Multipattern Consensus Regions in Multiple Aligned Protein Sequences and Their Segmentation

Decomposing a biological sequence into its functional regions is an important prerequisite to understand the molecule. Using the multiple alignments of the sequences, we evaluate a segmentation based on the type of statistical variation pattern from each of the aligned sites. To describe such a more general pattern, we introduce multipattern consensus regions as segmented regions based on conserved as well as interdependent patterns. Thus the proposed consensus region considers patterns that are statistically significant and extends a local neighborhood. To show its relevance in protein sequence analysis, a cancer suppressor gene called p53 is examined. The results show significant associations between the detected regions and tendency of mutations, location on the 3D structure, and cancer hereditable factors that can be inferred from human twin studies.[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27]     

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

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

Sip1, a Novel RS Domain-Containing Protein Essential for Pre-mRNA Splicing

Previous studies have shown that protein-protein interactions among splicing factors may play an important role in pre-mRNA splicing. We report here identification and functional characterization of a new splicing factor, Sip1 (SC35-interacting protein 1). Sip1 was initially identified by virtue of its interaction with SC35, a splicing factor of the SR family. Sip1 interacts with not only several SR proteins but also with U1-70K and U2AF65, proteins associated with 5′ and 3′ splice sites, respectively. The predicted Sip1 sequence contains an arginine-serine-rich (RS) domain but does not have any known RNA-binding motifs, indicating that it is not a member of the SR family. Sip1 also contains a region with weak sequence similarity to the Drosophila splicing regulator suppressor of white apricot (SWAP). An essential role for Sip1 in pre-mRNA splicing was suggested by the observation that anti-Sip1 antibodies depleted splicing activity from HeLa nuclear extract. Purified recombinant Sip1 protein, but not other RS domain-containing proteins such as SC35, ASF/SF2, and U2AF65, restored the splicing activity of the Sip1-immunodepleted extract. Addition of U2AF65 protein further enhanced the splicing reconstitution by the Sip1 protein. Deficiency in the formation of both A and B splicing complexes in the Sip1-depleted nuclear extract indicates an important role of Sip1 in spliceosome assembly. Together, these results demonstrate that Sip1 is a novel RS domain-containing protein required for pre-mRNA splicing and that the functional role of Sip1 in splicing is distinct from those of known RS domain-containing splicing factors.Pre-mRNA splicing takes place in spliceosomes, the large RNA-protein complexes containing pre-mRNA, U1, U2, U4/6, and U5 small nuclear ribonucleoprotein particles (snRNPs), and a large number of accessory protein factors (for reviews, see references 21, 22, 37, 44, and 48). It is increasingly clear that the protein factors are important for pre-mRNA splicing and that studies of these factors are essential for further understanding of molecular mechanisms of pre-mRNA splicing.Most mammalian splicing factors have been identified by biochemical fractionation and purification (3, 15, 19, 31–36, 45, 69–71, 73), by using antibodies recognizing splicing factors (8, 9, 16, 17, 61, 66, 67, 74), and by sequence homology (25, 52, 74).Splicing factors containing arginine-serine-rich (RS) domains have emerged as important players in pre-mRNA splicing. These include members of the SR family, both subunits of U2 auxiliary factor (U2AF), and the U1 snRNP protein U1-70K (for reviews, see references 18, 41, and 59). Drosophila alternative splicing regulators transformer (Tra), transformer 2 (Tra2), and suppressor of white apricot (SWAP) also contain RS domains (20, 40, 42). RS domains in these proteins play important roles in pre-mRNA splicing (7, 71, 75), in nuclear localization of these splicing proteins (23, 40), and in protein-RNA interactions (56, 60, 64). Previous studies by us and others have demonstrated that one mechanism whereby SR proteins function in splicing is to mediate specific protein-protein interactions among spliceosomal components and between general splicing factors and alternative splicing regulators (1, 1a, 6, 10, 27, 63, 74, 77). Such protein-protein interactions may play critical roles in splice site recognition and association (for reviews, see references 4, 18, 37, 41, 47 and 59). Specific interactions among the splicing factors also suggest that it is possible to identify new splicing factors by their interactions with known splicing factors.Here we report identification of a new splicing factor, Sip1, by its interaction with the essential splicing factor SC35. The predicted Sip1 protein sequence contains an RS domain and a region with sequence similarity to the Drosophila splicing regulator, SWAP. We have expressed and purified recombinant Sip1 protein and raised polyclonal antibodies against the recombinant Sip1 protein. The anti-Sip1 antibodies specifically recognize a protein migrating at a molecular mass of approximately 210 kDa in HeLa nuclear extract. The anti-Sip1 antibodies sufficiently deplete Sip1 protein from the nuclear extract, and the Sip1-depleted extract is inactive in pre-mRNA splicing. Addition of recombinant Sip1 protein can partially restore splicing activity to the Sip1-depleted nuclear extract, indicating an essential role of Sip1 in pre-mRNA splicing. Other RS domain-containing proteins, including SC35, ASF/SF2, and U2AF65, cannot substitute for Sip1 in reconstituting splicing activity of the Sip1-depleted nuclear extract. However, addition of U2AF65 further increases splicing activity of Sip1-reconstituted nuclear extract, suggesting that there may be a functional interaction between Sip1 and U2AF65 in nuclear extract.     

Biochemical Large-Scale Interaction Analysis of Murine Olfactory Receptors and Associated Signaling Proteins with Post-Synaptic Density 95, Drosophila Discs Large,Zona-Occludens 1 (PDZ) Domains

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) constitute the largest family among mammalian membrane proteins and are capable of initiating numerous essential signaling cascades. Various GPCR-mediated pathways are organized into protein microdomains that can be orchestrated and regulated through scaffolding proteins, such as PSD-95/discs-large/ZO1 (PDZ) domain proteins. However, detailed binding characteristics of PDZ–GPCR interactions remain elusive because these interactions seem to be more complex than previously thought. To address this issue, we analyzed binding modalities using our established model system. This system includes the 13 individual PDZ domains of the multiple PDZ domain protein 1 (MUPP1; the largest PDZ protein), a broad range of murine olfactory receptors (a multifaceted gene cluster within the family of GPCRs), and associated olfactory signaling proteins. These proteins were analyzed in a large-scale peptide microarray approach and continuative interaction studies. As a result, we demonstrate that canonical binding motifs were not overrepresented among the interaction partners of MUPP1. Furthermore, C-terminal phosphorylation and distinct amino acid replacements abolished PDZ binding promiscuity. In addition to the described in vitro experiments, we identified new interaction partners within the murine olfactory epithelium using pull-down-based interactomics and could verify the partners through co-immunoprecipitation. In summary, the present study provides important insight into the complexity of the binding characteristics of PDZ–GPCR interactions based on olfactory signaling proteins, which could identify novel clinical targets for GPCR-associated diseases in the future.PDZ domain proteins comprise one of the largest families among interaction domain scaffolding proteins and are highly abundant in various multicellular eukaryotic species. These proteins fulfill important physiological functions in a broad range of different tissues and cells as they orchestrate complex protein networks. Among putative PDZ interaction partners, one important protein family is the group of GPCRs¹, constituting the largest family of membrane proteins in mammals (1). Here, signal efficiency, speed, desensitization, and internalization can be modulated by PDZ proteins (2–5). Olfactory receptors (ORs) represent a multigene family within this group of seven-transmembrane domain proteins and encompass 2% of the mammalian genome (6). Belonging to class I GPCRs, ORs share many general features of this receptor family, making them an interesting target for interactions involving PDZ proteins. Until recently, an organizing complex builder, such as the inactivation no afterpotential D (InaD) protein in the visual system of Drosophila melanogaster (7, 8), could not be clearly identified for olfactory signaling.The multiple PDZ domain protein 1, with 13 individual PDZ domains, represents the largest of the described PDZ proteins to date (9) and interacts with different GPCRs (10–12). One well-described example is its interaction with GABA_B receptors, leading to enhanced receptor stability at the plasma membrane and prolonged signaling duration (2). In previous studies, we demonstrated that PDZ domains 1 + 2 can interact with a selected subset of ORs (13). Furthermore, we showed that MUPP1 binds to a specific OR and that most of the described proteins are involved in mammalian olfactory signal transduction in the native system, making MUPP1 a promising candidate for orchestrating the olfactory system (14).Many PDZ–ligand interactions depend on classical binding motifs at the ligand''s C-terminal end, thereby building weak transient protein complexes (15, 16). However, an increasing number of PDZ interactions have emerged that seem to provide more complex binding modalities, differing from the canonical interactions (17, 18). Ligand binding seems not to be exclusively restricted to C-terminal sites, and PDZ domains cannot be distinctly classified but are evenly distributed throughout a selective space (17, 19–21). Therefore, it is of great interest to analyze OR–PDZ interactions to characterize the putative binding requirements and to further investigate the role of MUPP1 in olfactory signaling.In the present study, we characterized the binding modalities between the 13 individual PDZ domains of MUPP1 and a broad range of murine olfactory receptors in a large-scale approach, indicating that classical binding motifs were not overrepresented among the evaluated binding partners. In addition, we identified new binding partners from the murine olfactory epithelium using pull-down-based interactomics.     

Sgt1 Dimerization Is Negatively Regulated by Protein Kinase CK2-mediated Phosphorylation at Ser361

The kinetochore, which consists of centromere DNA and structural proteins, is essential for proper chromosome segregation in eukaryotes. In budding yeast, Sgt1 and Hsp90 are required for the binding of Skp1 to Ctf13 (a component of the core kinetochore complex CBF3) and therefore for the assembly of CBF3. We have previously shown that Sgt1 dimerization is important for this kinetochore assembly mechanism. In this study, we report that protein kinase CK2 phosphorylates Ser³⁶¹ on Sgt1, and this phosphorylation inhibits Sgt1 dimerization.The kinetochore is a structural protein complex located in the centromeric region of the chromosome coupled to spindle microtubules (1, 2). The kinetochore generates a signal to arrest cells during mitosis when it is not properly attached to microtubules, thereby preventing chromosome missegregation, which can lead to aneuploidy (3, 4). The molecular structure of the kinetochore complex of the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae has been well characterized; it is composed of more than 70 proteins, many of which are conserved in mammals (2).The centromere DNA in the budding yeast is a 125-bp region that contains three conserved regions, CDEI, CDEII, and CDEIII (5, 6). CDEIII (25 bp) is essential for centromere function (7) and is bound to a key component of the centromere, the CBF3 complex. The CBF3 complex contains four proteins, Ndc10, Cep3, Ctf13 (8–15), and Skp1 (14, 15), all essential for viability. Mutations in any of the CBF3 proteins abolish the ability of CDEIII to bind to CBF3 (16, 17). All of the kinetochore proteins, except the CDEI-binding Cbf1 (18–20), localize to the kinetochores in a CBF3-dependent manner (2). Thus, CBF3 is a fundamental kinetochore complex, and its mechanism of assembly is of great interest.We have previously found that Sgt1 and Skp1 activate Ctf13; thus, they are required for assembly of the CBF3 complex (21). The molecular chaperone Hsp90 is also required to form the active Ctf13-Skp1 complex (22). Sgt1 has two highly conserved motifs that are required for protein-protein interaction: the tetratricopeptide repeat (21) and the CHORD protein and Sgt1-specific motif. We and others have found that both domains are important for the interaction of Sgt1 with Hsp90 (23–26), which is required for assembly of the core kinetochore complex. This interaction is an initial step in kinetochore activation (24, 26, 27), which is conserved between yeast and humans (28, 29).We have recently shown that Sgt1 dimerization is important for Sgt1-Skp1 binding and therefore for kinetochore assembly (30). In this study, we have found that protein kinase CK2 phosphorylates Sgt1 at Ser³⁶¹, and this phosphorylation inhibits Sgt1 dimerization. Therefore, CK2 appears to regulate kinetochore assembly negatively in budding yeast.     

Coomassie Blue as a Near-infrared Fluorescent Stain: A Systematic Comparison With Sypro Ruby for In-gel Protein Detection

Quantitative proteome analyses suggest that the well-established stain colloidal Coomassie Blue, when used as an infrared dye, may provide sensitive, post-electrophoretic in-gel protein detection that can rival even Sypro Ruby. Considering the central role of two-dimensional gel electrophoresis in top-down proteomic analyses, a more cost effective alternative such as Coomassie Blue could prove an important tool in ongoing refinements of this important analytical technique. To date, no systematic characterization of Coomassie Blue infrared fluorescence detection relative to detection with SR has been reported. Here, seven commercial Coomassie stain reagents and seven stain formulations described in the literature were systematically compared. The selectivity, threshold sensitivity, inter-protein variability, and linear-dynamic range of Coomassie Blue infrared fluorescence detection were assessed in parallel with Sypro Ruby. Notably, several of the Coomassie stain formulations provided infrared fluorescence detection sensitivity to <1 ng of protein in-gel, slightly exceeding the performance of Sypro Ruby. The linear dynamic range of Coomassie Blue infrared fluorescence detection was found to significantly exceed that of Sypro Ruby. However, in two-dimensional gel analyses, because of a blunted fluorescence response, Sypro Ruby was able to detect a few additional protein spots, amounting to 0.6% of the detected proteome. Thus, although both detection methods have their advantages and disadvantages, differences between the two appear to be small. Coomassie Blue infrared fluorescence detection is thus a viable alternative for gel-based proteomics, offering detection comparable to Sypro Ruby, and more reliable quantitative assessments, but at a fraction of the cost.Gel electrophoresis is an accessible, widely applicable and mature protein resolving technology. As the original top-down approach to proteomic analyses, among its many attributes the high resolution achievable by two dimensional gel-electrophoresis (2DE)¹ ensures that it remains an effective analytical technology despite the appearance of alternatives. However, in-gel detection remains a limiting factor for gel-based analyses; available technology generally permits the detection and quantification of only relatively abundant proteins (35). Many critical components in normal physiology and also disease may be several orders of magnitude less abundant and thus below the detection threshold of in-gel stains, or indeed most techniques. Pre- and post-fractionation technologies have been developed to address this central issue in proteomics but these are not without limitations (1–5). Thus improved detection methods for gel-based proteomics continue to be a high priority, and the literature is rich with different in-gel detection methods and innovative improvements (6–34). This history of iterative refinement presents a wealth of choices when selecting a detection strategy for a gel-based proteomic analysis (35).Perhaps the best known in-gel detection method is the ubiquitous Coomassie Blue (CB) stain; CB has served as a gel stain and protein quantification reagent for over 40 years. Though affordable, robust, easy to use, and compatible with mass spectrometry (MS), CB staining is relatively insensitive. In traditional organic solvent formulations, CB detects ∼ 10 ng of protein in-gel, and some reports suggest poorer sensitivity (27, 29, 36, 37). Sensitivity is hampered by relatively high background staining because of nonspecific retention of dye within the gel matrix (32, 36, 38, 39). The development of colloidal CB (CCB) formulations largely addressed these limitations (12); the concentration of soluble CB was carefully controlled by sequestering the majority of the dye into colloidal particles, mediated by pH, solvent, and the ionic strength of the solution. Minimizing soluble dye concentration and penetration of the gel matrix mitigated background staining, and the introduction of phosphoric acid into the staining reagent enhanced dye-protein interactions (8, 12, 40), contributing to an in-gel staining sensitivity of 5–10 ng protein, with some formulations reportedly yielding sensitivities of 0.1–1 ng (8, 12, 22, 39, 41, 42). Thus CCB achieved higher sensitivity than traditional CB staining, yet maintained all the advantages of the latter, including low cost and compatibility with existing densitometric detection instruments and MS. Although surpassed by newer methods, the practical advantages of CCB ensure that it remains one of the most common gel stains in use.Fluorescent stains have become the routine and sensitive alternative to visible dyes. Among these, the ruthenium-organometallic family of dyes have been widely applied and the most commercially well-known is Sypro Ruby (SR), which is purported to interact noncovalently with primary amines in proteins (15, 18, 19, 43). Chief among the attributes of these dyes is their high sensitivity. In-gel detection limits of < 1 ng for some proteins have been reported for SR (6, 9, 14, 44, 45). Moreover, SR staining has been reported to yield a greater linear dynamic range (LDR), and reduced interprotein variability (IPV) compared with CCB and silver stains (15, 19, 46–49). SR is easy to use, fully MS compatible, and relatively forgiving of variations in initial conditions (6, 15). The chief consequence of these advances remains high cost; SR and related stains are notoriously expensive, and beyond the budget of many laboratories. Furthermore, despite some small cost advantage relative to SR, none of the available alternatives has been consistently and quantitatively demonstrated to substantially improve on the performance of SR under practical conditions (9, 50).Notably, there is evidence to suggest that CCB staining is not fundamentally insensitive, but rather that its sensitivity has been limited by traditional densitometric detection (50, 51). When excited in the near IR at ∼650 nm, protein-bound CB in-gel emits light in the range of 700–800 nm. Until recently, the lack of low-cost, widely available and sufficiently sensitive infrared (IR)-capable imaging instruments prevented mainstream adoption of in-gel CB infrared fluorescence detection (IRFD); advances in imaging technology are now making such instruments far more accessible. Initial reports suggested that IRFD of CB-stained gels provided greater sensitivity than traditional densitometric detection (50, 51). Using CB R250, in-gel IRFD was reported to detect as little as 2 ng of protein in-gel, with a LDR of about an order of magnitude (2 to 20 ng, or 10 to 100 ng in separate gels), beyond which the fluorescent response saturated into the μg range (51). Using the G250 dye variant, it was determined that CB-IRFD of 2D gels detected ∼3 times as many proteins as densitometric imaging, and a comparable number of proteins as seen by SR (50). This study also concluded that CB-IRFD yielded a significantly higher signal to background ratio (S/BG) than SR, providing initial evidence that CB-IRFD may be superior to SR in some aspects of stain performance (50).Despite this initial evidence of the viability of CB-IRF as an in-gel protein detection method, a detailed characterization of this technology has not yet been reported. Here a more thorough, quantitative characterization of CB-IRFD is described, establishing its lowest limit of detection (LLD), IPV, and LDR in comparison to SR. Finally a wealth of modifications and enhancements of CCB formulations have been reported (8, 12, 21, 24, 26, 29, 40, 41, 52–54), and likewise there are many commercially available CCB stain formulations. To date, none of these formulations have been compared quantitatively in terms of their relative performance when detected using IRF. As a general detection method for gel-based proteomics, CB-IRFD was found to provide comparable or even slightly superior performance to SR according to most criteria, including sensitivity and selectivity (50). Furthermore, in terms of LDR, CB-IRFD showed distinct advantages over SR. However, assessing proteomes resolved by 2DE revealed critical distinctions between CB-IRFD and SR in terms of protein quantification versus threshold detection: neither stain could be considered unequivocally superior to the other by all criteria. Nonetheless, IRFD proved the most sensitive method of detecting CB-stained protein in-gel, enabling high sensitivity detection without the need for expensive reagents or even commercial formulations. Overall, CB-IRFD is a viable alternative to SR and other mainstream fluorescent stains, mitigating the high cost of large-scale gel-based proteomic analyses, making high sensitivity gel-based proteomics accessible to all labs. With improvements to CB formulations and/or image acquisition instruments, the performance of this detection technology may be further enhanced.     

Analysis of Free Energy Signals Arising from Nucleotide Hybridization Between rRNA and mRNA Sequences during Translation in Eubacteria

A decoding algorithm is tested that mechanistically models the progressive alignments that arise as the mRNA moves past the rRNA tail during translation elongation. Each of these alignments provides an opportunity for hybridization between the single-stranded, -terminal nucleotides of the 16S rRNA and the spatially accessible window of mRNA sequence, from which a free energy value can be calculated. Using this algorithm we show that a periodic, energetic pattern of frequency 1/3 is revealed. This periodic signal exists in the majority of coding regions of eubacterial genes, but not in the non-coding regions encoding the 16S and 23S rRNAs. Signal analysis reveals that the population of coding regions of each bacterial species has a mean phase that is correlated in a statistically significant way with species () content. These results suggest that the periodic signal could function as a synchronization signal for the maintenance of reading frame and that codon usage provides a mechanism for manipulation of signal phase.[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32]     

Analysis of Proteins That Rapidly Change Upon Mechanistic/Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Complex 1 (mTORC1) Repression Identifies Parkinson Protein 7 (PARK7) as a Novel Protein Aberrantly Expressed in Tuberous Sclerosis Complex (TSC)

Many biological processes involve the mechanistic/mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1). Thus, the challenge of deciphering mTORC1-mediated functions during normal and pathological states in the central nervous system is challenging. Because mTORC1 is at the core of translation, we have investigated mTORC1 function in global and regional protein expression. Activation of mTORC1 has been generally regarded to promote translation. Few but recent works have shown that suppression of mTORC1 can also promote local protein synthesis. Moreover, excessive mTORC1 activation during diseased states represses basal and activity-induced protein synthesis. To determine the role of mTORC1 activation in protein expression, we have used an unbiased, large-scale proteomic approach. We provide evidence that a brief repression of mTORC1 activity in vivo by rapamycin has little effect globally, yet leads to a significant remodeling of synaptic proteins, in particular those proteins that reside in the postsynaptic density. We have also found that curtailing the activity of mTORC1 bidirectionally alters the expression of proteins associated with epilepsy, Alzheimer''s disease, and autism spectrum disorder—neurological disorders that exhibit elevated mTORC1 activity. Through a protein–protein interaction network analysis, we have identified common proteins shared among these mTORC1-related diseases. One such protein is Parkinson protein 7, which has been implicated in Parkinson''s disease, yet not associated with epilepsy, Alzheimers disease, or autism spectrum disorder. To verify our finding, we provide evidence that the protein expression of Parkinson protein 7, including new protein synthesis, is sensitive to mTORC1 inhibition. Using a mouse model of tuberous sclerosis complex, a disease that displays both epilepsy and autism spectrum disorder phenotypes and has overactive mTORC1 signaling, we show that Parkinson protein 7 protein is elevated in the dendrites and colocalizes with the postsynaptic marker postsynaptic density-95. Our work offers a comprehensive view of mTORC1 and its role in regulating regional protein expression in normal and diseased states.The mechanistic/mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1)¹ is a serine/threonine protein kinase that is highly expressed in many cell types (1). In the brain, mTORC1 tightly coordinates different synaptic plasticities — long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD) — the molecular correlates of learning and memory (2–5). Because mTORC1 is at the core of many synaptic signaling pathways downstream of glutamate and neurotrophin receptors, many hypothesize that dysregulated mTORC1 signaling underlies cognitive deficits observed in several neurodegenerative diseases (3, 6–17). For example, mTORC1 and its downstream targets are hyperactive in human brains diagnosed with Alzheimer''s disease (AD) (18–20). Additionally in animal models of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), altered mTORC1 signaling contributes to the observed synaptic dysfunction and aberrant network connectivity (13, 15, 21–27). Furthermore, epilepsy, which is common in AD and ASD, has enhanced mTORC1 activity (28–32).Phosphorylation of mTORC1, considered the active form, is generally regarded to promote protein synthesis (33). Thus, many theorize that diseases with overactive mTORC1 arise from excessive protein synthesis (14). Emerging data, however, show that suppressing mTORC1 activation can trigger local translation in neurons (34, 35). Pharmacological antagonism of N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, a subtype of glutamate receptors that lies upstream of mTOR activation, promotes the synthesis of the voltage-gated potassium channel, Kv1.1, in dendrites (34, 35). Consistent with these results, in models of temporal lobe epilepsy there is a reduction in the expression of voltage-gated ion channels including Kv1.1 (30, 31, 36). Interestingly in a model of focal neocortical epilepsy, overexpression of Kv1.1 blocked seizure activity (37). Because both active and inactive mTORC1 permit protein synthesis, we sought to determine the proteins whose expression is altered when mTORC1 phosphorylation is reduced in vivo.Rapamycin is an FDA-approved, immunosuppressive drug that inhibits mTORC1 activity (38). We capitalized on the ability of rapamycin to reduce mTORC1 activity in vivo and the unbiased approach of mass spectrometry to identify changes in protein expression. Herein, we provide evidence that mTORC1 activation bidirectionally regulates protein expression, especially in the PSD where roughly an equal distribution of proteins dynamically appear and disappear. Remarkably, using protein–protein interaction networks facilitated the novel discovery that PARK7, a protein thus far only implicated in Parkinson''s disease, (1) is up-regulated by increased mTORC1 activity, (2) resides in the PSD only when mTORC1 is active, and (3) is aberrantly expressed in a rodent model of TSC, an mTORC1-related disease that has symptoms of epilepsy and autism. Collectively, these data provide the first comprehensive list of proteins whose abundance or subcellular distributions are altered with acute changes in mTORC1 activity in vivo.