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

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

Splitting the BLOSUM Score into Numbers of Biological Significance

Mathematical tools developed in the context of Shannon information theory were used to analyze the meaning of the BLOSUM score, which was split into three components termed as the BLOSUM spectrum (or BLOSpectrum). These relate respectively to the sequence convergence (the stochastic similarity of the two protein sequences), to the background frequency divergence (typicality of the amino acid probability distribution in each sequence), and to the target frequency divergence (compliance of the amino acid variations between the two sequences to the protein model implicit in the BLOCKS database). This treatment sharpens the protein sequence comparison, providing a rationale for the biological significance of the obtained score, and helps to identify weakly related sequences. Moreover, the BLOSpectrum can guide the choice of the most appropriate scoring matrix, tailoring it to the evolutionary divergence associated with the two sequences, or indicate if a compositionally adjusted matrix could perform better.[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]     

Role of Partitioning-defective 1/Microtubule Affinity-regulating Kinases in the Morphogenetic Activity of Helicobacter pylori CagA

Helicobacter pylori CagA plays a key role in gastric carcinogenesis. Upon delivery into gastric epithelial cells, CagA binds and deregulates SHP-2 phosphatase, a bona fide oncoprotein, thereby causing sustained ERK activation and impaired focal adhesions. CagA also binds and inhibits PAR1b/MARK2, one of the four members of the PAR1 family of kinases, to elicit epithelial polarity defect. In nonpolarized gastric epithelial cells, CagA induces the hummingbird phenotype, an extremely elongated cell shape characterized by a rear retraction defect. This morphological change is dependent on CagA-deregulated SHP-2 and is thus thought to reflect the oncogenic potential of CagA. In this study, we investigated the role of the PAR1 family of kinases in the hummingbird phenotype. We found that CagA binds not only PAR1b but also other PAR1 isoforms, with order of strength as follows: PAR1b > PAR1d ≥ PAR1a > PAR1c. Binding of CagA with PAR1 isoforms inhibits the kinase activity. This abolishes the ability of PAR1 to destabilize microtubules and thereby promotes disassembly of focal adhesions, which contributes to the hummingbird phenotype. Consistently, PAR1 knockdown potentiates induction of the hummingbird phenotype by CagA. The morphogenetic activity of CagA was also found to be augmented through inhibition of non-muscle myosin II. Because myosin II is functionally associated with PAR1, perturbation of PAR1-regulated myosin II by CagA may underlie the defect of rear retraction in the hummingbird phenotype. Our findings reveal that CagA systemically inhibits PAR1 family kinases and indicate that malfunctioning of microtubules and myosin II by CagA-mediated PAR1 inhibition cooperates with deregulated SHP-2 in the morphogenetic activity of CagA.Infection with Helicobacter pylori strains bearing cagA (cytotoxin-associated gene A)-positive strains is the strongest risk factor for the development of gastric carcinoma, the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide (1–3). The cagA gene is located within a 40-kb DNA fragment, termed the cag pathogenicity island, which is specifically present in the genome of cagA-positive H. pylori strains (4–6). In addition to cagA, there are ∼30 genes in the cag pathogenicity island, many of which encode a bacterial type IV secretion system that delivers the cagA-encoded CagA protein into gastric epithelial cells (7–10). Upon delivery into gastric epithelial cells, CagA is localized to the plasma membrane, where it undergoes tyrosine phosphorylation at the C-terminal Glu-Pro-Ile-Tyr-Ala motifs by Src family kinases or c-Abl kinase (11–14). The C-terminal Glu-Pro-Ile-Tyr-Ala-containing region of CagA is noted for the structural diversity among distinct H. pylori isolates. Oncogenic potential of CagA has recently been confirmed by a study showing that systemic expression of CagA in mice induces gastrointestinal and hematological malignancies (15).When expressed in gastric epithelial cells, CagA induces morphological transformation termed the hummingbird phenotype, which is characterized by the development of one or two long and thin protrusions resembling the beak of the hummingbird. It has been thought that the hummingbird phenotype is related to the oncogenic action of CagA (7, 16–19). Pathophysiological relevance for the hummingbird phenotype in gastric carcinogenesis has recently been provided by the observation that infection with H. pylori carrying CagA with greater ability to induce the hummingbird phenotype is more closely associated with gastric carcinoma (20–23). Elevated motility of hummingbird cells (cells showing the hummingbird phenotype) may also contribute to invasion and metastasis of gastric carcinoma.In host cells, CagA interacts with the SHP-2 phosphatase, C-terminal Src kinase, and Crk adaptor in a tyrosine phosphorylation-dependent manner (16, 24, 25) and also associates with Grb2 adaptor and c-Met in a phosphorylation-independent manner (26, 27). Among these CagA targets, much attention has been focused on SHP-2 because the phosphatase has been recognized as a bona fide oncoprotein, gain-of-function mutations of which are found in various human malignancies (17, 18, 28). Stable interaction of CagA with SHP-2 requires CagA dimerization, which is mediated by a 16-amino acid CagA-multimerization (CM)² sequence present in the C-terminal region of CagA (29). Upon complex formation, CagA aberrantly activates SHP-2 and thereby elicits sustained ERK MAP kinase activation that promotes mitogenesis (30). Also, CagA-activated SHP-2 dephosphorylates and inhibits focal adhesion kinase (FAK), causing impaired focal adhesions. It has been shown previously that both aberrant ERK activation and FAK inhibition by CagA-deregulated SHP-2 are involved in induction of the hummingbird phenotype (31).Partitioning-defective 1 (PAR1)/microtubule affinity-regulating kinase (MARK) is an evolutionally conserved serine/threonine kinase originally isolated in C. elegans (32–34). Mammalian cells possess four structurally related PAR1 isoforms, PAR1a/MARK3, PAR1b/MARK2, PAR1c/MARK1, and PAR1d/MARK4 (35–37). Among these, PAR1a, PAR1b, and PAR1c are expressed in a variety of cells, whereas PAR1d is predominantly expressed in neural cells (35, 37). These PAR1 isoforms phosphorylate microtubule-associated proteins (MAPs) and thereby destabilize microtubules (35, 38), allowing asymmetric distribution of molecules that are involved in the establishment and maintenance of cell polarity.In polarized epithelial cells, CagA disrupts the tight junctions and causes loss of apical-basolateral polarity (39, 40). This CagA activity involves the interaction of CagA with PAR1b/MARK2 (19, 41). CagA directly binds to the kinase domain of PAR1b in a tyrosine phosphorylation-independent manner and inhibits the kinase activity. Notably, CagA binds to PAR1b via the CM sequence (19). Because PAR1b is present as a dimer in cells (42), CagA may passively homodimerize upon complex formation with the PAR1 dimer via the CM sequence, and this PAR1-directed CagA dimer would form a stable complex with SHP-2 through its two SH2 domains.Because of the critical role of CagA in gastric carcinogenesis (7, 16–19), it is important to elucidate the molecular basis underlying the morphogenetic activity of CagA. In this study, we investigated the role of PAR1 isoforms in induction of the hummingbird phenotype by CagA, and we obtained evidence that CagA-mediated inhibition of PAR1 kinases contributes to the development of the morphological change by perturbing microtubules and non-muscle myosin II.     

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]     

Proinsulin and the Genetics of Diabetes Mellitus

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

Dbf4-Cdc7 Phosphorylation of Mcm2 Is Required for Cell Growth

The Dbf4-Cdc7 kinase (DDK) is required for the activation of the origins of replication, and DDK phosphorylates Mcm2 in vitro. We find that budding yeast Cdc7 alone exists in solution as a weakly active multimer. Dbf4 forms a likely heterodimer with Cdc7, and this species phosphorylates Mcm2 with substantially higher specific activity. Dbf4 alone binds tightly to Mcm2, whereas Cdc7 alone binds weakly to Mcm2, suggesting that Dbf4 recruits Cdc7 to phosphorylate Mcm2. DDK phosphorylates two serine residues of Mcm2 near the N terminus of the protein, Ser-164 and Ser-170. Expression of mcm2-S170A is lethal to yeast cells that lack endogenous MCM2 (mcm2Δ); however, this lethality is rescued in cells harboring the DDK bypass mutant mcm5-bob1. We conclude that DDK phosphorylation of Mcm2 is required for cell growth.The Cdc7 protein kinase is required throughout the yeast S phase to activate origins (1, 2). The S phase cyclin-dependent kinase also activates yeast origins of replication (3–5). It has been proposed that Dbf4 activates Cdc7 kinase in S phase, and that Dbf4 interaction with Cdc7 is essential for Cdc7 kinase activity (6). However, it is not known how Dbf4-Cdc7 (DDK)² acts during S phase to trigger the initiation of DNA replication. DDK has homologs in other eukaryotic species, and the role of Cdc7 in activation of replication origins during S phase may be conserved (7–10).The Mcm2-7 complex functions with Cdc45 and GINS to unwind DNA at a replication fork (11–15). A mutation of MCM5 (mcm5-bob1) bypasses the cellular requirements for DBF4 and CDC7 (16), suggesting a critical physiologic interaction between Dbf4-Cdc7 and Mcm proteins. DDK phosphorylates Mcm2 in vitro with proteins purified from budding yeast (17, 18) or human cells (19). Furthermore, there are mutants of MCM2 that show synthetic lethality with DBF4 mutants (6, 17), suggesting a biologically relevant interaction between DBF4 and MCM2. Nevertheless, the physiologic role of DDK phosphorylation of Mcm2 is a matter of dispute. In human cells, replacement of MCM2 DDK-phosphoacceptor residues with alanines inhibits DNA replication, suggesting that Dbf4-Cdc7 phosphorylation of Mcm2 in humans is important for DNA replication (20). In contrast, mutation of putative DDK phosphorylation sites at the N terminus of Schizosaccharomyces pombe Mcm2 results in viable cells, suggesting that phosphorylation of S. pombe Mcm2 by DDK is not critical for cell growth (10).In budding yeast, Cdc7 is present at high levels in G₁ and S phase, whereas Dbf4 levels peak in S phase (18, 21, 22). Furthermore, budding yeast DDK binds to chromatin during S phase (6), and it has been shown that Dbf4 is required for Cdc7 binding to chromatin in budding yeast (23, 24), fission yeast (25), and Xenopus (9). Human and fission yeast Cdc7 are inert on their own (7, 8), but Dbf4-Cdc7 is active in phosphorylating Mcm proteins in budding yeast (6, 26), fission yeast (7), and human (8, 10). Based on these data, it has been proposed that Dbf4 activates Cdc7 kinase in S phase and that Dbf4 interaction with Cdc7 is essential for Cdc7 kinase activity (6, 9, 18, 21–24). However, a mechanistic analysis of how Dbf4 activates Cdc7 has not yet been accomplished. For example, the multimeric state of the active Dbf4-Cdc7 complex is currently disputed. A heterodimer of fission yeast Cdc7 (Hsk1) in complex with fission yeast Dbf4 (Dfp1) can phosphorylate Mcm2 (7). However, in budding yeast, oligomers of Cdc7 exist in the cell (27), and Dbf4-Cdc7 exists as oligomers of 180 and 300 kDa (27).DDK phosphorylates the N termini of human Mcm2 (19, 20, 28), human Mcm4 (10), budding yeast Mcm4 (26), and fission yeast Mcm6 (10). Although the sequences of the Mcm N termini are poorly conserved, the DDK sites identified in each study have neighboring acidic residues. The residues of budding yeast Mcm2 that are phosphorylated by DDK have not yet been identified.In this study, we find that budding yeast Cdc7 is weakly active as a multimer in phosphorylating Mcm2. However, a low molecular weight form of Dbf4-Cdc7, likely a heterodimer, has a higher specific activity for phosphorylation of Mcm2. Dbf4 or DDK, but not Cdc7, binds tightly to Mcm2, suggesting that Dbf4 recruits Cdc7 to Mcm2. DDK phosphorylates two serine residues of Mcm2, Ser-164 and Ser-170, in an acidic region of the protein. Mutation of Ser-170 is lethal to yeast cells, but this phenotype is rescued by the DDK bypass mutant mcm5-bob1. We conclude that DDK phosphorylation of Ser-170 of Mcm2 is required for budding yeast growth.