Proinsulin and the Genetics of Diabetes Mellitus

Insulin plays a central role in the regulation of vertebrate metabolism. The hormone, the post-translational product of a single-chain precursor, is a globular protein containing two chains, A (21 residues) and B (30 residues). Recent advances in human genetics have identified dominant mutations in the insulin gene causing permanent neonatal-onset DM² (1–4). The mutations are predicted to block folding of the precursor in the ER of pancreatic β-cells. Although expression of the wild-type allele would in other circumstances be sufficient to maintain homeostasis, studies of a corresponding mouse model (5–7) suggest that the misfolded variant perturbs wild-type biosynthesis (8, 9). Impaired β-cell secretion is associated with ER stress, distorted organelle architecture, and cell death (10). These findings have renewed interest in insulin biosynthesis (11–13) and the structural basis of disulfide pairing (14–19). Protein evolution is constrained not only by structure and function but also by susceptibility to toxic misfolding.Insulin plays a central role in the regulation of vertebrate metabolism. The hormone, the post-translational product of a single-chain precursor, is a globular protein containing two chains, A (21 residues) and B (30 residues). Recent advances in human genetics have identified dominant mutations in the insulin gene causing permanent neonatal-onset DM² (1–4). The mutations are predicted to block folding of the precursor in the ER of pancreatic β-cells. Although expression of the wild-type allele would in other circumstances be sufficient to maintain homeostasis, studies of a corresponding mouse model (5–7) suggest that the misfolded variant perturbs wild-type biosynthesis (8, 9). Impaired β-cell secretion is associated with ER stress, distorted organelle architecture, and cell death (10). These findings have renewed interest in insulin biosynthesis (11–13) and the structural basis of disulfide pairing (14–19). Protein evolution is constrained not only by structure and function but also by susceptibility to toxic misfolding.     

Printor, a Novel TorsinA-interacting Protein Implicated in Dystonia Pathogenesis

Early onset generalized dystonia (DYT1) is an autosomal dominant neurological disorder caused by deletion of a single glutamate residue (torsinA ΔE) in the C-terminal region of the AAA⁺ (ATPases associated with a variety of cellular activities) protein torsinA. The pathogenic mechanism by which torsinA ΔE mutation leads to dystonia remains unknown. Here we report the identification and characterization of a 628-amino acid novel protein, printor, that interacts with torsinA. Printor co-distributes with torsinA in multiple brain regions and co-localizes with torsinA in the endoplasmic reticulum. Interestingly, printor selectively binds to the ATP-free form but not to the ATP-bound form of torsinA, supporting a role for printor as a cofactor rather than a substrate of torsinA. The interaction of printor with torsinA is completely abolished by the dystonia-associated torsinA ΔE mutation. Our findings suggest that printor is a new component of the DYT1 pathogenic pathway and provide a potential molecular target for therapeutic intervention in dystonia.Early onset generalized torsion dystonia (DYT1) is the most common and severe form of hereditary dystonia, a movement disorder characterized by involuntary movements and sustained muscle spasms (1). This autosomal dominant disease has childhood onset and its dystonic symptoms are thought to result from neuronal dysfunction rather than neurodegeneration (2, 3). Most DYT1 cases are caused by deletion of a single glutamate residue at positions 302 or 303 (torsinA ΔE) of the 332-amino acid protein torsinA (4). In addition, a different torsinA mutation that deletes amino acids Phe³²³–Tyr³²⁸ (torsinA Δ323–328) was identified in a single family with dystonia (5), although the pathogenic significance of this torsinA mutation is unclear because these patients contain a concomitant mutation in another dystonia-related protein, ϵ-sarcoglycan (6). Recently, genetic association studies have implicated polymorphisms in the torsinA gene as a genetic risk factor in the development of adult-onset idiopathic dystonia (7, 8).TorsinA contains an N-terminal endoplasmic reticulum (ER)³ signal sequence and a 20-amino acid hydrophobic region followed by a conserved AAA⁺ (ATPases associated with a variety of cellular activities) domain (9, 10). Because members of the AAA⁺ family are known to facilitate conformational changes in target proteins (11, 12), it has been proposed that torsinA may function as a molecular chaperone (13, 14). TorsinA is widely expressed in brain and multiple other tissues (15) and is primarily associated with the ER and nuclear envelope (NE) compartments in cells (16–20). TorsinA is believed to mainly reside in the lumen of the ER and NE (17–19) and has been shown to bind lamina-associated polypeptide 1 (LAP1) (21), lumenal domain-like LAP1 (LULL1) (21), and nesprins (22). In addition, recent evidence indicates that a significant pool of torsinA exhibits a topology in which the AAA⁺ domain faces the cytoplasm (20). In support of this topology, torsinA is found in the cytoplasm, neuronal processes, and synaptic terminals (2, 3, 15, 23–26) and has been shown to bind cytosolic proteins snapin (27) and kinesin light chain 1 (20). TorsinA has been proposed to play a role in several cellular processes, including dopaminergic neurotransmission (28–31), NE organization and dynamics (17, 22, 32), and protein trafficking (27, 33). However, the precise biological function of torsinA and its regulation remain unknown.To gain insights into torsinA function, we performed yeast two-hybrid screens to search for torsinA-interacting proteins in the brain. We report here the isolation and characterization of a novel protein named printor (protein interactor of torsinA) that interacts selectively with wild-type (WT) torsinA but not the dystonia-associated torsinA ΔE mutant. Our data suggest that printor may serve as a cofactor of torsinA and provide a new molecular target for understanding and treating dystonia.     

A Small Conserved Domain in the Yeast Spa2p Is Necessary and Sufficient for Its Polarized Localization

SPA2 encodes a yeast protein that is one of the first proteins to localize to sites of polarized growth, such as the shmoo tip and the incipient bud. The dynamics and requirements for Spa2p localization in living cells are examined using Spa2p green fluorescent protein fusions. Spa2p localizes to one edge of unbudded cells and subsequently is observable in the bud tip. Finally, during cytokinesis Spa2p is present as a ring at the mother–daughter bud neck. The bud emergence mutants bem1 and bem2 and mutants defective in the septins do not affect Spa2p localization to the bud tip. Strikingly, a small domain of Spa2p comprised of 150 amino acids is necessary and sufficient for localization to sites of polarized growth. This localization domain and the amino terminus of Spa2p are essential for its function in mating. Searching the yeast genome database revealed a previously uncharacterized protein which we name, Sph1p (Spa2p homolog), with significant homology to the localization domain and amino terminus of Spa2p. This protein also localizes to sites of polarized growth in budding and mating cells. SPH1, which is similar to SPA2, is required for bipolar budding and plays a role in shmoo formation. Overexpression of either Spa2p or Sph1p can block the localization of either protein fused to green fluorescent protein, suggesting that both Spa2p and Sph1p bind to and are localized by the same component. The identification of a 150–amino acid domain necessary and sufficient for localization of Spa2p to sites of polarized growth and the existence of this domain in another yeast protein Sph1p suggest that the early localization of these proteins may be mediated by a receptor that recognizes this small domain.Polarized cell growth and division are essential cellular processes that play a crucial role in the development of eukaryotic organisms. Cell fate can be determined by cell asymmetry during cell division (Horvitz and Herskowitz, 1992; Cohen and Hyman, 1994; Rhyu and Knoblich, 1995). Consequently, the molecules involved in the generation and maintenance of cell asymmetry are important in the process of cell fate determination. Polarized growth can occur in response to external signals such as growth towards a nutrient (Rodriguez-Boulan and Nelson, 1989; Eaton and Simons, 1995) or hormone (Jackson and Hartwell, 1990a , b ; Segall, 1993; Keynes and Cook, 1995) and in response to internal signals as in Caenorhabditis elegans (Goldstein et al., 1993; Kimble, 1994; Priess, 1994) and Drosophila melanogaster (St Johnston and Nusslein-Volhard, 1992; Anderson, 1995) early development. Saccharomyces cerevisiae undergo polarized growth towards an external cue during mating and to an internal cue during budding. Polarization towards a mating partner (shmoo formation) and towards a new bud site requires a number of proteins (Chenevert, 1994; Chant, 1996; Drubin and Nelson, 1996). Many of these proteins are necessary for both processes and are localized to sites of polarized growth, identified by the insertion of new cell wall material (Tkacz and Lampen, 1972; Farkas et al., 1974; Lew and Reed, 1993) to the shmoo tip, bud tip, and mother–daughter bud neck. In yeast, proteins localized to growth sites include cytoskeletal proteins (Adams and Pringle, 1984; Kilmartin and Adams, 1984; Ford, S.K., and J.R. Pringle. 1986. Yeast. 2:S114; Drubin et al., 1988; Snyder, 1989; Snyder et al., 1991; Amatruda and Cooper, 1992; Lew and Reed, 1993; Waddle et al., 1996), neck filament components (septins) (Byers and Goetsch, 1976; Kim et al., 1991; Ford and Pringle, 1991; Haarer and Pringle, 1987; Longtine et al., 1996), motor proteins (Lillie and Brown, 1994), G-proteins (Ziman, 1993; Yamochi et al., 1994; Qadota et al., 1996), and two membrane proteins (Halme et al., 1996; Roemer et al., 1996; Qadota et al., 1996). Septins, actin, and actin-associated proteins localize early in the cell cycle, before a bud or shmoo tip is recognizable. How this group of proteins is localized to and maintained at sites of cell growth remains unclear.Spa2p is one of the first proteins involved in bud formation to localize to the incipient bud site before a bud is recognizable (Snyder, 1989; Snyder et al., 1991; Chant, 1996). Spa2p has been localized to where a new bud will form at approximately the same time as actin patches concentrate at this region (Snyder et al., 1991). An understanding of how Spa2p localizes to incipient bud sites will shed light on the very early stages of cell polarization. Later in the cell cycle, Spa2p is also found at the mother–daughter bud neck in cells undergoing cytokinesis. Spa2p, a nonessential protein, has been shown to be involved in bud site selection (Snyder, 1989; Zahner et al., 1996), shmoo formation (Gehrung and Snyder, 1990), and mating (Gehrung and Snyder, 1990; Chenevert et al., 1994; Yorihuzi and Ohsumi, 1994; Dorer et al., 1995). Genetic studies also suggest that Spa2p has a role in cytokinesis (Flescher et al., 1993), yet little is known about how this protein is localized to sites of polarized growth.We have used Spa2p green fluorescent protein (GFP)¹ fusions to investigate the early localization of Spa2p to sites of polarized growth in living cells. Our results demonstrate that a small domain of ∼150 amino acids of this large 1,466-residue protein is sufficient for targeting to sites of polarized growth and is necessary for Spa2p function. Furthermore, we have identified and characterized a novel yeast protein, Sph1p, which has homology to both the Spa2p amino terminus and the Spa2p localization domain. Sph1p localizes to similar regions of polarized growth and sph1 mutants have similar phenotypes as spa2 mutants.     

The Boron Requirement and Cell Wall Properties of Growing and Stationary Suspension-Cultured Chenopodium album L. Cells

Suspension-cultured Chenopodium album L. cells are capable of continuous, long-term growth on a boron-deficient medium. Compared with cultures grown with boron, these cultures contained more enlarged and detached cells, had increased turbidity due to the rupture of a small number of cells, and contained cells with an increased cell wall pore size. These characteristics were reversed by the addition of boric acid (≥7 μm) to the boron-deficient cells. C. album cells grown in the presence of 100 μm boric acid entered the stationary phase when they were not subcultured, and remained viable for at least 3 weeks. The transition from the growth phase to the stationary phase was accompanied by a decrease in the wall pore size. Cells grown without boric acid or with 7 μm boric acid were not able to reduce their wall pore size at the transition to the stationary phase. These cells could not be kept viable in the stationary phase, because they continued to expand and died as a result of wall rupture. The addition of 100 μm boric acid prevented wall rupture and the wall pore size was reduced to normal values. We conclude that boron is required to maintain the normal pore structure of the wall matrix and to mechanically stabilize the wall at growth termination.The ultrastructure and physical properties of plant cell walls are known to be affected by boron deficiency (Kouchi and Kumazawa, 1976; Hirsch and Torrey, 1980; Fischer and Hecht-Buchholz, 1985; Matoh et al., 1992; Hu and Brown, 1994; Findeklee and Goldbach, 1996). Moreover, boron is predominantly localized in the cell wall when plants are grown with suboptimal boron (Loomis and Durst, 1991; Matoh et al., 1992; Hu and Brown, 1994; Hu et al., 1996). In radish, >80% of the cell wall boron is present in the pectic polysaccharide RG-II (Matoh et al., 1993; Kobayashi et al., 1996), which is now known to exist as a dimer that is cross-linked by a borate ester between two apiosyl residues (Kobayashi et al., 1996; O''Neill et al., 1996). Dimeric RG-II is unusually stable at low pH and is present in a large number of plant species (Ishii and Matsunaga, 1996; Kobayashi et al., 1996, 1997; Matoh et al., 1996; O''Neill et al., 1996; Pellerin et al., 1996; Kaneko et al., 1997). The widespread occurrence and conserved structure of RG-II (Darvill et al., 1978; O''Neill et al., 1990) have led to the suggestion that borate ester cross-linked RG-II is required for the development of a normal cell wall (O''Neill et al., 1996; Matoh, 1997).One approach for determining the function of boron in plant cell walls is to compare the responses to boron deficiency of growing plant cells that are dividing and synthesizing primary cell walls with those of growth-limited plant cells in which the synthesis of primary cell walls is negligible. Suspension-cultured cells are well suited for this purpose because they may be reversibly transferred from a growth phase to a stationary phase. Continuous cell growth phase is maintained by frequent transfer of the cells into new growth medium (King, 1981; Kandarakov et al., 1994), whereas a stationary cell population is obtained by feeding the cells with Suc and by not subculturing them. Cells in the stationary phase are characterized by mechanically stabilized primary walls and reduced biosynthetic activity. Here we describe the responses of suspension-cultured Chenopodium album L. cells in the growth and stationary phases to boron deficiency. These cells have a high specific-growth rate, no significant lag phase, and reproducible changes in their wall pore size during the transition from the growth phase to the stationary phase (Titel et al., 1997).     

Loop 2 Structure in Glycine and GABAA Receptors Plays a Key Role in Determining Ethanol Sensitivity

The present study tests the hypothesis that the structure of extracellular domain Loop 2 can markedly affect ethanol sensitivity in glycine receptors (GlyRs) and γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptors (GABA_ARs). To test this, we mutated Loop 2 in the α1 subunit of GlyRs and in the γ subunit of α1β2γ2GABA_ARs and measured the sensitivity of wild type and mutant receptors expressed in Xenopus oocytes to agonist, ethanol, and other agents using two-electrode voltage clamp. Replacing Loop 2 of α1GlyR subunits with Loop 2 from the δGABA_AR (δL2), but not the γGABA_AR subunit, reduced ethanol threshold and increased the degree of ethanol potentiation without altering general receptor function. Similarly, replacing Loop 2 of the γ subunit of GABA_ARs with δL2 shifted the ethanol threshold from 50 mm in WT to 1 mm in the GABA_A γ-δL2 mutant. These findings indicate that the structure of Loop 2 can profoundly affect ethanol sensitivity in GlyRs and GABA_ARs. The δL2 mutations did not affect GlyR or GABA_AR sensitivity, respectively, to Zn²⁺ or diazepam, which suggests that these δL2-induced changes in ethanol sensitivity do not extend to all allosteric modulators and may be specific for ethanol or ethanol-like agents. To explore molecular mechanisms underlying these results, we threaded the WT and δL2 GlyR sequences onto the x-ray structure of the bacterial Gloeobacter violaceus pentameric ligand-gated ion channel homologue (GLIC). In addition to being the first GlyR model threaded on GLIC, the juxtaposition of the two structures led to a possible mechanistic explanation for the effects of ethanol on GlyR-based on changes in Loop 2 structure.Alcohol abuse and dependence are significant problems in our society, with ∼14 million people in the United States being affected (1, 2). Alcohol causes over 100,000 deaths in the United States, and alcohol-related issues are estimated to cost nearly 200 billion dollars annually (2). To address this, considerable attention has focused on the development of medications to prevent and treat alcohol-related problems (3–5). The development of such medications would be aided by a clear understanding of the molecular structures on which ethanol acts and how these structures influence receptor sensitivity to ethanol.Ligand-gated ion channels (LGICs)² have received substantial attention as putative sites of ethanol action that cause its behavioral effects (6–12). Research in this area has focused on investigating the effects of ethanol on two large superfamilies of LGICs: 1) the Cys-loop superfamily of LGICs (13, 14), whose members include nicotinic acetylcholine, 5-hydroxytryptamine₃, γ-aminobutyric acid type A (GABA_A), γ-aminobutyric acid type C, and glycine receptors (GlyRs) (10, 11, 15–20) and 2) the glutamate superfamily, including N-methyl d-aspartate, α-amino-3-hydroxyisoxazolepropionic acid, and kainate receptors (21, 22). Recent studies have also begun investigating ethanol action in the ATP-gated P2X superfamily of LGICs (23–25).A series of studies that employed chimeric and mutagenic strategies combined with sulfhydryl-specific labeling identified key regions within Cys-loop receptors that appear to be initial targets for ethanol action that also can determine the sensitivity of the receptors to ethanol (7–12, 18, 19, 26–30). This work provides several lines of evidence that position 267 and possibly other sites in the transmembrane (TM) domain of GlyRs and homologous sites in GABA_ARs are targets for ethanol action and that mutations at these sites can influence ethanol sensitivity (8, 9, 26, 31).Growing evidence from GlyRs indicates that ethanol also acts on the extracellular domain. The initial findings came from studies demonstrating that α1GlyRs are more sensitive to ethanol than are α2GlyRs despite the high (∼78%) sequence homology between α1GlyRs and α2GlyRs (32). Further work found that an alanine to serine exchange at position 52 (A52S) in Loop 2 can eliminate the difference in ethanol sensitivity between α1GlyRs and α2GlyRs (18, 20, 33). These studies also demonstrated that mutations at position 52 in α1GlyRS and the homologous position 59 in α2GlyRs controlled the sensitivity of these receptors to a novel mechanistic ethanol antagonist (20). Collectively, these studies suggest that there are multiple sites of ethanol action in α1GlyRs, with one site located in the TM domain (e.g. position 267) and another in the extracellular domain (e.g. position 52).Subsequent studies revealed that the polarity of the residue at position 52 plays a key role in determining the sensitivity of GlyRs to ethanol (20). The findings with polarity in the extracellular domain contrast with the findings at position 267 in the TM domain, where molecular volume, but not polarity, significantly affected ethanol sensitivity (9). Taken together, these findings indicate that the physical-chemical parameters of residues at positions in the extracellular and TM domains that modulate ethanol effects and/or initiate ethanol action in GlyRs are not uniform. Thus, knowledge regarding the physical-chemical properties that control agonist and ethanol sensitivity is key for understanding the relationship between the structure and the actions of ethanol in LGICs (19, 31, 34–40).GlyRs and GABA_ARs, which differ significantly in their sensitivities to ethanol, offer a potential method for identifying the structures that control ethanol sensitivity. For example, α1GlyRs do not reliably respond to ethanol concentrations less than 10 mm (32, 33, 41). Similarly, γ subunit-containing GABA_ARs (e.g. α1β2γ2), the most predominantly expressed GABA_ARs in the central nervous system, are insensitive to ethanol concentrations less than 50 mm (42, 43). In contrast, δ subunit-containing GABA_ARs (e.g. α4β3δ) have been shown to be sensitive to ethanol concentrations as low as 1–3 mm (44–51). Sequence alignment of α1GlyR, γGABA_AR, and δGABA_AR revealed differences between the Loop 2 regions of these receptor subunits. Since prior studies found that mutations of Loop 2 residues can affect ethanol sensitivity (19, 20, 39), the non-conserved residues in Loop 2 of GlyR and GABA_AR subunits could provide the physical-chemical and structural bases underlying the differences in ethanol sensitivity between these receptors.The present study tested the hypothesis that the structure of Loop 2 can markedly affect the ethanol sensitivity of GlyRs and GABA_ARs. To accomplish this, we performed multiple mutations that replaced the Loop 2 region of the α1 subunit in α1GlyRs and the Loop 2 region of the γ subunit of α1β2γ2 GABA_ARs with corresponding non-conserved residues from the δ subunit of GABA_AR and tested the sensitivity of these receptors to ethanol. As predicted, replacing Loop 2 of WT α1GlyRs with the homologous residues from the δGABA_AR subunit (δL2), but not the γGABA_AR subunit (γL2), markedly increased the sensitivity of the receptor to ethanol. Similarly, replacing the non-conserved residues of the γ subunit of α1β2γ2 GABA_ARs with δL2 also markedly increased ethanol sensitivity of GABA_ARs. These findings support the hypothesis and suggest that Loop 2 may play a role in controlling ethanol sensitivity across the Cys-loop superfamily of receptors. The findings also provide the basis for suggesting structure-function relationships in a new molecular model of the GlyR based on the bacterial Gloeobacter violaceus pentameric LGIC homologue (GLIC).     

The Amino-terminal Domain of Desmoplakin Binds to Plakoglobin and Clusters Desmosomal Cadherin–Plakoglobin Complexes

The desmosome is a highly organized plasma membrane domain that couples intermediate filaments to the plasma membrane at regions of cell–cell adhesion. Desmosomes contain two classes of cadherins, desmogleins, and desmocollins, that bind to the cytoplasmic protein plakoglobin. Desmoplakin is a desmosomal component that plays a critical role in linking intermediate filament networks to the desmosomal plaque, and the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin targets desmoplakin to the desmosome. However, the desmosomal protein(s) that bind the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin have not been identified. To determine if the desmosomal cadherins and plakoglobin interact with the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin, these proteins were co-expressed in L-cell fibroblasts, cells that do not normally express desmosomal components. When expressed in L-cells, the desmosomal cadherins and plakoglobin exhibited a diffuse distribution. However, in the presence of an amino-terminal desmoplakin polypeptide (DP-NTP), the desmosomal cadherins and plakoglobin were observed in punctate clusters that also contained DP-NTP. In addition, plakoglobin and DP-NTP were recruited to cell–cell interfaces in L-cells co-expressing a chimeric cadherin with the E-cadherin extracellular domain and the desmoglein-1 cytoplasmic domain, and these cells formed structures that were ultrastructurally similar to the outer plaque of the desmosome. In transient expression experiments in COS cells, the recruitment of DP-NTP to cell borders by the chimera required co-expression of plakoglobin. Plakoglobin and DP-NTP co-immunoprecipitated when extracted from L-cells, and yeast two hybrid analysis indicated that DP-NTP binds directly to plakoglobin but not Dsg1. These results identify a role for desmoplakin in organizing the desmosomal cadherin–plakoglobin complex and provide new insights into the hierarchy of protein interactions that occur in the desmosomal plaque.Desmosomes are highly organized adhesive intercellular junctions that couple intermediate filaments to the cell surface at sites of cell–cell adhesion (Farquhar and Palade, 1963; Staehelin, 1974; Schwarz et al., 1990; Garrod, 1993; Collins and Garrod, 1994; Cowin and Burke, 1996; Kowalczyk and Green, 1996). Desmosomes are prominent in tissues that experience mechanical stress, such as heart and epidermis, and the disruption of desmosomes or the intermediate filament system in these organs has devastating effects on tissue integrity (Steinert and Bale, 1993; Coulombe and Fuchs, 1994; Fuchs, 1994; McLean and Lane, 1995; Stanley, 1995; Bierkamp et al., 1996; Ruiz et al., 1996). Desmosomes are highly insoluble structures that can withstand harsh denaturing conditions (Skerrow and Matoltsy, 1974; Gorbsky and Steinberg, 1981; Jones et al., 1988; Schwarz et al., 1990). This property of desmosomes facilitated early identification of desmosomal components but has impaired subsequent biochemical analysis of the protein complexes that form between desmosomal components. Ultrastructurally, desmosomes contain a core region that includes the plasma membranes of adjacent cells and a cytoplasmic plaque that anchors intermediate filaments to the plasma membrane. The plaque can be further divided into an outer dense plaque subjacent to the plasma membrane and an inner dense plaque through which intermediate filaments appear to loop.Molecular genetic analysis has revealed that the desmosomal glycoproteins, the desmogleins and desmocollins, are members of the cadherin family of cell–cell adhesion molecules (for review see Buxton et al., 1993, 1994; Cowin and Mechanic, 1994; Kowalczyk et al., 1996). The classical cadherins, such as E-cadherin, mediate calcium-dependent, homophilic cell–cell adhesion (Nagafuchi et al., 1987). The mechanism by which the desmosomal cadherins mediate cell–cell adhesion remains elusive (Amagai et al., 1994; Chidgey et al., 1996; Kowalczyk et al., 1996), although heterophilic interactions have recently been detected between desmogleins and desmocollins (Chitaev and Troyanovsky, 1997). Both classes of the desmosomal cadherins associate with the cytoplasmic plaque protein plakoglobin (Kowalczyk et al., 1994; Mathur et al., 1994; Roh and Stanley, 1995b ; Troyanovsky et al., 1994), which is part of a growing family of proteins that share a repeated motif first identified in the Drosophila protein Armadillo (Peifer and Wieschaus, 1990). This multigene family also includes the desmosomal proteins band 6/plakophilin 1, plakophilin 2a and 2b, and p0071, which are now considered to comprise a subclass of the armadillo family of proteins (Hatzfeld et al., 1994; Heid et al., 1994; Schmidt et al., 1994; Hatzfeld and Nachtsheim, 1996; Mertens et al., 1996).The most abundant desmosomal plaque protein is desmoplakin, which is predicted to be a homodimer containing two globular end domains joined by a central α-helical coiled-coil rod domain (O''Keefe et al., 1989; Green et al., 1990; Virata et al., 1992). Previous studies have demonstrated that the carboxyl-terminal domain of desmoplakin interacts with intermediate filaments (Stappenbeck and Green, 1992; Stappenbeck et al., 1993; Kouklis et al., 1994; Meng et al., 1997), and the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin is required for desmoplakin localization to the desmosomal plaque (Stappenbeck et al., 1993). Direct evidence supporting a role for desmoplakin in intermediate filament attachment to desmosomes was provided recently when expression of an amino-terminal polypeptide of desmoplakin was found to displace endogenous desmoplakin from cell borders and disrupt intermediate filament attachment to the cell surface in A431 epithelial cell lines (Bornslaeger et al., 1996).The classical cadherins, such as E-cadherin, bind directly to both β-catenin and plakoglobin (Aberle et al., 1994; Jou et al., 1995; for review see Cowin and Burke, 1996). β-Catenin is also an armadillo family member (McCrea et al., 1991; Peifer et al., 1992), and both plakoglobin and β-catenin bind directly to α-catenin (Aberle et al., 1994, 1996; Jou et al., 1995; Sacco et al., 1995; Obama and Ozawa, 1997). α-Catenin is a vinculin homologue (Nagafuchi et al., 1991) and associates with both α-actinin and actin (Knudson et al., 1995; Rimm et al., 1995; Nieset et al., 1997). Through interactions with β- and α-catenin, E-cadherin is coupled indirectly to the actin cytoskeleton, and this linkage is required for the adhesive activity of E-cadherin (Ozawa et al., 1990; Shimoyama et al., 1992). In addition, E-cadherin association with plakoglobin appears to be required for assembly of desmosomes (Lewis et al., 1997), underscoring the importance of E-cadherin in the overall program of intercellular junction assembly. However, the hierarchy of molecular interactions that couple the desmosomal cadherins to the intermediate filament cytoskeleton is largely unknown, although the desmocollin cytoplasmic domain appears to play an important role in recruiting components of the desmosomal plaque (Troyanovsky et al., 1993, 1994). Since desmosomal cadherins form complexes with plakoglobin and because the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin is required for desmoplakin localization at desmosomes, we hypothesized that the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin interacts with the desmosomal cadherin– plakoglobin complex.In previous studies, we used L-cell fibroblasts to characterize plakoglobin interactions with the cytoplasmic domains of the desmosomal cadherins and found that the desmosomal cadherins regulate plakoglobin metabolic stability (Kowalczyk et al., 1994) but do not mediate homophilic adhesion (Kowalczyk et al., 1996). To test the ability of the desmoplakin amino-terminal domain to interact with the desmosomal cadherin–plakoglobin complex, we established a series of L-cell lines expressing the desmosomal cadherins in the presence or absence of a desmoplakin amino-terminal polypeptide (DP-NTP).¹ The results indicate that one important function of the desmoplakin amino-terminal domain is to cluster desmosomal cadherin–plakoglobin complexes. In addition, DP-NTP and plakoglobin were found to form complexes that could be co-immunoprecipitated from L-cell lysates. Using the yeast two hybrid system, DP-NTP was found to bind directly to plakoglobin but not Dsg1. These data suggest that plakoglobin couples the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin to the desmosomal cadherins and that desmoplakin plays an important role in organizing the desmosomal cadherin–plakoglobin complex into discrete plasma membrane domains.     

Repeated Domains of Leptospira Immunoglobulin-like Proteins Interact with Elastin and Tropoelastin

Leptospira spp., the causative agents of leptospirosis, adhere to components of the extracellular matrix, a pivotal role for colonization of host tissues during infection. Previously, we and others have shown that Leptospira immunoglobulin-like proteins (Lig) of Leptospira spp. bind to fibronectin, laminin, collagen, and fibrinogen. In this study, we report that Leptospira can be immobilized by human tropoelastin (HTE) or elastin from different tissues, including lung, skin, and blood vessels, and that Lig proteins can bind to HTE or elastin. Moreover, both elastin and HTE bind to the same LigB immunoglobulin-like domains, including LigBCon4, LigBCen7′–8, LigBCen9, and LigBCen12 as demonstrated by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and competition ELISAs. The LigB immunoglobulin-like domain binds to the 17th to 27th exons of HTE (17–27HTE) as determined by ELISA (LigBCon4, K_D = 0.50 μm; LigBCen7′–8, K_D = 0.82 μm; LigBCen9, K_D = 1.54 μm; and LigBCen12, K_D = 0.73 μm). The interaction of LigBCon4 and 17–27HTE was further confirmed by steady state fluorescence spectroscopy (K_D = 0.49 μm) and ITC (K_D = 0.54 μm). Furthermore, the binding was enthalpy-driven and affected by environmental pH, indicating it is a charge-charge interaction. The binding affinity of LigBCon4D341N to 17–27HTE was 4.6-fold less than that of wild type LigBCon4. In summary, we show that Lig proteins of Leptospira spp. interact with elastin and HTE, and we conclude this interaction may contribute to Leptospira adhesion to host tissues during infection.Pathogenic Leptospira spp. are spirochetes that cause leptospirosis, a serious infectious disease of people and animals (1, 2). Weil syndrome, the severe form of leptospiral infection, leads to multiorgan damage, including liver failure (jaundice), renal failure (nephritis), pulmonary hemorrhage, meningitis, abortion, and uveitis (3, 4). Furthermore, this disease is not only prevalent in many developing countries, it is reemerging in the United States (3). Although leptospirosis is a serious worldwide zoonotic disease, the pathogenic mechanisms of Leptospira infection remain enigmatic. Recent breakthroughs in applying genetic tools to Leptospira may facilitate studies on the molecular pathogenesis of leptospirosis (5–8).The attachment of pathogenic Leptospira spp. to host tissues is critical in the early phase of Leptospira infection. Leptospira spp. adhere to host tissues to overcome mechanical defense systems at tissue surfaces and to initiate colonization of specific tissues, such as the lung, kidney, and liver. Leptospira invade hosts tissues through mucous membranes or injured epidermis, coming in contact with subepithelial tissues. Here, certain bacterial outer surface proteins serve as microbial surface components recognizing adhesive matrix molecules (MSCRAMMs)² to mediate the binding of bacteria to different extracellular matrices (ECMs) of host cells (9). Several leptospiral MSCRAMMs have been identified (10–18), and we speculate that more will be identified in the near future.Lig proteins are distributed on the outer surface of pathogenic Leptospira, and the expression of Lig protein is only found in low passage strains (14, 16, 17), probably induced by environmental cues such as osmotic or temperature changes (19). Lig proteins can bind to fibrinogen and a variety of ECMs, including fibronectin (Fn), laminin, and collagen, thereby mediating adhesion to host cells (20–23). Lig proteins also constitute good vaccine candidates (24–26).Elastin is a component of ECM critical to tissue elasticity and resilience and is abundant in skin, lung, blood vessels, placenta, uterus, and other tissues (27–29). Tropoelastin is the soluble precursor of elastin (28). During the major phase of elastogenesis, multiple tropoelastin molecules associate through coacervation (30–32). Because of the abundance of elastin or tropoelastin on the surface of host cells, several bacterial MSCRAMMs use elastin and/or tropoelastin to mediate adhesion during the infection process (33–35).Because leptospiral infection is known to cause severe pulmonary hemorrhage (36, 37) and abortion (38), we hypothesize that some leptospiral MSCRAMMs may interact with elastin and/or tropoelastin in these elastin-rich tissues. This is the first report that Lig proteins of Leptospira interact with elastin and tropoelastin, and the interactions are mediated by several specific immunoglobulin-like domains of Lig proteins, including LigBCon4, LigBCen7′–8, LigBCen9, and LigBCen12, which bind to the 17th to 27th exons of human tropoelastin (HTE).