The Apical Submembrane Cytoskeleton Participates in the Organization of the Apical Pole in Epithelial Cells

In a previous publication (Rodriguez, M.L., M. Brignoni, and P.J.I. Salas. 1994. J. Cell Sci. 107: 3145–3151), we described the existence of a terminal web-like structure in nonbrush border cells, which comprises a specifically apical cytokeratin, presumably cytokeratin 19. In the present study we confirmed the apical distribution of cytokeratin 19 and expanded that observation to other epithelial cells in tissue culture and in vivo. In tissue culture, subconfluent cell stocks under continuous treatment with two different 21-mer phosphorothioate oligodeoxy nucleotides that targeted cytokeratin 19 mRNA enabled us to obtain confluent monolayers with a partial (40–70%) and transitory reduction in this protein. The expression of other cytoskeletal proteins was undisturbed. This downregulation of cytokeratin 19 resulted in (a) decrease in the number of microvilli; (b) disorganization of the apical (but not lateral or basal) filamentous actin and abnormal apical microtubules; and (c) depletion or redistribution of apical membrane proteins as determined by differential apical–basolateral biotinylation. In fact, a subset of detergent-insoluble proteins was not expressed on the cell surface in cells with lower levels of cytokeratin 19. Apical proteins purified in the detergent phase of Triton X-114 (typically integral membrane proteins) and those differentially extracted in Triton X-100 at 37°C or in n-octyl-β-d-glycoside at 4°C (representative of GPIanchored proteins), appeared partially redistributed to the basolateral domain. A transmembrane apical protein, sucrase isomaltase, was found mispolarized in a subpopulation of the cells treated with antisense oligonucleotides, while the basolateral polarity of Na⁺– K⁺ATPase was not affected. Both sucrase isomaltase and alkaline phosphatase (a GPI-anchored protein) appeared partially depolarized in A19 treated CACO-2 monolayers as determined by differential biotinylation, affinity purification, and immunoblot. These results suggest that an apical submembrane cytoskeleton of intermediate filaments is expressed in a number of epithelia, including those without a brush border, although it may not be universal. In addition, these data indicate that this structure is involved in the organization of the apical region of the cytoplasm and the apical membrane.Cell polarity (asymmetry) is a broadly distributed and highly conserved feature of many different cell types, from prokaryotes to higher eukaryotes (Nelson, 1992). In multicellular organisms it is more conspicuous in, but not restricted to, neurons and epithelial cells. In the latter, the plasma membrane is organized in two different domains, apical and basolateral. This characteristic enables epithelia to accomplish their most specialized roles including absorption and secretion and, in general, to perform the functions of organs with an epithelial parenchyma such as the kidney, liver, intestine, stomach, exocrine glands, etc. (Simons and Fuller, 1985; Rodriguez-Boulan and Nelson, 1989).The acquisition and maintenance of epithelial polarity is based on multiple interrelated mechanisms that may work in parallel. Although the origin of polarization depends on the sorting of apical and basolateral membrane proteins at the trans-Golgi network (Simons and Wandinger-Ness, 1990), the mechanisms involved in the transport of apical or basolateral carrier vesicles, the specific fusion of such vesicles to the appropriate domain, and the retention of membrane proteins in their correct positions are also important (Wollner and Nelson, 1992). Various components of the cytoskeleton seem to be especially involved in these mechanisms (Mays et al., 1994). Among them, the microtubules, characteristically oriented in the apical–basal axis with their minus ends facing toward the apical domain, appear in a strategic position to transport carrier vesicles (Bacallao et al., 1989). This orientation is largely expected because of the apical distribution of centrioles and microtubule organizing centers in epithelial cells (Buendia et al., 1990). The molecular interactions responsible for that localization, however, are unknown.Actin is a widespread component of the membrane skeleton found under apical, lateral, and basal membranes in a nonpolarized fashion (Drenckhahn and Dermietzel, 1988; Vega-Salas et al., 1988). Actin bundling into microvillus cores in the presence of villin/fimbrin, on the other hand, is highly polarized to the apical domain (Ezzell et al., 1989; Louvard et al., 1992). In fact, different isoforms of plastins determine microvillus shape in a tissue-specific manner (Arpin et al., 1994b ). Why this arrangement is not found in other actin-rich regions of the cell is unclear (Louvard et al., 1992; Fath and Burgess, 1995).Fodrin, the nonerythroid form of spectrin, underlies the basolateral domain (Nelson and Veshnock, 1987a ,b) and is known to participate in the anchoring/retention of basolateral proteins (Drenckhahn et al., 1985; Nelson and Hammerton, 1989). Although different groups have found specific cytoskeletal anchoring of apical membrane proteins at the “correct” domain (Ojakian and Schwimmer, 1988; Salas et al., 1988; Parry et al., 1990), no specific apical counterpart of the basolateral fodrin cytoskeleton is known. This is especially puzzling since we showed that MDCK cells can maintain apical polarity in the absence of tight junctions, an indication that intradomain retention mechanisms are operational for apical membrane proteins (Vega-Salas et al., 1987a ).It is known that a network of intermediate filament (IF)¹, the major component of the terminal web, bridges the desmosomes under the apical membrane in brush border cells (Franke et al., 1979; Hull and Staehelin, 1979; Mooseker, 1985), although no specific protein has been identified with this structure. The observation of a remarkable resistance to extractions of apical proteins anchored to cytoskeletal preparations (Salas et al., 1988) comparable to that of intermediate filaments, led us to the study of cytokeratins in polarized cells. We developed an antibody against a 53-kD intermediate filament protein in MDCK cells. This protein was found to be distributed exclusively to the apical domain and to form large (2,900 S) multi-protein complexes with apical plasma membrane proteins. Internal microsequencing of the 53-kD protein showed very high (95– 100%) homology with two polypeptides in the rod domain of cytokeratin 19 (CK19; Moll et al., 1982) a highly conserved and peculiar intermediate filament protein (Bader et al., 1986). A complete identification however, could not be achieved (Rodriguez et al., 1994). The present study was undertaken to establish that identity and to determine the possible functions of this apical membrane skeleton. Because cytokeratins have been poorly characterized in canine cells, and no cytokeratin sequences are available in this species, we decided to switch from MDCK cells to two human epithelial cell lines, CACO-2, an extensively studied model of epithelial polarization that differentiates in culture to form brush border containing cells (Pinto et al., 1983), and MCF-10A (Tait et al., 1990), a nontumorigenic cell line derived from normal mammary epithelia, as a model of nonbrush border cells.To assess possible functions of cytokeratin 19, we chose to selectively reduce its synthesis using anti-sense phosphorothioate oligodeoxy nucleotides, an extensively used approach in recent years (e.g., Ferreira et al., 1992 ; Hubber et al., 1993; Takeuchi et al., 1994). Although we could not achieve a complete knock out, the steady-state levels of cytokeratin 19 were decreased to an extent that enabled us to detect significant changes in the phenotype of CACO-2 and MCF-10A cells.     

ERS-24, a Mammalian v-SNARE Implicated in Vesicle Traffic between the ER and the Golgi

We report the identification and characterization of ERS-24 (Endoplasmic Reticulum SNARE of 24 kD), a new mammalian v-SNARE implicated in vesicular transport between the ER and the Golgi. ERS24 is incorporated into 20S docking and fusion particles and disassembles from this complex in an ATP-dependent manner. ERS-24 has significant sequence homology to Sec22p, a v-SNARE in Saccharomyces cerevisiae required for transport between the ER and the Golgi. ERS-24 is localized to the ER and to the Golgi, and it is enriched in transport vesicles associated with these organelles.Newly formed transport vesicles have to be selectively targeted to their correct destinations, implying the existence of a set of compartment-specific proteins acting as unique receptor–ligand pairs. Such proteins have now been identified (Söllner et al., 1993a ; Rothman, 1994): one partner efficiently packaged into vesicles, termed a v-SNARE,¹ and the other mainly localized to the target compartment, a t-SNARE. Cognate pairs of v- and t-SNAREs, capable of binding each other specifically, have been identified for the ER–Golgi transport step (Lian and Ferro-Novick, 1993; Søgaard et al., 1994), the Golgi–plasma membrane transport step (Aalto et al., 1993; Protopopov et al., 1993; Brennwald et al., 1994) in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and regulated exocytosis in neuronal synapses (Söllner et al., 1993a ; for reviews see Scheller, 1995; Südhof, 1995). Additional components, like p115, rab proteins, and sec1 proteins, appear to regulate vesicle docking by controlling the assembly of SNARE complexes (Søgaard et al., 1994; Lian et al., 1994; Sapperstein et al., 1996; Hata et al., 1993; Pevsner et al., 1994).In contrast with vesicle docking, which requires compartment-specific components, the fusion of the two lipid bilayers uses a more general machinery derived, at least in part, from the cytosol (Rothman, 1994), which includes an ATPase, the N-ethylmaleimide–sensitive fusion protein (NSF) (Block et al., 1988; Malhotra et al., 1988), and soluble NSF attachment proteins (SNAPs) (Clary et al., 1990; Clary and Rothman, 1990; Whiteheart et al., 1993). Only the assembled v–t-SNARE complex provides high affinity sites for the consecutive binding of three SNAPs (Söllner et al., 1993b ; Hayashi et al., 1995) and NSF. When NSF is inactivated in vivo, v–t-SNARE complexes accumulate, confirming that NSF is needed for fusion after stable docking (Søgaard et al., 1994).The complex of SNAREs, SNAPs, and NSF can be isolated from detergent extracts of cellular membranes in the presence of ATPγS, or in the presence of ATP but in the absence of Mg²⁺, and sediments at ∼20 Svedberg (20S particle) (Wilson et al., 1992). In the presence of MgATP, the ATPase of NSF disassembles the v–t-SNARE complex and also releases SNAPs. It seems likely that this step somehow initiates fusion.To better understand vesicle flow patterns within cells, it is clearly of interest to identify new SNARE proteins. Presently, the most complete inventory is in yeast, but immunolocalization is difficult in yeast compared with animal cells, and many steps in protein transport have been reconstituted in animal extracts (Rothman, 1992) that have not yet been developed in yeast. Therefore, it is important to create an inventory of SNARE proteins in animal cells. The most unambiguous and direct method for isolating new SNAREs is to exploit their ability to assemble together with SNAPs and NSF into 20S particles and to disassemble into subunits when NSF hydrolyzes ATP. Similar approaches have already been successfully used to isolate new SNAREs implicated in ER to Golgi (Søgaard et al., 1994) and intra-Golgi transport (Nagahama et al., 1996), in addition to the original discovery of SNAREs in the context of neurotransmission (Söllner et al., 1993a ).Using this method, we now report the isolation and detailed characterization of ERS-24 (Endoplasmic Reticulum SNARE of 24 kD), a new mammalian v-SNARE that is localized to the ER and Golgi. ERS-24 is found in transport vesicles associated with the transitional areas of the ER and with the rims of Golgi cisternae, suggesting a role for ERS-24 in vesicular transport between these two compartments.     

Quantitative Proteomics Reveals that Plasma Membrane Microdomains From Poplar Cell Suspension Cultures Are Enriched in Markers of Signal Transduction,Molecular Transport,and Callose Biosynthesis

The plasma membrane (PM) is a highly dynamic interface that contains detergent-resistant microdomains (DRMs). The aim of this work was to determine the main functions of such microdomains in poplar through a proteomic analysis using gel-based and solution (iTRAQ) approaches. A total of 80 proteins from a limited number of functional classes were found to be significantly enriched in DRM relative to PM. The enriched proteins are markers of signal transduction, molecular transport at the PM, or cell wall biosynthesis. Their intrinsic properties are presented and discussed together with the biological significance of their enrichment in DRM. Of particular importance is the significant and specific enrichment of several callose [(1→3)-β-glucan] synthase isoforms, whose catalytic activity represents a final response to stress, leading to the deposition of callose plugs at the surface of the PM. An integrated functional model that connects all DRM-enriched proteins identified is proposed. This report is the only quantitative analysis available to date of the protein composition of membrane microdomains from a tree species.The plasma membrane (PM)¹ is considered as one of the most interactive and dynamic supramolecular structures of the cell (1, 2). It forms a physical interface between the cytoplasm and the extracellular environment and is involved in many biological processes such as metabolite and ion transport, gaseous exchanges, endocytosis, cell differentiation and proliferation, defense against pathogens, etc. (3). Various combinations of biochemical and analytical approaches have been used to characterize the PM proteome in different organisms such as yeast, plants, and animals (4–8). Typically, PM proteins are either embedded in the phospholipid bilayer through transmembrane helices or less tightly bound to the membrane through reversible or irreversible surface interactions. In eukaryotic cells, some PM proteins are enriched in lateral lipid patches that form microdomains within the membrane (9, 10). These microdomains are considered to act as functional units that support and regulate specific biological processes associated with the PM (9, 10). Often referred to as “membrane (lipid) rafts” in animals and other organisms, they are typically described as being enriched in sphingolipids, sterols, and phospholipids that contain essentially saturated fatty acids (9–11). Early work on PM microdomains has suggested that their specific lipid composition confers resistance to certain concentrations of nonionic detergents, such as Triton X-100 and Nonidet P-40 (10, 11). Although this property has been exploited experimentally to isolate so-called detergent-resistant microdomains (DRMs), the relationship between DRMs and membrane rafts remains controversial (12). Indeed, the relation between the two is much debated, essentially because the use of Triton X-100 at 4 °C to prepare DRMs has been proposed to potentially induce the artificial formation of detergent-resistant structures whose composition may not fully reflect that of physiological membrane rafts (12). Nonetheless, DRM preparations represent an excellent system for the isolation and identification of groups of proteins—eventually associated in complexes—that tend to naturally interact with specific sets of lipids, thereby forming specialized functional units. Their biochemical characterization is therefore most useful in attempts to better understand the mode of interaction of specific proteins with sterols and sphingolipids and to gain insight into the protein composition and biological activity of subdomains from the PM.Plant DRMs have been understudied relative to their animal counterparts. Indeed, proteomic studies have been undertaken on DRM preparations from only a limited number of plant species. These include tobacco (13–15), Arabidopsis (16), barrel clover (Medicago truncatula) (17), rice (18), oat, and rye (19). These studies, essentially based on qualitative or semi-quantitative proteomics, led to the identification of hundreds of proteins involved in a large range of mechanisms, functions, and biochemical activities (15–19). Depending on the report considered, a variable proportion of the identified proteins can be intuitively linked to DRMs and potentially to PM microdomains. However, many proteins that are clearly not related to the PM and its microdomains co-purify with DRM. These include, for instance, soluble proteins from cytoplasmic metabolic pathways; histones; and ribosomal, chloroplastic, and mitochondrial proteins (15–19). Thus, there is a need to obtain a more restricted list of proteins that are specifically enriched in DRMs and that define specialized functional structures. One way to tackle this problem is through quantitative proteomics, eventually in combination with complementary biochemical approaches. Although quantitative techniques have been increasingly applied to the proteomic analysis of complex mixtures of soluble proteins, their exploitation for the characterization of membrane samples remains challenging. As a result, very few studies of plant DRMs have been based on truly quantitative methods. For instance, stable isotope labeling combined with the selective disruption of sterol-rich membrane domains by methylcyclodextrin was performed in Arabidopsis cell cultures (20). A similar approach was used to study compositional changes of tobacco DRMs upon cell treatment with the signaling elicitor cryptogenin (21). In another study, 64 Arabidopsis proteins were shown to be significantly enriched in DRMs in response to a pathogen-associated molecular pattern protein (22). Together, these few quantitative proteomics analyses suggest a role of plant membrane microdomains in signal transduction, as in mammalian cells.Although several reports describe the partial characterization of DRMs from higher plants (13–23), there are no data available to date on the protein composition of DRMs from a tree species. We have therefore employed a quantitative proteomic approach for the characterization of DRMs from cell suspension cultures of Populus trichocarpa. In addition, earlier work in our laboratory based on biochemical activity assays revealed the presence of cell wall polysaccharide synthases in DRMs from poplar (23), which suggests the existence of DRM populations specialized in cell wall biosynthesis. This concept was further supported by similar investigations performed on DRMs isolated from the oomycete Saprolegnia monoica (24). The comprehensive quantitative proteomic analysis performed here revealed enrichment in the poplar DRMs of specific carbohydrate synthases involved in callose polymerization. Consistent with the role of callose in plant defense mechanisms, additional proteins related to stress responses and signal transduction were found to be specifically enriched in the poplar DRMs, together with proteins involved in molecular transport. To date, our report is the only analysis available of the DRM proteome of a tree species based on quantitative proteomics. The specific biochemical properties of the 80 proteins significantly enriched in DRMs are described and examined in relation to their localization in membrane microdomains. The relationship between poplar DRMs and molecular transport, signal transduction, stress responses, and callose biosynthesis is discussed, with support from a hypothetical model that integrates the corresponding enriched proteins.     

Evidence for a Role of CLIP-170 in the Establishment of Metaphase Chromosome Alignment

CLIPs (cytoplasmic linker proteins) are a class of proteins believed to mediate the initial, static interaction of organelles with microtubules. CLIP-170, the CLIP best characterized to date, is required for in vitro binding of endocytic transport vesicles to microtubules. We report here that CLIP-170 transiently associates with prometaphase chromosome kinetochores and codistributes with dynein and dynactin at kinetochores, but not polar regions, during mitosis. Like dynein and dynactin, a fraction of the total CLIP-170 pool can be detected on kinetochores of unattached chromosomes but not on those that have become aligned at the metaphase plate. The COOH-terminal domain of CLIP-170, when transiently overexpressed, localizes to kinetochores and causes endogenous full-length CLIP-170 to be lost from the kinetochores, resulting in a delay in prometaphase. Overexpression of the dynactin subunit, dynamitin, strongly reduces the amount of CLIP-170 at kinetochores suggesting that CLIP-170 targeting may involve the dynein/dynactin complex. Thus, CLIP-170 may be a linker for cargo in mitosis as well as interphase. However, dynein and dynactin staining at kinetochores are unaffected by this treatment and further overexpression studies indicate that neither CLIP-170 nor dynein and dynactin are required for the formation of kinetochore fibers. Nevertheless, these results strongly suggest that CLIP-170 contributes in some way to kinetochore function in vivo.Microtubules (MTs)¹ in vertebrate somatic cells are involved in intracellular transport and distribution of membranous organelles. Fundamental to this role are their tightly controlled, polarized organization, and unusual dynamic properties (Hirokawa, 1994) and their interaction with a complex set of MT-based motor proteins (Hirokawa, 1996; Sheetz, 1996; Goodson et al., 1997). During mitosis, they contribute to the motility of centrosomes, the construction of spindle poles (Karsenti et al., 1996; Merdes and Cleveland, 1997), and the dynamic movements of kinetochores (Rieder and Salmon, 1994) and chromosome arms (Barton and Goldstein, 1996; Vernos and Karsenti, 1996). The motor protein cytoplasmic dynein, drives the transport toward MT minus-ends of a variety of subcellular organelles (Schnapp and Reese, 1989; Schroer et al., 1989; Holzbaur and Vallee, 1994). Dynactin is a molecular complex originally identified as being essential for dynein-mediated movement of salt-washed vesicles in vitro (reviewed in Schroer, 1996; Schroer and Sheetz, 1991). Genetic studies in fungi, yeast, and flies have shown that the two complexes function together to drive nuclear migration, spindle and nuclear positioning and to permit proper neuronal development (Eshel et al., 1993; Clark and Meyer, 1994; Muhua et al., 1994; Plamann et al., 1994; McGrail et al., 1995; Karsenti et al., 1996). Biochemical studies suggest a direct interaction between certain subunits of dynein and dynactin (Karki and Holzbaur, 1995; Vaughan and Vallee, 1995). In vivo, the two molecules may bind one another transiently, since they have not been isolated as a stable complex.There is good evidence indicating that the dynein/dynactin complex, together with other motors (Eg5, and a minus-end oriented kinesin-related protein) and a structural protein (NuMa), drive the focusing of free microtubule ends into mitotic spindle poles (Merdes and Cleveland, 1997; Waters and Salmon, 1997)_. A trimolecular complex composed of NuMa and dynein/dynactin may be crucial in this process in both acentriolar (Merdes et al., 1996), and centriolar spindles (Gaglio et al., 1997). A number of findings also indicate that the combined actions of dynein and dynactin at the kinetochore contribute to chromosome alignment in vertebrate somatic cells. First, the initial interaction between polar spindle MTs and kinetochores seems to involve a tangential capture event (Merdes and De Mey, 1990; Rieder and Alexander, 1990) which is followed by a poleward gliding along the surface lattice of the MT (Hayden et al., 1990). Both in vivo and in vitro (Hyman and Mitchison, 1991) this gliding movement appears similar to the dynein-mediated retrograde transport of vesicular organelles along MTs. Consistent with this is the finding that both dynein (Pfarr et al., 1990; Steuer et al., 1990) and its activator, dynactin (Echeverri et al., 1996), are present at prometaphase kinetochores. Overexpression of dynamitin, a 50-kD subunit of the dynactin complex, results in the partial disruption of the dynactin complex and in the loss, from kinetochores, of dynein, as well as dynactin. Therefore, it has been proposed that dynactin mediates the association of dynein with kinetochores. Abnormal spindles with poorly focused poles are observed and the cells become arrested in pseudoprometaphase (Echeverri et al., 1996). Despite these findings, rigorous proof for a role of the dynein motor complex in kinetochore motility is still lacking, and its role may differ between lower and higher eucaryotes, and between mitosis and meiosis.CLIP-170 (Rickard and Kreis, 1996) is needed for in vitro binding of endocytic transport vesicles to MTs (Pierre et al., 1992). It is a nonmotor MT-binding protein that accumulates preferentially in the vicinity of MT plus ends and on early endosomes and endocytic transport vesicles in nondividing cells (Rickard and Kreis, 1990; Pierre et al., 1992). Like many MT-binding proteins, CLIP-170 is a homodimer whose NH₂-terminal head domains and COOH-terminal tail domains flank a central α-helical coiled-coil domain. The binding of CLIP-170 to MTs involves a 57–amino acid sequence present twice in the head domain (Pierre et al., 1992) and is regulated by phosphorylation (Rickard and Kreis, 1991). The COOH-terminal domain has been proposed to participate in targeting to endocytic membranes (Pierre et al., 1994). The fact that the latter move predominantly toward microtubule minus ends in a process most likely mediated by cytoplasmic dynein and dynactin (Aniento and Gruenberg, 1995), suggests that CLIP-170 may act in concert with this motor complex, and may be subject to regulated interactions with one or more dynactin or dynein subunits at the vesicle membrane.Here we report that during mitosis, CLIP-170 codistributes with dynein and dynactin at kinetochores, but not spindle poles. Evidence is presented that the COOH-terminal domain of CLIP-170 is responsible for its kinetochore targeting, and that this may be mediated by the complex of dynein and dynactin. The effects on mitotic progression of overexpression of wild type and several deletion mutants of CLIP-170 provide evidence for the involvement of CLIP-170 in kinetochore function early in mitosis. We also present in vivo evidence that neither CLIP-170 nor the complex of dynein and dynactin are required for formation of kinetochore fibers.     

Sec35p,a Novel Peripheral Membrane Protein,Is Required for ER to Golgi Vesicle Docking

SEC35 was identified in a novel screen for temperature-sensitive mutants in the secretory pathway of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Wuestehube et al., 1996. Genetics. 142:393–406). At the restrictive temperature, the sec35-1 strain exhibits a transport block between the ER and the Golgi apparatus and accumulates numerous vesicles. SEC35 encodes a novel cytosolic protein of 32 kD, peripherally associated with membranes. The temperature-sensitive phenotype of sec35-1 is efficiently suppressed by YPT1, which encodes the rab-like GTPase required early in the secretory pathway, or by SLY1-20, which encodes a dominant form of the ER to Golgi target -SNARE–associated protein Sly1p. Weaker suppression is evident upon overexpression of genes encoding the vesicle-SNAREs SEC22, BET1, or YKT6. The cold-sensitive lethality that results from deleting SEC35 is suppressed by YPT1 or SLY1-20. These genetic relationships suggest that Sec35p acts upstream of, or in conjunction with, Ypt1p and Sly1p as was previously found for Uso1p. Using a cell-free assay that measures distinct steps in vesicle transport from the ER to the Golgi, we find Sec35p is required for a vesicle docking stage catalyzed by Uso1p. These genetic and biochemical results suggest Sec35p acts with Uso1p to dock ER-derived vesicles to the Golgi complex.Protein transport through the secretory pathway occurs via transport vesicles under the direction of a large set of protein components (Rothman, 1994). The process can be divided into three stages: (a) vesicle budding, (b) vesicle docking, and (c) membrane fusion, with distinct sets of proteins mediating each phase. The budding step involves recruitment of coat proteins to the membrane and culminates with the release of coated vesicles (Schekman and Orci, 1996). The docking reaction is likely to require a set of integral membrane proteins on the vesicle and target membranes, termed v-SNAREs¹ and t-SNAREs (vesicle- and target membrane-soluble N-ethylmaleimide–sensitive fusion protein [NSF] attachment protein [SNAP] receptors, respectively), that are thought to confer specificity through their pair-wise interactions (Söllner et al., 1993b ). Small GTP-binding proteins of the rab family also assist in the docking process (Ferro-Novick and Novick, 1993), but their precise function is not known. The fusion step ensues after docking and results in the delivery of the vesicular cargo to the next compartment in the secretory pathway.Vesicular transport from the ER to the Golgi apparatus in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae has been extensively characterized. Transport vesicle budding involves the assembly of the COPII coat, composed of the Sec13p/Sec31p (Pryer et al., 1993; Salama et al., 1993; Barlowe et al., 1994) and Sec23p/Sec24p heterodimers (Hicke and Schekman, 1989; Hicke et al., 1992), under the direction of an integral membrane protein, Sec12p (Nakano et al., 1988; Barlowe and Schekman, 1993), a small GTPase, Sar1p (Nakano and Muramatsu, 1989), and a multidomain protein, Sec16p (Espenshade et al., 1995; Shaywitz et al., 1997). Docking is thought to require a tethering event mediated by Uso1p (Cao et al., 1998), the yeast homologue of mammalian p115 (Barroso et al., 1995; Sapperstein et al., 1995), followed by or concurrent with the interaction of a set of ER to Golgi v-SNAREs, Bet1p, Bos1p, Sec22p (Newman and Ferro-Novick, 1987; Newman et al., 1990; Ossig et al., 1991; Shim et al., 1991; Søgaard et al., 1994) and perhaps Ykt6p (Søgaard et al., 1994; McNew et al., 1997), with the cognate t-SNARE on the Golgi, Sed5p (Hardwick and Pelham, 1992). For some time it was thought that fusion may be initiated by disassembly of the v/t-SNARE complex (Söllner et al., 1993a ) by yeast SNAP, Sec17p, (Griff et al., 1992) and NSF, Sec18p (Eakle et al., 1988; Wilson et al., 1989). However, this concept has been challenged by studies with a yeast system that reconstitutes homotypic vacuolar fusion, which suggests the action of Sec18p is before vesicle docking (Mayer et al., 1996; Mayer and Wickner, 1997). In addition, a prefusion role for NSF has been supported by the recent finding that liposomes bearing SNAREs alone can fuse in the absence of NSF (Weber et al., 1998).Several proteins involved in the regulation of yeast ER to Golgi v/t-SNARE complex assembly have been identified, including Ypt1p, Uso1p, and Sly1p. Ypt1p is a member of the rab family of small GTP-binding proteins that have been identified as important components of almost every stage in the secretory pathway (Ferro-Novick and Novick, 1993). Hydrolysis of GTP by rab-like proteins has been hypothesized to provide the regulatory switch that controls the fidelity of vesicular transport (Bourne, 1988). A second protein, Uso1p (Nakajima et al., 1991), appears to function in the same pathway as Ypt1p (Sapperstein et al., 1996), and both proteins have been demonstrated to be essential for SNARE complex assembly (Søgaard et al., 1994; Sapperstein et al., 1996; Lupashin and Waters, 1997). The third protein, Sly1p, is associated with the t-SNARE Sed5p (Søgaard et al., 1994). SLY1 is an essential gene in yeast (Dascher et al., 1991; Ossig et al., 1991), and Sly1p is required for ER to Golgi transport in vitro (Lupashin et al., 1996) and in vivo (Ossig et al., 1991). However, several lines of evidence, particularly from Sly1p homologues in other organisms, indicate that Sly1p may also function as a negative regulator of v/t-SNARE complex assembly, perhaps by preventing the association of the v- and t-SNAREs (Hosono et al., 1992; Pevsner et al., 1994; Schulze et al., 1994). A dominant allele of SLY1, termed SLY1-20, is capable of suppressing mutations in YPT1 and USO1, including complete deletions (Dascher et al., 1991; Sapperstein et al., 1996). Thus, in the presence of Sly1-20p, two components required for SNARE complex assembly are no longer essential. We have proposed a model (Sapperstein et al., 1996; Lupashin and Waters, 1997) in which Ypt1p and Uso1p function to relieve the inhibitory action of Sly1p on SNARE complex assembly. In this model Sly1-20p can be thought of as a noninhibitory form of SLY1 that renders Ypt1p and Uso1p superfluous.We believe that the ability of SLY1-20 to suppress defects in upstream docking regulators can be used to identify additional components involved in the regulation of vesicular docking. We have undertaken a genetic screen (to be presented elsewhere) to isolate novel components in this pathway which, when mutated, depend upon Sly1-20p for viability. In the course of this work, we discovered that two recently identified mutants, sec34 and sec35, can be suppressed by SLY1-20 and thus satisfy the criterion of our screen. These mutants were isolated in a novel screen to identify components involved in transport at any step between the ER and the trans-Golgi network (i.e., the Kex2p compartment) in yeast (Wuestehube et al., 1996). Both sec34 and sec35 accumulate the core-glycosylated form of secretory proteins at the nonpermissive temperature, indicating a block in ER to Golgi transport. Furthermore, electron microscopy indicated that both sec34 and sec35 accumulate numerous vesicles upon shift to the restrictive temperature (Wuestehube et al., 1996), a hallmark of genes whose protein products are involved in the docking or fusion phase of transport (Kaiser and Schekman, 1990). In this report we describe the cloning of SEC35 and analysis of its genetic interactions with other secretory genes. Strong genetic interaction between SEC35 and SLY1, YPT1, and USO1 suggests that Sec35p may function in vesicle docking. To test this possibility, we devised an in vitro transport assay that depends on the addition of purified Sec35p and Uso1p. Vesicles synthesized in the absence of functional Sec35p do not fuse with the Golgi compartment and remain as freely diffusible intermediates. Upon addition of Sec35p and Uso1p, vesicles dock to the Golgi and proceed to membrane fusion. Requirements for Sec35p at the vesicle docking step correlates our genetic experiments with the biochemically distinguishable steps of vesicle docking and membrane fusion.     

A Small Conserved Domain in the Yeast Spa2p Is Necessary and Sufficient for Its Polarized Localization

SPA2 encodes a yeast protein that is one of the first proteins to localize to sites of polarized growth, such as the shmoo tip and the incipient bud. The dynamics and requirements for Spa2p localization in living cells are examined using Spa2p green fluorescent protein fusions. Spa2p localizes to one edge of unbudded cells and subsequently is observable in the bud tip. Finally, during cytokinesis Spa2p is present as a ring at the mother–daughter bud neck. The bud emergence mutants bem1 and bem2 and mutants defective in the septins do not affect Spa2p localization to the bud tip. Strikingly, a small domain of Spa2p comprised of 150 amino acids is necessary and sufficient for localization to sites of polarized growth. This localization domain and the amino terminus of Spa2p are essential for its function in mating. Searching the yeast genome database revealed a previously uncharacterized protein which we name, Sph1p (Spa2p homolog), with significant homology to the localization domain and amino terminus of Spa2p. This protein also localizes to sites of polarized growth in budding and mating cells. SPH1, which is similar to SPA2, is required for bipolar budding and plays a role in shmoo formation. Overexpression of either Spa2p or Sph1p can block the localization of either protein fused to green fluorescent protein, suggesting that both Spa2p and Sph1p bind to and are localized by the same component. The identification of a 150–amino acid domain necessary and sufficient for localization of Spa2p to sites of polarized growth and the existence of this domain in another yeast protein Sph1p suggest that the early localization of these proteins may be mediated by a receptor that recognizes this small domain.Polarized cell growth and division are essential cellular processes that play a crucial role in the development of eukaryotic organisms. Cell fate can be determined by cell asymmetry during cell division (Horvitz and Herskowitz, 1992; Cohen and Hyman, 1994; Rhyu and Knoblich, 1995). Consequently, the molecules involved in the generation and maintenance of cell asymmetry are important in the process of cell fate determination. Polarized growth can occur in response to external signals such as growth towards a nutrient (Rodriguez-Boulan and Nelson, 1989; Eaton and Simons, 1995) or hormone (Jackson and Hartwell, 1990a , b ; Segall, 1993; Keynes and Cook, 1995) and in response to internal signals as in Caenorhabditis elegans (Goldstein et al., 1993; Kimble, 1994; Priess, 1994) and Drosophila melanogaster (St Johnston and Nusslein-Volhard, 1992; Anderson, 1995) early development. Saccharomyces cerevisiae undergo polarized growth towards an external cue during mating and to an internal cue during budding. Polarization towards a mating partner (shmoo formation) and towards a new bud site requires a number of proteins (Chenevert, 1994; Chant, 1996; Drubin and Nelson, 1996). Many of these proteins are necessary for both processes and are localized to sites of polarized growth, identified by the insertion of new cell wall material (Tkacz and Lampen, 1972; Farkas et al., 1974; Lew and Reed, 1993) to the shmoo tip, bud tip, and mother–daughter bud neck. In yeast, proteins localized to growth sites include cytoskeletal proteins (Adams and Pringle, 1984; Kilmartin and Adams, 1984; Ford, S.K., and J.R. Pringle. 1986. Yeast. 2:S114; Drubin et al., 1988; Snyder, 1989; Snyder et al., 1991; Amatruda and Cooper, 1992; Lew and Reed, 1993; Waddle et al., 1996), neck filament components (septins) (Byers and Goetsch, 1976; Kim et al., 1991; Ford and Pringle, 1991; Haarer and Pringle, 1987; Longtine et al., 1996), motor proteins (Lillie and Brown, 1994), G-proteins (Ziman, 1993; Yamochi et al., 1994; Qadota et al., 1996), and two membrane proteins (Halme et al., 1996; Roemer et al., 1996; Qadota et al., 1996). Septins, actin, and actin-associated proteins localize early in the cell cycle, before a bud or shmoo tip is recognizable. How this group of proteins is localized to and maintained at sites of cell growth remains unclear.Spa2p is one of the first proteins involved in bud formation to localize to the incipient bud site before a bud is recognizable (Snyder, 1989; Snyder et al., 1991; Chant, 1996). Spa2p has been localized to where a new bud will form at approximately the same time as actin patches concentrate at this region (Snyder et al., 1991). An understanding of how Spa2p localizes to incipient bud sites will shed light on the very early stages of cell polarization. Later in the cell cycle, Spa2p is also found at the mother–daughter bud neck in cells undergoing cytokinesis. Spa2p, a nonessential protein, has been shown to be involved in bud site selection (Snyder, 1989; Zahner et al., 1996), shmoo formation (Gehrung and Snyder, 1990), and mating (Gehrung and Snyder, 1990; Chenevert et al., 1994; Yorihuzi and Ohsumi, 1994; Dorer et al., 1995). Genetic studies also suggest that Spa2p has a role in cytokinesis (Flescher et al., 1993), yet little is known about how this protein is localized to sites of polarized growth.We have used Spa2p green fluorescent protein (GFP)¹ fusions to investigate the early localization of Spa2p to sites of polarized growth in living cells. Our results demonstrate that a small domain of ∼150 amino acids of this large 1,466-residue protein is sufficient for targeting to sites of polarized growth and is necessary for Spa2p function. Furthermore, we have identified and characterized a novel yeast protein, Sph1p, which has homology to both the Spa2p amino terminus and the Spa2p localization domain. Sph1p localizes to similar regions of polarized growth and sph1 mutants have similar phenotypes as spa2 mutants.     

Neocentromere-mediated Chromosome Movement in Maize

Neocentromere activity is a classic example of nonkinetochore chromosome movement. In maize, neocentromeres are induced by a gene or genes on Abnormal chromosome 10 (Ab10) which causes heterochromatic knobs to move poleward at meiotic anaphase. Here we describe experiments that test how neocentromere activity affects the function of linked centromere/kinetochores (kinetochores) and whether neocentromeres and kinetochores are mobilized on the spindle by the same mechanism. Using a newly developed system for observing meiotic chromosome congression and segregation in living maize cells, we show that neocentromeres are active from prometaphase through anaphase. During mid-anaphase, normal chromosomes move on the spindle at an average rate of 0.79 μm/min. The presence of Ab10 does not affect the rate of normal chromosome movement but propels neocentromeres poleward at rates as high as 1.4 μm/min. Kinetochore-mediated chromosome movement is only marginally affected by the activity of a linked neocentromere. Combined in situ hybridization/immunocytochemistry is used to demonstrate that unlike kinetochores, neocentromeres associate laterally with microtubules and that neocentromere movement is correlated with knob size. These data suggest that microtubule depolymerization is not required for neocentromere motility. We argue that neocentromeres are mobilized on microtubules by the activity of minus end–directed motor proteins that interact either directly or indirectly with knob DNA sequences. C urrent models suggest that chromosomes move by a combination of forces generated by microtubule disassembly (Inoue and Salmon, 1995; Waters et al., 1996) and the activity of molecular motors (Vernos and Karsenti, 1996; Yen and Schaar, 1996). Microtubule disassembly generates a constant poleward force; while molecular motors can generate force in either poleward or away-from-pole directions, depending on the characteristics of the motor protein. Both plus and minus end–directed microtubule-based motors are localized to kinetochores (Hyman and Mitchison, 1991). Immunolocalization experiments indicate that mammalian kinetochores contain the minus end– directed motor dynein throughout metaphase and anaphase (Pfarr et al., 1990; Steuer et al., 1990). The kinesin-like proteins CENP-E, which has a transient kinetochore localization in animals, and MCAK, which is localized between the kinetochore plates of mammalian chromosomes, are also thought to generate and/or regulate chromosome movement (Yen et al., 1992; Lombillo et al., 1995; Wordeman and Mitchison, 1995).In addition to the molecular motors on kinetochores, several kinesin-like proteins are localized to chromosome arms (Vernos and Karsenti, 1996). Two subfamilies of arm-based motors have been identified in animals: the NOD subfamily (Afshar et al., 1995; Tokai et al., 1996) and the Xklp1/chromokinesin subfamily (Vernos et al., 1995; Wang and Adler, 1995). Both Nod and Xklp1 are required for positioning chromosomes on the metaphase plate, suggesting that they encode plus end–directed motors (Afshar et al., 1995; Vernos et al., 1995). Other evidence suggests that minus end–directed motors interact with chromosome arms. In the plant Haemanthus, a poleward force acts along chromosome arms during metaphase (Khodjakov et al., 1996), and forces propelling chromosome arms poleward have been detected during anaphase in crane fly spermatocytes (Adames and Forer, 1996). Little is known about how poleward arm motility at metaphase–anaphase affects the fidelity or rate of chromosome segregation.The neocentromeres of maize (Rhoades and Vilkomerson, 1942) provide a particularly striking example of poleward chromosome arm motility. In the presence of Abnormal chromosome 10 (Ab10),¹ heterochromatic DNA domains known as knobs are transformed into neocentromeres and mobilized on the spindle (Rhoades and Vilkomerson, 1942; Peacock et al., 1981; Dawe and Cande, 1996). Knobs are primarily composed of a tandem 180-bp repeat (Peacock et al., 1981) which shows homology to a maize B centromere clone (Alfenito and Birchler, 1993). A characteristic feature of neocentromeres is that they arrive at the spindle poles in advance of centromeres; in extreme cases the neocentromere-bearing chromosome arms stretch towards the poles (Rhoades and Vilkomerson, 1942; Rhoades, 1952). A recently identified mutation (smd1) demonstrates that a trans-acting factor(s) encoded on Ab10 is essential for converting the normally quiescent heterochromatic knobs into active neocentromeres (Dawe and Cande, 1996).Here we use neocentromeres as a model for understanding the mechanisms and importance of nonkinetochore chromosome movement. As a part of our analysis, we developed a four-dimensional system for observing chromosome segregation in living meiocytes. Our experiments were designed to determine (a) how poleward arm motility affects the rate and fidelity of chromosome segregation; and (b) whether the mechanism of neocentromere motility is comparable to the mechanism of kinetochore motility.     

Requirement of Myosin Vb��Rab11a��Rab11-FIP2 Complex in Cholesterol-regulated Translocation of NPC1L1 to the Cell Surface

Niemann-Pick C1-like 1 (NPC1L1) plays a critical role in the enterohepatic absorption of free cholesterol. Cellular cholesterol depletion induces the transport of NPC1L1 from the endocytic recycling compartment to the plasma membrane (PM), and cholesterol replenishment causes the internalization of NPC1L1 together with cholesterol via clathrin-mediated endocytosis. Although NPC1L1 has been characterized, the other proteins involved in cholesterol absorption and the endocytic recycling of NPC1L1 are largely unknown. Most of the vesicular trafficking events are dependent on the cytoskeleton and motor proteins. Here, we investigated the roles of the microfilament and microfilament-associated triple complex composed of myosin Vb, Rab11a, and Rab11-FIP2 in the transport of NPC1L1 from the endocytic recycling compartment to the PM. Interfering with the dynamics of the microfilament by pharmacological treatment delayed the transport of NPC1L1 to the cell surface. Meanwhile, inactivation of any component of the myosin Vb·Rab11a·Rab11-FIP2 triple complex inhibited the export of NPC1L1. Expression of the dominant-negative mutants of myosin Vb, Rab11a, or Rab11-FIP2 decreased the cellular cholesterol uptake by blocking the transport of NPC1L1 to the PM. These results suggest that the efficient transport of NPC1L1 to the PM is dependent on the microfilament-associated myosin Vb·Rab11a·Rab11-FIP2 triple complex.Cholesterol homeostasis in human bodies is maintained through regulated cholesterol synthesis, absorption, and excretion. Intestinal cholesterol absorption is one of the major pathways to maintain cholesterol balance. NPC1L1 (Niemann-Pick C1-like protein 1), a polytopic transmembrane protein highly expressed in the intestine and liver, is required for dietary cholesterol uptake and biliary cholesterol reabsorption (1–4). Genetic or pharmaceutical inactivation of NPC1L1 significantly inhibits cholesterol absorption and confers the resistance to diet-induced hypercholesterolemia (1, 2, 4). Ezetimibe, an NPC1L1-specific inhibitor, is currently used to prevent and treat cardiovascular diseases (5).Human NPC1L1 contains 1,332 residues with 13 transmembrane domains (6). The third to seventh transmembrane helices constitute a conserved sterol-sensing domain (4, 7). NPC1L1 recycles between the endocytic recycling compartment (ERC)³ and the plasma membrane (PM) in response to the changes of cholesterol level (8). ERC is a part of early endosomes that is involved in the recycling of many transmembrane proteins. It is also reported that ERC is a pool for free cholesterol storage (9). When cellular cholesterol concentration is low, NPC1L1 moves from the ERC to the PM (8, 10). Under cholesterol-replenishing conditions, NPC1L1 and cholesterol are internalized together and transported to the ERC (8). Disruption of microfilament, depletion of the clathrin·AP2 complex, or ezetimibe treatment can impede the endocytosis of NPC1L1, thereby decreasing cholesterol internalization (8, 10, 11).The microfilament (MF) system, part of the cytoskeleton network, is required for multiple cellular functions such as cell shape maintenance, cell motility, mitosis, protein secretion, and endocytosis (12, 13). The major players in the microfilament system are actin fibers and motor proteins (14). Actin fibers form a network that serves as the tracks for vesicular transport (15, 16). Meanwhile, the dynamic assembly and disassembly of actin fibers and the motor proteins provides the driving force for a multitude of membrane dynamics including endocytosis, exocytosis, and vesicular trafficking between compartments (15, 16).Myosins are a large family of motor proteins that are responsible for actin-based mobility (14). Class V myosins (17, 18), comprising myosin Va, Vb, and Vc, are involved in a wide range of vesicular trafficking events in different mammalian tissues. Myosin Va is expressed mainly in neuronal tissues (19, 20), whereas myosins Vb and Vc are universally expressed with enrichment in epithelial cells (21, 22). Class V myosins are recruited to their targeting vesicles by small GTPase proteins (Rab) (23). Rab11a and Rab11 family-interacting protein 2 (Rab11-FIP2) facilitate the binding of myosin Vb to the cargo proteins of endocytic recycling vesicles (24–28).Myosin Vb binds Rab11a and Rab11-FIP2 through the C-terminal tail (CT) domain. The triple complex of myosin Vb, Rab11a, and Rab11-FIP2 is critical for endocytic vesicular transport and the recycling of many proteins including transferrin receptor (29), AMPA receptors (30), CFTR (28), GLUT4 (31, 32), aquaporin-2 (26), and β2-adrenergic receptors (33). The myosin Vb-CT domain (24) competes for binding to Rab11a and Rab11-FIP2 and functions as a dominant-negative form. Expression of the CT domain substantially impairs the transport of vesicles. Deficient endocytic trafficking is also observed in cells expressing the GDP-locked form of Rab11a (S25N) (34) or a truncated Rab11-FIP2, which competes for the rab11a binding (35).Here we investigated the roles of actin fibers and motor proteins in the cholesterol-regulated endocytic recycling of NPC1L1. Using pharmaceutical inactivation, dominant-negative forms, and an siRNA technique, we demonstrated that actin fibers and myosin Vb·Rab11a·Rab11-FIP2 triple complex are involved in the export of NPC1L1 to the PM and that this intact MF-associated triple complex is required for efficient cholesterol uptake. Characterization of the molecules involved in the recycling of NPC1L1 may shed new light upon the mechanism of cholesterol absorption.     

The Amino-terminal Domain of Desmoplakin Binds to Plakoglobin and Clusters Desmosomal Cadherin–Plakoglobin Complexes

The desmosome is a highly organized plasma membrane domain that couples intermediate filaments to the plasma membrane at regions of cell–cell adhesion. Desmosomes contain two classes of cadherins, desmogleins, and desmocollins, that bind to the cytoplasmic protein plakoglobin. Desmoplakin is a desmosomal component that plays a critical role in linking intermediate filament networks to the desmosomal plaque, and the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin targets desmoplakin to the desmosome. However, the desmosomal protein(s) that bind the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin have not been identified. To determine if the desmosomal cadherins and plakoglobin interact with the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin, these proteins were co-expressed in L-cell fibroblasts, cells that do not normally express desmosomal components. When expressed in L-cells, the desmosomal cadherins and plakoglobin exhibited a diffuse distribution. However, in the presence of an amino-terminal desmoplakin polypeptide (DP-NTP), the desmosomal cadherins and plakoglobin were observed in punctate clusters that also contained DP-NTP. In addition, plakoglobin and DP-NTP were recruited to cell–cell interfaces in L-cells co-expressing a chimeric cadherin with the E-cadherin extracellular domain and the desmoglein-1 cytoplasmic domain, and these cells formed structures that were ultrastructurally similar to the outer plaque of the desmosome. In transient expression experiments in COS cells, the recruitment of DP-NTP to cell borders by the chimera required co-expression of plakoglobin. Plakoglobin and DP-NTP co-immunoprecipitated when extracted from L-cells, and yeast two hybrid analysis indicated that DP-NTP binds directly to plakoglobin but not Dsg1. These results identify a role for desmoplakin in organizing the desmosomal cadherin–plakoglobin complex and provide new insights into the hierarchy of protein interactions that occur in the desmosomal plaque.Desmosomes are highly organized adhesive intercellular junctions that couple intermediate filaments to the cell surface at sites of cell–cell adhesion (Farquhar and Palade, 1963; Staehelin, 1974; Schwarz et al., 1990; Garrod, 1993; Collins and Garrod, 1994; Cowin and Burke, 1996; Kowalczyk and Green, 1996). Desmosomes are prominent in tissues that experience mechanical stress, such as heart and epidermis, and the disruption of desmosomes or the intermediate filament system in these organs has devastating effects on tissue integrity (Steinert and Bale, 1993; Coulombe and Fuchs, 1994; Fuchs, 1994; McLean and Lane, 1995; Stanley, 1995; Bierkamp et al., 1996; Ruiz et al., 1996). Desmosomes are highly insoluble structures that can withstand harsh denaturing conditions (Skerrow and Matoltsy, 1974; Gorbsky and Steinberg, 1981; Jones et al., 1988; Schwarz et al., 1990). This property of desmosomes facilitated early identification of desmosomal components but has impaired subsequent biochemical analysis of the protein complexes that form between desmosomal components. Ultrastructurally, desmosomes contain a core region that includes the plasma membranes of adjacent cells and a cytoplasmic plaque that anchors intermediate filaments to the plasma membrane. The plaque can be further divided into an outer dense plaque subjacent to the plasma membrane and an inner dense plaque through which intermediate filaments appear to loop.Molecular genetic analysis has revealed that the desmosomal glycoproteins, the desmogleins and desmocollins, are members of the cadherin family of cell–cell adhesion molecules (for review see Buxton et al., 1993, 1994; Cowin and Mechanic, 1994; Kowalczyk et al., 1996). The classical cadherins, such as E-cadherin, mediate calcium-dependent, homophilic cell–cell adhesion (Nagafuchi et al., 1987). The mechanism by which the desmosomal cadherins mediate cell–cell adhesion remains elusive (Amagai et al., 1994; Chidgey et al., 1996; Kowalczyk et al., 1996), although heterophilic interactions have recently been detected between desmogleins and desmocollins (Chitaev and Troyanovsky, 1997). Both classes of the desmosomal cadherins associate with the cytoplasmic plaque protein plakoglobin (Kowalczyk et al., 1994; Mathur et al., 1994; Roh and Stanley, 1995b ; Troyanovsky et al., 1994), which is part of a growing family of proteins that share a repeated motif first identified in the Drosophila protein Armadillo (Peifer and Wieschaus, 1990). This multigene family also includes the desmosomal proteins band 6/plakophilin 1, plakophilin 2a and 2b, and p0071, which are now considered to comprise a subclass of the armadillo family of proteins (Hatzfeld et al., 1994; Heid et al., 1994; Schmidt et al., 1994; Hatzfeld and Nachtsheim, 1996; Mertens et al., 1996).The most abundant desmosomal plaque protein is desmoplakin, which is predicted to be a homodimer containing two globular end domains joined by a central α-helical coiled-coil rod domain (O''Keefe et al., 1989; Green et al., 1990; Virata et al., 1992). Previous studies have demonstrated that the carboxyl-terminal domain of desmoplakin interacts with intermediate filaments (Stappenbeck and Green, 1992; Stappenbeck et al., 1993; Kouklis et al., 1994; Meng et al., 1997), and the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin is required for desmoplakin localization to the desmosomal plaque (Stappenbeck et al., 1993). Direct evidence supporting a role for desmoplakin in intermediate filament attachment to desmosomes was provided recently when expression of an amino-terminal polypeptide of desmoplakin was found to displace endogenous desmoplakin from cell borders and disrupt intermediate filament attachment to the cell surface in A431 epithelial cell lines (Bornslaeger et al., 1996).The classical cadherins, such as E-cadherin, bind directly to both β-catenin and plakoglobin (Aberle et al., 1994; Jou et al., 1995; for review see Cowin and Burke, 1996). β-Catenin is also an armadillo family member (McCrea et al., 1991; Peifer et al., 1992), and both plakoglobin and β-catenin bind directly to α-catenin (Aberle et al., 1994, 1996; Jou et al., 1995; Sacco et al., 1995; Obama and Ozawa, 1997). α-Catenin is a vinculin homologue (Nagafuchi et al., 1991) and associates with both α-actinin and actin (Knudson et al., 1995; Rimm et al., 1995; Nieset et al., 1997). Through interactions with β- and α-catenin, E-cadherin is coupled indirectly to the actin cytoskeleton, and this linkage is required for the adhesive activity of E-cadherin (Ozawa et al., 1990; Shimoyama et al., 1992). In addition, E-cadherin association with plakoglobin appears to be required for assembly of desmosomes (Lewis et al., 1997), underscoring the importance of E-cadherin in the overall program of intercellular junction assembly. However, the hierarchy of molecular interactions that couple the desmosomal cadherins to the intermediate filament cytoskeleton is largely unknown, although the desmocollin cytoplasmic domain appears to play an important role in recruiting components of the desmosomal plaque (Troyanovsky et al., 1993, 1994). Since desmosomal cadherins form complexes with plakoglobin and because the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin is required for desmoplakin localization at desmosomes, we hypothesized that the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin interacts with the desmosomal cadherin– plakoglobin complex.In previous studies, we used L-cell fibroblasts to characterize plakoglobin interactions with the cytoplasmic domains of the desmosomal cadherins and found that the desmosomal cadherins regulate plakoglobin metabolic stability (Kowalczyk et al., 1994) but do not mediate homophilic adhesion (Kowalczyk et al., 1996). To test the ability of the desmoplakin amino-terminal domain to interact with the desmosomal cadherin–plakoglobin complex, we established a series of L-cell lines expressing the desmosomal cadherins in the presence or absence of a desmoplakin amino-terminal polypeptide (DP-NTP).¹ The results indicate that one important function of the desmoplakin amino-terminal domain is to cluster desmosomal cadherin–plakoglobin complexes. In addition, DP-NTP and plakoglobin were found to form complexes that could be co-immunoprecipitated from L-cell lysates. Using the yeast two hybrid system, DP-NTP was found to bind directly to plakoglobin but not Dsg1. These data suggest that plakoglobin couples the amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin to the desmosomal cadherins and that desmoplakin plays an important role in organizing the desmosomal cadherin–plakoglobin complex into discrete plasma membrane domains.     

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]     

Algorithms for Finding Small Attractors in Boolean Networks

A Boolean network is a model used to study the interactions between different genes in genetic regulatory networks. In this paper, we present several algorithms using gene ordering and feedback vertex sets to identify singleton attractors and small attractors in Boolean networks. We analyze the average case time complexities of some of the proposed algorithms. For instance, it is shown that the outdegree-based ordering algorithm for finding singleton attractors works in time for , which is much faster than the naive time algorithm, where is the number of genes and is the maximum indegree. We performed extensive computational experiments on these algorithms, which resulted in good agreement with theoretical results. In contrast, we give a simple and complete proof for showing that finding an attractor with the shortest period is NP-hard.[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]     

Tyrosine Phosphorylation at a Site Highly Conserved in the L1 Family of Cell Adhesion Molecules Abolishes Ankyrin Binding and Increases Lateral Mobility of Neurofascin

This paper presents evidence that a member of the L1 family of ankyrin-binding cell adhesion molecules is a substrate for protein tyrosine kinase(s) and phosphatase(s), identifies the highly conserved FIGQY tyrosine in the cytoplasmic domain as the principal site of phosphorylation, and demonstrates that phosphorylation of the FIGQY tyrosine abolishes ankyrin-binding activity. Neurofascin expressed in neuroblastoma cells is subject to tyrosine phosphorylation after activation of tyrosine kinases by NGF or bFGF or inactivation of tyrosine phosphatases with vanadate or dephostatin. Furthermore, both neurofascin and the related molecule Nr-CAM are tyrosine phosphorylated in a developmentally regulated pattern in rat brain. The FIGQY sequence is present in the cytoplasmic domains of all members of the L1 family of neural cell adhesion molecules. Phosphorylation of the FIGQY tyrosine abolishes ankyrin binding, as determined by coimmunoprecipitation of endogenous ankyrin and in vitro ankyrin-binding assays. Measurements of fluorescence recovery after photobleaching demonstrate that phosphorylation of the FIGQY tyrosine also increases lateral mobility of neurofascin expressed in neuroblastoma cells to the same extent as removal of the cytoplasmic domain. Ankyrin binding, therefore, appears to regulate the dynamic behavior of neurofascin and is the target for regulation by tyrosine phosphorylation in response to external signals. These findings suggest that tyrosine phosphorylation at the FIGQY site represents a highly conserved mechanism, used by the entire class of L1-related cell adhesion molecules, for regulation of ankyrin-dependent connections to the spectrin skeleton.Vertebrate L1, neurofascin, neuroglial cell adhesion molecule (Ng-CAM),¹ Ng-CAM–related cell adhesion molecule (Nr-CAM), and Drosophila neuroglian are members of a family of nervous system cell adhesion molecules that possess variable extracellular domains comprised of Ig and fibronectin type III domains and a relatively conserved cytoplasmic domain (Grumet, 1991; Hortsch and Goodman, 1991; Rathgen and Jessel, 1991; Sonderegger and Rathgen, 1992; Hortsch, 1996). Members of this family, including a number of alternatively spliced forms, are abundant in the nervous system during early development as well as in adults. Neurofascin and Nr-CAM, for example, constitute ∼0.5% of the total membrane protein in adult brain (Davis et al., 1993; Davis and Bennett, 1994). Cellular functions attributed to the L1 family include axon fasciculation (Stallcup and Beasley, 1985; Landmesser et al., 1988; Brummendorf and Rathjen, 1993; Bastmeyer et al., 1995; Itoh et al., 1995; Magyar-Lehmann et al., 1995), axonal guidance (van den Pol and Kim, 1993; Liljelund et al., 1994; Brittis and Silver, 1995; Brittis et al., 1995; Lochter et al., 1995; Wong et al., 1996), neurite extension (Chang et al., 1987; Felsenfeld et al., 1994; Hankin and Lagenaur, 1994; Ignelzi et al., 1994; Williams et al., 1994a ,b,c,d; Doherty et al., 1995; Zhao and Siu, 1995), a role in long term potentiation (Luthl et al., 1994), synaptogenesis (Itoh et al., 1995), and myelination (Wood et al., 1990). The potential clinical importance of this group of proteins has been emphasized by the findings that mutations in the L1 gene on the X chromosome are responsible for developmental anomalies including hydrocephalus and mental retardation (Rosenthal et al., 1992; Jouet et al., 1994; Wong et al., 1995).The conserved cytoplasmic domains of L1 family members include a binding site for the membrane skeletal protein ankyrin. This interaction was first described for neurofascin (Davis et. al., 1993) and subsequently has been observed for L1, Nr-CAM (Davis and Bennett, 1994), and Drosophila neuroglian (Dubreuil et al., 1996). The membrane-binding domain of ankyrin contains two distinct sites for neurofascin and has the potential to promote lateral association of neurofascin and presumably other L1 family members (Michaely and Bennett, 1995). Nodes of Ranvier are physiologically relevant axonal sites where ankyrin and L1 family members collaborate, based on findings of colocalization of a specialized isoform of ankyrin with alternatively spliced forms of neurofascin and NrCAM in adults (Davis et al., 1996) as well as in early axonal developmental intermediates (Lambert, S., J. Davis, P. Michael, and V. Bennett. 1995. Mol. Biol. Cell. 6:98a).L1, after homophilic and/or heterophilic binding, participates in signal transduction pathways that ultimately are associated with neurite extension and outgrowth (Ignelzi et al., 1994; Williams et al., 1994a ,b,c,d; Doherty et al., 1995). L1 copurifies with a serine–threonine protein kinase (Sadoul et al., 1989) and is phosphorylated on a serine residue that is not conserved among other family members (Wong et al., 1996). L1 pathway(s) may also involve G proteins, calcium channels, and tyrosine phosphorylation (Williams et al., 1994a ,b,c,d; Doherty et al., 1995). After homophilic interactions, L1 directly activates a tyrosine signaling cascade after a lateral association of its ectodomain with the fibroblast growth factor receptor (Doherty et al., 1995). Antibodies against L1 have also been shown to activate protein tyrosine phosphatase activity in growth cones (Klinz et al., 1995). However, details of the downstream substrates of L1-promoted phosphorylation and dephosphorylation and possible roles of the cytoplasmic domain are not known.Tyrosine phosphorylation is well established to modulate cell–cell and cell–extracellular matrix interactions involving integrins and their associated proteins (Akiyama et al., 1994; Arroyo et al., 1994; Schlaepfer et al., 1994; Law et al., 1996) as well as the cadherins (Balsamo et al., 1996; Krypta et al., 1996; Brady-Kalnay et al., 1995; Shibamoto et al., 1995; Hoschuetzky et al., 1994; Matsuyoshi et al., 1992). For example, the adhesive functions of the calciumdependent cadherin cell adhesion molecule are mediated by a dynamic balance between tyrosine phosphorylation of β-catenin by TrkA and dephosphorylation via the LARtype protein tyrosine phosphatase (Krypta et al., 1996). In this example the regulation of binding among the structural proteins is the result of a coordination between classes of protein kinases and protein phosphatases.This study presents evidence that neurofascin, expressed in a rat neuroblastoma cell line, is a substrate for both tyrosine kinases and protein tyrosine phosphatases at a tyrosine residue conserved among all members of the L1 family. Site-specific tyrosine phosphorylation promoted by both tyrosine kinase activators (NGF and bFGF) and protein tyrosine phosphatase inhibitors (dephostatin and vanadate) is a strong negative regulator of the neurofascin– ankyrin binding interaction and modulates the membrane dynamic behavior of neurofascin. Furthermore, neurofascin and, to a lesser extent Nr-CAM, are also shown here to be tyrosine phosphorylated in developing rat brain, implying a physiological relevance to this phenomenon. These results indicate that neurofascin may be a target for the coordinate control over phosphorylation that is elicited by protein kinases and phosphatases during in vivo tyrosine phosphorylation cascades. The consequent decrease in ankyrin-binding capacity due to phosphorylation of neurofascin could represent a general mechanism among the L1 family members for regulation of membrane–cytoskeletal interactions in both developing and adult nervous systems.