An ER‐peroxisome tether exerts peroxisome population control in yeast

Eukaryotic cells compartmentalize biochemical reactions into membrane‐enclosed organelles that must be faithfully propagated from one cell generation to the next. Transport and retention processes balance the partitioning of organelles between mother and daughter cells. Here we report the identification of an ER‐peroxisome tether that links peroxisomes to the ER and ensures peroxisome population control in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The tether consists of the peroxisome biogenic protein, Pex3p, and the peroxisome inheritance factor, Inp1p. Inp1p bridges the two compartments by acting as a molecular hinge between ER‐bound Pex3p and peroxisomal Pex3p. Asymmetric peroxisome division leads to the formation of Inp1p‐containing anchored peroxisomes and Inp1p‐deficient mobile peroxisomes that segregate to the bud. While peroxisomes in mother cells are not released from tethering, de novo formation of tethers in the bud assists in the directionality of peroxisome transfer. Peroxisomes are thus stably maintained over generations of cells through their continued interaction with tethers.     

Give what you can and keep what you need!

EMBO J 32 18, 2439–2453 doi:10.1038/emboj.2013.170; published online July302013During cell division, peroxisomes are inherited to daughter cells but some are retained in the mother cells. Our knowledge on how peroxisome inheritance and retention is balanced and how this is regulated for each individual organelle remains incompletely understood. The new findings by Knoblach et al (2013) published in this issue of The EMBO Journal demonstrate that Inp1p functions as a bridging protein to connect ER-resident Pex3p and peroxisomal Pex3p, which anchors peroxisomes to the cortical ER for organelle retention in the mother cell. Asymmetric peroxisome division generates peroxisomes, which lack Inp1p but contain Inp2p instead, and only these peroxisomes are primed for myosin-driven transport to daughter cells.Peroxisomes are single membrane-bound organelles found in almost all eukaryotic cells. They harbour a wide spectrum of metabolic activities that vary among different species, developmental stages and cell types (Schlüter et al, 2010). Eukaryotic cells have evolved elaborate mechanisms to ensure the maintenance of peroxisomes. New peroxisomes can form either de novo by budding from the ER or by growth and division of pre-existing organelles (Lazarow and Fujiki, 1985; Hoepfner et al, 2005). Despite the fact that peroxisomes can form de novo, yeast favours to multiply peroxisomes by growth and division (Motley and Hettema, 2007). It therefore has to be ensured that both mother and daughter cells get their share of peroxisomes during cell division. Thus, some peroxisomes need to be retained in the mother cell, while other peroxisomes are directed for transport and inheritance to daughter cells. Both processes have to be balanced to ensure a successful distribution of the organelles between the mother cell and the newly formed bud.The molecular details of how an even peroxisome distribution of dividing cells are maintained have now been disclosed by Knoblach et al (2013), advancing an exciting scientific journey. This journey originally started by the finding that the partitioning of peroxisomes between mother cell and bud is dependent on actin filaments and the myosin motor protein Myo2p (Hoepfner et al, 2001). Inp1p and Inp2p were identified by the Rachubinski group and Inp2p turned out to function as the peroxisomal tether, which interacts with Myo2p and hooks the organelle onto the actin-track on the road to the bud (Fagarasanu et al, 2006). Inp1p was shown to be a peripheral peroxisomal membrane protein, which acts as a peroxisome-retention factor, tethering peroxisomes to putative anchoring structures within the mother cell and bud (Fagarasanu et al, 2005). Later on, Pex3p, a multi-functional protein of the peroxisomal life cycle, was identified as peroxisomal membrane anchor of Inp1p (Munck et al, 2009). Until now, it was therefore known that peroxisomes hook onto Inp1p by Pex3p and Inp1p connects peroxisomes to cortical structures of unknown nature. Thus, it was an open question how peroxisomes are trapped in the mother cell and which additional factors are required for this process.The work of Knoblach et al (2013) published in this issue of The EMBO Journal now unravelled this mystery, allowing for a more complete picture of the whole process of peroxisome retention and inheritance (Figure 1A). The authors show that peroxisomes are recruited to mitochondria that artificially expose Inp1p on their surface, clearly demonstrating that Inp1p acts as a peroxisome tether. Most importantly, they identified the mechanism of how peroxisomes are directed and anchored to the cell cortex: the ER acts as a membrane anchor for the retention of peroxisomes during cell division. In vitro binding assays revealed that Inp1p contains two independent binding sites for Pex3p, located at the C- and the N-terminal region of the protein, respectively. Since Pex3p exhibits a dual localization at the peroxisomal membrane and at the ER, Inp1p seems to bind to Pex3p of both compartments in vivo and thus link Pex3p molecules across two membranes. Indeed, it turned out that ER-located Pex3p recruits Inp1p to discrete foci in close proximity to the cortical ER. Using the split-GFP assay, the authors confirmed that Inp1p interacts not only with ER-bound Pex3p but also with Pex3p in the peroxisomal membrane. Thus, the core of the ER-peroxisome tether is generated by the Inp1p-mediated linkage of ER-bound Pex3p with peroxisomal Pex3p. The functional relevance of this ER-peroxisome tether is disclosed by the phenotype of peroxisome inheritance mutants. Accordingly, the Pex3p–V81E mutant, affected in the recruitment of Inp1p to the ER, is characterized by a defect of ER retention of peroxisomes, which drives all peroxisomes into the bud and leaves no peroxisomes in the mother cell (Figure 1B).Open in a separate windowFigure 1Peroxisome retention and inheritance (A) free peroxisomes in the mother cell (stage I) are anchored to cortical ER by a tethering complex consisting of two molecules Pex3p, one located at the ER and the other associated with the peroxisomal membrane and Inp1p, which connects the ER-bound and peroxisome-bound Pex3p (stage II). Accordingly, Inp1p contains two Pex3p-binding domains, allowing the protein to function as a bridge between the two Pex3p-containing organelles. Peroxisomes elongate and divide, and Inp2p is loaded onto peroxisomes with an asymmetric distribution (stage III). The peroxisomal population that lacks Inp2p is anchored to the cortical ER, whereas the population of cytosolic peroxisomes containing Inp2p is destined for the transport to the bud (stage IV). To this end, Inp2p interacts with Myo2p and thus triggers the movement of the peroxisome along actin cables to the bud. The process is completed when the peroxisome is released from Myo2p in the bud (stage I). In wild-type cells, the described retention and inheritance process leads to an equal distribution of peroxisomes between mother cell. The described molecular mechanism results in a regulated balance of retention and inheritance of peroxisomes, ensuring that both the mother cell and the newly formed bud gain their share of peroxisomes. (B) However, when the endogenous Pex3p is replaced by a Pex3p-mutant (Pex3p–V81E), which lost its strong binding capacity to Inp1p, peroxisomes are not anchored to the cortical ER anymore, with the consequence that during cells'' division the entire organelle population is transported to the bud and peroxisomes are not retained in the mother cell.To piece together the puzzle, a final gap had to be filled. How is the peroxisomal fraction remaining in the mother cell discriminated from those ferried to the bud during cell division? In budding wild-type cells, Inp1p exhibits a striking asymmetry along the cell division axis. Knoblach et al (2013) show that most peroxisomes of the mother cell contain Inp1p, while peroxisomes that are ferried towards the bud contain little or no Inp1p. Live-cell video microscopy of individual peroxisome revealed that Inp1p-containing peroxisomes were mostly immobile and retained in the mother cell, while highly mobile peroxisomes contained Inp2p and were predominantly found in the bud. The question remains of how peroxisomes lacking Inp1p but containing Inp2p are formed? To tackle this question, the authors took advantage of the fact that cells defective in peroxisome division contain single enlarged peroxisomes and project a tubular extension into the bud upon cell division (Kuravi et al, 2006). Remarkably, Knoblach et al (2013) show that Inp1p and Inp2p localized to opposite ends of the giant peroxisome. Inp1p was confined to the part of the peroxisome that was retained in the mother cell, while Inp2p enriched at the tubule that protruded into the bud.In summary, Knoblach et al (2013) discovered the ER as the site for peroxisome binding to the cell cortex that is responsible for the retention of peroxisomes in the mother cells during cell division and identified Inp1p as a molecular hinge connecting Pex3p of peroxisomal and ER membranes. Furthermore, peroxisome division is shown to result in an asymmetric distribution of inheritance factors with Inp1p-containing organelles remaining tethered to the ER in the mother cell, while Inp2p-containing peroxisomes hook onto myosin motor proteins for movement to the bud. These remarkable discoveries disclose the molecular mechanism of peroxisome retention and inheritance during cell division. Moreover, this study adds to other known functions of Pex3p, which besides its newly discovered role as ER-tether for peroxisomes is also known as an initiator of de novo formation of peroxisomes, a docking factor for the transport of peroxisomal membrane proteins and a tether for the regulated degradation of peroxisomes. This study adds more complexity to the network of regulated processes in peroxisome biogenesis that all merge at Pex3p, and will certainly provide the ground for further exploration.     

Pex3 peroxisome biogenesis proteins function in peroxisome inheritance as class V myosin receptors

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, peroxisomal inheritance from mother cell to bud is conducted by the class V myosin motor, Myo2p. However, homologues of S. cerevisiae Myo2p peroxisomal receptor, Inp2p, are not readily identifiable outside the Saccharomycetaceae family. Here, we demonstrate an unexpected role for Pex3 proteins in peroxisome inheritance. Both Pex3p and Pex3Bp are peroxisomal integral membrane proteins that function as peroxisomal receptors for class V myosin through direct interaction with the myosin globular tail. In cells lacking Pex3Bp, peroxisomes are preferentially retained by the mother cell, whereas most peroxisomes gather and are transferred en masse to the bud in cells overexpressing Pex3Bp or Pex3p. Our results reveal an unprecedented role for members of the Pex3 protein family in peroxisome motility and inheritance in addition to their well-established role in peroxisome biogenesis at the endoplasmic reticulum. Our results point to a temporal link between peroxisome formation and inheritance and delineate a general mechanism of peroxisome inheritance in eukaryotic cells.     

Pex19p contributes to peroxisome inheritance in the association of peroxisomes to Myo2p

During budding of yeast cells peroxisomes are distributed over mother cell and bud, a process that involves the myosin motor protein Myo2p and the peroxisomal membrane protein Inp2p. Here, we show that Pex19p, a peroxin implicated in targeting and complex formation of peroxisomal membrane proteins, also plays a role in peroxisome partitioning. Binding studies revealed that Pex19p interacts with the cargo-binding domain of Myo2p. We identified mutations in Myo2p that specifically reduced binding to Pex19p, but not to Inp2p. The interaction between Myo2p and Pex19p was also reduced by a mutation that blocked Pex19p farnesylation. Microscopy revealed that the Pex19p-Myo2p interaction is important for peroxisome inheritance, because mutations that affect this interaction hamper peroxisome inheritance in vivo. Together these data suggest that both Inp2p and Pex19p are required for proper association of peroxisomes to Myo2p.     

Determinants of the assembly,integrity and maintenance of the endoplasmic reticulum‐peroxisome tether

Organelle tethering and intercommunication are crucial for proper cell function. We previously described a tether between peroxisomes and the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) that acts in peroxisome population control in the yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Components of this tether are Pex3p, an integral membrane protein of both peroxisomes and the ER and Inp1p, a connector that links peroxisomes to the ER. Here, we report the analysis of random Inp1p mutants that enabled identification of regions in Inp1p required for the assembly and maintenance of the ER‐peroxisome tether. Interaction analysis between Inp1p mutants and known Inp1p‐binding proteins demonstrated that Pex3p and Inp1p do not constitute the sole components of the ER‐peroxisome tether. Deletion of these Inp1p interactors whose steady‐state localization is outside of ER‐peroxisome tethers affected peroxisome dynamics. Our findings are consistent with the presence of regulatory cues that act on ER‐peroxisome tethers and point to the existence of membrane contact sites between peroxisomes and organelles other than the ER.      

Peroxisome Formation Requires the Endoplasmic Reticulum Channel Protein Sec61

In peroxisome formation, models of near‐autonomous peroxisome biogenesis with membrane protein integration directly from the cytosol into the peroxisomal membrane are in direct conflict with models whereby peroxisomes bud from the endoplasmic reticulum and receive their membrane proteins through a branch of the secretory pathway. We therefore reinvestigated the role of the Sec 61 complex, the protein‐conducting channel of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) in peroxisome formation. We found that depletion or partial inactivation of Sec 61 in yeast disables peroxisome formation. The ER entry of the early peroxisomal membrane protein Pex 3 engineered with a glycosylation tag is reduced in sec61 mutant cells. Moreover, we were able to reconstitute Pex 3 import into ER membranes in vitro, and we identified a variant of a signal anchor sequence for ER translocation at the Pex 3 N‐terminus. Our findings are consistent with a Sec 61 requirement for peroxisome formation and a fundamental role of the ER in peroxisome biogenesis.     

Atg36: The Saccharomyces cerevisiae receptor for pexophagy

Eukaryotic cells adapt their organelle composition and abundance according to environmental conditions. Analysis of the peroxisomal membrane protein Pex3 has revealed that this protein plays a crucial role in peroxisome maintenance as it is required for peroxisome formation, segregation and breakdown. Although its function in peroxisome formation and segregation was known to involve its recruitment to the peroxisomal membrane of factors specific for these processes, the role of Pex3 in peroxisome breakdown was unclear until our recent identification of Atg36 as a novel Saccharomyces cerevisiae Pex3-interacting protein. Atg36 is recruited to peroxisomes by Pex3 and is required specifically for pexophagy. Atg36 is distinct from Atg30, the pexophagy receptor identified in Pichia pastoris. Atg36 interacts with Atg11 in vivo, and to a lesser extent with Atg8. These latter proteins link autophagic cargo receptors to the core autophagy machinery. Like other autophagic cargo receptors, Atg36 is a suicide receptor and is broken down in the vacuole together with its cargo. Unlike other cargo receptors, the interaction between Atg36 and Atg8 does not seem to be direct. Our recent findings suggest that Atg36 is a novel pexophagy receptor that may target peroxisomes for degradation via a noncanonical mechanism.     

Overexpression of Pex15p, a phosphorylated peroxisomal integral membrane protein required for peroxisome assembly in S.cerevisiae, causes proliferation of the endoplasmic reticulum membrane.

We have cloned PEX15 which is required for peroxisome biogenesis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. pex15Delta cells are characterized by the cytosolic accumulation of peroxisomal matrix proteins containing a PTS1 or PTS2 import signal, whereas peroxisomal membrane proteins are present in peroxisomal remnants. PEX15 encodes a phosphorylated, integral peroxisomal membrane protein (Pex15p). Using multiple in vivo methods to determine the topology, Pex15p was found to be a tail-anchored type II (Ncyt-Clumen) peroxisomal membrane protein with a single transmembrane domain near its carboxy-terminus. Overexpression of Pex15p resulted in impaired peroxisome assembly, and caused profound proliferation of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane. The lumenal carboxy-terminal tail of Pex15p protrudes into the lumen of these ER membranes, as demonstrated by its O-glycosylation. Accumulation in the ER was also observed at an endogenous expression level when Pex15p was fused to the N-terminus of mature invertase. This resulted in core N-glycosylation of the hybrid protein. The lumenal C-terminal tail of Pex15p is essential for targeting to the peroxisomal membrane. Furthermore, the peroxisomal membrane targeting signal of Pex15p overlaps with an ER targeting signal on this protein. These results indicate that Pex15p may be targeted to peroxisomes via the ER, or to both organelles.     

Inp1p is a peroxisomal membrane protein required for peroxisome inheritance in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Cells have evolved molecular mechanisms for the efficient transmission of organelles during cell division. Little is known about how peroxisomes are inherited. Inp1p is a peripheral membrane protein of peroxisomes of Saccharomyces cerevisiae that affects both the morphology of peroxisomes and their partitioning during cell division. In vivo 4-dimensional video microscopy showed an inability of mother cells to retain a subset of peroxisomes in dividing cells lacking the INP1 gene, whereas cells overexpressing INP1 exhibited immobilized peroxisomes that failed to be partitioned to the bud. Overproduced Inp1p localized to both peroxisomes and the cell cortex, supporting an interaction of Inp1p with specific structures lining the cell periphery. The levels of Inp1p vary with the cell cycle. Inp1p binds Pex25p, Pex30p, and Vps1p, which have been implicated in controlling peroxisome division. Our findings are consistent with Inp1p acting as a factor that retains peroxisomes in cells and controls peroxisome division. Inp1p is the first peroxisomal protein directly implicated in peroxisome inheritance.     

Endoplasmic reticulum-directed Pex3p routes to peroxisomes and restores peroxisome formation in a Saccharomyces cerevisiae pex3Delta strain

Recent studies on the sorting of peroxisomal membrane proteins challenge the long-standing model in which peroxisomes are considered to be autonomous organelles that multiply by growth and division. Here, we present data lending support to the idea that the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) is involved in sorting of the peroxisomal membrane protein Pex3p, a protein required early in peroxisome biogenesis. First, we show that the introduction of an artificial glycosylation site into the N terminus of Pex3p leads to partial N-linked core glycosylation, indicative of insertion into the ER membrane. Second, when FLAG-tagged Pex3p is equipped with an ER targeting signal, it can restore peroxisome formation in pex3Delta cells. Importantly, FLAG antibodies that specifically recognize the processed Pex3p show that the signal peptide of the fusion protein is efficiently cleaved off and that the processed protein localizes to peroxisomes. In contrast, a Pex3p construct in which cleavage of the signal peptide is blocked by a mutation localizes to the ER and the cytosol and cannot complement pex3Delta cells. Together, these results strongly suggest that ER-targeted Pex3p indeed routes via the ER to peroxisomes, and we hypothesize that this pathway is also used by endogenous Pex3p.     

Atg36

Eukaryotic cells adapt their organelle composition and abundance according to environmental conditions. Analysis of the peroxisomal membrane protein Pex3 has revealed that this protein plays a crucial role in peroxisome maintenance as it is required for peroxisome formation, segregation and breakdown. Although its function in peroxisome formation and segregation was known to involve its recruitment to the peroxisomal membrane of factors specific for these processes, the role of Pex3 in peroxisome breakdown was unclear until our recent identification of Atg36 as a novel Saccharomyces cerevisiae Pex3-interacting protein. Atg36 is recruited to peroxisomes by Pex3 and is required specifically for pexophagy. Atg36 is distinct from Atg30, the pexophagy receptor identified in Pichia pastoris. Atg36 interacts with Atg11 in vivo, and to a lesser extent with Atg8. These latter proteins link autophagic cargo receptors to the core autophagy machinery. Like other autophagic cargo receptors, Atg36 is a suicide receptor and is broken down in the vacuole together with its cargo. Unlike other cargo receptors, the interaction between Atg36 and Atg8 does not seem to be direct. Our recent findings suggest that Atg36 is a novel pexophagy receptor that may target peroxisomes for degradation via a noncanonical mechanism.     

Yeast pex1 cells contain peroxisomal ghosts that import matrix proteins upon reintroduction of Pex1

Pex1 and Pex6 are two AAA-ATPases that play a crucial role in peroxisome biogenesis. We have characterized the ultrastructure of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae peroxisome-deficient mutants pex1 and pex6 by various high-resolution electron microscopy techniques. We observed that the cells contained peroxisomal membrane remnants, which in ultrathin cross sections generally appeared as double membrane rings. Electron tomography revealed that these structures consisted of one continuous membrane, representing an empty, flattened vesicle, which folds into a cup shape. Immunocytochemistry revealed that these structures lack peroxisomal matrix proteins but are the sole sites of the major peroxisomal membrane proteins Pex2, Pex10, Pex11, Pex13, and Pex14. Upon reintroduction of Pex1 in Pex1-deficient cells, these peroxisomal membrane remnants (ghosts) rapidly incorporated peroxisomal matrix proteins and developed into peroxisomes. Our data support earlier views that Pex1 and Pex6 play a role in peroxisomal matrix protein import.     

Peroxisomal Membrane Proteins Insert into the Endoplasmic Reticulum

We show that a comprehensive set of 16 peroxisomal membrane proteins (PMPs) encompassing all types of membrane topologies first target to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. These PMPs insert into the ER membrane via the protein import complexes Sec61p and Get3p (for tail-anchored proteins). This trafficking pathway is representative for multiplying wild-type cells in which the peroxisome population needs to be maintained, as well as for mutant cells lacking peroxisomes in which new peroxisomes form after complementation with the wild-type version of the mutant gene. PMPs leave the ER in a Pex3p-Pex19p–dependent manner to end up in metabolically active peroxisomes. These results further extend the new concept that peroxisomes derive their basic framework (membrane and membrane proteins) from the ER and imply a new functional role for Pex3p and Pex19p.     

Import of peroxisomal membrane proteins: the interplay of Pex3p- and Pex19p-mediated interactions

In contrast to the molecular mechanisms underlying import of peroxisomal matrix proteins, those involving the transport of membrane proteins remain rather elusive. At present, two targeting routes for peroxisomal membrane proteins (PMPs) have been depicted: class I PMPs are targeted from the cytoplasm directly to the peroxisome membrane, and class II PMPs are sorted indirectly to peroxisomes via the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). In addition, three peroxins--Pex3p, Pex16p, and Pex19p - have been identified as essential factors for PMP assembly in several species including humans: Pex19p is a predominantly cytoplasmic protein that shows a broad PMP-binding specificity; Pex3p serves as the membrane-anchoring site for Pex19p; and Pex16p - a protein absent in most yeasts--is thought to provide the initial scaffold for recruiting the protein import machinery required for peroxisome membrane biogenesis. Remarkably, the function of Pex16p does not appear to be conserved between different species. In addition, significant disagreement exists about whether Pex19p has a chaperone-like role in the cytosol or at the peroxisome membrane and/or functions as a cycling import receptor for newly synthesized PMPs. Here we review the recent progress made in our understanding of the role of two key players in PMP biogenesis, Pex3p and Pex19p.     

Peroxisomal Pex3 Activates Selective Autophagy of Peroxisomes via Interaction with the Pexophagy Receptor Atg30

Pexophagy is a process that selectively degrades peroxisomes by autophagy. The Pichia pastoris pexophagy receptor Atg30 is recruited to peroxisomes under peroxisome proliferation conditions. During pexophagy, Atg30 undergoes phosphorylation, a prerequisite for its interactions with the autophagy scaffold protein Atg11 and the ubiquitin-like protein Atg8. Atg30 is subsequently shuttled to the vacuole along with the targeted peroxisome for degradation. Here, we defined the binding site for Atg30 on the peroxisomal membrane protein Pex3 and uncovered a role for Pex3 in the activation of Atg30 via phosphorylation and in the recruitment of Atg11 to the receptor protein complex. Pex3 is classically a docking protein for other proteins that affect peroxisome biogenesis, division, and segregation. We conclude that Pex3 has a role beyond simple docking of Atg30 and that its interaction with Atg30 regulates pexophagy in the yeast P. pastoris.     

Distinct requirements for intra-ER sorting and budding of peroxisomal membrane proteins from the ER

During de novo peroxisome biogenesis, importomer complex proteins sort via two preperoxisomal vesicles (ppVs). However, the sorting mechanisms segregating peroxisomal membrane proteins to the preperoxisomal endoplasmic reticulum (pER) and into ppVs are unknown. We report novel roles for Pex3 and Pex19 in intra–endoplasmic reticulum (ER) sorting and budding of the RING-domain peroxins (Pex2, Pex10, and Pex12). Pex19 bridged the interaction at the ER between Pex3 and RING-domain proteins, resulting in a ternary complex that was critical for the intra-ER sorting and subsequent budding of the RING-domain peroxins. Although the docking subcomplex proteins (Pex13, Pex14, and Pex17) also required Pex19 for budding from the ER, they sorted to the pER independently of Pex3 and Pex19 and were spatially segregated from the RING-domain proteins. We also discovered a unique role for Pex3 in sorting Pex10 and Pex12, but with the docking subcomplex. Our study describes an intra-ER sorting process that regulates segregation, packaging, and budding of peroxisomal importomer subcomplexes, thereby preventing their premature assembly at the ER.     

A Combined Approach of Quantitative Interaction Proteomics and Live-cell Imaging Reveals a Regulatory Role for Endoplasmic Reticulum (ER) Reticulon Homology Proteins in Peroxisome Biogenesis

Peroxisome biogenesis initiates at the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and maturation allows for the formation of metabolically active organelles. Yet, peroxisomes can also multiply by growth and division. Several proteins, called peroxins, are known to participate in these processes but little is known about their organization to orchestrate peroxisome proliferation. Here, we demonstrate that regulation of peroxisome proliferation relies on the integrity of the tubular ER network. Using a dual track SILAC-based quantitative interaction proteomics approach, we established a comprehensive network of stable as well as transient interactions of the peroxin Pex30p, an integral membrane protein. Through association with merely ER resident proteins, in particular with proteins containing a reticulon homology domain, and with other peroxins, Pex30p designates peroxisome contact sites at ER subdomains. We show that Pex30p traffics through the ER and segregates in punctae to which peroxisomes specifically append, and we ascertain its transient interaction with all subunits of the COPI coatomer complex suggesting the involvement of a vesicle-mediated transport. We establish that the membrane protein Pex30p facilitates the connection of peroxisomes to the ER. Taken together, our data indicate that Pex30p-containing protein complexes act as focal points from which peroxisomes can form and that the tubular ER architecture organized by the reticulon homology proteins Rtn1p, Rtn2p and Yop1p controls this process.All nucleated cells contain essential round-shaped organelles called peroxisomes, whose function is mainly associated with lipid metabolism (1). Depending on the cellular requirements, the size, number, and protein content of these single membrane-bound organelles can vary widely. Although peroxisomes are dispensable for unicellular species such as yeasts, they are essential for the development of multicellular organisms (2, 3). In human, mutations in PEX genes lead to defects in peroxisome function or formation and are associated with the development of lethal pathologies (4). These PEX genes code for proteins, called peroxins, which are involved in peroxisome assembly and maintenance (5).Two major routes seem to lead to peroxisome formation, namely, de novo biogenesis and growth/division of pre-existing peroxisomes. The division pathway operates with proteins of the Pex11 family and requires fission factors shared with mitochondria (6). Studies in yeast and mammalian cells revealed that through the action of the protein Pex3p peroxisome precursors can also originate from the endoplasmic reticulum (ER)¹ and, via import of membrane and matrix proteins, mature into fully functional organelles (7, 8). Furthermore, several peroxisomal membrane proteins were shown to migrate to peroxisomes via the ER (7, 9, 10). The molecular mechanism underlying the biogenic pathway of peroxisome formation has not been clarified so far. Recent data based on cell-free vesicle-budding reactions, however, demonstrated that several peroxisomal proteins traffic from the ER to peroxisomes in a COPII vesicle-independent manner (11). These observations point to the existence of vesicular events to mediate the transport of peroxisomal membrane proteins from the ER. In fact, analysis of secretory mutant yeast cells already suggest that part of the ER-associated secretory machinery is involved in peroxisome biogenesis (12).The de novo biogenesis of peroxisomes and the growth/division pathways are usually seen as independent routes; however, these events may be coordinated and, thus, intimately linked. Indeed, peroxisomes need to acquire membrane components to proliferate and it has been proposed that their binding to the cell cortex or to the cytoskeleton allows their partitioning and segregation during cell division (13–15).Among the proteins required for assembly of peroxisomes, the membrane proteins Pex23p and Pex24p play essential roles in the yeast Yarrowia lipolytica (16, 17). Homologs of these two proteins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae are Pex30p, Pex31p, and Pex32p, all containing at least one transmembrane domain and a dysferlin domain as common structural motifs, as well as Pex28p and Pex29p. In S. cerevisiae, these proteins seem to negatively control peroxisomal size and number (18, 19). Interestingly, Pex30p seems to exhibit species-specific differences in the regulation of peroxisome proliferation. While the lack of Pex30p in S. cerevisiae leads to an increase in the number of normal-sized peroxisomes (18), in Pichia pastoris its absence correlates with the appearance of fewer and clustered peroxisomes (20). Although peroxisomes are highly versatile organelles, under given conditions their total number per cell remains fairly constant owing to the delicate balance of proliferation, inheritance and degradation (21, 22). The question is: what are the molecular mechanisms responsible for the spatiotemporal organization of these events?Here, we present data obtained from a dual approach based on quantitative interaction proteomics using stable isotope labeling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) (23, 24) and live-cell imaging, revealing for the first time the dynamic interaction network around Pex30p and its function in the organization of ER-to-peroxisome membrane associations. We report the existence of a macromolecular membrane protein complex that acts as a hub for the regulation of peroxisome proliferation and movement. Our data suggest a direct role for the tubular cortical ER and the reticulon homology proteins Rtn1p, Rtn2p, and Yop1p in the regulation of peroxisome biogenesis. Furthermore, as an initially cortical-ER localized protein that interacts with reticulon homology proteins, Pex30p is shown in this work to establish contacts between ER tubules and peroxisomes and to specifically traffic through the ER. In summary, our data reveal a central role for Pex30p in the formation of ER-to-peroxisomes associations that appear to be involved in the coordination of peroxisome biogenesis and maintenance.     

Pex19p binds Pex30p and Pex32p at regions required for their peroxisomal localization but separate from their peroxisomal targeting signals

The assembly of proteins in the peroxisomal membrane is a multistep process requiring their recognition in the cytosol, targeting to and insertion into the peroxisomal membrane, and stabilization within the lipid bilayer. The peroxin Pex19p has been proposed to be either the receptor that recognizes and targets newly synthesized peroxisomal membrane proteins (PMP) to the peroxisome or a chaperone required for stabilization of PMPs at the peroxisomal membrane. Differentiating between these two roles for Pex19p could be achieved by determining whether the peroxisomal targeting signal (PTS) and the region of Pex19p binding of a PMP are the same or different. We addressed the role for Pex19p in the assembly of two PMPs, Pex30p and Pex32p, of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Pex30p and Pex32p control peroxisome size and number but are dispensable for peroxisome formation. Systematic truncations from the carboxyl terminus, together with in-frame deletions of specific regions, have identified PTSs essential for targeting Pex30p and Pex32p to peroxisomes. Both Pex30p and Pex32p interact with Pex19p in regions that do not overlap with their PTSs. However, Pex19p is required for localizing Pex30p and Pex32p to peroxisomes, because mutations that disrupt the interaction of Pex19p with Pex30p and Pex32p lead to their mislocalization to a compartment other than peroxisomes. Mutants of Pex30p and Pex32p that localize to peroxisomes but produce cells exhibiting the peroxisomal phenotypes of cells lacking these proteins demonstrate that the regions in these proteins that control peroxisomal targeting and cell biological activity are separable. Together, our data show that the interaction of Pex19p with Pex30p and Pex32p is required for their roles in peroxisome biogenesis and are consistent with a chaperone role for Pex19p in stabilizing or maintaining membrane proteins in peroxisomes.     

Pex3p initiates the formation of a preperoxisomal compartment from a subdomain of the endoplasmic reticulum in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Peroxisomes are dynamic organelles that often proliferate in response to compounds that they metabolize. Peroxisomes can proliferate by two apparent mechanisms, division of preexisting peroxisomes and de novo synthesis of peroxisomes. Evidence for de novo peroxisome synthesis comes from studies of cells lacking the peroxisomal integral membrane peroxin Pex3p. These cells lack peroxisomes, but peroxisomes can assemble upon reintroduction of Pex3p. The source of these peroxisomes has been the subject of debate. Here, we show that the amino-terminal 46 amino acids of Pex3p of Saccharomyces cerevisiae target to a subdomain of the endoplasmic reticulum and initiate the formation of a preperoxisomal compartment for de novo peroxisome synthesis. In vivo video microscopy showed that this preperoxisomal compartment can import both peroxisomal matrix and membrane proteins leading to the formation of bona fide peroxisomes through the continued activity of full-length Pex3p. Peroxisome formation from the preperoxisomal compartment depends on the activity of the genes PEX14 and PEX19, which are required for the targeting of peroxisomal matrix and membrane proteins, respectively. Our findings support a direct role for the endoplasmic reticulum in de novo peroxisome formation.     

Peroxisome biogenesis: where Arf and coatomer might be involved

The present review summarizes recent observations on binding of Arf and COPI coat to isolated rat liver peroxisomes. The general structural and functional features of both Arf and coatomer were considered along with the requirements and dependencies of peroxisomal Arf and coatomer recruitment. Studies on the expression of mammalian Pex11 proteins, mainly Pex11alpha and Pex11beta, intimately related to the process of peroxisome proliferation, revealed a sequence of individual steps including organelle elongation/tubulation, formation of membrane and matrix protein patches segregating distinct proteins from each other, development of membrane constrictions and final membrane fission. Based on the similarities of the processes leading to cargo selection and concentration on Golgi membranes on the one hand and to the formation of peroxisomal protein patches on the other hand, an implication of Arf and COPI in distinct processes of peroxisomal proliferation is hypothesized. Alternatively, peroxisomal Arf/COPI might facilitate the formation of COPI-coated peroxisomal vesicles functioning in cargo transport and retrieval from peroxisomes to the ER. Recent observations suggesting transport of Pex3 and Pex19 during early steps of peroxisome biogenesis from the ER to peroxisomes inevitably propose such a retrieval mechanism, provided the ER to peroxisome pathway is based on transporting vesicles.