Segregation of the polypeptide translocation apparatus to regions of the endoplasmic reticulum containing ribophorins and ribosomes. II. Rat liver microsomal subfractions contain equimolar amounts of ribophorins and ribosomes

Ribophorins I and II, two transmembrane glycoproteins characteristic of the rough endoplasmic reticulum (ER) are thought to be part of the translocation apparatus for proteins made on membrane bound polysomes. To study the stoichiometry between ribophorins and membrane-bound ribosomes we have determined the RNA and ribophorin content in rat liver microsomes or in microsomal subfractions of different density (i.e., ribosome content). The specificity of antibodies against the ribophorins was demonstrated by Western blot analysis of rat liver rough microsomes separated by 2-dimensional gel electrophoresis. The ribophorin content of microsomal subfractions was determined by indirect immunoprecipitation and for ribophorin I by a radioimmune assay. In the latter assay a molar ratio of ribophorin I/ribosomes approaching one was calculated for total microsomes as well as in the gradient subfractions. We therefore suggest that ribophorins mediate the binding of ribosomes to endoplasmic reticulum membranes or play a role in co-translational process which depend on this binding, such as the insertion of nascent polypeptides into the membrane or their transfer into the cisternal lumen.     

Characterization of the ribosomal binding site in rat liver rough microsomes: Ribophorins I and II,two integral membrane proteins related to ribosome binding

Rat liver rough endoplasmic reticulum membranes (ER) contain two characteristic transmembrane glycoproteins which have been designated ribophorins I and II and are absent from smooth ER membranes. These proteins (MW 65,000 and 63,000 respectively) are related to the binding sites for ribosomes, as suggested by the following findings: (i) The ribophorin content of the rough ER membranes corresponds stoichiometrically to the number of bound ribosomes; (ii) ribophorins are quantitatively recovered with the bound polysomes after most other ER membrane proteins are dissolved with the nonionic detegent Kyro EOB; (iii) in intact rough microsomes ribophorins can be crosslinked chemically to the ribosomes and therefore are in close proximity to them. Treatment of rough microsomes with a low Triton X-100 concentration leads to the lateral displacement of ribosomes on the microsomal surface and to the formation of aggregates of bound ribosomes in areas of membranes which frequently invaginate into the microsomal lumen. Subfractionation of Triton-treated microsomes containing invaginations led to the recovery of smooth and “rough-inverted” vesicles. Ribophorins were present only in the latter fraction, indicating that both proteins are displaced together with the ribosome-binding capacity of rough and smooth microsomal membranes reconstituted after solubilization with detergents sugest that ribophorins are necessary for in vitro ribosome binding. Ribophorin-like proteins were found in rough microsomes obtained from secretory tissues of several animal species. The two proteins present in rat lacrimal gland microsomes have the same mobility as hepatocyte ribophorins and cross-react with antisera against them.     

Binding of ribosomes to the rough endoplasmic reticulum mediated by the Sec61p-complex

The cotranslational translocation of proteins across the ER membrane involves the tight binding of translating ribosomes to the membrane, presumably to ribosome receptors. The identity of the latter has been controversial. One putative receptor candidate is Sec61 alpha, a multi- spanning membrane protein that is associated with two additional membrane proteins (Sec61 beta and gamma) to form the Sec61p-complex. Other receptors of 34 and 180 kD have also been proposed on the basis of their ability to bind at low salt concentration ribosomes lacking nascent chains. We now show that the Sec61p-complex has also binding activity but that, at low salt conditions, it accounts for only one third of the total binding sites in proteoliposomes reconstituted from a detergent extract of ER membranes. Under these conditions, the assay has also limited specificity with respect to ribosomes. However, if the ribosome-binding assay is performed at physiological salt concentration, most of the unspecific binding is lost; the Sec61p- complex then accounts for the majority of specific ribosome-binding sites in reconstituted ER membranes. To study the membrane interaction of ribosomes participating in protein translocation, native rough microsomes were treated with proteases. The amount of membrane-bound ribosomes is only slightly reduced by protease treatment, consistent with the protease-resistance of Sec61 alpha which is shielded by these ribosomes. In contrast, p34 and p180 can be readily degraded, indicating that they are not essential for the membrane anchoring of ribosomes in protease-treated microsomes. These data provide further evidence that the Sec61p-complex is responsible for the membrane- anchoring of ribosomes during translocation and make it unlikely that p34 or p180 are essential for this process.     

Segregation of the polypeptide translocation apparatus to regions of the endoplasmic reticulum containing ribophorins and ribosomes. I. Functional tests on rat liver microsomal subfractions

A preparation of rat liver microsomes containing 70% of the total cellular endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membranes was subfractionated by isopycnic density centrifugation. Twelve subfractions of different ribosome content ranging in density from 1.06 to 1.29 were obtained and analyzed with respect to marker enzymes, RNA, and protein content, as well as the capacity of these membranes to bind 80S ribosomes in vitro. After removal of native polysomes from these microsomal subfractions by puromycin in a buffer of high ionic strength their capacity to rebind 80S ribosomes approached levels found in the corresponding native membranes before ribosome stripping. This indicates that in vitro rebinding of ribosomes occurs to the same sites occupied in the cell by membrane-bound polysomes. Microsomes in the microsomal subfractions were also tested for their capacity to effect the translocation of nascent secretory proteins into the microsomal lumen utilizing a rabbit reticulocyte translation system programmed with mRNA coding for the precursor of human placental lactogen. Membranes from microsomes with the higher isopycnic density and a high ribosome content showed the highest translocation activity, whereas membranes derived from smooth microsomes had only a very low translocation activity. These results indicate the membranes of the rough and smooth portions of the endoplasmic reticulum are functionally differentiated so that sites for ribosome binding and the translocation of nascent polypeptides are segregated to the rough domain of the organelle.     

Regulation of ribosome detachment from the mammalian endoplasmic reticulum membrane

In current models, protein translocation in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) occurs in the context of two cycles, the signal recognition particle (SRP) cycle and the ribosome cycle. Both SRP and ribosomes bind to the ER membrane as a consequence of the targeting process of translocation. Whereas SRP release from the ER membrane is regulated by the GTPase activities of SRP and the SRP receptor, ribosome release from the ER membrane is thought to occur in response to the termination of protein synthesis. We report that ER-bound ribosomes remain membrane-bound following the termination of protein synthesis and in the bound state can initiate the translation of secretory and cytoplasmic proteins. Two principal observations are reported. 1) Membrane-bound ribosomes engaged in the synthesis of proteins lacking a signal sequence are released from the ER membrane as ribosome-nascent polypeptide complexes. 2) Membrane-bound ribosomes translating secretory proteins can access the translocon in an SRP receptor-independent manner. We propose that ribosome release from the ER membrane occurs in the context of protein translation, with release occurring by default in the absence of productive nascent polypeptide-membrane interactions.     

Proteins of rough microsomal membranes related to ribosome binding. I. Identification of ribophorins I and II, membrane proteins characteristics of rough microsomes

Rat liver rough microsomes (RM) contain two integral membrane proteins which are not found in smooth microsomes (SM) and appear to be related to the presence of ribosome-binding sites. These proteins, of molecular weight 65,000 and 63,000, were designated ribophorins I and II, respectively. They were not released from the microsomal membranes by alkali or acid treatment, or when the ribosomes were detached by incubation with puromycin in a high salt medium. The anionic detergent sodium deoxycholate caused solubilization of the ribophorins, but neutral detergents led to their recovery with the sedimentable ribosomes. Ribosomal aggregates containing both ribophorins, but few other membrane proteins, were obtained from RM treated with the nonionic detergent Kyro EOB (2.5 X10(-2) M) in a low ionic strength medium. Sedimentation patterns produced by these aggregates resembled those of large polysomes but were not affected by RNase treatment. The aggregates, however, were dispersed by mild trypsinization (10 microgram trypsin for 30 min at 0 degrees C), incubation with deoxycholate, or in a medium of high salt concentration. These treatments led to a concomitant degradation or release of the ribophorins. It was estimated, from the staining intensity of protein bands in acrylamide gels, that in the Kyro EOB aggregates there were one to two molecules of each ribophorin per ribosome. Sedimentable complexes without ribosomes containing both ribophorins could also be obtained by dissolving RM previously stripped of ribosomes by puromycin- KCl using cholate, a milder detergent than DOC. Electron microscope examination of the residue obtained from RM treated with Kyro EOB showed that the rapidly sedimenting polysome-like aggregates containing the ribophorins consisted of groups of tightly packed ribosomes which were associated with remnants of the microsomal membranes.     

Studies on membrane proteins involved in ribosome binding on the rough endoplasmic reticulum. Ribophorins have no ribosome-binding activity.

A membrane protein fraction showing affinity for ribosomes was isolated from rat liver microsomes (microsomal fractions) in association with ribosomes by treatment of the microsomes with Emulgen 913 and then solubilized from the ribosomes with sodium deoxycholate. This protein fraction was separated into two fractions, glycoproteins, including ribophorins I and II, and non-glycoproteins, virtually free from ribophorins I and II, on concanavalin A-Sepharose columns. The two fractions were each reconstituted into liposomes to determine their ribosome-binding activities. The specific binding activity of the non-glycoprotein fraction was approx. 2.3-fold higher than that of the glycoprotein fraction. The recovery of ribosome-binding capacity of the two fractions was about 85% of the total binding capacity of the material applied to a concanavalin A-Sepharose column, and about 90% of it was found in the non-glycoprotein fraction. The affinity constants of the ribosomes for the reconstituted liposomes were somewhat higher than those for stripped rough microsomes. The mode of ribosome binding to the reconstituted liposomes was very similar to that to the stripped rough microsomes, in its sensitivity to proteolytic enzymes and its strong inhibition by increasing KCl concentration. These results support the idea that ribosome binding to rat liver microsomes is not directly mediated by ribophorins I and II, but that another unidentified membrane protein(s) plays a role in ribosome binding.     

A membrane preparation that contains proteins characteristic of the rough endoplasmic reticulum

We describe a procedure for disassembling rat liver rough microsomes, which allows the purification of the rough endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane. Membrane-bound ribosomes and adsorbed proteins are first detached by washing rough microsomes with 5 mM Na-pyrophosphate. In a second step, the vesicle membrane is opened by digitonin, with concomitant release of the luminal content. The purification is monitored at each step by electron microscopy, and by assaying chemical constituents (protein, phospholipid, RNA) and marker enzymes for the main subcellular organelles. The final membrane preparation is representative of the ER, since it contains 24.1% of the liver glucose 6-phosphatase with a relative specific activity of 14.2. Contaminants represent less than 5% of its protein content. SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, followed by immunoblot analysis, reveals that the ribophorins I and II, two established markers of the rough (d) domain are still present in the final membrane preparation. It also contains the docking protein (or signal recognition particle receptor) and protein disulfide isomerase, and has conserved the functional capacity to remove co- and post-translationally the signal peptide of pre-secretory proteins. The membrane preparation is suitable for studies on the polypeptide composition of the d domain.     

Import of frog prepropeptide GLa into microsomes requires ATP but does not involve docking protein or ribosomes.

Frog prepropeptide GLa, a precursor to a secretory protein containing 64 amino acids, was processed and imported by dog pancreas microsomes. These events did not depend on either docking protein or on the presence of ribosomes. A hybrid protein between the first 60 amino acids of prepropeptide GLa and an unrelated peptide of 49 amino acids fused to the carboxy terminus, however, behaved like a typical secretory protein precursor with regard to docking protein dependence. This suggests that independence of the need for docking protein, in the case of prepropeptide GLa, can be attributed to the size of the precursor protein. Processing and import of prepropeptide GLa by microsomes were ATP dependent. Therefore, import of proteins into the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) includes an ATP-requiring step not involving a ribosome/ribosome receptor or signal recognition particle (SRP)/docking protein interaction.     

180-kD ribosome receptor is essential for both ribosome binding and protein translocation

We have previously isolated a 180-kD ribosome receptor (p180) from mammalian rough ER that, when incorporated into liposomes, bound ribosomes with an affinity similar to intact membranes. To directly assess the contribution of p180 to ribosome binding as well as protein translocation, monoclonal antibodies were used to selectively deplete p180 from the detergent extracts of rough ER membranes used in the preparation of translocation-competent proteoliposomes. Proteoliposomes prepared from p180-depleted extracts showed a reduction in ribosome binding to the level of trypsin-inactivated controls as well as a loss in their ability to cotranslationally translocate two different secretory protein precursors. When purified p180 was added back to depleted extracts before proteoliposome formation, both ribosome binding and translocation activity were restored. In addition, the monoclonal antibodies, as well as their Fab' fragments, were able to inhibit ribosome binding and protein translocation when bound to intact rough microsomes. These data provide direct evidence that the 180-kD ribosome receptor is essential for ribosome binding and for the translocation of nascent proteins across the membrane of the rough ER.     

Antiribophorin antibodies inhibit the targeting to the ER membrane of ribosomes containing nascent secretory polypeptides

Polyclonal antibodies directed against ribophorins I and II, two membrane glycoproteins characteristic of the rough endoplasmic reticulum, inhibit the cotranslational translocation of a secretory protein growth hormone into the lumen of dog pancreas or rat liver microsomes. As expected, site-specific antibodies to epitopes located within the cytoplasmic domain of ribophorin I, but not antibodies to epitopes in the luminal domain of this protein, were effective in inhibiting translocation. Since monovalent Fab fragments were as inhibitory as intact IgG molecules, ribophorins must be closely associated with the translocation site and, therefore, are likely to function at some stage in the translocation process. In all cases, the antibodies that inhibited translocation also caused a significant reduction in total protein synthesis and treatments that neutralized their capacity to inhibit translocation also prevented their inhibitory effect on protein synthesis. This would be expected if the antibodies blocked the membrane-mediated relief of the SRP-induced arrest of polypeptide elongation. The antibodies were effective only when added before translocation was allowed to begin. In this case, they prevented the targeting of active ribosomes containing mRNA and nascent chains to the ER membrane. Thus, ribophorins must either directly participate in targeting or be so close to the targeting site that the antibodies sterically blocked this early phase of the translocation process.     

In vitro binding of ribosomes to the beta subunit of the Sec61p protein translocation complex

The Sec61p complex forms the core element of the protein translocation complex (translocon) in the rough endoplasmic reticulum (rough ER) membrane. Translating or nontranslating ribosomes bind with high affinity to ER membranes that have been stripped of ribosomes or to liposomes containing purified Sec61p. Here we present evidence that the beta subunit of the complex (Sec61beta) makes contact with nontranslating ribosomes. A fusion protein containing the Sec61beta cytoplasmic domain (Sec61beta(c)) prevents the binding of ribosomes to stripped ER-derived membranes and also binds to ribosomes directly with an affinity close to the affinity of ribosomes for stripped ER-derived membranes. The ribosome binding activity of Sec61beta(c), like that of native ER membranes, is sensitive to high salt concentrations and is not based on an unspecific charge-dependent interaction of the relatively basic Sec61beta(c) domain with ribosomal RNA. Like stripped ER membranes, the Sec61beta(c) sequence binds to large ribosomal subunits in preference over small subunits. Previous studies have shown that Sec61beta is inessential for ribosome binding and protein translocation, but translocation is impaired by the absence of Sec61beta, and it has been proposed that Sec61beta assists in the insertion of nascent proteins into the translocation pore. Our results suggest a physical interaction of the ribosome itself with Sec61beta; this may normally occur alongside interactions between the ribosome and other elements of Sec61p, or it may represent one stage in a temporal sequence of binding.     

Sec61p is the main ribosome receptor in the endoplasmic reticulum of Saccharomyces cerevisiae

A characteristic feature of the co-translational protein translocation into the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) is the tight association of the translating ribosomes with the translocation sites in the membrane. Biochemical analyses identified the Sec61 complex as the main ribosome receptor in the ER of mammalian cells. Similar experiments using purified homologues from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the Sec61p complex and the Ssh1p complex, respectively, demonstrated that they bind ribosomes with an affinity similar to that of the mammalian Sec61 complex. However, these studies did not exclude the presence of other proteins that may form abundant ribosome binding sites in the yeast ER. We now show here that similar to the situation found in mammals in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae the two Sec61-homologues Sec61p and Ssh1p are essential for the formation of high-affinity ribosome binding sites in the ER membrane. The number of binding sites formed by Ssh1p under standard growth conditions is at least 4 times less than those formed by Sec61p.     

Binding of Signal Recognition Particle Gives Ribosome/Nascent Chain Complexes a Competitive Advantage in Endoplasmic Reticulum Membrane Interaction

Most secretory and membrane proteins are sorted by signal sequences to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane early during their synthesis. Targeting of the ribosome-nascent chain complex (RNC) involves the binding of the signal sequence to the signal recognition particle (SRP), followed by an interaction of ribosome-bound SRP with the SRP receptor. However, ribosomes can also independently bind to the ER translocation channel formed by the Sec61p complex. To explain the specificity of membrane targeting, it has therefore been proposed that nascent polypeptide-associated complex functions as a cytosolic inhibitor of signal sequence- and SRP-independent ribosome binding to the ER membrane. We report here that SRP-independent binding of RNCs to the ER membrane can occur in the presence of all cytosolic factors, including nascent polypeptide-associated complex. Nontranslating ribosomes competitively inhibit SRP-independent membrane binding of RNCs but have no effect when SRP is bound to the RNCs. The protective effect of SRP against ribosome competition depends on a functional signal sequence in the nascent chain and is also observed with reconstituted proteoliposomes containing only the Sec61p complex and the SRP receptor. We conclude that cytosolic factors do not prevent the membrane binding of ribosomes. Instead, specific ribosome targeting to the Sec61p complex is provided by the binding of SRP to RNCs, followed by an interaction with the SRP receptor, which gives RNC–SRP complexes a selective advantage in membrane targeting over nontranslating ribosomes.     

The ATP requiring step in assembly of M13 procoat protein into microsomes is related to preservation of transport competence of the precursor protein.

M13 procoat protein is processed to transmembrane coat protein by dog pancreas microsomes after completion of synthesis and in the absence of the signal recognition particle (SRP)/docking protein system. ATP is required for fast and efficient processing of procoat protein by microsomes in a reticulocyte lysate. Requirement for ATP is also observed in the absence of ribosomes or docking protein. This indicates the existence of a unique assembly pathway for procoat protein into microsomes which depends on ATP but does not depend on the SRP/docking protein and ribosome/ribosome receptor systems. We suggest that the ATP requirement is linked to a so far unknown component of the reticulocyte lysate, acting on transport competence of precursor proteins.     

Access to ribosomal protein Rpl25p by the signal recognition particle is required for efficient cotranslational translocation

Targeting of proteins to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) occurs cotranslationally necessitating the interaction of the signal recognition particle (SRP) and the translocon with the ribosome. Biochemical and structural studies implicate ribosomal protein Rpl25p as a major ribosome interaction site for both these factors. Here we characterize an RPL25GFP fusion, which behaves as a dominant mutant leading to defects in co- but not posttranslational translocation in vivo. In these cells, ribosomes still interact with ER membrane and the translocon, but are defective in binding SRP. Overexpression of SRP can restore ribosome binding of SRP, but only partially rescues growth and translocation defects. Our results indicate that Rpl25p plays a critical role in the recruitment of SRP to the ribosome.     

Evolutionarily conserved binding of ribosomes to the translocation channel via the large ribosomal RNA

During early stages of cotranslational protein translocation across the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane the ribosome is targeted to the heterotrimeric Sec61p complex, the major component of the protein-conducting channel. We demonstrate that this interaction is mediated by the 28S rRNA of the eukaryotic large ribosomal subunit. Bacterial ribosomes also bind via their 23S rRNA to the bacterial homolog of the Sec61p complex, the SecYEG complex. Eukaryotic ribosomes bind to the SecYEG complex, and prokaryotic ribosomes to the Sec61p complex. These data indicate that rRNA-mediated interaction of ribosomes with the translocation channel occurred early in evolution and has been conserved.     

Identification of a Novel Stage of Ribosome/Nascent Chain Association with the Endoplasmic Reticulum Membrane

Protein translocation in the mammalian endoplasmic reticulum (ER) occurs cotranslationally and requires the binding of translationally active ribosomes to components of the ER membrane. Three candidate ribosome receptors, p180, p34, and Sec61p, have been identified in binding studies with inactive ribosomes, suggesting that ribosome binding is mediated through a receptor-ligand interaction. To determine if the binding of nascent chain-bearing ribosomes is regulated in a manner similar to inactive ribosomes, we have investigated the ribosome/nascent chain binding event that accompanies targeting. In agreement with previous reports, indicating that Sec61p displays the majority of the ER ribosome binding activity, we observed that Sec61p is shielded from proteolytic digestion by native, bound ribosomes. The binding of active, nascent chain bearing ribosomes to the ER membrane is, however, insensitive to the ribosome occupancy state of Sec61p. To determine if additional, Sec61p independent, stages of the ribosome binding reaction could be identified, ribosome/nascent chain binding was assayed as a function of RM concentration. At limiting RM concentrations, a protease resistant ribosome-membrane junction was formed, yet the nascent chain was salt extractable and cross-linked to Sec61p with low efficiency. At nonlimiting RM concentrations, bound nascent chains were protease and salt resistant and cross-linked to Sec61p with higher efficiency. On the basis of these and other data, we propose that ribosome binding to the ER membrane is a multi-stage process comprised of an initial, Sec61p independent binding event, which precedes association of the ribosome/nascent chain complex with Sec61p.     

Functional characterization of the 180-kD ribosome receptor in vivo

A cDNA encoding the 180-kD canine ribosome receptor (RRp) was cloned and sequenced. The deduced primary structure indicates three distinct domains: an NH2-terminal stretch of 28 uncharged amino acids representing the membrane anchor, a basic region (pI = 10.74) comprising the remainder of the NH2-terminal half and an acidic COOH- terminal half (pI = 4.99). The most striking feature of the amino acid sequence is a 10-amino acid consensus motif, NQGKKAEGAP, repeated 54 times in tandem without interruption in the NH2-terminal positively charged region. We postulate that this repeated sequence represents a ribosome binding domain which mediates the interaction between the ribosome and the ER membrane. To substantiate this hypothesis, recombinant full-length ribosome receptor and two truncated versions of this protein, one lacking the potential ribosome binding domain, and one lacking the COOH terminus, were expressed in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Morphological and biochemical analyses showed all proteins were targeted to, and oriented correctly in the ER membrane. In vitro ribosome binding assays demonstrated that yeast microsomes containing the full-length canine receptor or one lacking the COOH-terminal domain were able to bind two to four times as many human ribosomes as control membranes lacking a recombinant protein or microsomes containing a receptor lacking the NH2-terminal basic domain. Electron micrographs of these cells revealed that the expression of all receptor constructs led to a proliferation of perinuclear ER membranes known as "karmellae." Strikingly, in those strains which expressed cDNAs encoding a receptor containing the putative ribosome binding domain, the induced ER membranes (examined in situ) were richly studded with ribosomes. In contrast, karmellae resulting from the expression of receptor cDNA lacking the putative ribosome binding domain were uniformly smooth and free of ribosomes. Cell fractionation and biochemical analyses corroborated the morphological characterization. Taken together these data provide further evidence that RRp functions as a ribosome receptor in vitro, provide new evidence indicating its functionality in vivo, and in both cases indicate that the NH2-terminal basic domain is essential for ribosome binding.