Recruitment of Cdc20 to the Kinetochore Requires BubR1 but Not Mad2 in Drosophila melanogaster

To prevent aneuploidy, cells require a mitotic surveillance mechanism, the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC). The SAC prevents metaphase/anaphase transition by blocking the ubiquitylation and destruction of cyclin B and securin via the Cdc20-activated anaphase-promoting complex or cyclosome (APC/C)-mediated proteolysis pathway. This checkpoint involves the kinetochore proteins Mad2, BubR1, and Cdc20. Mad2 and BubR1 are inhibitors of the APC/C, but Cdc20 is an activator. Exactly how the SAC regulates Cdc20 via unattached kinetochores remains unclear; in vertebrates, most current models suggest that kinetochore-bound Mad2 is required for initial binding to Cdc20 to form a stable complex that includes BubR1. Here, we show that the Mad2 kinetochore dimerization recruitment mechanism is conserved and that the recruitment of Cdc20 to kinetochores in Drosophila requires BubR1 but not Mad2. BubR1 and Mad2 can bind to Cdc20 independently, and the interactions are enhanced after cells are arrested at mitosis by the depletion of Cdc27 using RNA interference (RNAi) in S2 cells or by MG132 treatment in syncytial embryos. These findings offer an explanation of why BubR1 is more important than Mad2 for SAC function in flies. These findings could lead to a better understanding of vertebrate SAC mechanisms.The spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) is a mitotic surveillance mechanism that negatively regulates the activation of the anaphase-promoting complex or cyclosome (APC/C)-mediated proteolysis pathway to prevent the destruction of two key substrates, cyclin B and securin, thereby inhibiting the metaphase-to-anaphase transition until bipolar attachment of all chromosomes has been achieved (35). A number of conserved kinetochore proteins have been identified as SAC components, such as Mad1, Mad2, Bub1, BubR1, Bub3, Mps1, Zw10, and Rod and Aurora B kinase (reviewed by Musacchio and Salmon [35]). In vertebrates, it is believed that a diffusible inhibitory “wait anaphase” signal is generated from unattached kinetochores or lack of spindle tension (27, 45, 47) and that its primary target is Cdc20/Fzy (Fzy is the Drosophila Cdc20 homolog that we refer to as Cdc20 here), which is an essential APC/C activator (35). Mad2, BubR1 (Mad3 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae), Bub3, and Cdc20 have been found in the mitotic checkpoint complex (MCC) or its subcomplexes Bub3-BubR1-Cdc20 and Mad2-Cdc20 (42, 50, 56). Kinetochore-dependent recruitment and activation of Mad2 have been illustrated in a “template” model (12) and later a modified “two-state” model (28, 32, 35, 36, 40, 57). This model suggests that a kinetochore-bound and conformationally rearranged Mad2 is required for Cdc20 binding and that it leads to the formation of the Mad2-Cdc20 complex (8, 9, 12, 16, 48, 49). This is further supported by a more recent report that unattached kinetochores from purified HeLa cell chromosomes can catalytically generate a diffusible Cdc20 inhibitor when presented with kinetochore-bound Mad2 and that these purified chromosomes can also promote BubR1 binding to APC/C-Cdc20 by acting directly on Mad2 but not BubR1 (27). In vitro assays also suggest that Mad2 is required for Cdc20 binding to BubR1 (7, 10, 19). Fluorescence recovery after photobleaching analysis has suggested that the ∼50% of green fluorescent protein (GFP)-Cdc20 that associates with slow-phase kinetics on PtK₂ cell kinetochores is Mad2 dependent (22). However, contradictory reports also exist to suggest that Mad2 might not be required for Cdc20 kinetochore localization in Xenopus and PtK₂ cells (22) and that BubR1 might play a crucial role for this in human cell lines (33). In contrast to the above-mentioned slow-phase GFP-Cdc20, the remaining ∼50% of GFP-Cdc20 that associates with fast kinetics on prometaphase or metaphase kinetochores is Mad2 independent, and its kinetics parallel those of GFP-BubR1 in PtK₂ cells. GFP-Cdc20 is still detectable on kinetochores through anaphase, where both Mad2 and BubR1 are greatly reduced (22, 25). Moreover, the direct requirement for the kinetochore in the formation of the SAC-inhibitory complexes has been challenged by a non-kinetochore-based formation hypothesis, with MCC found to be present in HeLa cells during S phase (50) and complex formation in yeast previously shown to be independent of intact kinetochores (17, 43). Therefore, despite the importance of Cdc20 in understanding SAC mechanisms, exactly how the SAC regulates Cdc20 via unattached kinetochores remains unclear in vertebrates.Drosophila melanogaster is a well-established model used to study the spindle assembly checkpoint (2, 3, 6, 39). More recently, phenotypes of two mad2-null Drosophila mutant alleles, mad2^Δ and mad2^P, have been characterized, showing that Mad2 protein is not essential for normal mitotic progression but remains essential for SAC when microtubule attachment, chromosome alignment, and congression are abnormal (5). This contrasts with its counterpart in mouse and human (14, 34, 54) and is also different from the lethality phenotypes reported for bubR1 and cdc20 mutations in Drosophila (3, 11). It has also been reported that Mad2 is less important for SAC than BubR1 and that it is regulated differently in Drosophila S2 culture cells (39). These observations led to the tentative conclusion that Drosophila Mad2 may possess different kinetochore molecular mechanisms and function differently from its homologs in mouse and human (14, 34, 54, 58). We therefore tested Mad2 kinetochore function and further investigated the mechanisms required for Cdc20 kinetochore recruitment and localization using Drosophila transgenic and mutant lines, as well as culture cells. We have characterized a new mad2-null mutant allele, mad2^EY, and demonstrated that Drosophila possesses a highly conserved Mad2 kinetochore dimerization mechanism required for SAC function. However, Mad2 is not required for Cdc20 kinetochore recruitment and localization. Instead, there is an essential role for BubR1 in this mechanism during normal mitosis and SAC activation.     

Regulation of IRSp53-Dependent Filopodial Dynamics by Antagonism between 14-3-3 Binding and SH3-Mediated Localization

Filopodia are dynamic structures found at the leading edges of most migrating cells. IRSp53 plays a role in filopodium dynamics by coupling actin elongation with membrane protrusion. IRSp53 is a Cdc42 effector protein that contains an N-terminal inverse-BAR (Bin-amphipysin-Rvs) domain (IRSp53/MIM homology domain [IMD]) and an internal SH3 domain that associates with actin regulatory proteins, including Eps8. We demonstrate that the SH3 domain functions to localize IRSp53 to lamellipodia and that IRSp53 mutated in its SH3 domain fails to induce filopodia. Through SH3 domain-swapping experiments, we show that the related IRTKS SH3 domain is not functional in lamellipodial localization. IRSp53 binds to 14-3-3 after phosphorylation in a region that lies between the CRIB and SH3 domains. This association inhibits binding of the IRSp53 SH3 domain to proteins such as WAVE2 and Eps8 and also prevents Cdc42-GTP interaction. The antagonism is achieved by phosphorylation of two related 14-3-3 binding sites at T340 and T360. In the absence of phosphorylation at these sites, filopodium lifetimes in cells expressing exogenous IRSp53 are extended. Our work does not conform to current views that the inverse-BAR domain or Cdc42 controls IRSp53 localization but provides an alternative model of how IRSp53 is recruited (and released) to carry out its functions at lamellipodia and filopodia.The ability of a cell to rapidly respond to extracellular cues and direct cytoskeletal rearrangements is dependent on an array of signaling complexes that control actin assembly (58). The protrusive structures at the leading edges of motile cells are broadly defined as lamellipodia or filopodia (14). Lamellae are sheet-like protrusions composed of dendritic actin arrays that drive membrane expansion, with the “lamellipodium” representing a narrow region at the edge of the cell (in culture) characterized by rapid actin polymerization. This F-actin assembly is suggested to require Arp2/3 activity that nucleates new actin filaments from the sides of existing ones (58, 71) and capping proteins that limit the length of these new filaments and stabilize them (7). Arp2/3 activity in turn is regulated by the WASP/WAVE family of proteins, such as N-WASP and WAVE2 (68), whose regulation is a subject of intense interest (12, 29, 36, 41, 56, 76).Filopodia contain parallel bundles of actin filaments containing fascin (22). These are dynamic structures that emanate from the periphery of the cell and are retracted, with occasional attachment (to the dish in culture). Thus, they have been thought to have a sensory or exploratory role during cell migration (28). This is the case for neuronal growth cones, where filopodia sense attractant or repulsive cues and dictate direction in axonal path finding (9, 17, 25, 35). Filopodia have been shown to be important in the context of dendritic-spine development (64, 77), epithelial-sheet closure (26, 60, 79), and cell invasion/metastasis (80, 83).Lamellipodia have been well characterized since the pioneering work of Abercrombie et al. in the early 1970s (2, 3, 4). Filopodia require symmetry breaking at the leading edge (initiation), followed by elongation driven by a filopodial-tip protein complex (14, 28). A few proteins have been identified in this complex; Mena/Vasp serve to prevent capping at the barbed ends of bundled actin filaments (7, 53), and Dia2 promotes F-actin elongation (57, 85). Termination of filopodial elongation is not understood but nonetheless is likely to be tightly regulated. In the absence of F-actin elongation, retraction of the filopodium takes place by a rearward flow of F-actin and filament depolymerization (22).IRSp53 is in a position to play a pivotal role in generating filopodia; this brain-enriched protein was discovered as a substrate of the insulin receptor (87). Subsequently, IRSp53 was identified as an effector for Rac1 (50) and Cdc42 (27, 38), where it participates in filopodium and lamellipodium production (38, 51, 54, 86), neurite extension (27), dendritic-spine morphogenesis (1, 15, 66, 67), cell motility and invasiveness (24). The N terminus of IRSp53 contains a conserved helical domain that is found in five different gene products and is referred to as the IRSp53/MIM homology domain (IMD) (51, 70). This domain has been postulated to bind to Rac1 (50, 70) in a nucleotide-independent manner (52), but no convincing effector-like region has been identified. A Cdc42-specific CRIB-like sequence that does not bind Rac1 (27, 38) allows coupling of this and perhaps related Rho GTPases. The structure of the IMD reveals a zeppelin-shaped dimer that could bind “bent” membranes; thus, its potential as an F-actin-bundling domain (51, 82) could be an in vitro artifact often attributed to proteins with basic patches (46). Although there are reports of F-actin binding at physiological ionic strength (ca. 100 mM KCl) (82, 19), this region when expressed in isolation does not decorate F-actin in vivo.Two reports showed the IMD to be an “inverse-BAR” domain. BAR (Bin-amphipysin-Rvs) domains are found in proteins involved in endocytic trafficking, such as amphipysin and endophilin, and stabilize positively bent membranes, such as those on endocytic vesicles (31, 47). The IMD domains of both IRSp53 (70) and MIM-B (46) associate with lipids and can induce tubulations of PI(3,4,5)P₃ or PI(4,5)P₂-rich membranes, respectively. These tubulations are equivalent to membrane protrusions and are also referred to as negatively bent membranes. Ectopic expression of the IMD from IRSp53 (51, 70, 82, 86) or two other family members, MIM-B (11, 46) and IRTKS (52), can give rise to cells with many peripheral extensions. MIM-B is said to stimulate lamellipodia (11), while IRTKS generates “short actin clusters” at the cell periphery (52).In IRSp53 is a CRIB-like motif that mediates binding to Cdc42 (27, 38), but the function of this interaction in unclear. Cdc42 could relieve IRSp53 autoinhibition as described for N-Wasp (38), but there is little evidence for this. It has been suggested that Cdc42 controls IRSp53 localization and actin remodeling (27, 38), but another study indicated that these events are Cdc42 independent (19). IRSp53 contains a central SH3 domain that may bind proline-rich proteins, such as Dia1 (23), Mena (38), WAVE2 (49, 50, 69), and Eps8 (19, 24). However, it seems unlikely that all of these represent bona fide partners, and side-by-side comparison is provided in this study. Mena is involved in filopodium production (37), Dia1 in stress fiber formation (81), and WAVE2 in lamellipodium extension (72). Thus, Mena is a better candidate as a partner for IRSp53-mediated filopodia than Dia1 or WAVE2.There is good evidence for IRSp53 as a cellular partner for Eps8 (19). Eps8 is an adaptor protein containing an N-terminal PTB domain that can associate with receptor tyrosine kinases (65), and perhaps β integrins (13), and a C-terminal SH3 domain that can associate with Abi1 (30). Binding of the general adaptor Abi1 appears to positively regulate the actin-capping domain at the C terminus of Eps8 (18). It has been suggested that IRSp53 and Eps8 as a complex regulate cell motility, and perhaps Rac1 activation, via SOS (24); more recently, their roles in filopodium formation have been addressed (19). The involvement of IRSp53, but not MIM-B or IRTKS, in filopodium formation might be related to its role as a Cdc42 effector. We show here that, surprisingly, the CRIB motif is not essential for this activity, but rather, the ability of IRSp53 to associate via its SH3 domain is required, and that this domain is controlled by 14-3-3 binding.We have focused on the regulation of Cdc42 effectors that bind 14-3-3, including IRSp53 and PAK4, which are found as 14-3-3 targets in various proteomic projects (32, 44). In this study, we characterize the binding of 14-3-3 to IRSp53 and uncover how this activity regulates IRSp53 function. The phosphorylation-dependent 14-3-3 binding is GSK3β dependent, and 14-3-3 blocks the accessibility of both the CRIB and SH3 domains of IRSp53, thus indicating its primary function in controlling IRSp53 partners. This regulation of the SH3 domain by 14-3-3 is critical in the proper localization and termination of IRSp53 function to promote filopodium dynamics.     

Polo-Like Kinase 1 Depletion Induces DNA Damage in Early S Prior to Caspase Activation

Polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) plays several roles in mitosis, and it has been suggested to have a role in tumorigenesis. We have previously reported that Plk1 depletion results in cell death in cancer cells, whereas normal cells survive similar depletion. However, Plk1 depletion together with p53 depletion induces cell death in normal cells as well. This communication presents evidence on the sequence of events that leads to cell death in cancer cells. DNA damage is detected at the first S phase following Plk1 depletion and is more severe in Plk1-depleted p53-null cancer cells. As a consequence of Plk1 depletion using lentivirus-based small interfering RNA techniques, prereplicative complex (pre-RC) formation is disrupted at the G₁/S transition, and DNA synthesis is reduced during S phase of the first cycle after depletion. The levels of geminin, an inhibitor of DNA pre-RC, and Emi1, an inhibitor of anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome, are elevated in Plk1-depleted cells. The rate of cell cycling is slower in Plk1-depleted cells than in control cells when synchronized by serum starvation. Plk1 depletion results in disrupted DNA pre-RC formation, reduced DNA synthesis, and DNA damage before cells display severe mitotic catastrophe or apoptosis. Our data suggest that Plk1 is required for cell cycle progression not only in mitosis but also for DNA synthesis, maintenance of DNA integrity, and prevention of cell death.Progression of the cell cycle is tightly regulated in eukaryotic cells by coordinated control of phosphorylation and proteolytic events. Duplication of genetic information for the next cell generation requires the precise coordination of numerous proteins (2). To ensure the accurate division of duplicated DNA, cells require condensed chromosomes, a mitotic spindle, and correct attachment of duplicated chromosomes to the spindle. Errors in DNA replication and mitosis may lead to cell death through apoptosis or result in mutations that lead to cancer (3). Polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) is essential for several steps in mitosis and is highly expressed in proliferating cells. Expression of Plk1 increases in S phase and peaks during M phase (8). In addition, at the G₂/M boundary, Plk1 is activated by phosphorylation and promotes mitotic entry. Its primary role in mammalian cells appears to be control of mitotic progression, particularly in the metaphase/anaphase transition, and mitotic exit (37). At the G₂/M transition, Plx1, a counterpart of Plk1 in Xenopus, activates cyclin B1/Cdk1 by phosphorylation of Cdc25C (14) or of cyclin B1 (29). During mitotic entry, Plk1 is required for recruitment of the γ-tubulin ring complex (7). Phosphorylation of Emi1 by Plk1 leads to its destruction, release of Cdc20, and activation of the anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C) (10, 22, 26). Active APC/C mediates the degradation of proteins such as cyclin A, cyclin B1, securin, and geminin to promote exit from mitosis (6, 26). The multiple roles of Plk1 from the entry to and exit from mitosis indicate its importance as a regulator of these events.Recently, several reports suggest that Plk1 may play a role in other phases of the cell cycle. Plk1 interacts with prereplicative complex (pre-RC) proteins, such as Mcm2 and Orc2, in yeast two-hybrid studies (32), and coimmunoprecipitates with Mcm2 to Mcm7 and Orc2 (32, 35). Orc2, Mcm4, Mcm6, and Mcm7 proteins colocalize in the centrosome with Plk1 (25, 32). In addition, ectopic expression of Plk1-S137D arrests HeLa cells at the G₁/S boundary (12). Moreover, microinjection of in vitro-transcribed sense mRNA of Plk1 into serum-starved NIH 3T3 cells induced thymidine incorporation, whereas microinjection of antisense mRNA into growing NIH 3T3 cells that were stimulated with serum blocked thymidine incorporation (9). This observation suggests that Plk1 is required for DNA synthesis and that overexpression of Plk1 appears to be sufficient for induction of DNA synthesis. These data raise the possibility that Plk1 might have a required function in DNA replication.Depletion of Plk1 activity by microinjection of neutralizing anti-Plk1 antibody impairs centrosome maturation in HeLa cells (15). When Plk1 function is blocked by dominant-negative Plk1, several human tumor cells undergo mitotic catastrophe independent of Cdc25C (1). In Plk1-deficient human cancer cells, centrosomes do not separate to form bipolar spindles. The cells undergo prometaphase arrest and cell death caused by mitotic catastrophe (18, 33, 38). These effects are more severe in p53-deficient cancer cells. Cells codepleted for p53 and Plk1 undergo cell death as a consequence of mitotic defects (17). However, it is unclear how Plk1 depletion induces cell death or what the sequence of events is prior to cell death.Here, we provide evidence that Plk1 depletion induces DNA damage at G₁/S before cell death responses, such as caspase activation, are initiated.     

Inactivation and Disassembly of the Anaphase-Promoting Complex during Human Cytomegalovirus Infection Is Associated with Degradation of the APC5 and APC4 Subunits and Does Not Require UL97-Mediated Phosphorylation of Cdh1

Infection of quiescent cells by human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) elicits severe cell cycle deregulation, resulting in a G₁/S arrest, which can be partly attributed to the inactivation of the anaphase-promoting complex (APC). As we previously reported, the premature phosphorylation of its coactivator Cdh1 and/or the dissociation of the core complex can account for the inactivation. We have expanded on these results and further delineated the key components required for disabling the APC during HCMV infection. The viral protein kinase UL97 was hypothesized to phosphorylate Cdh1, and consistent with this, phosphatase assays utilizing a virus with a UL97 deletion mutation (ΔUL97 virus) indicated that Cdh1 is hypophosphorylated at early times in the infection. Mass spectrometry analysis demonstrated that UL97 can phosphorylate Cdh1 in vitro, and the majority of the sites identified correlated with previously characterized cyclin-dependent kinase (Cdk) consensus sites. Analysis of the APC core complex during ΔUL97 virus infection showed APC dissociation occurring at the same time as during infection with wild-type virus, suggesting that the UL97-mediated phosphorylation of Cdh1 is not required for this to occur. Further investigation of the APC subunits showed a proteasome-dependent loss of the APC5 and APC4 subunits that was temporally associated with the disassembly of the APC. Immediate early viral gene expression was not sufficient for the degradation of APC4 and APC5, indicating that a viral early gene product(s), possibly in association with a de novo-synthesized cellular protein(s), is involved.Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV), a highly prevalent β-herpesvirus, can cause serious birth defects and disease in immunocompromised individuals, and it may be associated with cancer and cardiovascular disease (53). Viral gene expression is temporally regulated and is dependent on many cellular factors for a productive infection. Immediate early (IE) genes are expressed by 2 h postinfection (p.i.) and transactivate the early genes required for viral DNA replication. The expression of the late genes, which encode proteins involved in virion maturation and egress, is dependent on viral DNA replication.The virus has adopted different strategies for altering the cellular environment to make it more conducive to productive infection, including the stimulation of host cell DNA replication pathways, cell cycle deregulation and arrest, immune evasion, and inhibition of apoptosis (53). Although HCMV encodes its own DNA polymerase, it is dependent on other cellular resources for DNA replication. Infection of quiescent cells induces passage toward S phase such that the host cell is stimulated to generate proteins and DNA precursors necessary for genome replication; however, entry into S phase and cellular DNA replication are subsequently blocked and the cell arrests in G₁/S (1, 10, 11, 14, 30, 45). Cellular resources are thereby presumably free to be efficiently utilized for viral replication. Cell cycle arrest by HCMV is achieved in part through the misregulation of several cell cycle proteins, including the phosphorylation and accumulation of the Rb family pocket proteins, upregulation of cyclins E and B and their associated kinase activities, inhibition of cyclin A expression, stabilization of p53, and accumulation of Cdc6 and geminin, which inhibits licensing of the cellular origins of DNA replication (8, 17, 30, 49, 54, 65). Some of these cell cycle defects can be attributed to a deregulation of the anaphase-promoting complex (APC) (8, 72, 79, 80), an E3 ubiquitin ligase that is responsible for the timely degradation of cell cycle proteins and mitotic cyclins to promote cycle progression from mitosis through G₁ to S phase (58, 74). As the APC also appears to be a common target among other viruses, including the chicken anemia virus, adenoviruses, and poxviruses (23, 36, 52, 70), understanding the mechanisms leading to its inactivation during viral infection has been of great interest.As we have previously reported, multiple mechanisms may be involved in disabling the APC during HCMV infection (72), which is not surprising given the complexity of its structure and regulation (for a review, see references 58 and 74). The APC is a large multisubunit complex consisting of at least 11 conserved core subunits, as well as other species-specific subunits. In metazoans, the APC2 and APC11 subunits form the catalytic core, and along with APC10, provide the platform for binding the E2 ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme. Each of the APC3, APC8, APC6, and APC7 subunits contain multiple copies of the tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) motif and together make up the TPR subcomplex, which provides a platform of protein interaction surfaces for binding the coactivators (i.e., Cdh1 and Cdc20) and various substrates. These two subcomplexes are bridged by the large scaffolding subunit APC1, with the TPR subcomplex tethered to APC1 through APC4 and APC5. The binding between APC1, APC4, APC5, and APC8 is also interdependent, such that the loss of one subunit decreases the association of the other three (71).The APC is activated by either of its coactivators, Cdh1 or Cdc20, which also function in recruiting specific substrates to the APC during different phases of the cell cycle. The phosphorylation of several APC subunits at the onset of mitosis, including APC1 and the TPR subunits, by cyclin B/cyclin-dependent kinase 1 (Cdk1) and Plk1 allows the binding of Cdc20 and subsequent activation of the APC (APC^Cdc20) (19, 37), whereas the binding and activation of the complex by Cdh1 is inhibited through its phosphorylation by cyclin B/Cdk1 (9, 29, 38, 83). As cells pass the spindle assembly checkpoint, APC^Cdc20 ubiquitinates securin (to allow for sister chromatid separation) and cyclin B for degradation by the proteasome (42, 67). The subsequent inactivation of Cdk1 and activation of mitotic phosphatases during late anaphase relieves the inhibitory phosphorylation on Cdh1, presumably by Cdc14 (6, 38, 44), which then allows Cdh1 to bind and activate the APC (APC^Cdh1). APC^Cdh1 ubiquitinates Cdc20 and mitotic cyclins for degradation to facilitate mitotic exit and maintains their low levels, along with S-phase regulators (e.g., Cdc6, geminin, etc.), during G₁ (16, 50, 59, 63). The inactivation of APC^Cdh1 as cells enter S phase may be mediated in part through the phosphorylation of Cdh1 by cyclin A/Cdk2 (46) and Cdh1 binding to the inhibitor Emi1 (25). The inactivation of Cdh1 by phosphorylation has been shown in all organisms studied thus far (e.g., yeast, Drosophila, plants, mammals, etc.), and mutants mimicking constitutively phosphorylated Cdh1 on Cdk consensus sites can neither bind nor activate the APC in vivo or in vitro (9, 29, 38, 69, 83).During HCMV infection of fibroblasts in G₀/G₁, however, Cdh1 becomes prematurely phosphorylated in a Cdk-independent manner and no longer associates with the APC (72). This dissociation does not appear to be due to an overexpression of Emi1 (79). Cdc20 also can no longer associate with the APC (79), suggesting a defect in the APC core. We have further shown that the APC core complex disassembles during the infection, with the TPR subunits (i.e., APC3, APC7, and APC8) and APC10 localizing to the cytosol, while APC1 remains nuclear (72). Interestingly, both the phosphorylation of Cdh1 and the dissociation of the APC occur at similar times during HCMV infection. Although either of these mechanisms could render the APC inactive, it was unclear whether these processes are linked or represent independent (or redundant) pathways. The causative factor(s) in mediating these events and the question of whether such a factor(s) was of cellular or viral origin also remained unresolved.On the basis of the results of several recent studies (26, 32, 62), the viral protein kinase UL97 emerged as a likely candidate for involvement in the phosphorylation of Cdh1. Conserved among herpesviruses, UL97 functions in viral genome replication (7, 32, 81) and in nuclear egress of viral capsids (21, 39, 48). UL97 is present in the tegument of the virus particle (76) and is also expressed de novo with early kinetics (i.e., detectable by 5 h p.i. by Western blot assay), with increased expression at later times of the infection (51, 76, 77). UL97 is a serine/threonine (S/T) protein kinase (22), and recent studies have further characterized it as a Cdkl mimic, with predicted structural similarity to Cdk2 (64) and common substrates. UL97 has been shown to phosphorylate in vitro nuclear lamin A/C (21), the carboxyl-terminal domain of RNA polymerase II (5), the translation elongation factor 1δ (EF1δ) (33), and Rb (26, 62) on sites targeted by Cdks, and there is considerable evidence that UL97 phosphorylates lamin A/C, EF1δ, and Rb on these sites in infected cells as well (21, 26, 33, 62). Given that cyclin A/Cdk2 and cyclin B/Cdk1 complexes normally phosphorylate Cdh1, thus preventing its association with the APC, we hypothesized that UL97 phosphorylates Cdh1 during HCMV infection.In the present study, we provide further mechanistic details of the events and players involved in inactivating the APC during HCMV infection. Evidence that UL97 is the viral factor mediating the phosphorylation of Cdh1 was obtained. However, APC disassembly still occurred at similar times in ΔUL97 and wild-type virus infections, indicating that UL97-mediated phosphorylation of Cdh1 is not required for this event. The inactivation of the APC core complex is further attributed to the loss of the APC5 and APC4 subunits early during the infection. The degradation of these subunits is proteasome dependent and requires de novo synthesis of viral early or cellular proteins. While the primary mechanism of inactivation appears to be the dissociation of the complex and the targeted loss of APC5 and APC4, phosphorylation of Cdh1 may provide a small kinetic advantage and backup mechanism for disabling the APC.     

Virus Entry via the Alternative Coreceptors CCR3 and FPRL1 Differs by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Subtype

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infects target cells by binding to CD4 and a chemokine receptor, most commonly CCR5. CXCR4 is a frequent alternative coreceptor (CoR) in subtype B and D HIV-1 infection, but the importance of many other alternative CoRs remains elusive. We have analyzed HIV-1 envelope (Env) proteins from 66 individuals infected with the major subtypes of HIV-1 to determine if virus entry into highly permissive NP-2 cell lines expressing most known alternative CoRs differed by HIV-1 subtype. We also performed linear regression analysis to determine if virus entry via the major CoR CCR5 correlated with use of any alternative CoR and if this correlation differed by subtype. Virus pseudotyped with subtype B Env showed robust entry via CCR3 that was highly correlated with CCR5 entry efficiency. By contrast, viruses pseudotyped with subtype A and C Env proteins were able to use the recently described alternative CoR FPRL1 more efficiently than CCR3, and use of FPRL1 was correlated with CCR5 entry. Subtype D Env was unable to use either CCR3 or FPRL1 efficiently, a unique pattern of alternative CoR use. These results suggest that each subtype of circulating HIV-1 may be subject to somewhat different selective pressures for Env-mediated entry into target cells and suggest that CCR3 may be used as a surrogate CoR by subtype B while FPRL1 may be used as a surrogate CoR by subtypes A and C. These data may provide insight into development of resistance to CCR5-targeted entry inhibitors and alternative entry pathways for each HIV-1 subtype.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infects target cells by binding first to CD4 and then to a coreceptor (CoR), of which C-C chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) is the most common (6, 53). CXCR4 is an additional CoR for up to 50% of subtype B and D HIV-1 isolates at very late stages of disease (4, 7, 28, 35). Many other seven-membrane-spanning G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been identified as alternative CoRs when expressed on various target cell lines in vitro, including CCR1 (76, 79), CCR2b (24), CCR3 (3, 5, 17, 32, 60), CCR8 (18, 34, 38), GPR1 (27, 65), GPR15/BOB (22), CXCR5 (39), CXCR6/Bonzo/STRL33/TYMSTR (9, 22, 25, 45, 46), APJ (26), CMKLR1/ChemR23 (49, 62), FPLR1 (67, 68), RDC1 (66), and D6 (55). HIV-2 and simian immunodeficiency virus SIVmac isolates more frequently show expanded use of these alternative CoRs than HIV-1 isolates (12, 30, 51, 74), and evidence that alternative CoRs other than CXCR4 mediate infection of primary target cells by HIV-1 isolates is sparse (18, 30, 53, 81). Genetic deficiency in CCR5 expression is highly protective against HIV-1 transmission (21, 36), establishing CCR5 as the primary CoR. The importance of alternative CoRs other than CXCR4 has remained elusive despite many studies (1, 30, 70, 81). Expansion of CoR use from CCR5 to include CXCR4 is frequently associated with the ability to use additional alternative CoRs for viral entry (8, 16, 20, 63, 79) in most but not all studies (29, 33, 40, 77, 78). This finding suggests that the sequence changes in HIV-1 env required for use of CXCR4 as an additional or alternative CoR (14, 15, 31, 37, 41, 57) are likely to increase the potential to use other alternative CoRs.We have used the highly permissive NP-2/CD4 human glioma cell line developed by Soda et al. (69) to classify virus entry via the alternative CoRs CCR1, CCR3, CCR8, GPR1, CXCR6, APJ, CMKLR1/ChemR23, FPRL1, and CXCR4. Full-length molecular clones of 66 env genes from most prevalent HIV-1 subtypes were used to generate infectious virus pseudotypes expressing a luciferase reporter construct (19, 57). Two types of analysis were performed: the level of virus entry mediated by each alternative CoR and linear regression of entry mediated by CCR5 versus all other alternative CoRs. We thus were able to identify patterns of alternative CoR use that were subtype specific and to determine if use of any alternative CoR was correlated or independent of CCR5-mediated entry. The results obtained have implications for the evolution of env function, and the analyses revealed important differences between subtype B Env function and all other HIV-1 subtypes.     

Protein Tyrosine Kinase 6 Directly Phosphorylates AKT and Promotes AKT Activation in Response to Epidermal Growth Factor

Protein tyrosine kinase 6 (PTK6) is a nonmyristoylated Src-related intracellular tyrosine kinase. Although not expressed in the normal mammary gland, PTK6 is expressed in a majority of human breast tumors examined, and it has been linked to ErbB receptor signaling and AKT activation. Here we demonstrate that AKT is a direct substrate of PTK6 and that AKT tyrosine residues 315 and 326 are phosphorylated by PTK6. Association of PTK6 with AKT occurs through the SH3 domain of PTK6 and is enhanced through SH2 domain-mediated interactions following tyrosine phosphorylation of AKT. Using Src, Yes, and Fyn null mouse embryonic fibroblasts (SYF cells), we show that PTK6 phosphorylates AKT in a Src family kinase-independent manner. Introduction of PTK6 into SYF cells sensitized these cells to physiological levels of epidermal growth factor (EGF) and increased AKT activation. Stable introduction of active PTK6 into SYF cells also resulted in increased proliferation. Knockdown of PTK6 in the BPH-1 human prostate epithelial cell line led to decreased AKT activation in response to EGF. Our data indicate that in addition to promoting growth factor receptor-mediated activation of AKT, PTK6 can directly activate AKT to promote oncogenic signaling.Protein tyrosine kinase 6 (PTK6; also known as the breast tumor kinase BRK) is an intracellular Src-related tyrosine kinase (9, 48). Human PTK6 was identified in cultured human melanocytes (32) and breast tumor cells (39), while its mouse orthologue was cloned from normal small intestinal epithelial cell RNA (50). Although PTK6 shares overall structural similarity with Src family tyrosine kinases, it lacks an N-terminal myristoylation consensus sequence for membrane targeting (39, 51). As a consequence, PTK6 is localized to different cellular compartments, including the nucleus (14, 15). PTK6 is expressed in normal differentiated epithelial cells of the gastrointestinal tract (34, 42, 51), prostate (14), and skin (51-53). Expression of PTK6 is upregulated in different types of cancers, including breast carcinomas (6, 39, 54), colon cancer (34), ovarian cancer (47), head and neck cancers (33), and metastatic melanoma cells (16). The significance of apparent opposing signaling roles for PTK6 in normal differentiation and cancer is still poorly understood.In human breast tumor cells, PTK6 enhances signaling from members of the ErbB receptor family (10, 29, 30, 36, 40, 49, 54). In the HB4a immortalized human mammary gland luminal epithelial cell line, PTK6 promoted epidermal growth factor (EGF)-induced ErbB3 tyrosine phosphorylation and AKT activation (29). In response to EGF stimulation, PTK6 promoted phosphorylation of the focal adhesion protein paxillin and Rac1-mediated cell migration (10). PTK6 can be activated by the ErbB3 ligand heregulin and promotes activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase 5 (ERK5) and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) in breast cancer cells (40). PTK6 can also phosphorylate p190RhoGAP-A and stimulate its activity, leading to RhoA inactivation and Ras activation and thereby promoting EGF-dependent breast cancer cell migration and proliferation (49). Expression of PTK6 has been correlated with ErbB2 expression in human breast cancers (4, 5, 54).AKT (also called protein kinase B) is a serine-threonine kinase that is activated downstream of growth factor receptors (38). It is a key player in signaling pathways that regulate energy metabolism, proliferation, and cell survival (7, 45). Aberrant activation of AKT through diverse mechanisms has been discovered in different cancers (2). AKT activation requires phosphorylation of AKT on threonine residue 308 and serine residue 473. The significance of phosphorylation of AKT on tyrosine residues is less well understood. Src has been shown to phosphorylate AKT on conserved tyrosine residues 315 and 326 near the activation loop (11). Substitution of these two tyrosine residues with phenylalanine abolished AKT kinase activity stimulated by EGF (11). Use of the Src family inhibitor PP2 impaired AKT activation following IGF-1 stimulation of oligodendrocytes (13). The RET/PTC receptor tyrosine kinase that responds to glial cell-line-derived neurotrophic factor also phosphorylated AKT tyrosine residue 315 promoting activation of AKT (28). AKT tyrosine residue 474 was phosphorylated when cells were treated with the tyrosine phosphatase inhibitor pervanadate, and phosphorylation of tyrosine 474 contributed to full activation of AKT (12). Recently, the nonreceptor tyrosine kinase Ack1 was shown to regulate AKT tyrosine phosphorylation and activation (37).Here we show that AKT is a cytoplasmic substrate of the intracellular tyrosine kinase PTK6. We identify the tyrosine residues on AKT that are targeted by PTK6, and we demonstrate that tyrosine phosphorylation plays a role in regulating association between PTK6 and AKT. In addition, we show that PTK6 promotes AKT activation and cell proliferation in a Src-independent manner.     

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.     

DivIC Stabilizes FtsL against RasP Cleavage

The essential cell division protein FtsL is a substrate of the intramembrane protease RasP. Using heterologous coexpression experiments, we show here that the division protein DivIC stabilizes FtsL against RasP cleavage. Degradation seems to be initiated upon accessibility of a cytosolic substrate recognition motif.Cell division in bacteria is a highly regulated process (1). The division site selection as well as assembly and disassembly of the divisome have to be strictly controlled (1, 4). Although the spatial control of the divisome is relatively well understood (2, 4, 14, 17), mechanisms governing the temporal control of division are still mainly elusive. Regulatory proteolysis was thought to be a potential modulatory mechanism (8, 9). The highly unstable division protein FtsL was shown to be rate limiting for division and would make an ideal candidate for a regulatory factor in the timing of bacterial cell division (7, 9). In Bacillus subtilis, FtsL is an essential protein of the membrane part of the divisome (5, 7, 8). It is necessary for the assembly of the membrane-spanning division proteins, and a knockout is lethal (8, 9, 12). We have previously reported that FtsL is a substrate of the intramembrane protease RasP (5).These findings raised the question of whether RasP can regulate cell division by cleaving FtsL from the division complex. In order to mimic the situation in which FtsL is bound to at least one of its interaction partners, we used a heterologous coexpression system in which we synthesized FtsL and DivIC. It has been reported before that DivIC and FtsL are intimate binding partners in various organisms (6, 9, 15, 21, 22, 26) and that FtsL and DivIC (together with DivIB) can form complexes even in the absence of the other divisome components (6, 21). We therefore asked whether RasP is able to cleave FtsL in the presence of its major interaction partner DivIC, which would argue for the possibility that RasP could cleave FtsL within a mature divisome. In contrast, if interaction with DivIC could stabilize FtsL against RasP cleavage, this result would bring such a model into question. An alternative option for the role of RasP might be the removal of FtsL from the membrane. It has been shown that divisome disassembly and prevention of reassembly are crucial to prevent minicell formation close to the new cell poles (3, 16).     

A New Borrelia Species Defined by Multilocus Sequence Analysis of Housekeeping Genes

Analysis of Lyme borreliosis (LB) spirochetes, using a novel multilocus sequence analysis scheme, revealed that OspA serotype 4 strains (a rodent-associated ecotype) of Borrelia garinii were sufficiently genetically distinct from bird-associated B. garinii strains to deserve species status. We suggest that OspA serotype 4 strains be raised to species status and named Borrelia bavariensis sp. nov. The rooted phylogenetic trees provide novel insights into the evolutionary history of LB spirochetes.Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) and multilocus sequence analysis (MLSA) have been shown to be powerful and pragmatic molecular methods for typing large numbers of microbial strains for population genetics studies, delineation of species, and assignment of strains to defined bacterial species (4, 13, 27, 40, 44). To date, MLST/MLSA schemes have been applied only to a few vector-borne microbial populations (1, 6, 30, 37, 40, 41, 47).Lyme borreliosis (LB) spirochetes comprise a diverse group of zoonotic bacteria which are transmitted among vertebrate hosts by ixodid (hard) ticks. The most common agents of human LB are Borrelia burgdorferi (sensu stricto), Borrelia afzelii, Borrelia garinii, Borrelia lusitaniae, and Borrelia spielmanii (7, 8, 12, 35). To date, 15 species have been named within the group of LB spirochetes (6, 31, 32, 37, 38, 41). While several of these LB species have been delineated using whole DNA-DNA hybridization (3, 20, 33), most ecological or epidemiological studies have been using single loci (5, 9-11, 29, 34, 36, 38, 42, 51, 53). Although some of these loci have been convenient for species assignment of strains or to address particular epidemiological questions, they may be unsuitable to resolve evolutionary relationships among LB species, because it is not possible to define any outgroup. For example, both the 5S-23S intergenic spacer (5S-23S IGS) and the gene encoding the outer surface protein A (ospA) are present only in LB spirochete genomes (36, 43). The advantage of using appropriate housekeeping genes of LB group spirochetes is that phylogenetic trees can be rooted with sequences of relapsing fever spirochetes. This renders the data amenable to detailed evolutionary studies of LB spirochetes.LB group spirochetes differ remarkably in their patterns and levels of host association, which are likely to affect their population structures (22, 24, 46, 48). Of the three main Eurasian Borrelia species, B. afzelii is adapted to rodents, whereas B. valaisiana and most strains of B. garinii are maintained by birds (12, 15, 16, 23, 26, 45). However, B. garinii OspA serotype 4 strains in Europe have been shown to be transmitted by rodents (17, 18) and, therefore, constitute a distinct ecotype within B. garinii. These strains have also been associated with high pathogenicity in humans, and their finer-scale geographical distribution seems highly focal (10, 34, 52, 53).In this study, we analyzed the intra- and interspecific phylogenetic relationships of B. burgdorferi, B. afzelii, B. garinii, B. valaisiana, B. lusitaniae, B. bissettii, and B. spielmanii by means of a novel MLSA scheme based on chromosomal housekeeping genes (30, 48).     

Extracellular Signal-Regulated Kinase Promotes Rho-Dependent Focal Adhesion Formation by Suppressing p190A RhoGAP

Cell migration is critical for normal development and for pathological processes including cancer cell metastasis. Dynamic remodeling of focal adhesions and the actin cytoskeleton are crucial determinants of cell motility. The Rho family and the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) module consisting of MEK-extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) are important regulators of these processes, but mechanisms for the integration of these signals during spreading and motility are incompletely understood. Here we show that ERK activity is required for fibronectin-stimulated Rho-GTP loading, Rho-kinase function, and the maturation of focal adhesions in spreading cells. We identify p190A RhoGAP as a major target for ERK signaling in adhesion assembly and identify roles for ERK phosphorylation of the C terminus in p190A localization and activity. These observations reveal a novel role for ERK signaling in adhesion assembly in addition to its established role in adhesion disassembly.Cell migration is a highly coordinated process essential for physiological and pathological processes (69). Signaling through Rho family GTPases (e.g., Rac, Cdc42, and Rho) is crucial for cell migration. Activated Rac and Cdc42 are involved in the production of a dominant lamellipodium and filopodia, respectively, whereas Rho-stimulated contractile forces are required for tail retraction and to maintain adhesion to the matrix (57, 58, 68). Rac- and Cdc42-dependent membrane protrusions are driven by the actin cytoskeleton and the formation of peripheral focal complexes; Rho activation stabilizes protrusions by stimulating the formation of mature focal adhesions and stress fibers. Active Rho influences cytoskeletal dynamics through effectors including the Rho kinases (ROCKs) (2, 3).Rho activity is stimulated by GEFs that promote GTP binding and attenuated by GTPase-activating proteins (GAPs) that enhance Rho''s intrinsic GTPase activity. However, due to the large number of RhoGEFs and RhoGAPs expressed in mammalian cells, the molecular mechanisms responsible for regulation of Rho activity in time and space are incompletely understood. p190A RhoGAP (hereafter p190A) is implicated in adhesion and migration signaling. p190A contains an N-terminal GTPase domain, a large middle domain juxtaposed to the C-terminal GAP domain, and a short C-terminal tail (74). The C-terminal tail of ∼50 amino acids is divergent between p190A and the closely related family member p190B (14) and thus may specify the unique functional roles for p190A and p190B revealed in gene knockout studies (10, 11, 41, 77, 78). p190A activity is dynamically regulated in response to external cues during cell adhesion and migration (5, 6, 59). Arthur et al. (5) reported that p190A activity is required for the transient decrease in RhoGTP levels seen in fibroblasts adhering to fibronectin. p190A activity is positively regulated by tyrosine phosphorylation (4, 5, 8, 17, 31, 39, 40, 42): phosphorylation at Y1105 promotes its association with p120RasGAP and subsequent recruitment to membranes or cytoskeleton (8, 17, 27, 31, 71, 75, 84). However, Y1105 phosphorylation is alone insufficient to activate p190A GAP activity (39). While the functions of p190A can be irreversibly terminated by ubiquitinylation in a cell-cycle-dependent manner (80), less is known about reversible mechanisms that negatively regulate p190A GAP activity during adhesion and motility.The integration of Rho family GTPase and extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) signaling is important for cell motility (48, 50, 63, 76, 79). Several studies have demonstrated a requirement for ERK signaling in the disassembly of focal adhesions in migrating cells, in part through the activation of calpain proteases (36, 37) that can downregulate focal adhesion kinase (FAK) signaling (15), locally suppress Rho activity (52), and sever cytoskeletal linkers to focal adhesions (7, 33). Inhibition of ERK signaling increases focal adhesion size and retards disassembly of focal adhesions in adherent cells (57, 64, 85, 86). It is also recognized that ERK modulates Rho-dependent cellular processes, including membrane protrusion and migration (18, 25, 64, 86). Interestingly, ERK activated in response to acute fibronectin stimulation localizes not only to mature focal adhesions, but also to peripheral focal complexes (32, 76). Since these complexes can either mature or be turned over (12), ERK may play a distinct role in focal adhesion assembly. ERK is proposed to promote focal adhesion formation by activating myosin light chain kinase (MLCK) (21, 32, 50).Here we find that ERK activity is required for Rho activation and focal adhesion formation during adhesion to fibronectin and that p190A is an essential target of ERK signaling in this context. Inspection of the p190A C terminus reveals a number of consensus ERK sites and indeed p190A is phosphorylated by recombinant ERK only on its C terminus in vitro, and on the same C-terminal peptide in vivo. Mutation of the C-terminal ERK phosphorylation sites to alanine increases the biochemical and biological activity of p190A. Finally, inhibition of MEK or mutation of the C-terminal phosphorylation sites enhances retention of p190A in peripheral membranes during spreading on fibronectin. Our data support the conclusion that ERK phosphorylation inhibits p190A allowing increases in RhoGTP and cytoskeletal changes necessary for focal adhesion formation.     

Cultivation of Fastidious Bacteria by Viability Staining and Micromanipulation in a Soil Substrate Membrane System

Soil substrate membrane systems allow for microcultivation of fastidious soil bacteria as mixed microbial communities. We isolated established microcolonies from these membranes by using fluorescence viability staining and micromanipulation. This approach facilitated the recovery of diverse, novel isolates, including the recalcitrant bacterium Leifsonia xyli, a plant pathogen that has never been isolated outside the host.The majority of bacterial species have never been recovered in the laboratory (1, 14, 19, 24). In the last decade, novel cultivation approaches have successfully been used to recover “unculturables” from a diverse range of divisions (23, 25, 29). Most strategies have targeted marine environments (4, 23, 25, 32), but soil offers the potential for the investigation of vast numbers of undescribed species (20, 29). Rapid advances have been made toward culturing soil bacteria by reformulating and diluting traditional media, extending incubation times, and using alternative gelling agents (8, 21, 29).The soil substrate membrane system (SSMS) is a diffusion chamber approach that uses extracts from the soil of interest as the growth substrate, thereby mimicking the environment under investigation (12). The SSMS enriches for slow-growing oligophiles, a proportion of which are subsequently capable of growing on complex media (23, 25, 27, 30, 32). However, the SSMS results in mixed microbial communities, with the consequent difficulty in isolation of individual microcolonies for further characterization (10).Micromanipulation has been widely used for the isolation of specific cell morphotypes for downstream applications in molecular diagnostics or proteomics (5, 15). This simple technology offers the opportunity to select established microcolonies of a specific morphotype from the SSMS when combined with fluorescence visualization (3, 11). Here, we have combined the SSMS, fluorescence viability staining, and advanced micromanipulation for targeted isolation of viable, microcolony-forming soil bacteria.     

Analysis of the Viral Elements Required in the Nuclear Import of HIV-1 DNA

HIV-1 possesses an exquisite ability to infect cells independently from their cycling status by undergoing an active phase of nuclear import through the nuclear pore. This property has been ascribed to the presence of karyophilic elements present in viral nucleoprotein complexes, such as the matrix protein (MA); Vpr; the integrase (IN); and a cis-acting structure present in the newly synthesized DNA, the DNA flap. However, their role in nuclear import remains controversial at best. In the present study, we carried out a comprehensive analysis of the role of these elements in nuclear import in a comparison between several primary cell types, including stimulated lymphocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells. We show that despite the fact that none of these elements is absolutely required for nuclear import, disruption of the central polypurine tract-central termination sequence (cPPT-CTS) clearly affects the kinetics of viral DNA entry into the nucleus. This effect is independent of the cell cycle status of the target cells and is observed in cycling as well as in nondividing primary cells, suggesting that nuclear import of viral DNA may occur similarly under both conditions. Nonetheless, this study indicates that other components are utilized along with the cPPT-CTS for an efficient entry of viral DNA into the nucleus.Lentiviruses display an exquisite ability to infect dividing and nondividing cells alike that is unequalled among Retroviridae. This property is thought to be due to the particular behavior or composition of the viral nucleoprotein complexes (NPCs) that are liberated into the cytoplasm of target cells upon virus-to-cell membrane fusion and that allow lentiviruses to traverse an intact nuclear membrane (17, 28, 29, 39, 52, 55, 67, 79). In the case of the human immunodeficiency type I virus (HIV-1), several studies over the years identified viral components of such structures with intrinsic karyophilic properties and thus perfect candidates for mediation of the passage of viral DNA (vDNA) through the nuclear pore: the matrix protein (MA); Vpr; the integrase (IN); and a three-stranded DNA flap, a structure present in neo-synthesized viral DNA, specified by the central polypurine tract-central termination sequence (cPPT-CTS). It is clear that these elements may mediate nuclear import directly or via the recruitment of the host''s proteins, and indeed, several cellular proteins have been found to influence HIV-1 infection during nuclear import, like the karyopherin α2 Rch1 (38); importin 7 (3, 30, 93); the transportin SR-2 (13, 20); or the nucleoporins Nup98 (27), Nup358/RANBP2, and Nup153 (13, 56).More recently, the capsid protein (CA), the main structural component of viral nucleoprotein complexes at least upon their cytoplasmic entry, has also been suggested to be involved in nuclear import or in postnuclear entry steps (14, 25, 74, 90, 92). Whether this is due to a role for CA in the shaping of viral nucleoprotein complexes or to a direct interaction between CA and proteins involved in nuclear import remains at present unknown.Despite a large number of reports, no single viral or cellular element has been described as absolutely necessary or sufficient to mediate lentiviral nuclear import, and important controversies as to the experimental evidences linking these elements to this step exist. For example, MA was among the first viral protein of HIV-1 described to be involved in nuclear import, and 2 transferable nuclear localization signals (NLSs) have been described to occur at its N and C termini (40). However, despite the fact that early studies indicated that the mutation of these NLSs perturbed HIV-1 nuclear import and infection specifically in nondividing cells, such as macrophages (86), these findings failed to be confirmed in more-recent studies (23, 33, 34, 57, 65, 75).Similarly, Vpr has been implicated by several studies of the nuclear import of HIV-1 DNA (1, 10, 21, 43, 45, 47, 64, 69, 72, 73, 85). Vpr does not possess classical NLSs, yet it displays a transferable nucleophilic activity when fused to heterologous proteins (49-51, 53, 77, 81) and has been shown to line onto the nuclear envelope (32, 36, 47, 51, 58), where it can truly facilitate the passage of the viral genome into the nucleus. However, the role of Vpr in this step remains controversial, as in some instances Vpr is not even required for viral replication in nondividing cells (1, 59).Conflicting results concerning the role of IN during HIV-1 nuclear import also exist. Indeed, several transferable NLSs have been described to occur in the catalytic core and the C-terminal DNA binding domains of IN, but for some of these, initial reports of nuclear entry defects (2, 9, 22, 46, 71) were later shown to result from defects at steps other than nuclear import (60, 62, 70, 83). These reports do not exclude a role for the remaining NLSs in IN during nuclear import, and they do not exclude the possibility that IN may mediate this step by associating with components of the cellular nuclear import machinery, such as importin alpha and beta (41), importin 7 (3, 30, 93, 98), and, more recently, transportin-SR2 (20).The central DNA flap, a structure present in lentiviruses and in at least 1 yeast retroelement (44), but not in other orthoretroviruses, has also been involved in the nuclear import of viral DNA (4, 6, 7, 31, 78, 84, 95, 96), and more recently, it has been proposed to provide a signal for viral nucleoprotein complexes uncoating in the proximity of the nuclear pore, with the consequence of providing a signal for import (8). However, various studies showed an absence or weakness of nuclear entry defects in viruses devoid of the DNA flap (24, 26, 44, 61).Overall, the importance of viral factors in HIV-1 nuclear import is still unclear. The discrepancies concerning the role of MA, IN, Vpr, and cPPT-CTS in HIV-1 nuclear import could in part be explained by their possible redundancy. To date, only one comprehensive study analyzed the role of these four viral potentially karyophilic elements together (91). This study showed that an HIV-1 chimera where these elements were either deleted or replaced by their murine leukemia virus (MLV) counterparts was, in spite of an important infectivity defect, still able to infect cycling and cell cycle-arrested cell lines to similar efficiencies. If this result indicated that the examined viral elements of HIV-1 were dispensable for the cell cycle independence of HIV, as infections proceeded equally in cycling and arrested cells, they did not prove that they were not required in nuclear import, because chimeras displayed a severe infectivity defect that precluded their comparison with the wild type (WT).Nuclear import and cell cycle independence may not be as simply linked as previously thought. On the one hand, there has been no formal demonstration that the passage through the nuclear pore, and thus nuclear import, is restricted to nondividing cells, and for what we know, this passage may be an obligatory step in HIV infection in all cells, irrespective of their cycling status. In support of this possibility, certain mutations in viral elements of HIV affect nuclear import in dividing as well as in nondividing cells (4, 6, 7, 31, 84, 95). On the other hand, cell cycle-independent infection may be a complex phenomenon that is made possible not only by the ability of viral DNA to traverse the nuclear membrane but also by its ability to cope with pre- and postnuclear entry events, as suggested by the phenotypes of certain CA mutants (74, 92).Given that the cellular environment plays an important role during the early steps of viral infection, we chose to analyze the role of the four karyophilic viral elements of HIV-1 during infection either alone or combined in a wide comparison between cells highly susceptible to infection and more-restrictive primary cell targets of HIV-1 in vivo, such as primary blood lymphocytes (PBLs), monocyte-derived macrophages (MDM), and dendritic cells (DCs).In this study, we show that an HIV-1-derived virus in which the 2 NLSs of MA are mutated and the IN, Vpr, and cPPT-CTS elements are removed displays no detectable nuclear import defect in HeLa cells independently of their cycling status. However, this mutant virus is partially impaired for nuclear entry in primary cells and more specifically in DCs and PBLs. We found that this partial defect is specified by the cPPT-CTS, while the 3 remaining elements seem to play no role in nuclear import. Thus, our study indicates that the central DNA flap specifies the most important role among the viral elements involved thus far in nuclear import. However, it also clearly indicates that the role played by the central DNA flap is not absolute and that its importance varies depending on the cell type, independently from the dividing status of the cell.