Triskelion Structure of the Gli521 Protein,Involved in the Gliding Mechanism of Mycoplasma mobile

Mycoplasma mobile binds to solid surfaces and glides smoothly and continuously by a unique mechanism. A huge protein, Gli521 (521 kDa), is involved in the gliding machinery, and it is localized in the cell neck, the base of the membrane protrusion. This protein is thought to have the role of force transmission. In this study, the Gli521 protein was purified from M. mobile cells, and its molecular shape was studied. Gel filtration analysis showed that the isolated Gli521 protein forms mainly a monomer in Tween 80-containing buffer and oligomers in Triton X-100-containing buffer. Rotary shadowing electron microscopy showed that the Gli521 monomer consisted of three parts: an oval, a rod, and a hook. The oval was 15 nm long by 11 nm wide, and the filamentous part composed of the rod and the hook was 106 nm long and 3 nm in diameter. The Gli521 molecules form a trimer, producing a “triskelion” reminiscent of eukaryotic clathrin, through association at the hook end. Image averaging of the central part of the triskelion suggested that there are stable and rigid structures. The binding site of a previously isolated monoclonal antibody on Gli521 images showed that the hook end and oval correspond to the C- and N-terminal regions, respectively. Partial digestion of Gli521 showed that the molecule could be divided into three domains, which we assigned to the oval, rod, and hook of the molecular image. The Gli521 molecule''s role in the gliding mechanism is discussed.Mycoplasmas are commensal and occasionally parasitic bacteria with small genomes that lack a peptidoglycan layer (31). Several mycoplasma species form membrane protrusions, such as the headlike structure in Mycoplasma mobile and the attachment organelle in Mycoplasma pneumoniae (15, 19, 21, 22, 25, 33, 34, 36). On solid surfaces, these species exhibit gliding motility in the direction of the protrusion; this motility is believed to be involved in the pathogenicity of mycoplasmas (12, 13, 16, 20, 21). Interestingly, mycoplasmas have no surface flagella or pili, and their genomes contain no genes related to other known bacterial motility systems. In addition, no homologs of motor proteins that are common in eukaryotic motility have been found (11).M. mobile, which was isolated from the gills of a freshwater fish in the early 1980s, is a fast gliding mycoplasma (14). It glides smoothly and continuously on glass at an average speed of 2.0 to 4.5 μm/s, or three to seven times the length of the cell per second, exerting a force of up to 27 pN (8, 9, 24, 25, 32). Previously, we identified huge proteins involved in this gliding mechanism that are localized at the so-called cell neck, the base of the membrane protrusion (17, 26, 30, 35, 37, 39); we also visualized the putative machinery and the binding protein (1, 18, 23) and identified both the direct energy source used and the direct binding target (10, 27, 38). The force generated by the gliding machinery may be supported from inside the cell by a cytoskeletal “jellyfish” structure (28, 29). On the basis of these results, we proposed a working model, called the centipede or power stroke model, where cells are propelled by “legs” composed of Gli349 that repeatedly catch and release sialic acids fixed on the glass surface (5, 19, 21). These legs are driven by the force exerted by P42 through Gli521 molecules, which is supported by the jellyfish structure, based on energy from ATP hydrolysis.The Gli521 protein, which has an unusually high molecular mass (521 kDa), is suggested to have the role of force transmission, because a monoclonal antibody against this protein stops gliding, keeping the cells on a solid surface (35). About 450 molecules are estimated to be clustered in the gliding machinery with other component proteins, although their alignment has not been clarified (35, 37, 39). In this study, we isolated the Gli521 protein and studied its molecular shape using electron microscopy (EM) and biochemical analyses in order to understand the gliding mechanism.     

Dynamin Reduces Pyk2 Y402 Phosphorylation and Src Binding in Osteoclasts

Signaling via the Pyk2-Src-Cbl complex downstream of integrins contributes to the assembly, organization, and dynamics of podosomes, which are the transient adhesion complexes of highly motile cells such as osteoclasts and dendritic cells. We previously demonstrated that the GTPase dynamin is associated with podosomes, regulates actin flux in podosomes, and promotes bone resorption by osteoclasts. We report here that dynamin associates with Pyk2, independent of dynamin''s GTPase activity, and reduces Pyk2 Y402 phosphorylation in a GTPase-dependent manner, leading to decreased Src binding to Pyk2. Overexpressing dynamin decreased the macrophage colony-stimulating factor- and adhesion-induced phosphorylation of Pyk2 in osteoclastlike cells, suggesting that dynamin is likely to regulate Src-Pyk2 binding downstream of integrins and growth factor receptors with important cellular consequences. Furthermore, catalytically active Src promotes dynamin-Pyk2 association, and mutating specific Src-phosphorylated tyrosine residues in dynamin blunts the dynamin-induced decrease in Pyk2 phosphorylation. Thus, since Src binds to Pyk2 through its interaction with phospho-Y402, our results suggest that Src activates a negative-feedback loop downstream of integrin engagement and other stimuli by promoting both the binding of dynamin to Pyk2-containing complexes and the dynamin-dependent decrease in Pyk2 Y402 phosphorylation, ultimately leading to the dissociation of Src from Pyk2.Podosomes are specialized transient actin-containing adhesion structures (11, 14, 37, 60) that are found in highly motile cells, such as osteoclasts, macrophages, dendritic cells, transformed metastatic cells, and v-src-transformed cells (37, 43), where they are thought to play important roles in cellular migration and invasion (34). In resorbing osteoclasts on bone, podosomes are concentrated within the sealing zone, a beltlike actin-rich structure that is important for adhesion and which delineates the resorptive region of the cell known as the ruffled border. Unlike focal adhesions, which are relatively stable structures (11, 60), the assembly and disassembly of podosomes occurs within minutes (t_1/2 = 2 to 4 min) and involves the recruitment and activation of integrins, signaling proteins and scaffolding proteins (11, 14, 35, 47, 60). However, the mechanisms of action of key signaling proteins involved in podosome assembly and disassembly are only partially understood.The focal adhesion kinase Pyk2 has been linked to the proliferation, migration, and activity of a variety of mesenchymal, epithelial, and hematopoietic cell types. Several groups, including our own, have reported the importance of Pyk2 in podosome belt organization, cell spreading, and bone-resorbing activity in osteoclasts (18, 26, 31, 40, 65, 66). Pyk2 is recruited to activated β₂ and β₃ integrins (9, 20) at adhesion sites and is autophosphorylated at Y402 (17, 47, 50) via an intermolecular trans-acting mechanism (46). Although Pyk2 is partially activated by integrin-induced Ca²⁺ signaling (20, 50), the induction of Pyk2''s full catalytic activity requires the binding of Src via its SH2 domain to autophosphorylated Pyk2 Y402 and the subsequent phosphorylation of Pyk2 at functionally distinct sites, including Y579, Y580, and Y881 (17, 31, 46). The binding of Src to phosphorylated Pyk2, which leads to the formation of a multiprotein signaling complex at adhesion sites (17, 40, 50), is critical for Pyk2 activity, as demonstrated by the fact that Pyk2 phosphorylation and activity are significantly reduced in osteoclasts derived from Src^−/− mice (17, 40). Src^−/− osteoclasts also exhibit decreased motility (50) and decreased bone-resorbing activity (40, 54, 59), and we recently demonstrated that Src promotes both podosome formation and disassembly, as well as actin flux into existing podosomes and the organization of podosomes into a peripheral belt in osteoclasts (15).We have also demonstrated that the GTP-hydrolyzing protein dynamin-2, which is ubiquitously expressed and well known for its role in endocytosis (53), regulates actin remodeling in the podosomes of osteoclasts and Rous sarcoma virus-transformed baby hamster kidney cells (43). In addition, a dynamin-2 mutant that binds GTP with reduced affinity (dynK44A) (12) decreased the flux of actin into podosomes (43) and disrupted podosome belt formation in osteoclasts, thereby affecting osteoclast migration and bone-resorbing activity (8). The dynamin proteins, of which there are three homologous isoforms (3), contain several protein domains: a GTP-hydrolyzing domain (GTPase), a plextrin homology domain that mediates binding to phosphoinositides, a GTPase effector domain (GED), and a C-terminal proline-rich domain (PRD) (38, 45, 55) through which dynamin binds a number of functionally diverse SH3-containing molecules, such as Src, cortactin, Grb2, and N-Wasp (1, 7, 27, 39, 58). We previously reported that dynamin-2 partially colocalizes and associates with the E3-ubiquitin ligase Cbl within the podosome belt/sealing zone of osteoclasts, as well as in SYF cells, which lack the Src family kinases Src, Yes, and Fyn, and in HEK 293 cells that stably express the vitronectin receptor (293VnR) (8). Protein complexes containing dynamin-2 and Cbl, which are both substrates of Src (1, 2, 23, 50, 56), were disrupted in the presence of activated Src and stabilized in the absence of Src (8), demonstrating a key role of Src in regulating the formation of signaling complexes in osteoclasts downstream of integrins.In the present study, we sought to determine whether dynamin, which regulates podosome actin dynamics and bone resorption in osteoclasts, also associates with Pyk2 and/or regulates Pyk2''s activities in osteoclasts. We report here that dynamin associates with Pyk2 and promotes the dephosphorylation of Pyk2 Y402 and that catalytically active Src promotes both dynamin''s association with Pyk2 and the dynamin-induced dephosphorylation of Pyk2 Y402, resulting, in turn, in the decreased binding of Src to Pyk2. Thus, we propose that dynamin regulates podosome dynamics and osteoclast bone-resorbing activity by promoting the disassembly of the Pyk2-Src-Cbl complex that is formed in osteoclasts downstream of β₃ integrin activation.     

Functional and Spatial Regulation of Mitotic Centromere- Associated Kinesin by Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 1

Mitotic centromere-associated kinesin (MCAK) plays an essential role in spindle formation and in correction of improper microtubule-kinetochore attachments. The localization and activity of MCAK at the centromere/kinetochore are controlled by Aurora B kinase. However, MCAK is also abundant in the cytosol and at centrosomes during mitosis, and its regulatory mechanism at these sites is unknown. We show here that cyclin-dependent kinase 1 (Cdk1) phosphorylates T537 in the core domain of MCAK and attenuates its microtubule-destabilizing activity in vitro and in vivo. Phosphorylation of MCAK by Cdk1 promotes the release of MCAK from centrosomes and is required for proper spindle formation. Interfering with the regulation of MCAK by Cdk1 causes dramatic defects in spindle formation and in chromosome positioning. This is the first study demonstrating that Cdk1 regulates the localization and activity of MCAK in mitosis by directly phosphorylating the catalytic core domain of MCAK.Chromosomes are properly attached to the mitotic spindles, and chromosome movement is tightly linked to the structure and dynamics of spindle microtubules during mitosis. Important regulators of microtubule dynamics are the kinesin-13 proteins (37). This kinesin superfamily is defined by the localization of the conserved kinesin core motor domain in the middle of the polypeptide (19). Kinesin-13 proteins induce microtubule depolymerization by disassembling tubulin subunits from the polymer end (6). Among them, mitotic centromere-associated kinesin (MCAK) is the best-characterized member of the family. It depolymerizes microtubules in vitro and in vivo, regulates microtubule dynamics, and has been implicated in correcting misaligned chromosomes (12, 14, 16, 24). In agreement with these observations, both overexpression and inhibition of MCAK result in a disruption of microtubule dynamics, leading further to improper spindle assembly and errors in chromosome alignment and segregation (7, 11, 15, 22, 33). The importance of MCAK in ensuring the faithful segregation of chromosomes is consistent with the observation that MCAK is highly expressed in several types of cancer and thus is likely to be involved in causing aneuploidy (25, 32).While MCAK is found both in the cytoplasm and at the centromeres throughout the cell cycle, it is highly enriched on centrosomes, the centromeres/kinetochores, and the spindle midzone during mitosis (18, 21, 36, 38). In accordance with its localizations, MCAK affects many aspects throughout mitosis, from spindle assembly and maintenance (3, 10, 36) to chromosome positioning and segregation (14, 21, 35). Thus, the precise control of the localization and activity of MCAK is crucial for maintaining genetic integrity during mitosis. Regulation of MCAK on the centromeres/kinetochores by Aurora B kinase in mitosis has been intensively investigated (1, 28, 29, 43). The data reveal that MCAK is phosphorylated on several serine/threonine residues by Aurora B, which inhibits the microtubule-destabilizing activity of MCAK and regulates its localization on chromosome arms/centromeres/kinetochores during mitosis (1, 18, 28). Moreover, in concert with Aurora B, ICIS (inner centromere KinI stimulator), a protein targeting the inner centromeres in an MCAK-dependent manner, may regulate MCAK at the inner centromeres and prevent kinetochore-microtubule attachment errors in mitosis by stimulating the activity of MCAK (27). Interestingly, hSgo2, a recently discovered inner centromere protein essential for centromere cohesion, has been reported to be important in localizing MCAK to the centromere and in spatially regulating its mitotic activity (13). These data highlight that the activity and localization of MCAK on the centromeres/kinetochores during mitosis are tightly controlled by Aurora B and its cofactors. Remarkably, MCAK concentrates at spindle poles from prophase to telophase during mitosis (18); however, only a few studies have been done to deal with that issue. Aurora A-depleted prometaphase cells delocalize MCAK from spindle poles but accumulate the microtubule-stabilizing protein ch-TOG at poles (5), implying that Aurora A might influence the centrosomal localization of MCAK in mitosis. Aurora A is also found to be important for focusing microtubules at aster centers and for facilitating the transition from asters to bipolar spindles in Xenopus egg extracts (42). In addition, it has been revealed that Ca²⁺/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II gamma (CaMKII gamma) suppresses MCAK''s activity, which is essential for bipolar spindle formation in mitosis (11). More work is required to gain insight into the regulatory mechanisms of MCAK at spindle poles during mitosis.Deregulated cyclin-dependent kinases (Cdks) are very often linked to genomic and chromosomal instability (20). Cyclin B1, the regulatory subunit of Cdk1, is localized to unattached kinetochores and contributes to efficient microtubule attachment and proper chromosome alignment (2, 4). We observed that knockdown of cyclin B1 induces defects in chromosome alignment and mitotic spindle formation (N.-N. Kreis, M. Sanhaji, A. Krämer, K. Sommor, F. Rödel, K. Strebhardt, and J. Yuan, submitted for publication). Yet, how Cdk1/cyclin B1 carries out these functions is not very well understood. In this context, it is extremely interesting to investigate the relationship between the essential mitotic kinase Cdk1 and the microtubule depolymerase MCAK in human cells.     

Sequestration of Free Tubulin Molecules by the Viral Protein NSP2 Induces Microtubule Depolymerization during Rotavirus Infection

Microtubules, components of the cell cytoskeleton, play a central role in cellular trafficking. Here we show that rotavirus infection leads to a remodeling of the microtubule network together with the formation of tubulin granules. While most microtubules surrounding the nucleus depolymerize, others appear packed at the cell periphery. In microtubule depolymerization areas, tubulin granules are observed; they colocalize with viroplasms, viral compartments formed by interactions between rotavirus proteins NSP2 and NSP5. With purified proteins, we show that tubulin directly interacts in vitro with NSP2 but not with NSP5. The binding of NSP2 to tubulin is independent of its phosphatase activity. The comparison of three-dimensional (3-D) reconstructions of NSP2 octamers alone or associated with tubulin reveals electron densities in the positively charged grooves of NSP2 that we attribute to tubulin. Site-directed mutagenesis of NSP2 and competition assays between RNA and tubulin for NSP2 binding confirm that tubulin binds to these charged grooves of NSP2. Although the tubulin position within NSP2 grooves cannot be precisely determined, the tubulin C-terminal H12 α-helix could be involved in the interaction. NSP2 overexpression and rotavirus infection produce similar effects on the microtubule network. NSP2 depolymerizes microtubules and leads to tubulin granule formation. Our results demonstrate that tubulin is a viroplasm component and reveal an original mechanism. Tubulin sequestration by NSP2 induces microtubule depolymerization. This depolymerization probably reroutes the cell machinery by inhibiting trafficking and functions potentially involved in defenses to viral infections.Microtubules (MTs) are components of the cell cytoskeleton and play a major role in cellular trafficking. Molecular motors (dynein and kinesins) use MTs as tracks to address organelles to precise loci. Viruses are irreplaceable tools to study cellular processes; for example, many of them hijack cellular transport to reach the perinuclear region (for reviews, see references 27, 35, 39, and 40). Some viruses also modify the cell compartmentation and create viral inclusions where viral replication and virion assembly are performed (for a review, see reference 30). Both aspects are sometimes related; electron and fluorescence microscopy observations of reovirus-infected cells have shown that viral inclusions form an electron-dense coat surrounding the MTs (15, 32, 41). In the case of rotavirus, another member of the Reoviridae family, interactions between viral proteins and MTs remain unclear; some studies report an interaction between MTs and either NSP4 or VP4, whereas others did not detect these interactions (4, 19, 29, 51). Rotavirus is the leading agent of gastroenteritis in young children worldwide (31); studying its interactions with its host cell is thus of particular interest to identify new potential therapeutical targets.The rotavirus genome is composed of 11 double-stranded RNAs (dsRNA) surrounded by a triple-layer capsid. During rotavirus infection, punctuate cytoplasmic structures, named “viroplasms,” are formed; they are the sites of viral genome replication and virion assembly. These structures are made of several viral proteins and of viral mRNAs that serve as templates for genome replication. Two viral nonstructural proteins, NSP2 and NSP5, are crucial for viroplasm formation (10, 24, 38). Their coexpression in uninfected cells leads to the formation of punctuate cytoplasmic structures termed viroplasm-like structures (VLS) (18). NSP2 forms a doughnut-shaped octamer by tail-to-tail interaction of two tetramers; four positively charged grooves crossing the two tetramers have been identified (21). Structural and biochemical studies have revealed a histidine-triad (HIT)-like motif responsible for the nucleoside triphosphatase (NTPase), RNA triphosphatase (RTPase), and nucleoside diphosphate (NDP) kinase-like activities of NSP2 (21, 23, 42, 46). These catalytic activities are required for dsRNA synthesis but not for viroplasm formation (11, 43). NSP2 binds single-stranded RNA nonspecifically, has helix destabilizing activity (44), and undertakes conformational changes upon nucleotide binding (37). NSP2 might thus function as a molecular motor involved in genome replication and packaging. NSP5 is a dimeric O-linked glyco- and phosphoprotein, which exists as variously phosphorylated isoforms (1, 36, 48). A cryoelectron microscopy study pointed out that RNA and NSP5 compete for binding to the grooves of the NSP2 octamer (22). The function of NSP5 in rotavirus replication and the role of its phosphorylation remain unknown. No cellular partner of these two nonstructural proteins was known, until a possible association of both proteins with tubulin was reported (9).In the present report, we studied the interaction of rotavirus with tubulin and MTs. We focused on the cellular effects and the structural characterization of the interaction between tubulin and NSP2. Our results highlight that infection by the rotavirus RF strain disorganizes and depolymerizes the MT network of MA104 cells and that viroplasms colocalize with tubulin granules. Electron microscopy and biochemical experiments demonstrate that tubulin directly binds to the positively charged grooves of NSP2. Moreover, NSP2 overexpression induces MT depolymerization and tubulin granule formation. We thus propose that NSP2 sequesters tubulin in viroplasms during rotavirus infection. This sequestration induces the MT depolymerization observed during rotavirus infection and most probably modifies cellular trafficking.     

mTORC1-Activated S6K1 Phosphorylates Rictor on Threonine 1135 and Regulates mTORC2 Signaling

The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) is a conserved Ser/Thr kinase that forms two functionally distinct complexes important for nutrient and growth factor signaling. While mTOR complex 1 (mTORC1) regulates mRNA translation and ribosome biogenesis, mTORC2 plays an important role in the phosphorylation and subsequent activation of Akt. Interestingly, mTORC1 negatively regulates Akt activation, but whether mTORC1 signaling directly targets mTORC2 remains unknown. Here we show that growth factors promote the phosphorylation of Rictor (rapamycin-insensitive companion of mTOR), an essential subunit of mTORC2. We found that Rictor phosphorylation requires mTORC1 activity and, more specifically, the p70 ribosomal S6 kinase 1 (S6K1). We identified several phosphorylation sites in Rictor and found that Thr1135 is directly phosphorylated by S6K1 in vitro and in vivo, in a rapamycin-sensitive manner. Phosphorylation of Rictor on Thr1135 did not affect mTORC2 assembly, kinase activity, or cellular localization. However, cells expressing a Rictor T1135A mutant were found to have increased mTORC2-dependent phosphorylation of Akt. In addition, phosphorylation of the Akt substrates FoxO1/3a and glycogen synthase kinase 3α/β (GSK3α/β) was found to be increased in these cells, indicating that S6K1-mediated phosphorylation of Rictor inhibits mTORC2 and Akt signaling. Together, our results uncover a new regulatory link between the two mTOR complexes, whereby Rictor integrates mTORC1-dependent signaling.The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) is an evolutionarily conserved phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)-related Ser/Thr kinase that integrates signals from nutrients, energy sufficiency, and growth factors to regulate cell growth as well as organ and body size in a variety of organisms (reviewed in references 4, 38, 49, and 77). mTOR was discovered as the molecular target of rapamycin, an antifungal agent used clinically as an immunosuppressant and more recently as an anticancer drug (5, 20). Recent evidence indicates that deregulation of the mTOR pathway occurs in a majority of human cancers (12, 18, 25, 46), suggesting that rapamycin analogs may be potent antineoplastic therapeutic agents.mTOR forms two distinct multiprotein complexes, the rapamycin-sensitive and -insensitive mTOR complexes 1 and 2 (mTORC1 and mTORC2), respectively (6, 47). In cells, rapamycin interacts with FKBP12 and targets the FKBP12-rapamycin binding (FRB) domain of mTORC1, thereby inhibiting some of its function (13, 40, 66). mTORC1 is comprised of the mTOR catalytic subunit and four associated proteins, Raptor (regulatory associated protein of mTOR), mLST8 (mammalian lethal with sec13 protein 8), PRAS40 (proline-rich Akt substrate of 40 kDa), and Deptor (28, 43, 44, 47, 59, 73, 74). The small GTPase Rheb (Ras homolog enriched in brain) is a key upstream activator of mTORC1 that is negatively regulated by the tuberous sclerosis complex 1 (TSC1)/TSC2 GTPase-activating protein complex (reviewed in reference 35). mTORC1 is activated by PI3K and Ras signaling through direct phosphorylation and inactivation of TSC2 by Akt, extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK), and p90 ribosomal protein S6 kinase (RSK) (11, 37, 48, 53, 63). mTORC1 activity is also regulated at the level of Raptor. Whereas low cellular energy levels negatively regulate mTORC1 activity through phosphorylation of Raptor by AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) (27), growth signaling pathways activating the Ras/ERK pathway positively regulate mTORC1 activity through direct phosphorylation of Raptor by RSK (10). More recent evidence has also shown that mTOR itself positively regulates mTORC1 activity by directly phosphorylating Raptor at proline-directed sites (20a, 75). Countertransport of amino acids (55) and amino acid signaling through the Rag GTPases were also shown to regulate mTORC1 activity (45, 65). When activated, mTORC1 phosphorylates two main regulators of mRNA translation and ribosome biogenesis, the AGC (protein kinase A, G, and C) family kinase p70 ribosomal S6 kinase 1 (S6K1) and eukaryotic initiation factor 4E-binding protein 1 (4E-BP1), and thus stimulates protein synthesis and cellular growth (50, 60).The second mTOR complex, mTORC2, is comprised of mTOR, Rictor (rapamycin-insensitive companion of mTOR), mSin1 (mammalian stress-activated mitogen-activated protein kinase-interacting protein 1), mLST8, PRR5 (proline-rich region 5), and Deptor (21, 39, 58, 59, 66, 76, 79). Rapamycin does not directly target and inhibit mTORC2, but long-term treatment with this drug was shown to correlate with mTORC2 disassembly and cytoplasmic accumulation of Rictor (21, 39, 62, 79). Whereas mTORC1 regulates hydrophobic motif phosphorylation of S6K1, mTORC2 has been shown to phosphorylate other members of the AGC family of kinases. Biochemical and genetic evidence has demonstrated that mTORC2 phosphorylates Akt at Ser473 (26, 39, 68, 70), thereby contributing to growth factor-mediated Akt activation (6, 7, 52). Deletion or knockdown of the mTORC2 components mTOR, Rictor, mSin1, and mLST8 has a dramatic effect on mTORC2 assembly and Akt phosphorylation at Ser473 (26, 39, 79). mTORC2 was also shown to regulate protein kinase Cα (PKCα) (26, 66) and, more recently, serum- and glucocorticoid-induced protein kinase 1 (SGK1) (4, 22). Recent evidence implicates mTORC2 in the regulation of Akt and PKCα phosphorylation at their turn motifs (19, 36), but whether mTOR directly phosphorylates these sites remains a subject of debate (4).Activation of mTORC1 has been shown to negatively regulate Akt phosphorylation in response to insulin or insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1) (reviewed in references 30 and 51). This negative regulation is particularly evident in cell culture models with defects in the TSC1/TSC2 complex, where mTORC1 and S6K1 are constitutively activated. Phosphorylation of insulin receptor substrate-1 (IRS-1) by mTORC1 (72) and its downstream target S6K1 has been shown to decrease its stability and lead to an inability of insulin or IGF1 to activate PI3K and Akt (29, 69). Although the mechanism is unknown, platelet-derived growth factor receptor β (PDGF-Rβ) has been found to be downregulated in TSC1- and TSC2-deficient murine embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs), contributing to a reduction of PI3K signaling (80). Interestingly, inhibition of Akt phosphorylation by mTORC1 has also been observed in the presence of growth factors other than IGF-1, insulin, or PDGF, suggesting that there are other mechanisms by which mTORC1 activation restricts Akt activity in cells (reviewed in references 6 and 31). Recent evidence demonstrates that rapamycin treatment causes a significant increase in Rictor electrophoretic mobility (2, 62), suggesting that phosphorylation of the mTORC2 subunit Rictor may be regulated by mTORC1 or downstream protein kinases.Herein, we demonstrate that Rictor is phosphorylated by S6K1 in response to mTORC1 activation. We demonstrate that Thr1135 is directly phosphorylated by S6K1 and found that a Rictor mutant lacking this phosphorylation site increases Akt phosphorylation induced by growth factor stimulation. Cells expressing the Rictor T1135A mutant were found to have increased Akt signaling to its substrates compared to Rictor wild-type- and T1135D mutant-expressing cells. Together, our results suggest that Rictor integrates mTORC1 signaling via its phosphorylation by S6K1, resulting in the inhibition of mTORC2 and Akt signaling.     

Serine Protease HtrA1 Associates with Microtubules and Inhibits Cell Migration

HtrA1 belongs to a family of serine proteases found in organisms ranging from bacteria to humans. Bacterial HtrA1 (DegP) is a heat shock-induced protein that behaves as a chaperone at low temperature and as a protease at high temperature to help remove unfolded proteins during heat shock. In contrast to bacterial HtrA1, little is known about the function of human HtrA1. Here, we report the first evidence that human HtrA1 is a microtubule-associated protein and modulates microtubule stability and cell motility. Intracellular HtrA1 is localized to microtubules in a PDZ (PSD95, Dlg, ZO1) domain-dependent, nocodazole-sensitive manner. During microtubule assembly, intracellular HtrA associates with centrosomes and newly polymerized microtubules. In vitro, purified HtrA1 promotes microtubule assembly. Moreover, HtrA1 cosediments and copurifies with microtubules. Purified HtrA1 associates with purified α- and β-tubulins, and immunoprecipitation of endogenous HtrA1 results in coprecipitation of α-, β-, and γ-tubulins. Finally, downregulation of HtrA1 promotes cell motility, whereas enhanced expression of HtrA1 attenuates cell motility. These results offer an original identification of HtrA1 as a microtubule-associated protein and provide initial mechanistic insights into the role of HtrA1 in theregulation of cell motility by modulating microtubule stability.HtrA1 (for high temperature requirement) belongs to a family of serine proteases and is so named because of its essential role in thermal tolerance in Escherichia coli, which requires HtrA (also known as DegP) for survival at elevated temperatures (14). This survival is attributed to the ability of HtrA proteins to switch from chaperones to proteases that reduce the amount of unfolded and aggregated protein upon heat stress (46). Human, as well as bacterial, HtrA proteins contain trypsin and PDZ (PSD95, Dlg, ZO1) domains that display a high degree of sequence conservation from bacteria to human (14). Of the four human HtrA proteins, HtrA1, HtrA3, and HtrA4 also contain a signal peptide, insulin-like growth factor binding protein (IGFBP), and Kazal-type trypsin inhibitor domains, while HtrA2 lacks these domains. Although HtrA1 contains signal peptide, an intracellular form of HtrA1 has been reported as well (15, 17). The mitochondrial protein HtrA2 is well characterized and has been shown to be involved in apoptosis (27, 37, 39, 47, 52, 53) and neurodegenerative disease (35). However, HtrA1 is the first in the family to be implicated as a tumor suppressor in ovarian cancer and melanoma (3, 5, 13). In addition, HtrA1 is implicated in various pathogenic and developmental processes, including osteoarthritis, Alzheimer''s disease, neuronal maturation and development, age-related macular degeneration, and tumor progression (11, 23, 24, 33, 36, 50, 56). Specific to its role in tumor progression, HtrA1 is downregulated in various cancers, and its downregulation is associated with resistance to chemotherapy and a metastatic phenotype (4, 11, 19). Recently, we developed a mixture-based peptide library to determine the specificities of cleavage site motifs for HtrA1 serine protease. The results identified tubulins as potential substrates of HtrA1. Furthermore, we showed that exogenously expressed HtrA1 disrupts microtubules (MTs) and targets tubulins for degradation (data not shown). These results suggest a potential role for HtrA1 as an MT-associated protein (MAP) and its potential to regulate MT and tubulin stability and MT-associated cellular functions.MTs are highly dynamic noncovalent polymers of α- and β-tubulins that undergo cyclical shrinking (catastrophe) and growing (rescue) (18, 31, 43). The dynamic instability of MTs is central to their diverse biological functions, including the coordination of cell division (40, 55), morphogenesis (25), cell polarity (42), and motility (48). MT instability is, in part, modulated by MAPs (2, 29). Many tumor suppressors, such as adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) (20), RASSF1A (45), and Dlg (6), associate with MTs and impose tumor suppressor activities by regulating their functions related to cell division, polarity, and motility. Deregulation of these processes, as a consequence of loss of function of these tumor suppressors, contributes to unchecked proliferation; cytoarchitecture disruption; and the ability to migrate, invade, and metastasize distant organs (6, 7, 26). Therefore, the regulation of MT stability and dynamics or the lack of it has dire consequences for normal cell functions.Given the fact that HtrA1 is downregulated in various cancers, particularly in metastatic cancer, it is possible that HtrA1 may regulate certain aspects of cancer, namely, the motility of cancer cells, by modulating MT stability and dynamics. Therefore, to better characterize the interaction between HtrA1 and MTs and to gain mechanistic insights into the functional consequences of HtrA1 downregulation in cancer, we investigated the biochemical interaction between HtrA1 and tubulin, the domain within HtrA1 required for localization to MTs, and the effect on cell migration. Here, we describe the identification of HtrA1 as an MT-associated serine protease and a novel role of HtrA1 in the regulation of cell motility.     

Ebola Virus Glycoprotein Counteracts BST-2/Tetherin Restriction in a Sequence-Independent Manner That Does Not Require Tetherin Surface Removal

BST-2/tetherin is an interferon-inducible protein that restricts the release of enveloped viruses from the surface of infected cells by physically linking viral and cellular membranes. It is present at both the cell surface and in a perinuclear region, and viral anti-tetherin factors including HIV-1 Vpu and HIV-2 Env have been shown to decrease the cell surface population. To map the domains of human tetherin necessary for both virus restriction and sensitivity to viral anti-tetherin factors, we constructed a series of tetherin derivatives and assayed their activity. We found that the cytoplasmic tail (CT) and transmembrane (TM) domains of tetherin alone produced its characteristic cellular distribution, while the ectodomain of the protein, which includes a glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI) anchor, was sufficient to restrict virus release when presented by the CT/TM regions of a different type II membrane protein. To counteract tetherin restriction and remove it from the cell surface, HIV-1 Vpu required the specific sequence present in the TM domain of human tetherin. In contrast, the HIV-2 Env required only the ectodomain of the protein and was sensitive to a point mutation in this region. Strikingly, the anti-tetherin factor, Ebola virus GP, was able to overcome restriction conferred by both tetherin and a series of functional tetherin derivatives, including a wholly artificial tetherin molecule. Moreover, GP overcame restriction without significantly removing tetherin from the cell surface. These findings suggest that Ebola virus GP uses a novel mechanism to circumvent tetherin restriction.Pathogenic viruses often have evolved mechanisms to neutralize host defenses that act at the cellular level to interfere with the virus life cycle. Such cellular restriction factors have been most extensively characterized for HIV-1 (38) and include the interferon-inducible membrane protein BST-2/HM1.24/CD317/tetherin (28, 40). If unchecked, tetherin blocks the release of newly formed HIV-1 particles from cells by physically tethering them at the cell surface (7, 28, 32, 40). In addition, tetherin has been shown to act against a broad range of enveloped viral particles, including retroviruses, filoviruses, arenaviruses, and herpesviruses (17, 18, 23, 35). In turn, certain viruses that are targeted by tetherin appear to have evolved counteracting activities, and anti-tetherin factors so far identified include HIV-1 Vpu; HIV-2 Env; simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) Nef, Vpu, and Env proteins; Ebola virus GP; and Kaposi''s sarcoma-associated herpesvirus (KSHV) K5 (11, 16, 18, 20, 23, 28, 36, 40, 44, 45).Tetherin is a homodimeric type II integral membrane protein containing an N-terminal cytoplasmic tail (CT), a single-pass transmembrane domain (TM), an ectodomain-containing predicted coiled-coil regions, two glycoslyation sites, three conserved cysteines, and a C-terminal glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI) anchor (2, 19, 31). This unusual topology, with two independent membrane anchors, has led to the suggestion that the retention of virions at the cell surface arises from tetherin''s ability to be inserted simultaneously in both host and viral membranes (28, 32, 41) or, alternatively, that dimers or higher-order complexes of tetherin conferred by the ectodomain mediate this effect (39). Interestingly, an artificial tetherin containing the same structural features as the native protein but constructed from unrelated sequences was able to restrict both HIV-1 and Ebola virus particles (32). This suggests that the viral lipid envelope is the target of tetherin and provides an explanation for tetherin''s broad activity against diverse enveloped viruses.A fraction of tetherin is present at the plasma membrane of cells (9, 14), and it has been proposed that viral anti-tetherin factors function by removing this cell surface fraction (40). This now has been shown to occur in the presence of HIV-1 Vpu (5, 7, 15, 26, 34, 40, 44), HIV-2 Env (5, 20), SIV Env (11), SIV Nef (15), and KSHV K5 (3, 23). In addition, certain anti-tetherin factors also may promote the degradation of tetherin, as has been observed for both HIV-1 Vpu (3, 5, 7, 10, 22, 26, 27) and KSHV K5 (3, 23), although Vpu also appears able to block tetherin restriction in the absence of degradation (8), and no effects on tetherin steady-state levels have been observed in the presence of either the HIV-2 or SIVtan Env (11, 20). Simply keeping tetherin away from the cell surface, or targeting it for degradation, may not be the only mechanism used by anti-tetherin factors, since it also has been reported that Vpu does not affect the levels of surface tetherin or its total cellular levels in certain T-cell lines (27).The interactions between tetherin and viral anti-tetherin factors show evidence of species specificity, suggesting ongoing evolution between viruses and their hosts. HIV-1 Vpu is active against human and chimpanzee tetherin but not other primate tetherins (10, 25, 34, 36, 44, 45), while SIV Nef proteins are active against primate but not human tetherins (16, 36, 44, 45). This suggests that, unlike tetherin restriction, the action of the anti-tetherin factors may involve specific sequence interactions. Indeed, the TM domain has been recognized as a target for HIV-1 Vpu (10, 15, 16, 25, 34), while a single point mutation introduced into the extracellular domain of human tetherin can block its antagonism by the SIVtan Env (11).In the present study, we investigated the roles of the different domains of tetherin in both promoting virus restriction and conferring susceptibility to the anti-tetherin factors encoded by HIV-1, HIV-2, and Ebola virus. We confirmed that tetherin restriction can be conferred by proteins that retain the two distinct membrane anchors, while signals for the cellular localization of the protein reside in the CT/TM domains of the protein. We found that the Vpu protein targets the TM domain of tetherin, while the HIV-2 Env targets the ectodomain of the protein. In contrast, the Ebola virus GP appears to use a non-sequence-specific mechanism to counteract tetherin restriction, since even an artificial tetherin could be successfully overcome by GP expression. Interestingly, Ebola virus GP counteracted tetherin restriction without removing the protein from the cell surface, suggesting that it is possible to overcome this restriction by mechanisms other than blocking tetherin''s cell surface expression.