, such as drought, heat or salinity, which have been shown to lead to the production of ^•OH in vegetation,⁹ could therefore be processes leading to aerobic methane formation, as could exposure to elevated ozone concentrations.¹⁰ Indeed, physical injury (by cutting) of plant material has recently been demonstrated to cause methane emissions.¹¹The origin of the ROS may not be important, as long as their generation is in or close to the pectin of the plant cell wall, since ^•OH cannot travel far within a cell. Indeed, it is estimated that ^•OH typically reacts with organic matter within ∼1 nm of the site of radical production.¹² Processes such as growth^13,14 and calcium signaling,¹⁵ which both involve ROS production as an intermediary in the mechanism but are not necessarily due to external stress, may therefore have the potential to generate methane aerobically. Any process involved in the complicated pathways of ROS-regulation, for which 152 genes are responsible in Arabidopsis thaliana,¹⁶ could be involved in methane emission if the ROS generation is localised close to pectin or other potential substrates.In addition, hydrogen peroxide, which is generated in the cell walls of healthy plants,¹⁷ can be converted in the cell wall into ^•OH by processes such as the Fenton reaction,^18,19 especially in the presence of apoplastic ascorbate.^20,21 A complete analysis of the potential for ^•OH and singlet oxygen to be present in the plant cell wall is therefore necessary for a proper understanding of the different mechanisms that may drive aerobic methane generation. Further experiments into the effects of abiotic stresses other than UV on aerobic methane production from different types of vegetation are necessary in order that future in-vitro studies under simulated natural conditions can be carried out correctly. This type of study, in conjunction with direct in-vivo field studies and satellite observations, are essential to allow global estimates to be made accurately in the future and help us understand the significance of ROS-driven methane emission.     

Why have chloroplasts developed a unique motility system?

Organelle movement in plants is dependent on actin filaments with most of the organelles being transported along the actin cables by class XI myosins. Although chloroplast movement is also actin filament-dependent, a potential role of myosin motors in this process is poorly understood. Interestingly, chloroplasts can move in any direction and change the direction within short time periods, suggesting that chloroplasts use the newly formed actin filaments rather than preexisting actin cables. Furthermore, the data on myosin gene knockouts and knockdowns in Arabidopsis and tobacco do not support myosins'' XI role in chloroplast movement. Our recent studies revealed that chloroplast movement and positioning are mediated by the short actin filaments localized at chloroplast periphery (cp-actin filaments) rather than cytoplasmic actin cables. The accumulation of cp-actin filaments depends on kinesin-like proteins, KAC1 and KAC2, as well as on a chloroplast outer membrane protein CHUP1. We propose that plants evolved a myosin XI-independent mechanism of the actin-based chloroplast movement that is distinct from the mechanism used by other organelles.Key words: actin, Arabidopsis, blue light, kinesin, myosin, organelle movement, phototropinOrganelle movement and positioning are pivotal aspects of the intracellular dynamics in most eukaryotes. Although plants are sessile organisms, their organelles are quickly repositioned in response to fluctuating environmental conditions and certain endogenous signals. By and large, plant organelle movements and positioning are dependent on actin filaments, although microtubules play certain accessory roles in organelle dynamics.^1,2 Actin inhibitors effectively retard the movements of mitochondria,^3–6 peroxisomes,^5,7–11 Golgi stacks,^12,13 endoplasmic reticulum (ER),^14,15 and nuclei.^16–18 These organelles are co-aligned and associated with actin filaments.^{5,7,8,10–12,15,18} Recent progress in this field started to reveal the molecular motility system responsible for the organelle transport in plants.¹⁹Chloroplast movement is among the most fascinating models of organelle movement in plants because it is precisely controlled by ambient light conditions.^20,21 Weak light induces chloroplast accumulation response so that chloroplasts can capture photosynthetic light efficiently (Fig. 1A). Strong light induces chloroplast avoidance response to escape from photodamage (Fig. 1B).²² The blue light-induced chloroplast movement is mediated by the blue light receptor phototropin (phot). In some cryptogam plants, the red light-induced chloroplast movement is regulated by a chimeric phytochrome/phototropin photoreceptor neochrome.^23–25 In a model plant Arabidopsis, phot1 and phot2 function redundantly to regulate the accumulation response,²⁶ whereas phot2 alone is essential for the avoidance response.^27,28 Several additional factors regulating chloroplast movement were identified by analyses of Arabidopsis mutants deficient in chloroplast photorelocation.^29–32 In particular, identification of CHUP1 (chloroplast unusual positioning 1) revealed the connection between chloroplasts and actin filaments at the molecular level.²⁹ CHUP1 is a chloroplast outer membrane protein capable of interacting with F-actin, G-actin and profilin in vitro.^29,33,34 The chup1 mutant plants are defective in both the chloroplast movement and chloroplast anchorage to the plasma membrane,^22,29,33 suggesting that CHUP1 plays an important role in linking chloroplasts to the plasma membrane through the actin filaments. However, how chloroplasts move using the actin filaments and whether chloroplast movement utilizes the actin-based motility system similar to other organelle movements remained to be determined.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Schematic distribution patterns of chloroplasts in a palisade cell under different light conditions, weak (A) and strong (B) lights. Shown as a side view of mid-part of the cell and a top view with three different levels (i.e., top, middle and bottom of the cell). The cell was irradiated from the leaf surface shown as arrows. Weak light induces chloroplast accumulation response (A) and strong light induces the avoidance response (B).Here, we review the recent findings pointing to existence of a novel actin-based mechanisms for chloroplast movement and discuss the differences between the mechanism responsible for movement of chloroplasts and other organelles.     

Hypoxia: A novel function for VIN3

VERNALIZATION INSENSITIVE 3 (VIN3) encodes a PHD domain chromatin remodelling protein that is induced in response to cold and is required for the establishment of the vernalization response in Arabidopsis thaliana.¹ Vernalization is the acquisition of the competence to flower after exposure to prolonged low temperatures, which in Arabidopsis is associated with the epigenetic repression of the floral repressor FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC).^2,3 During vernalization VIN3 binds to the chromatin of the FLC locus,¹ and interacts with conserved components of Polycomb-group Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2).^4,5 This complex catalyses the tri-methylation of histone H3 lysine 27 (H3K27me3),^4,6,7 a repressive chromatin mark that increases at the FLC locus as a result of vernalization.^4,7–10 In our recent paper¹¹ we found that VIN3 is also induced by hypoxic conditions, and as is the case with low temperatures, induction occurs in a quantitative manner. Our experiments indicated that VIN3 is required for the survival of Arabidopsis seedlings exposed to low oxygen conditions. We suggested that the function of VIN3 during low oxygen conditions is likely to involve the mediation of chromatin modifications at certain loci that help the survival of Arabidopsis in response to prolonged hypoxia. Here we discuss the implications of our observations and hypotheses in terms of epigenetic mechanisms controlling gene regulation in response to hypoxia.Key words: arabidopsis, VIN3, FLC, hypoxia, vernalization, chromatin remodelling, survival     

The TRPA1 channel and oral hypoglycemic agents

Diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2) results from the combination of insulin unresponsiveness in target tissues and the failure of pancreatic β cells to secrete enough insulin.¹ It is a highly prevalent chronic disease that is aggravated with time, leading to major complications, such as cardiovascular disease and peripheral and ocular neuropathies.² Interestingly, therapies to improve glucose homeostasis in diabetic patients usually involve the use of glibenclamide, an oral hypoglycemic drug that blocks ATP-sensitive K⁺ channels (K_ATP),^3,4 forcing β cells to release more insulin to overcome peripheral insulin resistance. However, sulfonylureas are ineffective for long-term treatments and ultimately result in the administration of insulin to control glucose levels.⁵ The mechanisms underlying β-cell failure to respond effectively with glibenclamide after long-term treatments still needs clarification. A recent study demonstrating that this drug activates TRPA1,⁶ a member of the Transient Receptor Potential (TRP) family of ion channels and a functional protein in insulin secreting cells,^7,8 has highlighted a possible role for TRPA1 as a potential mediator of sulfonylurea-induced toxicity.     

Arf GTPase-activating Protein AGAP2 Regulates Focal Adhesion Kinase Activity and Focal Adhesion Remodeling

Focal adhesions are specialized sites of cell attachment to the extracellular matrix where integrin receptors link extracellular matrix to the actin cytoskeleton, and they are constantly remodeled during cell migration. Focal adhesion kinase (FAK) is an important regulator of focal adhesion remodeling. AGAP2 is an Arf GTPase-activating protein that regulates endosomal trafficking and is overexpressed in different human cancers. Here we examined the regulation of the FAK activity and the focal adhesion remodeling by AGAP2. Our results show that FAK binds the pleckstrin homology domain of AGAP2, and the binding is independent of FAK activation following epidermal growth factor receptor stimulation. Overexpression of AGAP2 augments the activity of FAK, and concordantly, the knockdown of AGAP2 expression with RNA interference attenuates the FAK activity stimulated by epidermal growth factor or platelet-derived growth factor receptors. AGAP2 is localized to the focal adhesions, and its overexpression results in dissolution of the focal adhesions, whereas knockdown of its expression stabilizes them. The AGAP2-induced dissolution of the focal adhesions is independent of its GTPase-activating protein activity but may involve its N-terminal G protein-like domain. Our results indicate that AGAP2 regulates the FAK activity and the focal adhesion disassembly during cell migration.Focal adhesions are macromolecular structures that connect actin cytoskeleton to the extracellular matrix and play an important role in cell migration (1). Components of focal adhesions include signaling proteins such as focal adhesion kinase (FAK),³ c-Src, and paxillin, as well as structural proteins such as talin and vinculin (2, 3). Focal adhesions are constantly formed and disassembled (i.e. remodeled) at the leading edge of migrating cells, and they are disassembled at the trailing edge during the cell migration (4, 5). Available evidence demonstrates that the remodeling of focal adhesions is regulated by FAK (6) and Arf-directed GTPase-activating proteins (Arf GAPs) (7).FAK is a member of the Src family nonreceptor tyrosine kinases whose activities are regulated by intra-molecular phosphorylation (8). Autophosphorylation of FAK on tyrosine residue 397 provides docking sites for Src homology 2 domain-containing proteins, including c-Src. After binding to FAK, c-Src phosphorylates FAK on Tyr-576 and Tyr-577 to activate fully the intrinsic kinase activity of FAK (9). Cellular functions of FAK are many and include cell migration, survival, and proliferation; and activation of FAK occurs upon integrin clustering or stimulation of cell surface receptors such as the epidermal growth factor (EGF) or platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) receptors. FAK activation following integrin clustering results in recruitment of structural and signaling proteins that collectively contribute to the formation of the focal adhesions (10). In FAK null cells, focal adhesions are formed but cannot disassemble (11), suggesting that FAK is required for the focal adhesion disassembly.ADP-ribosylation factors (Arfs) are GTP-binding proteins that lack detectable intrinsic GTPase activities. Therefore, hydrolysis of GTP bound to Arf is mediated by Arf GAPs (12, 13). The AZAP family of Arf GAPs are multidomain proteins that contain a catalytic core of pleckstrin homology (PH), Arf GAP, and ankyrin repeat domains (14), and each subgroup possesses characteristic domain(s). For example, ASAPs have a BAR (Bin, Amphiphysin, Rvs) domain at their N termini and a Src homology 3 domain at their C termini; ARAPs have a Rho GAP domain and five PH domains; and AGAPs have a G protein-like domain (GLD) at their N termini and their PH domains are split, i.e. there is an insert of 80–100 amino acids between the β5 strand and β6 strand. The Arf GAPs regulate membrane trafficking and remodeling of the actin cytoskeleton (7, 15), but the molecular mechanisms underlying the contribution of individual Arf GAPs to membrane trafficking and actin remodeling are being defined. We have reported that AGAP2 binds the clathrin adaptor protein AP-1 and regulates the AP-1/Rab4-dependent endosomal trafficking (16). Studies from other groups have indicated that AGAP2 is overexpressed in different human cancers, including glioblastoma, and that AGAP2 enhances the invasion of glioblastoma cells (17, 18).In this study, we tested the hypothesis that AGAP2 regulates focal adhesion remodeling and cell migration. We find that AGAP2 forms a complex with FAK, increases the FAK activity, and provokes the focal adhesion disassembly that may lead to increased cell migration. Some Arf GAPs have been shown to regulate focal adhesions, and each Arf GAP seems to regulate the focal adhesions by a distinct mechanism. Our results introduce a new way to regulate the focal adhesions by the Arf GAP AGAP2, i.e. through the regulation of FAK activity. These observations support the idea that various Arf GAPs function coordinately to provide temporal and spatial regulation of the focal adhesions during cell migration.     

Neutralization of Clostridium difficile toxin A using antibody combinations

The pathogenicity of Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) is mediated by the release of two toxins, A and B. Both toxins contain large clusters of repeats known as cell wall binding (CWB) domains responsible for binding epithelial cell surfaces. Several murine monoclonal antibodies were generated against the CWB domain of toxin A and screened for their ability to neutralize the toxin individually and in combination. Three antibodies capable of neutralizing toxin A all recognized multiple sites on toxin A, suggesting that the extent of surface coverage may contribute to neutralization. Combination of two noncompeting antibodies, denoted 3358 and 3359, enhanced toxin A neutralization over saturating levels of single antibodies. Antibody 3358 increased the level of detectable CWB domain on the surface of cells, while 3359 inhibited CWB domain cell surface association. These results suggest that antibody combinations that cover a broader epitope space on the CWB repeat domains of toxin A (and potentially toxin B) and utilize multiple mechanisms to reduce toxin internalization may provide enhanced protection against C. difficile-associated diarrhea.Key words: Clostridium difficile, toxin neutralization, therapeutic antibody, cell wall binding domains, repeat proteins, CROPs, mAb combinationThe most common cause of nosocomial antibiotic-associated diarrhea is the gram-positive, spore-forming anaerobic bacillus Clostridium difficile (C. difficile). Infection can be asymptomatic or lead to acute diarrhea, colitis, and in severe instances, pseudomembranous colitis and toxic megacolon.^1,2The pathological effects of C. difficile have long been linked to two secreted toxins, A and B.^3,4 Some strains, particularly the virulent and antibiotic-resistant strain 027 with toxinotype III, also produce a binary toxin whose significance in the pathogenicity and severity of disease is still unclear.⁵ Early studies including in vitro cell-killing assays and ex vivo models indicated that toxin A is more toxigenic than toxin B; however, recent gene manipulation studies and the emergence of virulent C. difficile strains that do not express significant levels of toxin A (termed “A⁻ B⁺”) suggest a critical role for toxin B in pathogenicity.^6,7Toxins A and B are large multidomain proteins with high homology to one another. The N-terminal region of both toxins enzymatically glucosylates small GTP binding proteins including Rho, Rac and CDC42,^8,9 leading to altered actin expression and the disruption of cytoskeletal integrity.^9,10 The C-terminal region of both toxins is composed of 20 to 30 residue repeats known as the clostridial repetitive oligopeptides (CROPs) or cell wall binding (CWB) domains due to their homology to the repeats of Streptococcus pneumoniae LytA,^11–14 and is responsible for cell surface recognition and endocytosis.^12,15–17C. difficile-associated diarrhea is often, but not always, induced by antibiotic clearance of the normal intestinal flora followed by mucosal C. difficile colonization resulting from preexisting antibiotic resistant C. difficile or concomitant exposure to C. difficile spores, particularly in hospitals. Treatments for C. difficile include administration of metronidazole or vancomycin.^2,18 These agents are effective; however, approximately 20% of patients relapse. Resistance of C. difficile to these antibiotics is also an emerging issue^19,20 and various non-antibiotic treatments are under investigation.^20–25Because hospital patients who contract C. difficile and remain asymptomatic have generally mounted strong antibody responses to the toxins,^26,27 active or passive immunization approaches are considered hopeful avenues of treatment for the disease. Toxins A and B have been the primary targets for immunization approaches.^20,28–33 Polyclonal antibodies against toxins A and B, particularly those that recognize the CWB domains, have been shown to effectively neutralize the toxins and inhibit morbidity in rodent infection models.³¹ Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against the CWB domains of the toxins have also demonstrated neutralizing capabilities; however, their activity in cell-based assays is significantly weaker than that observed for polyclonal antibody mixtures.^33–36We investigated the possibility of creating a cocktail of two or more neutralizing mAbs that target the CWB domain of toxin A with the goal of synthetically re-creating the superior neutralization properties of polyclonal antibody mixtures. Using the entire CWB domain of toxin A, antibodies were raised in rodents and screened for their ability to neutralize toxin A in a cell-based assay. Two mAbs, 3358 and 3359, that (1) both independently demonstrated marginal neutralization behavior and (2) did not cross-block one another from binding toxin A were identified. We report here that 3358 and 3359 use differing mechanisms to modify CWB-domain association with CHO cell surfaces and combine favorably to reduce toxin A-mediated cell lysis.     

Protein Misfolding and the Serpinopathies

The serpins are the largest superfamily of protease inhibitors. They are found in almost all branches of life including viruses, prokaryotes and eukaryotes. They inhibit their target protease by a unique mechanism that involves a large conformational transition and the translocation of the enzyme from the upper to the lower pole of the protein. This complex mechanism, and the involvement of serpins in important biological regulatory processes, makes them prone to mutation-related diseases. For example the polymerization of mutant α₁-antitrypsin leads to the accumulation of ordered polymers within the endoplasmic reticulum of hepatocytes in association with cirrhosis. An identical process in the neuron specific serpin, neuroserpin, results in the accumulation of polymers in neurons and the dementia FENIB. In both cases there is a clear correlation between the molecular instability, the rate of polymer formation and the severity of disease. A similar process underlies the hepatic retention and plasma deficiency of antithrombin, C1 inhibitor, α₁-antichymotrypsin and heparin co-factor II. The common mechanism of polymerization has allowed us to group these conditions together as a novel class of disease, the serpinopathies.Key Words: serpins, α1-antitrypsin, neuroserpin, polymerization, dementia, conformational disease, serpinopathiesSerpins (or serine protease inhibitors) are the largest family of protease inhibitors. They have been found in all major branches of life including viruses, prokaryotes and eukaryotes.^1–3 Despite their name there is increasing evidence that serpins can also inhibit other classes of proteases as demonstrated by the viral serpin CrmA and recently by a plant serpin, serpin1.^4,5 They can even play a non-inhibitory role in events as diverse as blood pressure regulation (angiotensinogen), chromatin condensation (MENT), tumor progression (maspin), protein folding (hsp47) and hormone transport (cortisol and thyroxine binding globulin).⁶One of the most important roles of serpins is the regulation of enzymes involved in proteolytic cascades. Among these serpins are α₁-antitrypsin, α₁-antichymotrypsin, C1 inhibitor, antithrombin and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, which play an important role in the control of proteases involved in the inflammatory, complement, coagulation and fibrinolytic pathways, respectively.^1,3 The serpin superfamily is characterised by more than 30% homology with the archetypal serpin α₁-antitrypsin and conservation of tertiary structure.^7,8 Serpins adopt a metastable conformation composed in most cases of 9 α-helices, three β-sheet (A to C) and an exposed mobile reactive centre loop (RCL). This flexible RCL typically contains 20 residues that act as a pseudo substrate for the target protease (Fig. 1A).^9–15 After formation of a Michaelis complex^16,17 the enzyme cleaves the P1-P1′ bond of the serpin, releasing the P1'' residue and forming an ester bond between the protease and the serpin.^18,19 This is then followed by a dramatic conformational transition from a stressed to relaxed conformation with the enzyme being pulled from the upper to the lower pole of the serpin and the insertion of the reactive loop as an extra strand in β-sheet A.^20–25 As a consequence of this conformational change the thermal stability of the serpin is greatly enhanced. Whereas a typical serpin in its native state exhibits a midpoint of thermal denaturation of around 50–60°C, a cleaved serpin with its RCL fully incorporated into β-sheet A denatures at temperatures >120°C.^9,26,27 Another consequence is the inactivation of the enzyme, stabilised at the acyl-intermediate and unable to proceed further to deacylation of the complex.^24,28 This serpin-protease complex then binds to members of the lipoprotein receptor family and is cleared from the circulation.^29–31Open in a separate windowFigure 1Inhibition of neutrophil elastase by α₁-antitrypsin and the structural basis of polymerization. (A) After docking (left) the neutrophil elastase (grey) is inactivated by movement from the upper to the lower pole of the protein (right). This is associated with the insertion of the RCL (red) as an extra strand into β-sheet A (green). (B) The structure of α₁-antitrypsin is centred on β-sheet A (green) and the mobile reactive centre loop (red). Polymer formation results from the Z variant of α₁-antitrypsin (Glu342Lys at P17; indicated by arrow) or mutations in the shutter domain (blue circle) that open β-sheet A to favour partial loop insertion and the formation of an unstable intermediate (M*). The patent β-sheet A then accepts the loop of another molecule to form a dimer (D), which then extends into polymers (P). The individual molecules of α₁-antitrypsin within the polymer, although identical, are coloured red, yellow and blue for clarity. Figure reproduced with permission from Lomas et al.⁹⁷Despite the evolutionary advantage conferred upon serpins by the remarkable mobility of the native state, their complexity is also their weak point.^19,32 Mutations affecting the serpins can lead to a variety of diseases, resulting from either a gain or loss of function.^6,19 For example mutations can cause aberrant conformational transitions that result in the retention of the serpin within the cell of synthesis. This will lead to either protein overload and death of the cell in which the serpin is synthesised, or disease as a consequence of the resulting plasma deficiency. Such a mechanism underlies diseases as diverse as cirrhosis, thrombosis, angio-oedema, emphysema and dementia. We review here the common mechanism underlying these diseases that we have grouped together as the serpinopathies.^33–35 The aggregation and accumulation of conformationally destabilized proteins is an important feature of many neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer''s and Parkinson''s disease and the spongiform encephalopathies. Indeed we have used the serpinopathies as a paradigm for these other ‘conformational diseases’.³⁶     

Strigolactones: Internal and external signals in plant symbioses?

As the newest plant hormone, strigolactone research is undergoing an exciting expansion. In less than five years, roles for strigolactones have been defined in shoot branching, secondary growth, root growth and nodulation, to add to the growing understanding of their role in arbuscular mycorrhizae and parasitic weed interactions.¹ Strigolactones are particularly fascinating as signaling molecules as they can act both inside the plant as an endogenous hormone and in the soil as a rhizosphere signal.^2-4 Our recent research has highlighted such a dual role for strigolactones, potentially acting as both an endogenous and exogenous signal for arbuscular mycorrhizal development.⁵ There is also significant interest in examining strigolactones as putative regulators of responses to environmental stimuli, especially the response to nutrient availability, given the strong regulation of strigolactone production by nitrate and phosphate observed in many species.^5,6 In particular, the potential for strigolactones to mediate the ecologically important response of mycorrhizal colonization to phosphate has been widely discussed. However, using a mutant approach we found that strigolactones are not essential for phosphate regulation of mycorrhizal colonization or nodulation.⁵ This is consistent with the relatively mild impairment of phosphate control of seedling root growth observed in Arabidopsis strigolactone mutants.⁷ This contrasts with the major role for strigolactones in phosphate control of shoot branching of rice and Arabidopsis^8,9 and indicates that the integration of strigolactones into our understanding of nutrient response will be complex. New data presented here, along with the recent discovery of phosphate specific CLE peptides,¹⁰ indicates a potential role for PsNARK, a component of the autoregulation of nodulation pathway, in phosphate control of nodulation.